kcbrett5

Yes you have paraphrased the movie well but you have not explained how one news channel projecting a winner in an election changes an actual election result. It doesn't matter what the networks project, it only matters what the actual votes are.

Now if you want to argue that the vote count was all screwed up that is a separate issue. It still wouldn't explain how Moore thinks Foxnews stole the election.

Shannon Nutt

His exact words were "I WONDER what he was thinking..."

Tafellappen

The poll machines were still open in the panhandle when the networks called Florida for Gore. Anyone looking at the raw numbers available on the net on the night of the election could have told you that Florida was way too close to call.

Chew

I have to agree: I don't understand Mattrk's post either. The networks (before the polls closed) called the state for Gore. Fox made an opposite projection. The truth lies in the middle as it was too close for anybody to call.

pro-bassoonist

Wrong!!

The only person that has divided us is Bush. If Bush wasn't in office Moore's latest film would have not been made.


Pro-B

LiquidSky

Liked the film: ***/****.

TheAllPurposeNothing

You obviously didn't spend any time on the TV Talk board during American Idol season.

Fantasia Barino may have garnered something close.

Mad Dawg

I'd agree, but I wouldn't consider Fantasia the most dividing force in those threads.

NEUMANN

lol, you know i actually did see that thread but never clicked on it because i never watched american idol,i think i am now glad i did'nt lol

DonnachaOne

Okay, I was mad when this thread ran off course...

... I was mad when it languished in petty arguments over political issues...

... but now Neumann has used "lol" in a post. TWICE in the same one.

Let's stop the madness!










Did anyone else think the film suffered a little bit by not having enough of "funny" Moore? You know, vignettes with Moore doing something funny, like the congress enlisting?

RyoHazuki

He still goes on for a while about "No one being there to tell him what to do" and stupid stuff like that. You show that video and you provide the narration, the audience just buys into that.

NEUMANN

What can i say,i'm just a happy guy lol, and no i thought it was wise of Moore to keep himself more low profile in this movie then he has been in his other ones,those right wing republicans have been ripping him bad enough,it would have been worse if he played it more comedic then he did.

lucasorion

A lot of people get the feeling that Bush is not exactly the most independent and proactive president we've had. I remember during the campaign he made sure to stress that he was going to be surrounded by all these knowledgeable and capable advisers.

This is one of those points I wonder about with his supporters - do you all really think that he is the kind of can-do guy that would immediately start brainstorming and solving problems like that old SNL skit with the behind-the-scenes Reagan? There's an old quote from Bush, shortly before he ran for governor, after someone asked him about his political aspirations: "I'm basically a media creation. I've never done anything"

I understand if you think he suits your ideological purposes with huge tax-cuts and pro-business policies or whatever it is you find so appealing, but you'd be a lot more credible if you were more honest with yourselves about the package those political ends come in.

exm

Exactly my thoughts. People seem to be either Republican or Democrat and bashing the other side but regardless whether you like Kerry or not, I just can not believe anyone finding Bush a great, honest and thrustworthy president.

angryyoungman

You and I may find it funny, but Moore's ambushes (no pun intended) are one of the main things that turn people off from Moore's films. And that goes for both ends of the political spectrum. Remember the controversy over the the enlisting stunt you mentioned? I think that sort of thing makes it easier for the other side to pick him apart.

RyoHazuki

Every president has advisers. If you think Bush is an idiot who just surrounds himself with smart people, well than more power to you. I don't agree with you.

NEUMANN

I think he is a liar and a Idiot that surrounds himself with liars and Idiots

RyoHazuki

Good for you.

docF94

That's true, every president from the best to the worst has advisers. And each one in modern history has had advisers leave office early, and sign a book-deal to reveal what takes place in all those meetings behind closed doors. In Clinton's case, it was George Stephanopoulos, Jeffrey Birnbaum, Benjamin Barber, Dick Morris, and, of course, Monica Lewinsky. In Bush II's column, we have John DilUlio, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, and Karen Hughes. Presuming you haven't read these books, which may be incorrect, would you wager which president is seen as attentive, interested, engaged, knowledgeable, curious, quick-on-his-feet, and prone to late night policy tweaking - even by those who disagree with him? Could you take a guess as to which administration was referred to by one of these authors as the "Mayberry Machiavellis"? It isn't hard to figure out what life is like working in close proximity to the President. It's not easy work no matter who's in office - but the leadership styles and leadership substance vary dramatically. That's important to recognize, and to defend when your guy is being mercilessly attacked or called into question.

Musigalage.

chess

You are half right on both counts.

I think that Bush believes without question everything that comes out of his mouth, so it's tough to call him a liar. He has complete faith in his advisors and doesn't have what I would call an analytical mind, so it is completely fair to call him an idiot...plus he's just embarrassing.

The people he surrounds himself with are very smart, and amazingly politically savvy (why do you think they hide him so much), so it's not really fair to call them idiots. However, they have certainly developed an unnerving culture of misleading the public, the president, and the world for political purposes, which qualifies them IMO as liars.

And I think that Moore pretty much presents it that way.

lucasorion

I don't think he's an idiot, I've met plenty of people who I'd place as about his intellectual equals and I wouldn't call any of them an idiot - but I wouldn't also feel enthusiastic about them holding any position of power above local government.

The biggest problem with Bush is that he has a bad combination of character traits - he trusts his instincts over information and facts, and he has bad instincts. The first thought that comes into his head feels to him like a revelation from God or Jesus, and most of us know that often the first thing that comes into our head really should be re-thought.

Bush is incurious and anti-intellectual, and he probably would be an idiot if nurture hadn't won some of the battles with nature during his privileged formative years.

I'm not a huge fan of Bill Clinton (I like the Spiderman line about power and responsibility), but he got to the most powerful position in the world in spite of his background. Put Bush in the same background or even in 99.xx % of the other families out there and he would just be a face in the crowd.

Sex Fiend

chess and lucasorion, both of your posts were well stated and pretty well sum up my general feelings about Bush and his "people." It is overly simplistic to characterize Bush or anyone associated with his presidency as an idiot. Truly he is not one of the great thinkers of our generation, and I highly doubt his input to formation and execution of policy for the country amounts to anything more than nodding his head to whatever his advisors tell him is the correct course of action. Hence, to continually berate him for his intellectual shortcomings is to miss the point entirely.

Anyone who believes that Bush is anything but a figurehead whose public image is carefully constructed to appeal to his constituency is extraordinarily fatuous. Can one really listen to Bush speak and imagine that he is an expert (or even mildly well-versed) in history, economics, current domestic and foreign social phenomena, and/or international geo-politics? Probably only if one is also so ignorant of those topics him or herself that there would be no basis for questioning the issue.

In point of fact, it is the GOP power structure and their underlying supporters (corporate America, the religious right, etc.) that really drives the policy of the country under this presidency. And it seems highly doubtful to me that these folks could be characterized as idiots, given the political machinations they have been able to accomplish in the last four years, which has seemingly until only recently managed to escape the scrutiny and critical appraisal of the American public.

That those machinations have been largely obscured by diversion, misdirection and misinformation is of course the thesis of Moore's film. And agree or not, he does make a compelling point calling into question the honesty and motives of this administration, even if his methods and presentation cast his thesis with some measure of sensationalism and hyperbole.

Frank TJ Mackey

I've previously stated that I liked the film.

It expands this week to 1,700 screens from 868 or whatever.

kcbrett5

That is exactly my opinion. I was hoping for more funny parts.

Tafellappen

I think it would've been much more effective and entertaining if Moore injected it with his brand of humor.