Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Aaah...

I knew that question would get the fur flyin'.

IN response to Buz and StrongCanada, I don't think you are giving Moore a fair shake, and the website that you are referring to, Buz, is very inaccurate in what it states that Moore had said. Most of those accusations are very detail-oriented, e.g. Moore said that Charlton Heston was in Denver when he siad the 'cold dead' hands speech, but that's not even true! Moore never said that.

As for what he said about Canadaians, it was very pro-Canada and very critical of America. He went to a town where they did not lock their doors to prove a point (That is something you'd hardly ever see in the US) and the deaths by gun statistic you were referring to was in 'Bowling for Columbine,' so it was for the whole year of 2002, I believe.

People should not see this as a documentary, yes, but you have to admit that some of Moore's points are dead on. What the heck are we doing being so friendly to the Saudis? Oh, yeah, our economy would collapse if they left. It certainly doesn't give us very much moral high ground though, for our business dealings. These are the same people who beheaded three homosexuals on New Years Day for a celebration.

Buz, that website that you referenced was way off. No offense.

I think everyone should see it. I have heard it described as "You will go away angry at GWB or at Moore, but you will go away angry.

And as StrongCanada said, I love you all, in spite of your political beliefs and all that. See the movie. Vote in November.

You guys, I only wrote two lines. But I can write more.


That's all I was doing for you.

The documentary format is meant to be taken as reporting facts, though you're right, there are a lot of abuses where someone uses the documentary format to present opinions.

The only kind of documentaries I watch do not do that to the best of my knowledge. I watch plenty of stuff, but DOCUMENTARIES are supposed to be like encyclopedia articles, IMHO. If everyone seeing F9/11 knows it's a movie to be watched like you watch Top Gun, then fine. But people are saying things like, "Now we really know the facts about the Bush war" and so forth. Since it's presented as news and people think it's true, it's propaganda. Plain and simple, and I'd say the same if Rush Limbaugh or Larry King themselves made their own propaganda.

Yes, it does cite the source. Something like Moore is a Big Fat White Guy is the name of the book. It was all over the page. If one wants to see the sources that the book itself references, I guess one would have to look at the book. But the article does cite the book, since it's trying to sell it. And I didn't say I knew the facts in the case, I merely said the refutations were credible.

America's Finest News Source. Aw c'mon, you know you love The Onion.

Thanks for saying it for me... I said the above before I read your reply. The governor of Michigan is a Canadian (many Americans think Michigan is in Canada), so maybe you're not all socialists after all.

Well, that may be, but how many of even the slightly slanted ones (like wolves eating rabbits and space shuttles on PBS) spend the entire time trying to make someone look bad? Seen Citizen Kane? Yeah, that movie was there to make someone look bad. Seen Schindler's List? Swing Kids? Yeah, those were to make national socialists look bad. And you know what? No one called those documentaries. The dinosaur documentaties are slanted towards evolution, and the ballet documentaries are slanted toward public support of the arts. But those documentaries are not intended to slander.

You make it sound like people who disagree are censoring. I'm not suggesting censorship. I'm just a fan of exposing the self-proclaimed "exposer." I got a kick out of seeing him get what was coming to him, in his own style. I mean, I can take the same as I dish out, and I hope the Moore guy can too.

I'm tired. I don't want any more propaganda right now, not from liberals or conservatives. But seeing how it's a presidential election year, I'm not likely to get my wish.

I get tired of explaining this. The biggest (legal) thing was not the affair, it was the perjury. The reason him having an affair matters to people like me is because I want a president who is as moral or more moral than I am. And if you want me to attack something he did politically, how about this: he got a bunch of Americans killed in Serbia and Somalia. Are you all too young to remember soldiers going out on patrol with only 3 bullets in their rifles?

Yeah, you're probably right. But I'm not going to spend my time on propaganda unless I'm being paid. My time's too valuable.

Could be. I'm talking about Moore the same way some of you guys talk about the Bible. I've read the Bible, so when someone says, "God told the Jews to kill millions of people? That's not what a loving God would do!" I know they've just heard it from someone rather than read it themselves. So when I show you where some source says, "Michael Moore lies about a quote's context," you know I'm just going by what I heard. I even show you where I got it! I never met the guy who wrote the book... he could be a propagandist lawyer communist hedonist glutton smoking pot for all I know. I was just trying to throw a bone to the guy saying So he'd have something to work with.

Except I didn't have to lock my either door when I was in my undergraduate, and often didn't. And that was metropolitan Toledo, OH.

Now that's a great point. How come noone ever brought that one up before? Yeah, we need to break ties with the Saudis and Red China fast, both full of human rights violations.

None taken.

I'm too old to watch things that make me angry. I'll keel over from a heart attack. I get mad just watching the CBS news. I can't afford the hospital bill following watching an intentionally incindiary video.

But only vote once! Except StrongCanada... you're not a U.S. citizen so vote for your own parlaiment... or whatever moon government you guys have up there . Just funnin' ya. Did I ever say out loud how happy I am it's you Canadians next to us and not anyone else? Oh, and if you're underage, don't vote either. That's voter fraud, and with all the electronic voting problems we're gonna have this fall, the last thing we need is more fraud.

Anyway, I spent WAY too long writing this. It's my last post to this thread. If you want to chat more with me about these, PM or email me.

And I still don't know what a pundit is.

_________________

Buz, I wish you'd address the actual points made by myself, the film, and the article you cited instead of arguing at length over the semantics of the word "documentary" (or "DOCUMENTARIES" and "documentaries" as you say). Semantics, as usual, are irrelevant -- nobody has been misled by this film being referred to as a documentary. Folks are smart enough to separate fact from opinion, and if they aren't, they aren't qualified to vote.

And I appreciate your correcting me concerning the sources cited. I see now that the entire article is just an ad for the book. Hum.



I appreciate the effort, but it was wasted. You gave me a book ad without cited sources. But if I happen to see the book in an actual book store, I'll definitely take the time to leaf through it (the Amazon reviews say the writing, if not the message, is pretty poor, so I doubt I'll buy it, sorry).

Look, I'm not trying to be an arse, here, and if your opinion is supported by facts, I'd love to hear them, but please give me something from a legitimate news source (the AP is a good start).

Oh, and election day was Monday in Canada and the results are, well, uncertain. If I'm interpreting Canada's electoral policy correctly, they've elected a minority government, which means, um.. help me out here, StrongCanada?

Lastly, if you're not familiar with the word 'pundit' then I have a hard time believing you actually watch the news. The least you could do is pick up a dictionary, or a Wikipedia and look it up.

_________________

Okay, I think I've got this Canada thing figured out. The Liberal party got the most seats in parlaiment, so they are the ruling party and their leader, Paul Martin, is the new Prime Minister. However, they did not get enough seats to have a majority in parlaiment (this is called a 'plurality'), which causes problems because it will be difficult for the ruling party to pass legislation, so they may have to form a coalition with one or more of the other parties. If they don't do so, there may be a motion of no confidence, in which case they'd be unseated. And from what I've gathered, that would be a very bad thing. It's been said in no uncertain terms that Stephen Harper, the leader of the Conservatives, is approximately as awful as Bush.

Is that about right, StrongCanada?

_________________

Yes, IJ, you more or less got the politics of Canada correctly. Basically, it's going to be very difficult for Martin to pass anything. The opposition will always shoot him down. Canadians have a system just like the Brits - we believe conflict creates good government (I personally don't!). And actually, Buz, I didn't vote this year - hold on now, don't be upset, I am a MAJOR advocate of voting, but I haven't lived in Canada for 5+ years, so I can't. I WILL be voting in the USA this fall, just like I did 4 years ago (I'm 23, and I'm a dual citizen, so basically, I vote wherever I'm living!), even though I'm going to be on tour in Virginia - I'm already working on getting my absentee ballot.

Even if I don't agree with Moore's opinions, I do agree that we shouldn't be afraid to have our beliefs challenged - what good are your beliefs if they can't stand up to opposition? I think both sides have valid points, and both sides should rise to challenges from one another!

Oh, and Buz, most of my family has been STAUNCHLY Republican ever since I can remember (Conservative, in Canadaspeak); as a generalization, Eastern Canadians are more often (but not always) liberal, and Westerners, like my family, are conservative. So we aren't all socialists! Just our medicine (my dad calls Medicare "socialized medicine")! Me, I sit on the fence, cause I can see both sides! :20x6: Actually, I prefer to make decisions based on specific issues as opposed to just leaning one way or the other (if anyone leans left or right, I am not criticizing - that is your freedom, and that is why we live in free nations).

Ok, I think this post is long enough! Love to all, freedom to all!

_________________

Well, that's what it is. I don't think anybody would argue that it's not.



Well, someone's "leaning" is based upon how they feel about particular issues. Everybody leans (well, some people are centrist, but that's still a "leaning") -- how you feel about the issues determines how you lean, not the other way around. Sure, there are some people who vote along party lines, which is truly unfortunate, and there are some people who say "well, I'm a member of Party X, and Party X supports issue Y, so I support issue Y, too!", but I think (well, hope) that that's the exception rather than the rule.

A lot of people affiliate themselves with whatever party their parents were affiliated with. That's fine, as long as they question their beliefs enough to know that it's the right party for them, or to realize that it's the wrong party for them and switch. I feel very fortunate to have lived in a sort of "political vacuum" from an early age -- my parents never discussed politics around me, for whatever reason (I'd like to think it was intentional), and so I truly had no idea what their beliefs were until I was about 16 or 17 and pretty deep in my own beliefs already. My religious upbringing was much the same. My parents took me to church (Lutheran) for the first dozen or so years of my life, but I think mostly to appease my Grandma, and they made it pretty clear from very early on that whatever direction I want to take with my own life is my choice. Looking back on it, it's pretty refreshing.

_________________

John Kerry is pro-US heath care 'socialization' as you call it.

Any thoughts? I say Heck yeah! National Health Care means a better tomorrow! Certainly it is unhealthy to refuse the right to be healthy to a person just because of the class that they are in. The rich need to remember that they NEED us poor around. The reason that they are rich in the current system is beause WE LET them be rich.

If we weren't around, they would cease to be rich. They would have to take out their own garbage and teach their own children. The price of mink would plummet and no one would serve them caviar from silver encrusted plates anymore.

It's time they started treating us better, or we might quit and go to the woods.

If you know what I mean.

And you do know what I mean.

I hope you don't think I was disparraging it when I referred to it as socialized medicine. I definitely think that publicly-funded health care is a good thing, no matter what you call it. Wikipedia says that it's "often referred to as socialized medicine by its opponents" -- I guess I tend to forget that to a lot of people socialism is still a dirty word. People get so worked up about words.

_________________

Yeah, I don't see socialism as necessarily dirty.

I mean, I think that if everyone is happier, then everyone will be happier! I certainly don't want anyone in my country to hate their existence here on the earth.

I say, let's socialize food, too! Do you know how many hormones and toxins are found in you meals, the non-vegetarian ones, specifically?

I don't either, but I am sure it's a bunch!

Why don't you and I get to decide on what gets fed to our animals? I could take the time out of my day to say, "If those chickens were any more packed together, they are going to spontaneously combust."

On a different topic altogether: Okay, I admit it. Communism is a stupid idea, sure. It was several key elements of Marxist theory taken to a scary extreme. It's Fascism, really.

I just want the US to help a guy if he gets his arm sheered off. We're the greatest country in the world, aren't we? I don't care whether the guy has insurance or not. In fact, I think we should make a law FORCING people to get medical treatment, even if they don't want it. "Hello, Mr. Denson, I am here to grant you this subpeona because you missed your last four dentist visits."

Maybe that's going too far.

You do have some choice. First, you can raise your own animals. You don't need much space to raise a few chickens. At the turn of the century, many immigrant families in New York kept poultry in the courtyards on on the roofs of their tenements. That's not really legal most places anymore, but it's still an option if you're willing to move.

Second, buy organic. There's an organic grocery within driving distance of your house. Use it. Organic food vendors can tell you exactly how the animal or plant was raised, right down to the feed and soil conditions. You'll spend significantly more, but you'll know what's in your food. You'll also be doing your local economy a lot of good, and supporting independent farmers.

_________________

Take it from me. Several years of experience working for the government (first in the military, then in the Atlanta VA, and now at the VA in St. Louis) have taught me that, whenever the government gets involved, they tend to screw it up. That is why I distrust socialized health care.

What's more, a friend of mine from seminary is from Canada, and he has very few good things to say about Canadian health care. According to him, people actually travel down here to the states when they want quality health care.

I am all for employers taking the responsibility for their employees' health care, but my fear is that the moment you make it a government regulated effort, it will drop faster than a lead balloon. Just look at how Social Security has fared over the past 30 years or so.

What's more, socialized health care means higher taxes, and the brunt of that will be paid by the middle class, not the rich. The rich already have too many loopholes and shelters so they can avoid paying higher taxes.

One thing that might help is if they could eliminate ambulance-chasers, lawyers who specialize in frivolous lawsuits against hospitals and doctors. Doctors have to pay millions in malpractice insurance because the blood-sucking lawyers won't let them do their jobs.

_________________

It's not really that Canadians don't have good doctors and nurses, etc., it's just that the waiting lists are so long that you could die before you get treatment! That's why Canadians come to the US for healthcare - they can get it immediately if they pay for it! And for them, no price is greater than their health!

_________________

That's pretty much what my friend said, SC. According to him, at certain times of the year, you can get really good care, but the majority of the year, there just aren't enough doctors to handle all the patients. He says that it has to do with budget constraints; when the government runs out of money, they have to start cutting back on availagle health services.

That's why I don't approve of socialized medicine in the US. From what I know about the US Government, we'd end up with the same problem inside of ten years. And we'd have to pay a ton of taxes just to keep it afloat. While I would love a way to provide affordable health care to people with low income, I just don't think socialized medicine would be worth it in the long run.

My answer? Eliminate the ambulance chasers.

_________________

I will say a little more about socialism, not as a particular philosophy, but as a pragmatic approach to government. Socialism in practical politics not only removes the responsibility of providing for oneself, but also the freedom to do so. People wouldn't be given a choice in whether or not they wanted to participate in socialized medicine, or for that matter, any other government operated program. Do you really want the government to tell you what to eat everyday? Or to assign your doctor for you? Heck, I don't even like them telling me what insurance I have to buy.

BTW, a socialized food program would not eliminate chemical and hormone treatment of food. In fact, I would wager that in a government food program, the food would be chock-full of chemicals, hormones, and preservatives.

My philosophy is very simple: don't start giving the government new things to mess up. The government is not infallible (the war in Iraq is proof of that--remember the war? the whole thing that started this thread?).

_________________

Good point, Didymus.

The government certainly is fallible, as the current war and other factors of our current situation proves.

I am a huge proponent of "For the people by the people" but our current system does not really follow that system. If we really did, then corporations would be subservient to us the people. Halliburton would not be allowed to dream up wars where our finest must fight and die for. The food system and farmers would be given incentives to produce healthy, toxin-free food.

The goal should be the welfare of the People of your country. We should be protected, not the money-makers. We should weed them out of office and out of our lives. The root of all evil is the love of money, anyone disagree?

So why don't we have for-the-people-by-the-people?

Two reasons that I can think of, and you all are welcome to add more:

1. Elected officials are the rich put into power by the rich. It is much easier to maximize profits whewn you are in power. You can make the laws that can make you richer. Nasty FCC telling you that you are too powerful? Hire someone on the inside, in exchange for good media play and soft news reporter questions. "Mr. Bush, the people want to know: how do you get your shirts so white?" "Well, I'm glad you asked that, fox news, I had been waiting for that question."

The poor get in the way, and by poor, I mean most people. Forthepeoplebythepeople means the poor have a say, which is bad for big business government.

I hope Kerry can steer clear of this model, but absolute power is quite tempting. There have always been people that are gunnin' for that number - one spot. A god complex, if you will.

2. The people in this freakin' counry are lazy and despondant!

Well, what do I expect when their votes are thrown away? Why should I vote unless I am in a swing state? The electoral system is a crock, man. If everone's vote counted EXACTLY ONE VOTE, the problem would be fixed. Jeb Bush would shrivel up like so much wicked witch in teh wind, baby. Happy Americans dancing in the streets.

A lot of my more anarchist friends are trying to tell me not to vote. I am an old-school American I guess. I still think it counts a bit. Throwing away votes: it makes me want to cry for this country.

The average American is too burned out for politics. It looks like dirty laundry to a lot of people that I talk to.

Not that that is an excuse to not pay attention to what is going on. When people are dying, it is a sin to not help them. Everyone needs to pay attention to our leaders. It is our duty as citizens to ask tough questions of the people with the most power. Rude questions.

Well, that's it for me.

Happy 4th.

Part of the problem is that our government isn't a democracy, per se. It's a representational form of government originally based on the idea that individual states have sovereignty within their borders. The federal government was intended to be a loose association of states for common defense and mutual prosperity, not a huge nation with complete sovereignty over the states. The electoral college was invented to maintain a balance of power between the states. That all changed with the Civil War.

I would prefer to see more power and responsibility removed from the federal government and given back to state and local authorities, who would be better equipped to establish policies for their people than beaurocrats in Washington. Also, people could be more directly involved in state and local politics.

_________________

Just when we thought we were living in a free country with cool stuff like a Bill of Rights..



This happened on public property outside the West Virginia Capitol. Welcome to Bush's America, where constitutionally protected speech will be remembered as an archaeic thing of the past. (Thanks to Tom for the link.)

Thanks, George; I sure feel safer now that I know those pesky people flaunting that quaint "Freedom of Expression" malarkey on public property will be ushered away by armed law enforcement agents.

I can only hope that the EU or someone gets together an "Operation American Freedom" sooner or later.

_________________

Good find, IJ. I do believe the internet will eventually make EVERYONE a liberal based on the quick information it provides. People in power hate quick information. It will be the informed vs. the uninformed. Rupert Murdoch will lose all power.

I heard Bush's July 4th speech, and the whole thing was a political propogandist slop in order to make the Iraq situation look like more than a complete failure. He called Iraq a "Sovereign Nation" the same day that we shot missiles legally into a house in Fallujah.

That conversation about dictionaries needs to be directed towards America's president: the word "sovereign" specifically.

So let me get this straight, IJ. You actually WANT Europeans illegally invading our country, bombing our cities, imposing martial law, and destroying our livelihood? And who would lead them, the French?

Did you hear about the problems the Iraqis were having with the tanks they bought from France? As it turns out, the French tanks only had one gear: Reverse.

_________________

Hey, it would teach us a lesson.

I am reminded of an American soldier I swa on PBS who said something to the effect of, "I don't blame these Iraqis for being mad at us; I would feel the same way if they rolled into my neighborhood in a tank."

Didymus, I hope that you didn't miss the (quite intentional) irony of that part of my post and in the above are just playing along, because assuming you didn't your post is great; you clearly understand what "Iraqi Freedom" really meens.

_________________

I was just playing along.

The problem with "liberating" the Iraqis is that I don't think they particularly WANT to be liberated. They have lived under oppression for so long, it's all they know. Giving them freedom is like giving a T-bone steak to a vegetarian. Especially when that "freedom" is accompanied by violence and occupation.

_________________

Any thoughts on John Edwards?

I sure like him. A self made-man, for the most part. He is an excellent speaker, and the things that he chooses to be passionate about: equality, race issues, school systems, fairness in jobs, wtc. are things that I care about.

He seems like he's not trying to scare me.

General Terror Threat, anyone? "Uh...there is an outside chance that terrorist organizations are going to attack soon. Uh...we don't know the time or place, but uh..be on the lookout, we guess. We're, uh, gonna bring the color threat chart to orange, just in case. this has been your government. Plug into the TV tomorrow at ten."

Speaking of Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News, I laughed out loud when I heard about the NY Post, who ran the erroneous 'Gephart is VP' headline. which is possibly the most conservative paper in NY, maybe excepting the Wall Street Journal. Couldn't have happened to a better paper.

The place where I heard the NYPost thing was the Rush Limbaugh show, which I frequent from time to time. I like listening to Rush. "Know thy enemy," as the art of war says.

Rush is getting more and more frightened, you can tell. Must be all those illegal prescriptions. Bush doesn't stand a chance in November.

Have you folks heard Al Franken on Air America? Gosh, do I love that man.

Here, go check out the times:

http://www.airamericaradio.com

Funny thing is, it was Rupert Murdoch himself who supposedly tipped off the editorial staff about the Gephart choice.

I don't have a formed opinion on Edwards yet, except that at least he has more personality than Kerry. I've got plenty on my reading list concerning the new Democratic ticket and hopefully I'll be able to offer a better-informed opinion about Edwards soon.

It's a busy day at work today, but here are some juicy links for the day (well, yesterday, actually):

• Bush's military records "inadvertently destroyed" (inconceivable!)
• Bush White House figuring out how to "postpone" democracy in the event of bad polls, er, um, a terrorist attack.
• Remember the October Surprise? Oh, you thought I was just being paranoid, didn't you? White House to Pakistan: "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT (High Value Targets) were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July." Oh, you mean right in the middle of the Democratic National Convention. It'll be fun to see what they come up with in October.

(Remember to use BugMeNot for those pesky registration-required articles.)

While it's characteristically heavy-handed, this weeks' Top Ten Conservative Idiots is a particularly good read.

_________________

By the way, Michael Moore has published his sources.

_________________

Ah, the politics have been segregated.

We can now get much meaner and disrespectful of each other -- let me be the first to say that everyoine who is not myself is full of the ol' proverbial CRAP. Really, though.

Some thoughts:
I recently bought Rush Limbaugh's book "See, I tild you so" for 25 cents. I find the section on drug-abuse particularly enlightening.

As empty as I find all this Republican saber-rattling concerning how rich the Kerry-Heinz clan is (I mean give me a break: Bush had his oil company that he practically drove into the ground handed to him by Daddy Bush), it does make me upset that even after all this so-called "campaign finance reform" that we have one of the richest Americans up there competing with BushCheney 2004.

It should not be a factor that someone is going to run out of money during their election bid. That just makes sense, right? I mean, do any of us want the richest two people competing for the top job?

So Dick Cheney WILL be the vice prez for next term. A poor choice, but what is Bush to do now? You can't fire everyone on your staff. Oh, I'm sorry, Tenet resigned. Same thing.

I would like Howard Zinn for president. Any other suggestions for the Chief?

ME!

My brother sent me this link. It's hilarious. The language gets a little rough, but I think everyone will get a kick out if it, regardless of political affiliation.

Click: http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/static/jibjabdaughter.html?id=this_land

Try this Full Size link:

http://images.shockwave.com/afassets/fl ... s_land.swf

That was hilarious. Just what we need to get BOTH parties riled up.

_________________