# Fat smart a$$



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

i really hate this guy
http://weirdrepublic.com/episode73.htm


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

You can't honestly expect us to read all that. What do you dislike about him?


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

what is there to like about him? even if you dont like the current administration, how could you like this guy? anybody can do some creative editing to make ppl look bad. did you not see bowling for columbine?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

dennis_d said:


> i really hate this guy
> http://weirdrepublic.com/episode73.htm


That is long, but no need to explain. We know the guy lied about Columbine and everything else he gets his hands into. I know no one lower and with less credibility than this man. He should be forced to live in the kind of world he would like to create.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I am not of the mind that you must dislike someone simply for not liking them. It might not be acceptable in this day of strong polarization but it seems to me that not having an opinion on someone is ok. I disliked the anti gun message in _Bowling for Columbine _ but I thought that he did a good job at exposing the administration screw ups that lead to the war in Iraq and the mishandling of the mission in _Farenheit 9/11_.


----------



## T3|-| F7U&gt;&lt; C4P4C41 (Mar 22, 2006)

If you don't like him, he's just another hollywood scumbag, who cares. Using him as a scapegoat is, well, retarded.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

i was using him as a scapegaot? wow i didnt realize that. i was just stating that i didnt like him. thats it, as simple as that. if thats retarded, then dont reply.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

T3|-| F7U>< C4P4C41 said:


> If you don't like him, he's just another hollywood scumbag, who cares. Using him as a scapegoat is, well, retarded.


Your on a role tonight aren't you. What do you mean using him as a scapegoat? I simply don't like the guy because I don't find him truthful. Who is it your calling retarded?


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

im not a fan of the current administration and my party affiliation leans towards the left a little bit, so i dont like him because all of the dems buy into him. he trashed the nra, and twists facts around to make a buck. do you think he cares at all about the columbine families or the auto workers in michigan?


----------



## T3|-| F7U&gt;&lt; C4P4C41 (Mar 22, 2006)

> Your on a role tonight aren't you.


 After giving up smoking and being bed-ridden for two weeks with pneumonia you would be too. As for scapegoat, you make it out like this fat *** everyone hates misled the American public for years while running around with a bag of cash, complete with dollar symbols.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I do think he cares about the Michigan auto workers and Columbine families, and I believe he gets people to talk and think about points they might not have considered before. I do not however agree with a majority of his points.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

T3|-| F7U>< C4P4C41 said:


> > Your on a role tonight aren't you.
> 
> 
> After giving up smoking and being bed-ridden for two weeks with pneumonia you would be too. As for scapegoat, you make it out like this fat a$$ everyone hates misled the American public for years while running around with a bag of cash, complete with dollar symbols.


yeah im sure he didnt get rich off his documentaries :roll:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

What do his earnings have to do with his feelings towards the people he spoke with and his target audience? Money is a side effect of making popular motion pictures.


----------



## T3|-| F7U&gt;&lt; C4P4C41 (Mar 22, 2006)

Denis, you're missing my point. You act as if he shafted everyone in America and got away with it, when in reality he's just another hollywood *****.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

you missed my point, maybe the article reads like he shafted everyone in america, but that wasnt really what i meant. i was just saying i dont like the guy, and i think that the gullibilty of the dems have made him rich. i dont think he cares about the issues he addresses either. he has found away to tap into ppls dislike of the right to get rich. and myself also questioning the current administration, cant believe everyone buys into him. thats all, hes not public enemy #1. he didnt really rip anyone off i guess, hes just really fake.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I am confused, what do his movies have to do with putting those who are rich? Thus far I've seen him attack Heston and Bush, but not for being rich.


----------



## T3|-| F7U&gt;&lt; C4P4C41 (Mar 22, 2006)

Ok, thanks for the clairifcation, it seemed as though you were trying to paint a different picture of just another *******.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

Militant_Tiger said:


> I am confused, what do his movies have to do with putting those who are rich? Thus far I've seen him attack Heston and Bush, but not for being rich.


what?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

dennis_d said:


> Militant_Tiger said:
> 
> 
> > I am confused, what do his movies have to do with putting those who are rich? Thus far I've seen him attack Heston and Bush, but not for being rich.
> ...





> *he has found away to tap into ppls dislike of the right to get rich*


This.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

i meant of ppls dislike of the right wing


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

The right to get rich vs the right wing? You have really got me confused now. Those have nothing to do with one another.


----------



## dennis_d (Feb 1, 2006)

Militant_Tiger said:


> dennis_d said:
> 
> 
> > Militant_Tiger said:
> ...


your making it too hard. I meant he has found a way to tap into ppls dislike of the right wing administration to make himself rich.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> he has found away to tap into ppls dislike of the right to get rich.


He is saying that he found a way to tap into peoples dislike of the right --------so he could get rich. He didn't say anything about the rich. I know RICH is a word that gets peoples eyes open, but come on we disagree enough without imagining things. Is there going to be a full moon tonight or something?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

He stated that he tapped into people's dislike of the right (as in granted ability) to get rich. No need for sarcasm here.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> What do his earnings have to do with his feelings towards the people he spoke with and his target audience?


Does PT Barnum Ring a bell.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Militant_Tiger said:


> He stated that he tapped into people's dislike of the right (as in granted ability) to get rich. No need for sarcasm here.


I am not being sarcastic. I quoted him and he said:


> he has found away to tap into ppls dislike of the right to get rich.


I take that to mean that Moore taped into peoples dislike of the right to make himself rich. That is what it says.

Edit: oh I get it my full moon comment. That was because on every thread everyone is angry.


----------



## hill billy (Jan 10, 2006)

> That was because on every thread everyone is angry.


But it is all in good fun P.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

I think you all have missed the one point that is important here! I truely belive that most people who watch his films take his info at face value. Most people when they see a movie and at the end of that movie, the phraze "Based on actual events" pops up they take the movie at face value. They think its all true, I think we are all forgetting the power of movies and cinema. Michael Moore knows this he attacks real events with with BS editing.

Just think of this for a moment, you walk down the beach hand in hand wth your wife, seems inocent enought. The next day sombody like Michael Moore prints headline news Walking nude on the beach you see yourself and your wife on the front page with edit blur over your privates. You will be explaining this to people with grins from ear to ear for years to come. What Moore does should have to have a disclaimer saying that this IS NOT FACTUAL!!


----------



## hill billy (Jan 10, 2006)

Everybody knows that....


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

You would be suprized!!! How many don't.


----------



## hill billy (Jan 10, 2006)

Yeah you are right there are alot of people in the world that buy into senseless bull like that. They will believe anything just because it somehow fits together and makes sense. I am not directing this to any of my fellow outdoorsmen/women on this site...


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> Just think of this for a moment, you walk down the beach hand in hand wth your wife, seems inocent enought. The next day sombody like Michael Moore prints headline news Walking nude on the beach you see yourself and your wife on the front page with edit blur over your privates. You will be explaining this to people with grins from ear to ear for years to come. What Moore does should have to have a disclaimer saying that this IS NOT FACTUAL!!


But that isn't what happens at all. Those are apples and oranges. You could claim that he takes quotes out of context, but certainly not that he changes what actually occured.



> Yeah you are right there are alot of people in the world that buy into senseless bull like that. They will believe anything just because it somehow fits together and makes sense. I am not directing this to any of my fellow outdoorsmen/women on this site...


Reminds me of how the government sold the Iraq war.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

Yes MT it is the same, to mislead is to mislead. A white lie is a lie. You are smarter than that MT CMON!!! :x


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Bore.224 said:


> Yes MT it is the same, to mislead is to mislead. A white lie is a lie. You are smarter than that MT CMON!!! :x


Care to explain yourself?


----------



## hill billy (Jan 10, 2006)

:lol:


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

Ok MT , A man was robbed the other day, "David Copperfield" he was un harmed and the gun toting bad guys got caught. In an interview with the press Mr copperfield said "Its good to get people with guns off the street" obviously glad to hear the bad guys got caught!

Ok lets spin his statement, "its good to get people with guns off the street". Ok people with guns, we have bad guys, good guys, Police officers they are people with guns. So would it be a lie if I said "David Copperfield said all cops should be taken off the street? After all they are people with guns right!! How is that different than blurring out a bathing suit and claiming Nude Beach. Either way the truth is lost and it is a lie!!


----------



## hill billy (Jan 10, 2006)

You put alot of thought in that one.. Good scenario though...


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

The president isn't your average Joe. He lives in the political realm. Words must be carefully chosen.

As to Mr. Moore, what statements has he taken out of context such that they no longer reflected the original point?


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

How about Charleston Heston Holding up the musket and saying "From My Cold Dead Hands"!! He implied that it happened at the NRA meeting that took place right after the Colimbine shootings, when in fact the event took place a year later. He also left out the fact the NRA cancelled gun shows and other events that it could around that time of the shootings. Moore made it seem as if the NRA thumbed their noses at the Colimbine tradgedy when in fact this was not true.

Hope that works for YA, Mil-tiger!! 8)


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I never got that impression from the movie. Might just be you.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

Mil-Tiger, You just might be right!! I cannot tell you what you should think!!


----------



## backhome (Oct 25, 2004)

I am not a fan of him, though I do not hold it against him for creating and promoting a product (his movies) for which people pay money. That sounds a lot like capitalism. I did not read all of the banter up to this post, but I did see a suggestion that he lied about Columbine and everything else. Is there any proof to that? If I missed the facts I apologize.


----------

