George_Washington
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,962
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
ban.the.electoral.college said:It makes me laugh everytime people attack MM for his appearance. It just goes to show you that anyone resorting to such elementary observations has no idea about what Moore represents.
Your take exemplifies the reason that Jerry Springer enjoys the largest TV audience and the National Enquirer enjoys the largest "newspaper" circulation in the US.skabanger13 said:thats because people like to be entertained and fiction is more entertaining than fact, and their was more truth than fiction in fahrenhype, and michels more's film was definitely fiction.
ban.the.electoral.college said:You make good points. Have you listened to Democracy Now? Amy Goodman is an excellent journalist. There is no spin - just straight reporting and interviews. Really good show. A good break from the mainstream.
SixStringHero said:NO, I haven't listened to Amy Goodman. I will have to give her show a listen.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:I thought giving aid and comfort to the enemy for money was considered treason not slander . . . eh. Any body want to hear something really funny?? Moore has invested money in Halliburton that's right Halliburton it's all on the public record.
Kelzie said:Ah yes. The old "speaking out against the government during a war is treason" line. Very original.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Hay why don't you kiss his fat ass then? He owned stocks in Halliburton, he makes a living off of human misery he's a pompous disgusting hypocrit, is this the man you're defending, a man who complains about the gun problem in America, doesn't donate one cent of his movies profits to gun crime victims or army charities and then turns around and buys shares of Halliburton, **** that guy, and that's from the heart. I didn't say critisizing the war was treason I said doing it for money is.
Kelzie said:Well now you're just being confusing. So criticizing the war isn't treason...making money isn't treason...but somehow when you throw them together they are? Doesn't make much sense.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:No, the only reason why Moore critisizes the war effort is to profit, he's a hypocrit in the worst sense of the words, his actions are no different than those of Benedict Arnold, he has sold out his own country for money, I can't think of a more complete definition for treason there could be.
Kelzie said:Did you...take history at all? Arnold made a deal to gave a fort up to the British. That is ILLEGAL. Speaking out against your government isn't. Even if you get money doing it. Being a hypocrite is completely legal.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Giving aid or comfort to the enemy is treason that's the definition of treason specified in that little piece of paper that I like to call the constitution, Moore gives comfort to the enemy, does it for profit, and is in my book the quintesential traitor but I can tell you're from the same school of thought as that master propogandist so anything I'll say won't change your mind as to the true nature of your hero Moore.
What would you consider a traitor then? Does someone have to actually shoot at soldiers before they are considered treasonous? Come on, someone who go's against their own nation for financial gain is a ****ing traitor!Kelzie said:How does he give them comfort? Does he tuck them in at night? You can dislike the guy all you want. He's not my favorite person either. Just don't say dumb things like "he's a traitor" and expect to get away with it. That just shows you don't know what the definition is.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:What would you consider a traitor them does someone have to actually shoot at soldiers before they are considered treasonous? Come on someone who go's against their own nation for financial gain is a ****ing traitor!
Kelzie said:He's not "going against" our nation. He's speaking out against it. Something that is perfectly legal, no matter what you do it for.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:and what exactly is the difference? Legal yes but is it moral?
Kelzie said:Who cares? A lot of stuff's immoral and it's not even illegal, let alone treason.
ddoyle00 said:In my opinion, giving Moore as much media as we do it sends hope and encouragement to the enemy by telling them:
-our President is unpopular and if we continue blowing things up, the American
people will vote troops to leave.
-it gives the terrorists a voice that otherwise wouldnt be heard. They dont
need that kind of free publicity.
-it allows the terrorists to fight on two fronts. One on Iraq and on our media
outlets.
The same thing happened when we refused to play the tapes sent in by the Unabomber. To do so would lend credibility to him and possibly encourage others to follow in his footsteps.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:it just strikes me as odd that libs can talk **** about the idiotic statements of deushe bags like Rush, Hannity or O'Reilly all day long but then turn around and defend media whores like Moore and Frankin
hipsterdufus said:There were a lot of problems in F911 as I stated in another post. Frankin, on the other hand, does a very good job of researching and fact checking his books. He does a great job exposing the lies of Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly etc. I wouldn't expect you to like that but if you have a specific Franken item you would like to debate - bring it on!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?