Moore admits 'ban' was a publicity stunt

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mytwocents, May 8, 2004.

  1. damir00

    damir00 Guest

    how is this different from mel gibson taunting the jewish community to raise the profile of his political film?
     
    #11     May 18, 2004
  2. #12     May 18, 2004
  3. Funny, I thought the title of this thread was about Moore, not Mel Gibson.

    As usual, after about 8 posts, the average Elite Trader thread starts to breakdown into pure crap.
     
    #13     May 18, 2004
  4. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    Hahahahahahahaha! What a piece of shit this guy is. He is like many on the left. They preach a certain lifestyle, a liberal one, but then live their lives as conservatives! LOL. So typical.

    This is some classic stuff.

    A look at Bowling for Columbine (my main analysis to date). In producing his Oscar-winner, Moore altered history, misled his viewers, and edited the footage and audio in such a way as to reverse the meaning. In one case, he took a speech of a person he desired to target; the problem was that the speech was in fact conciliatory and mild. So he spliced in footage from another speech, cut out paragraphs, and spliced the beginning of one sentence to the ending of another. In another, when he wanted to criticize a political advertisement, but it wasn't as pointed as he wanted, he spliced together two different political ads, then added titling which was in neither.


    Another of his books --Dude, Where's My Country, (page still under construction.) In this tome we learn "There is no terrorist threat," (p. 95) and Richard Nixon was the last liberal President, (p. 193). (Even more amusingly, in chapter 8 Moore pledges to contribute the limit to whichever Democrat has the best chance of winning (p. 162) and then in chapter 11 tells the reader that the Democrats are "professional losers," that "Democratic Party leaders have told me something they will not admit in public -- that they have basically written off 2004; that they see little chance of defeating George W. Bush" (p. 204) and that they might as well run Oprah Winfrey. (p. 206).)


    Why does anyone on the left take this guy seriously? I mean how can you guys on the left handle having guys like Moore and Soros running your party? Unreal.
     
    #14     May 18, 2004
  5. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    #15     May 19, 2004
  6. This again illustrates may initial premise: Hard core left wing thinking and liberalism is really about self hatred.
     
    #16     May 19, 2004