• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why does the right hate Michael Moore so much?

Why doe the right hate Micheal Moore?

  • He is lying about government policy

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • He is telling the truth that people can't handle

    Votes: 2 33.3%

  • He is fat and ugly

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • He is just in this business for the money

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • Total voters
    6
barfolemew

barfolemew

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why does the right hate Micheal moore so? Everything I have seen by him exposes many issues today, and how they tie in to our lives and government. From what I have seen in his documenteries he really just tries to show why events are happening in our country. I don't think he is out to just "bash Bush".
Why does the right treat him with such seething hatred and disdain? I often just hear "He is fat and stupid". Typically I tend to ignore comments that only point out someone's physical appearance. Obviously the man is not stupid or he would not have the success he does.
 
barfolemew said:
Why does the right hate Micheal moore so? Everything I have seen by him exposes many issues today, and how they tie in to our lives and government. From what I have seen in his documenteries he really just tries to show why events are happening in our country. I don't think he is out to just "bash Bush".
Why does the right treat him with such seething hatred and disdain? I often just hear "He is fat and stupid". Typically I tend to ignore comments that only point out someone's physical appearance. Obviously the man is not stupid or he would not have the success he does.
Click to expand...


You mean other then thefact that his mocumenteries are full of staged scenes, lies, massive exxagerations and taking things completely out of context.... Other then that I don't have a clue why anyone would have a problem with him
 
Michael Moore is an idiot who gives liberals a bad name. He's nothing more than the left's answer to Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh.
 
What was the name of the documentary that disputed Fahrenheit 9/11? Has anyone seen it?
 
barfolemew said:
What was the name of the documentary that disputed Fahrenheit 9/11? Has anyone seen it?
Click to expand...

Fahrenhype 9/11? It was equally stupid.
 
I like Michael Moore for what he is. An entertainer. But I don't really think he should be respected as some kind of political figure.
 
besides him being fat and ugly:mrgreen:

I think he does it for money and the spotlight.
 
I don't hate him, I don't hate anyone, that would give that person too much control over me. I am simply disgusted by his irresponsibility, and dishonesty, but I certainly do not hate him.
 
Calm2Chaos said:
You mean other then thefact that his mocumenteries are full of staged scenes, lies, massive exxagerations and taking things completely out of context.... Other then that I don't have a clue why anyone would have a problem with him
Click to expand...

Two hours of Michael Moore = Two Hours of Fox News.
 
Kandahar said:
Michael Moore is an idiot who gives liberals a bad name. He's nothing more than the left's answer to Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

I thought "Roger and Me" & "Bowling for Columbine" were excellent, so I don't discount everything he does.

Roger and Me explored the effect corporate downsizing has on cities in 1989. He used GM in Flint, but we're seeing the same thing regularly with other auto-makers. Ford will lay off 30,000 over the next few years. Bowling for Columbine is an interesting look at our county's love affair with guns.

His films should be released under the realm of fiction, rather than documentary.

Does anyone out there think the movies "Titanic" "JFK" "Ghandi" "Nixon" or "Apocalypse Now" didn't take artistic license? The problem happens when people start getting their history from the movies. Generally, it doesn't work.
 
hipsterdufus said:
I thought "Roger and Me" & "Bowling for Columbine" were excellent, so I don't discount everything he does.

Roger and Me explored the effect corporate downsizing has on cities in 1989. He used GM in Flint, but we're seeing the same thing regularly with other auto-makers. Ford will lay off 30,000 over the next few years. Bowling for Columbine is an interesting look at our county's love affair with guns.

His films should be released under the realm of fiction, rather than documentary.

Does anyone out there think the movies "Titanic" "JFK" "Ghandi" "Nixon" or "Apocalypse Now" didn't take artistic license? The problem happens when people start getting their history from the movies. Generally, it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Still very dishonest films professor, like the important part about how they are still being paid, even though they have not worked in years. Or the fact that the Union was responsible for much of the problems there, and their constant threats and extortion, that have forced good companies out of business here in the states. None of this was researched, explained, or even mentioned in his movies, he has a one track mind, and is only about creating controversy, not change. He should realize this by now, and taken steps to change, he has only gotten more partisan, and more disruptive, irresponsible, and dishonest with every new film.

That said, it does not surprise me you enjoy his films, you often imitate him here daily.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom