-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
Michael Moore
- Thread starter Goblin
- Start date
Caleb14, I wasn't saying you were pro-slavery, but I was calling you out for shallow thinking - not in a sparring way though. I'd expect you to call me out if you thought what I was saying was bullshit. That's how people change and grow, yo? Others challenging their frame of mind. I was using the slavery example to show how what was a popular thought at the time historically proved not correct. I think the same is true of gun control. I think that if handguns were highly inaccessible to people, and there were very stiff penalties for 1. carrying one 2. using one, then yes even criminals would think twice. Take M-60's and rocket launchers for example. No extremely violent criminals in this country have ever used either of those weapons in a crime. 1. Because they're completely inaccessible to the public. 2. Because having one is a serious offense.
I do apologize if I offended you though in my previous post. It's not my intention - I just enjoy a spirited political debate. So fire back!
I'm James Willing and I'm asking for your vote...
I do apologize if I offended you though in my previous post. It's not my intention - I just enjoy a spirited political debate. So fire back!
I'm James Willing and I'm asking for your vote...
member2686
Banned
I think you mean, "I'm James Willing, and I approve this message." lmao Stupid election ads rules...
jameswilling said:
hi nightfly
insurance will reimburse you a certain amount of the value of the goods but not all.I know many watch and car colector who have and own guns even if they have insurance. Personnally one never knows what can happen that is why it is better to be armed (that is my opinion)
regards
georges
insurance will reimburse you a certain amount of the value of the goods but not all.I know many watch and car colector who have and own guns even if they have insurance. Personnally one never knows what can happen that is why it is better to be armed (that is my opinion)
regards
georges
Cool, well by extremely violent criminals, what do you mean? Do you mean like serial killers, because most of them don't use guns anyway. Or do you mean like gang members, I totally agree that they don't seem to use rocket launchers and M-60s in drive-bys, because I don't think rocket launchers and M-60s are very potrtable, they are rather large. How many gang members use hunting rifles to kill people? Anyway as far a stop producing all the bullets, what about the bullets that exist? What kind of stiffer penalities would you impose on someone who killed somebody in a drive by? I mean they already killed somebody? As fars as drug dealers, most of them have no regaurd for the law anyway, so I really don't think stiffer gun penalties would mean much to them.
BOX OFFICE TOP 10
Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.
1. "Fahrenheit 9/11," $21.8 million
2. "White Chicks," $19.6 million
3. "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story," $18.5 million
4. "The Terminal," $13.9 million
5. "The Notebook," $13 million
6. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," $11.4 million
7. "Shrek 2," $10.5 million
8. "Garfield: The Movie," $7 million
9. "Two Brothers," $6.2 million
10. "The Stepford Wives," $5.2 million
Whether you support the film or not I'd say that's encouraging news. Besides, "White Chicks" looks pretty lame to me. :tongue:
Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.
1. "Fahrenheit 9/11," $21.8 million
2. "White Chicks," $19.6 million
3. "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story," $18.5 million
4. "The Terminal," $13.9 million
5. "The Notebook," $13 million
6. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," $11.4 million
7. "Shrek 2," $10.5 million
8. "Garfield: The Movie," $7 million
9. "Two Brothers," $6.2 million
10. "The Stepford Wives," $5.2 million
Whether you support the film or not I'd say that's encouraging news. Besides, "White Chicks" looks pretty lame to me. :tongue:
member2686
Banned
The Wayans are a lame-ass group of "we made it out of the housing projects!" comedians...sub-par, not really funny, but over-the-top sometimes, and that keeps them in the headlines. Pathetic. Good for a chuckle, but not a whole-hearted laugh... They have as much talent as the Olsen twins (combined, of course....they eat for one, the twins...). :nanner:
MightyKrendall said:
I just saw the movie last night and that scene your talking about is nothing compared to what they have shown on the news over the past few months. The scene just showed a few soilders poking fun at Iraqi prisoners.
And even though those scenes might have been from December, Moore was certainly not withholding information about these acts because they were caught on tape by news' cameras, not his own. If you want to blame someone for not coming forth with this kind of information earlier, look to those in Office and those in control of the Army because they knew about this stuff long before cameras could film it.
Re: the footage referred to above........
I've not seen the movie so I can't comment on it, but it does remind me of an article regarding other footage that Moore purposely left out of the film. Apparently, he interviewed Nick Berg some time before he left the US. At some point during that interview, Berg expresses his concern regarding safety in Iraq and, as I'm sure everyone knows, his words turned out to be frightfully prophetic. Moore gave that film to Berg's family instead. They were very grateful, not only because they wanted to keep the film as a memento of their son, but for Moore's not using the interview as sensationalism to help promote his film.
I've not seen the movie so I can't comment on it, but it does remind me of an article regarding other footage that Moore purposely left out of the film. Apparently, he interviewed Nick Berg some time before he left the US. At some point during that interview, Berg expresses his concern regarding safety in Iraq and, as I'm sure everyone knows, his words turned out to be frightfully prophetic. Moore gave that film to Berg's family instead. They were very grateful, not only because they wanted to keep the film as a memento of their son, but for Moore's not using the interview as sensationalism to help promote his film.
One of the things that irks me about the critics of Michael Moore are they keep saying he's only interested in self promoting or "padding his pockets". If you truly want to "pad your pockets", you don't go into documentary filmmaking or writing anti-corporate diatribes. Luckily Micheal Moore hit big time so we can hear the counter point of view. But for all he knew, when he started he would have been lugging his movies around to local peace groups showing screenings there. And as far as self-promoting, I think people need to ask themselves, what is Michael Moore promoting? Peace, anti-war, and a pro-democracy message. So if he wants to crack a few jokes here and there, I say go for it. Wheter F911 is bias or not isn't really the question. What it does do is hinges on the truth that Bush and his cobal lied to the world and the American Public to launch this war where innocent people are being murdered to pad the pockets of his energy industry buddies. Period on that - no debate.
And it's funny that the critics of this film aren't going acknowledging that - only petty little digs here and there to discredit the film...because they know full well the overriding message is true.
And it's funny that the critics of this film aren't going acknowledging that - only petty little digs here and there to discredit the film...because they know full well the overriding message is true.
Links/suggested reading for any progressive thinker:
http://www.free-porn-vid.com/extreme_democracy/index.html
Links to where you can sign up to vote, too, if you're an American.
Make democracy rule!
http://www.free-porn-vid.com/extreme_democracy/index.html
Links to where you can sign up to vote, too, if you're an American.
Make democracy rule!
SovereignAxe
Closed Account
I've heard alot of people say that we'd all be better off if guns were banned and nobody had them so nobody could shoot at each other. Well, there's one flaw here. Banning guns will take the guns away from those that follow that law, whereas those who are willing enough to commit a crime will find a gun on the black market or elsewhere and-boom, only the bad guys have guns. :| it's a shitty situation but that's the only other option.
BTW, i REALLY like the idea about being able to carry a sword on your person, that would be so badass.
BTW, i REALLY like the idea about being able to carry a sword on your person, that would be so badass.
ok personally, i dont like Michael moor, hes a jerk and while yes he has a right to his opinion, and yes he had some good points , and yes the president has made some bad moves, he really was just using the movie to brainwash people into thinking about the bad things that have happened in the past four years, and hes using the brainwashing as a way to make people vote against Bush. i do hope bush wins again, though with recent events my hopes are slipping, so with it all i have only one thing to say
MOORES AN ASSHOLE, COMMIE BASTARD but i had better not say too much more stuff
oh and one more thing, please dont ban me because of my political views!
thank you
MOORES AN ASSHOLE, COMMIE BASTARD but i had better not say too much more stuff
oh and one more thing, please dont ban me because of my political views!
thank you
no, i havnt seen the movie yet, but i intend to, but i said some of the things because i read a couple of reviews, and some of the things that are in the movie actually made some sense, like the fact that he went around and tried to get some congresspeoples kids to enlist, i think they should!, its not fair that they get better treatment, but seeing as how im a full fledged Republican i do have my views about the way he acts and thinks,
and oh yeah, im a person that has grown up around guns, ive got 3 cops in the family and a couple of Military people, and a retired FBI agent, so i didnt really like bowling for columbine
and oh yeah, im a person that has grown up around guns, ive got 3 cops in the family and a couple of Military people, and a retired FBI agent, so i didnt really like bowling for columbine
Just to get something straight...
You don't like Bowling for Columbine because you grew up around firearms?
Is this because you feel like your way of life is being attacked?
Or because you think EVERYBODY in the world has a great
knowledge of how to act around firearms? The Columbine
High School shooting happened and you can't say it didn't.
Why do you feel it happened? Do you think it would of been
easier for them to do what they did without firearms? Don't
just say you dislike something and not give a reason. Michael
Moore states his opinion. You don't have to BELIEVE it. Just
believe the facts of what is in his movies. It is a documentary
after all... It would get pretty boring just hearing facts. He
doesn't force you to do anything.
I got discharged with a Congressmen's daughter. So they do join the service believe it or not. She got VERY few things for being a Congressmen's daughter. And the one few thing that I knew about wasn't anything major. (Some privacy when writing her letters during AIT or something like that.)
You don't like Bowling for Columbine because you grew up around firearms?
Is this because you feel like your way of life is being attacked?
Or because you think EVERYBODY in the world has a great
knowledge of how to act around firearms? The Columbine
High School shooting happened and you can't say it didn't.
Why do you feel it happened? Do you think it would of been
easier for them to do what they did without firearms? Don't
just say you dislike something and not give a reason. Michael
Moore states his opinion. You don't have to BELIEVE it. Just
believe the facts of what is in his movies. It is a documentary
after all... It would get pretty boring just hearing facts. He
doesn't force you to do anything.
I got discharged with a Congressmen's daughter. So they do join the service believe it or not. She got VERY few things for being a Congressmen's daughter. And the one few thing that I knew about wasn't anything major. (Some privacy when writing her letters during AIT or something like that.)
ok ok ok, i apologize if ive made someone mad, i know that all congresspeoples kids dont get special treatment, though there have been a couple, hell even BUSH himself got it as we all now know, as for the gun thing no i dont feel like my way of life is being attacked its just that gun manufacturers have been coming under a lot of unneeded flak in recent years i like to say "GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, THE STUPID PEOPLE BEHIND THEM DO!" , no i dont think that everyone knows how to act around firearms, i dont say the shooting didnt happen, i know it did and im sorry it did, i feel it happened because the boys were taunted at school, and theyre parents werent smart enough to realize that their kids had aquired weapons and were buliding bombs, no i dont think it would have been easier to do without weapons even though they could have had the same if not greater efFect with the bombs, i agree that it would be boreing if it were all just facts and im sorry if i missled you in any way. um, now if its not a problem im going to shut myself up before i dig myself an even greater hole, again im sorry about all this
Michael Moore is a true patriot. The real deal.
He came from a working class family -- unlike virtually everyone in national politics and the elite media -- has consistently fought for the little guy -- at risk to his own personal safety -- and still holds the record for being the youngest person in the United States to win an election. He was elected to his local school board when he was either still in high school (but the requisite 18 yrs of age) or else right after graduation, I forget which. (Mentioned in one of his interviews on John Stewart's Daily Show.)
My point, he's not just a pundit looking for fame and money. The man has been in the trenches and won, then decided he could do more good outside of the beaurocracy, so he started publishing a pro-worker newspaper. After a few years of financial squalor, he tried movies with Roger And Me, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Some conservatives and neocons have said he "hates America" -- a charge most receive whenever a Bush administration fabrication is brought up, or a non-party line is introduced -- but this man loves his country enough to paint a target on his own back while trying to make the world a safer and kinder place.
At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I'd take a bullett for Michael Moore. I wouldn't for George II.
Finally, from one ex-Republican to all those who still insist on supporting the Bush administration: Are you a millionaire, or just ill-informed?
I can see arguing for the man if he's lining your pockets with fat cat freebies, but if you're a working stiff -- even up to $100K per year American -- these guys are not your ally. Entrepreneur/small business owner? Small business loans are being cut by this administration and the Republican congress. If you can't afford a $250K per year lobbyist of your own, get in line. And a long line it is.
Sorry if this got too verbose. I'm just a single, white, pissed off male who's afraid if we (the American electorate) don't wake up soon, they'll be asking the same thing of us that we have always asked about the German voting public in Germany, 1935+.... "What were they thinking? How could they let it happen?"
He came from a working class family -- unlike virtually everyone in national politics and the elite media -- has consistently fought for the little guy -- at risk to his own personal safety -- and still holds the record for being the youngest person in the United States to win an election. He was elected to his local school board when he was either still in high school (but the requisite 18 yrs of age) or else right after graduation, I forget which. (Mentioned in one of his interviews on John Stewart's Daily Show.)
My point, he's not just a pundit looking for fame and money. The man has been in the trenches and won, then decided he could do more good outside of the beaurocracy, so he started publishing a pro-worker newspaper. After a few years of financial squalor, he tried movies with Roger And Me, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Some conservatives and neocons have said he "hates America" -- a charge most receive whenever a Bush administration fabrication is brought up, or a non-party line is introduced -- but this man loves his country enough to paint a target on his own back while trying to make the world a safer and kinder place.
At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I'd take a bullett for Michael Moore. I wouldn't for George II.
Finally, from one ex-Republican to all those who still insist on supporting the Bush administration: Are you a millionaire, or just ill-informed?
I can see arguing for the man if he's lining your pockets with fat cat freebies, but if you're a working stiff -- even up to $100K per year American -- these guys are not your ally. Entrepreneur/small business owner? Small business loans are being cut by this administration and the Republican congress. If you can't afford a $250K per year lobbyist of your own, get in line. And a long line it is.
Sorry if this got too verbose. I'm just a single, white, pissed off male who's afraid if we (the American electorate) don't wake up soon, they'll be asking the same thing of us that we have always asked about the German voting public in Germany, 1935+.... "What were they thinking? How could they let it happen?"
Similar threads
