Do you have a positive or negative view of MICHAEL MOORE and WHY...

[Mensch]

What is your overall opinion of Michael Moore, his work, and why?

 

[1069]

What is your overall opinion of Michael Moore, his work, and why?

I like him.

 

[Mensch]

I like him.

And the last part of the question is why?

 

[Hatuey]

Full of **** for the most part, raises some good points that can't be addressed by his critics in others.

 

[earthworm]

He is an opinionated movie producer, similar to Limbaugh, but with caring and an intellect.
"left"entertainer ......"right" entertainer...... .
Either appeal to fools.

 

[Mensch]

Full of **** for the most part, raises some good points that can't be addressed by his critics in others.

I don't think "raising some good points" is reason enough to commend his work, given that it is total propaganda and full of lies and inaccuracies. Hitler raised some "good points" when speaking about the ridiculous war debt that Germany was forced to pay and led to millions of Germans starving. Those points, by themselves, were well-intended. But what was the other side of that coin?

Yes, I know. I'm comparing Moore to Hitler. But Hitler was a totalitarian dictator and Moore doesn't mind a totalitarian state. I'd be glad to compare Noam Chomsky to Pol Pot. After all, the former had completely denied what the latter was doing.

 

[Barbbtx]

negative
He hates the free market and embraces big government.

 

[Hatuey]

I don't think "raising some good points" is reason enough to commend his work, given that it is total propaganda and full of lies and inaccuracies. Hitler raised some "good points" when speaking about the ridiculous war debt that Germany was forced to pay and led to millions of Germans starving. Those points, by themselves, were well-intended. But what was the other side of that coin?

Yes, I know. I'm comparing Moore to Hitler. But Hitler was a totalitarian dictator and Moore doesn't mind a totalitarian state. I'd be glad to compare Noam Chomsky to Pol Pot. After all, the former had completely denied what the latter was doing.

What the hell are you talking about? You're a Libertarian and right wing. Like Hitler. Thanks for dividing by zero and Godwining your own thread within 6 posts.

 

[Mensch]

He is an opinionated movie producer, similar to Limbaugh, but with caring and an intellect.
"left"entertainer ......"right" entertainer...... .
Either appeal to fools.

Well, I don't appreciate Limbaugh anymore than I appreciate Moore. I think both are somewhat conspiracy theorists. I have a larger problem with Moore because his entertainment leads to people making drastic mistakes at the voting booths. Limbaugh advances a chauvinistic form of radical capitalism while Moore advances the sacrifice of individual rights over collective control. As I said earlier: totalitarianism.

 

[Mensch]

What the hell are you talking about? You're a Libertarian and right wing. Like Hitler. Thanks for dividing by zero and Godwining your own thread within 6 posts.

Check out the Nolan chart and open your mind to the possibility that political thinking extends to a much more than an absolute right-left binary. Libertarians are advocates for liberty. Conservatives are advocates for traditional ways. If spending for the social security of this nation is the norm and has been for at least 70 years, then the CHANGE would be to cut spending and put individuals in charge of their own lives. I don't think Hitler would agree with that. That is why I brought up Hitler. Taking away the fanatical anti-Semitism, in terms of governing a country, Moore would probably agree with many Hitlerian economic policies. Moore really likes Cuba and Fidel Castro. Hitler is not that far away on the political spectrum. The thing they all have in common is support for a totalitarian regime.

 

[pbrauer]

I don't think "raising some good points" is reason enough to commend his work, given that it is total propaganda and full of lies and inaccuracies. Hitler raised some "good points" when speaking about the ridiculous war debt that Germany was forced to pay and led to millions of Germans starving. Those points, by themselves, were well-intended. But what was the other side of that coin?

Yes, I know. I'm comparing Moore to Hitler. But Hitler was a totalitarian dictator and Moore doesn't mind a totalitarian state. I'd be glad to compare Noam Chomsky to Pol Pot. After all, the former had completely denied what the latter was doing.

Some people put their opinions in the newspaper; Moore is an entrepreneur who puts his in film and people pay to watch. To say it's total propaganda is inaccurate, but much of it in just his opinion. He is a brilliant film maker who needs to go on a diet.

 

[Hatuey]

Check out the Nolan chart and open your mind to the possibility that political thinking extends to a much more than an absolute right-left binary. Libertarians are advocates for liberty. Conservatives are advocates for traditional ways. If spending for the social security of this nation is the norm and has been for at least 70 years, then the CHANGE would be to cut spending and put individuals in charge of their own lives. I don't think Hitler would agree with that. That is why I brought up Hitler. Taking away the fanatical anti-Semitism, in terms of governing a country, Moore would probably agree with many Hitlerian economic policies. Moore really likes Cuba and Fidel Castro. Hitler is not that far away on the political spectrum. The thing they all have in common is support for a totalitarian regime.

Oh good lord you're already boring me with your mischaracterizations of Michael Moore's work. If exposing the misdeeds of the 'free market' in regards to American workers is support for totalitarianism than you're more dishonest than I thought. All the other bull**** regarding what Michael Moore would probably agree with or wouldn't agree with is ridiculous unless you actually know what he would agree with and what he wouldn't. Your argument was that because Michael Moore and Hitler both raised 'good points' than they're alike:

Hitler raised some "good points" when speaking about the ridiculous war debt that Germany was forced to pay and led to millions of Germans starving. Those points, by themselves, were well-intended. But what was the other side of that coin?

With your dishonesty aside, Nolan's Libertarian chart isn't going to save you right now. It is a political quiz consisting of about 8 questions which are supposed to determine where you fall in the ridiculously complex world of politics. Even though in the real world you're just as likely to find a self declared libertarian who supports 'small government' with big social agendas as you're to find conservatives who believe in small government which place enphasis on the welfare of its people. No, no. You're simply wrong and Godwinized your own thread.

/thread.

 

[Mensch]

Some people put their opinions in the newspaper; Moore is an entrepreneur who puts his in film and people pay to watch. To say it's total propaganda is inaccurate, but much of it in just his opinion. He is a brilliant film maker who needs to go on a diet.

prop·a·gan·da   /ˌprɒpəˈgændə/ Show Spelled[prop-uh-gan-duh] Show IPA
–noun
1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.

I think that best defines Moore's work. Whether he makes money off of his propaganda, or whether a movement of individuals distributes free pamphlets, it can all be considered propaganda. Propaganda is simply the spreading of falsehoods and shrouding them in an aura of truth. Whether it comes from print or film is irrelevant.

And how can anyone take his last film seriously? He hates on capitalism, and gives a ridiculous alternative (democracy), but he's making millions of dollars (as you said) as an entrepreneur.

 

[LizardofOz]

While I thought Sicko wasn't to bad, he really likes to distort and fabricate things. Anyone that saw "Fahrenheit 9/11" I suggest you check out "Fahrenhype 9/11" and form your opinion on the subject after that.

 

[Mensch]

Oh good lord you're already boring me with your mischaracterizations of Michael Moore's work. If exposing the misdeeds of the 'free market' in regards to American workers is support for totalitarianism than you're more dishonest than I thought. All the other bull**** regarding what Michael Moore would probably agree with or wouldn't agree with is ridiculous unless you actually know what he would agree with and what he wouldn't. Your argument was that because Michael Moore and Hitler both raised 'good points' than they're alike:/thread.

I am not mischaracterizing Moore's work. I've watched neary every one of his movies more than once, and I've read more than one of his books. He is very much an open socialist. Lenin would be proud of him (Lenin, as you might not know, considered communism to be the next step after socialism...but that even Lenin did not claim the USSR had progressed to communism). Instead of bringing out the historical boogeyman who best represents evil, shall I instead bring up Lenin and compare Lenin to Moore? That might not be so offensive to you.

The fact that you brought up "American workers" plays right into my argument. Mussolini wrote extensively about protecting Italian workers from cheap foreign labor, as did many other statists. That argument is extremely xenophobic and completely misleading.

With your dishonesty aside, Nolan's Libertarian chart isn't going to save you right now. It is a political quiz consisting of about 8 questions which are supposed to determine where you fall in the ridiculously complex world of politics. Even though in the real world you're just as likely to find a self declared libertarian who supports 'small government' with big social agendas as you're to find conservatives who believe in small government which place enphasis on the welfare of its people. No, no. You're simply wrong and Godwinized your own thread. /thread.

Of course, but I think you're confusing two different things. It's possible to believe in small government and still maintain "big social agendas." A "big social agenda" could be a large private organization dedicated to providing charity for those less fortunate. You don't need a large government to maintain such a big social agenda, so the ideology remains consistent. I don't see your point here.

 

[Mensch]

While I thought Sicko wasn't to bad, he really likes to distort and fabricate things. Anyone that saw "Fahrenheit 9/11" I suggest you check out "Fahrenhype 9/11" and form your opinion on the subject after that.

Instead, check out Michael and Me by Larry Elder.

 

[samsmart]

I would like to comment on this thread, but it has been subjected to Godwin's Law in the first page, and therefore, I fear, is destined to be nothing but a troll magnet.

Oh well, there's always the next time I suppose.

 

[winston53660]

I would like to comment on this thread, but it has been subjected to Godwin's Law in the first page, and therefore, I fear, is destined to be nothing but a troll magnet.

Oh well, there's always the next time I suppose.

Oh stop being such a Nazi.:mrgreen:

 

[FilmFestGuy]

I don't think "raising some good points" is reason enough to commend his work, given that it is total propaganda and full of lies and inaccuracies. Hitler raised some "good points" when speaking about the ridiculous war debt that Germany was forced to pay and led to millions of Germans starving. Those points, by themselves, were well-intended. But what was the other side of that coin?

Yes, I know. I'm comparing Moore to Hitler. But Hitler was a totalitarian dictator and Moore doesn't mind a totalitarian state. I'd be glad to compare Noam Chomsky to Pol Pot. After all, the former had completely denied what the latter was doing.

With what you say here, you are no better than what you accuse Moore of. Propaganda.

So, you think free speech and societal criticism is the same thing as killing Jews and Cambodians?

Hyperbolic, much?

 

[samsmart]

Oh stop being such a Nazi.:mrgreen:

Do you think poopie smells bad?

Because you know who else thought poopie smells bad, don't you?

Hitler.

So thinking that poopie smells bad makes you a Nazi.

 

[FilmFestGuy]

I am not mischaracterizing Moore's work. I've watched neary every one of his movies more than once, and I've read more than one of his books. He is very much an open socialist. Lenin would be proud of him (Lenin, as you might not know, considered communism to be the next step after socialism...but that even Lenin did not claim the USSR had progressed to communism). Instead of bringing out the historical boogeyman who best represents evil, shall I instead bring up Lenin and compare Lenin to Moore? That might not be so offensive to you.

The fact that you brought up "American workers" plays right into my argument. Mussolini wrote extensively about protecting Italian workers from cheap foreign labor, as did many other statists. That argument is extremely xenophobic and completely misleading.



Of course, but I think you're confusing two different things. It's possible to believe in small government and still maintain "big social agendas." A "big social agenda" could be a large private organization dedicated to providing charity for those less fortunate. You don't need a large government to maintain such a big social agenda, so the ideology remains consistent. I don't see your point here.

And again, you're lying. He is a socialist just as most citizens of Norway are Socialist. Unless you think Scandinavian nations are dictatorships and their people are horribly oppressed. If you do, then I suppose your views are consistent.

Otherwise, you're doing as much lying and propagandizing as you accuse Moore of doing.

If anything, Moore is guilty of overstating his case through non-typical examples.

You're doing the exact same thing by comparing the defense of work to dictators who slaughtered millions.

Your comparison is inaccurate; it shows that you are completely hyperbolic; prone to exaggeration; and base your views not on facts, but on the things you've read and heard in right-wing media (which is just as bad as anything Moore has done - but worse, because they have daily audiences who actually believe them as opposed to approximately bi-annual bursts of popularity).

Oh, and neutral should have been a choice in your poll; but that's further evidence of your black and white thinking.

 

[Dittohead not!]

The only example of his work I've seen is Bowling for Columbine. In his movie, he examines possible reasons why we have so many gun murders in this country as compared to others, and comes up with nothing. He suggests that it is due to "white America's fear of black America", and never examines that conclusion. The issue of our incessant gang wars doesn't even come up for examination.

He starts with a conclusion, then tries to find facts to match. I find him to be less than credible.

 

[pragmatic]

Have to admire the guys passion. Think he does tend to go over the top a bit in his films, but also believe he is completely genuine in (what i would call) his far left political/societal positions.

I just don't happen to agree with much he says.



.

 

[earthworm]

These things that you say, Elijah, do you have any proof, other than right-wing hate sites.
And I have seen these - disgusting!

 

[hallam]

If he was more accurate, then I would take him more seriously but now my opinion of him is negative. Mind you I haven't watched his more recent movies.