The documentary "No End in Sight" (mentioned in the previous post) has plenty of company. Hollywood is releasing a number of high-profile feature films dealing with the war in Iraq, says the New York Times, and without exception, the focus is on the downsides -- devastated families, stressed-out troops, horrendous "collateral damage" to Iraqis. Oscar-winning writer/director Paul Haggis ("Crash"), for example is completing work on In the Valley of Elah, based on the true story of an American soldier, Richard R. Davis, who was murdered by members of his unit. “This is not one of our brighter moments in America,” Oscar-winning writer-director Paul Haggis told the Times. “We should not have gotten involved.”
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Hollywood Goes to War
The documentary "No End in Sight" (mentioned in the previous post) has plenty of company. Hollywood is releasing a number of high-profile feature films dealing with the war in Iraq, says the New York Times, and without exception, the focus is on the downsides -- devastated families, stressed-out troops, horrendous "collateral damage" to Iraqis. Oscar-winning writer/director Paul Haggis ("Crash"), for example is completing work on In the Valley of Elah, based on the true story of an American soldier, Richard R. Davis, who was murdered by members of his unit. “This is not one of our brighter moments in America,” Oscar-winning writer-director Paul Haggis told the Times. “We should not have gotten involved.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
88 comments:
I wonder if Bush will freeze all of Paul's assets under his new law?
No Shirley, only if he commits and act of violence in protest of the war. Making a movie is not an act of violence. Burning someone's house down or bombing a public building is an act of violence. Get it?
Shirley heezgay,
Bush's new law is only for ACTS OF VIOLENCE in the name of war protest. That means that if someone decided to shoot you in protest of the war, their assets would be frozen. Or someone decided to detinate a car bomb in protest of the war (just like the crazies do in Iraq). Not making a movie or using freedom of speech. Only VIOLENT ACTS. Quit putting your spin on it.
Not putting any kind of "spin" on anything. Actually, I was kinda being sarcastic. But since you brought it up...maybe you guys are getting whipped up because deep down, you fear that GWB will take it to that extreme?
What are the rumblings that I'm hearing about him being able to be solely responsible for all branches of gov't in the event of extreme crisis?
I worry because it all sounds just a little dictator-ish... I won't say which one.
Get it?
Hollywood making films about the war & focusing on the downsides-imagine that! These ultra left-wing libs. turn my stomach.
Does anyone really believe that we have accomplished nothing over there?
Dems. & libs. say they support the troops but not the mission. Well, saying that they haven't accomplished anything & never will doesn't sound like "support".
Bottom line: Whining, crying libs. STILL can't get over the fact that Bush is STILL the president. They suffer from "Bush Hatred" & will do & say anything to butcher this administration.
Keep letting the enemy know how divided we are-it gives them the fuel they need to forge ahead.
ENEMY? WHAT ENEMY?? Al-qaeda Al qaeda in Irag? The guys training on the monkey bars?
This whole "terrorist" threat scenario is so overblown it's pathetic. Look at all the lives, money, time and energy that has been spent to fight a relatively SMALL threat to the American public.
If all the money and effort that has been spend on this trumped-up adventure in the Middle East had been spent on HEATH CARE and EDUCATION, the public would be far more SAFE and HEALTHY than they are after 6 years of nonsense.
We have meet the enemy, and it is US!
"Bottom line: Whining, crying libs. STILL can't get over the fact that Bush is STILL the president. They suffer from "Bush Hatred" & will do & say anything to butcher this administration."
Totally right. Why IS he still the president? Even Nixon stepped down.
Everyone was ready to impeach Clinton over some improprieties that had potential ramifications. Ultimately, all that happened was he got some hummers and didn't put his cigar in the ashtray.
The 75% of Americans who don't like him are not 'butchering' his administration. He's doing it all by himself, clearing a path into infamy, taking the gov't, the American people, and the REST of the world with him.
Okay, time for a show of hands -- how many posters here have personally been in the military during a war? Oh, wow -- NONE? I'm SO shocked!! If you think this war is worth fighting, why aren't you in Iraq or Afghanistan right now? Oh, right, you're busy holding down the home front and clogging up the tubes on the internets. Chickenhawk cowards.
stayhungry - I hope you starve to death.
ENEMY? WHAT ENEMY? Why don't you check out www.americawakeup.org? You'll find out who they are. Give them any damn name you want (or don't want). They are all the same-they are radical & they want America & the rest of western civilization wiped off the face of the earth. What part of that don't you understand??
And, if 75% of Americans hate Bush, why is it that ImpeachBush.org hasn't quite met the million mark yet? Here's a theory for you: Maybe the media wants everyone to believe that Bush is hated by majority. If they could alter facts regarding 9/11, I guess they could alter polls too, now couldn't they?
With over 300 million people in this country l million signatures to impeach this President is hardly the MAJORITY now is it?
Sandy, I believe you're right. impeachbush.org should have more than a million signatures.
Perhaps it is because of two words that one anon poster said:
Apathy & Laziness
Apathy & Liziness is also the reason people in this country don't want to fight the enemy. We are fat cats who think nothing can happen here (9/11 woke eveyone up for about 15 min-then we forgot).
Do you not see the leaders of these countries on TV vowing "Death to Ameica"? Or are those clips really Bush & Cheney in disquise?
Please take the time to view THE POWER OF NIGHTMARES, posted here, and then comment.
Thanks!
"one way or the other, we are determinded to deny
Iraq the capacity to develop WMDs and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." -Pres.Clinton, Feb.4,1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's WMD'S program."-Pres. Clinton, Feb.17, 1998.
"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with WMD's". -Madeline Albright, Feb.1, l998
"He will use the WMD's again, as he has ten times since 1983." -Sandy Berger, Clinton Natl. Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998
"(We) urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD'S programs." - (D) senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of WMD's technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA) Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has..chosen to spend his money on building WMD'S and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Sec. of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
Take note of the dates of these quotes. All BEFORE Bush was president. So much for the "cherry -picked" facts the Dems. NOW say is the reason they voted for war.
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!
"WAKE UP" is right! Wake up and smell the real Truth!
(and watch the videos...)
I did watch the videos.
Now here are a few more quotes you can read:
"Iraq's search for WMD's has proven impossible to deter & we should assure that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - AL GORE
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking & developing WMD's."- TED KENNEDY
"The last UN inpsectors left Iraq in Oct. of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical & biological weapons, and that he has embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical & biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." SEN. ROBERT BYRD (D)
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have them within the next FIVE years..We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of WMD'S." SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D)
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of WMD'S." - SEN. BOB GRAHAM (D)
Take a whiff of this-it is the real truth. OPEN YOUR EYES!!
Stephanie - Saddam is gone.
He was never a threat to anyone but Iran and Israel, if that. We could have BOUGHT AND SOLD him if we wanted to. WAKE YOU, you have been repeatedly lied to.
You will never convince me or millions of others, that we are one bit safer or better off after this foolish, unnecessary fiasco in IRAQ.
...and now with Saddam gone, why can't he infuse that same energy into finding bin Laden?
I mean, Saddam was found inside a HOLE IN THE GROUND! Brought to justice, tried, convicted, executed.
Wasn't that the mission? Sure, Clinton and a bunch of Dems talked about SH's WMD's...but UN Weapons Inspectors could not find them, and GWB went to war anyway.
Again, they found him in a hole in the ground. bin Laden is supposedly hiding out in a cave in Afghanistan. "Al Qaeda is the enemy." I'm not saying that Hussein wasn't tied in some way to that group, but BUSH himself said that Osama was responsible. Why not go after him first????
I think Michael Moore answered that a few times, already.
Nighty night!
To Shoes: How can you say that we have not been safer since 9/11 when we have not been attacked since then? Not to say that there will not be another one but there has NOT been one since 9/11. Besides,what are you worrying about being safe from? Not the terrorists. Because, as we all know, they don't really exist. Bush & CO. only tells us that to SCARE us!
It is better that these radicals are out of their caves and actually fighting over there. Because if not, they'd be IN those caves secretly plotting their next big attack OVER HERE.
Sure they hate Bush.He has the b----to fight back (unlike another former Pres.) Maybe our govt. will create havoc in every corner of the world in order to protect our homeland.
To Shirley: The point of the quotes is to show that all those Dems. supported the war before things started to go sour. Then they all blamed their decisions on so-called "cherry picked" information. What BS.
All (or most) politicans & govts. lie (including the radical leaders) but I will give our government the "benefit of the doubt" when it comes down to "us" or "them".
I do believe that Bush & CO. were not truthful when they said that a nuclear was in the very near future. But what was he to do? Sit back & do nothing like Clinton. Let them keep kicking us little by litte until the next BIGGER one? We need to play offense not defense.
.
But you (& others like you) can continue to believe morons like Michael Moore (& others like him). Amazing, Bush is a liar &but you believe Moore's BS! Pitiful-
Nighty, night to you too! DREAM ON!
Stephanie said...
To Shoes: How can you say that we have not been safer since 9/11 when we have not been attacked since then?
What makes you so sure that we were ATTACKED on 9-11 and if so by WHO? The jury is still out on that, WAY OUT.
PLEASE VIEW THE VIDEOS POSTED ON THIS SITE.
Thanks
To shoes: We already know the who & why reagarding 9/11. And the jury is still out only for all conspiracy theorits who refuse to accept & believe the thruth.
I DID WATCH THE VIDEO'S!
You can't brainwash everyone.
Who's brainwashing who?
Thanks for watching the videos, I hope they helped you gain some rational perspective.
The jury, BTW, is still out on 7WTC. so until then...
To Shoes: I'am new to this website & a little confused.
Is it your belief that just the current administration is responsible for creating terrorism or administrations before this one are in on it too?
Just find it a little hard to believe that the current administration drummed all of this up in only 7 months before actual attack.
Maria said...
To Shoes: I'am new to this website & a little confused.
Is it your belief that just the current administration is responsible for creating terrorism...?
Good question, Maria. Let us clarify.
If you read history and watch be BBC documentary above, you will realize that, although that Bush administration did not "create" the terrorist threat,
they magnified and capitalized on it. They used what was (and is) a relatively SMALL threat to the American public, to launch a series of programs, wars and operations to further their Neo Con agenda and usurped everyone's constitutional rights. Not to mention the largest transfer of wealth in history from he poor and middle class to wealthy corporations and their officers. They have destroyed the middle class in American, you just don't know it yet. (Remember, Maria, "There are only 2 kinds of Republicans, millionaires and fools."
All this based on the events of 9-11, the "official" reports and investigations which are suspicious at best and at worst, a cover-up.
Look and think for yourself please.
Shoes: You didn't answer the question. Are past administrations and/or current one responsible? I think you do not want to actually come out & say it is the current one but you certainly give every indication that it is.
How does one "take wealth from the poor" and isn't it the American Dream to work hard and be financially independent? Why are then people hated when they achieve that?
Me thinks this is an ultra-liberal left-wing site that blames conseratives for everything.
Why is it that you don't mention the Democrats and the scare tatic of global warming they use. Just curious.
Let me clarify -- as the documentary "The Power of Nightmares" shows, it is the current administration's Neocon agenda that is responsible for where we are today. The documentary explains that people are much more easily manipulated when they are fearful. That's why Bush is constantly bringing up 9/11 and terrorists. Then he uses those scare tactics as an excuse to destroy our constitutional rights and break the law.
Experts estimate that the war in Iraq will cost more than $1 trillion, all paid for by taxpayer dollars! That money could have been spent on rebuilding bridges, like the one that collapsed yesterday in Minnesota, or on rebuilding the Gulf Coast and New Orleans, which is still a disaster area, or on health care, education, and so many other worthwhile endeavors. Instead, companies like Halliburton, where Dick Cheney worked, have made billions of dollars from the war. Bush's tax cuts gave billions to the wealthiest people in the nation. And meanwhile, the lower and middle class citizens in this country have seen their standards of living drop.
No one here has said (that I'm aware of) that it's bad to be rich. Certainly, wealth can be a reward of hard work. But often wealth is the result of unfair advantages or criminal activity (remember the Robber Barons?)
Finally, global warming is very real and there is overwhelming scientific proof that it exists. As for the Democrats using it as a threat, if you are speaking about Congress, they have not passed one single piece of legislation directed at the issue. If you mean the Democratic presidential candidates, the reason they are talking about it is because the vast majority of the world believes global warming is real and that something must be done as soon as possible.
I hope this answers some of your questions.
Shoes: What is this documentary"Power of Nightmares" & BBC-the know all and be all?
Talk about the govt. manipulating fear. That is exactly what this web site is trying to do-create fear of our government.
As far as the money spent in Iraq:
l. The bridges should have been fixed long before we went into Iraq
2. NO received lots of money over the years to fix those levy's. Where did it go?
3.Education & health care was a mess also, long before we went to Iraq.
Unfortunatley, there will ALWAYS be the poor class (just as there ALWAYS has been). And do you think that just maybe lots of middle class people are trying to live of the lives of the people that really have the money to to so? How many middle class are living WAY beyond their means? If you make $50,000/yr, you don't spend like your making $150,000.I think there is alot of "class envy" that exists in this country. Everyone wants what everyone else has but not everyone is willing to work for it.
And, "Republicans are either millionaires or fools". Really! I believe all the Hollywood millionaires are mostly Democrats. Or is it OK to be a millionaire if one is Democract and/or liberal?
Global Warming: It may be a problem but please don't say VAST MAJORITy beleive so. There are as many scientists that say there is no great threat as there are those who say it is. And yes, the Dems.ARE using global warming as a scare tatic to get the spotlight away from the real threat.
.As far as being a Republican goes: There is some point in everyone's life where they have to either GROW UP or WISE UP!
Maria said...
Shoes: What is this documentary"Power of Nightmares" & BBC-the know all and be all?
NO, BUT WE THINK IT BRINGS UP SOME VERY INTERESTING AND THOUGHT PROVOKING ISSUES, DON'T YOU?
Talk about the govt. manipulating fear. That is exactly what this web site is trying to do-create fear of our government.
YES, SHOULDN'T YOU BE SKEPTICAL OF WHAT POLITICIANS TELL YOU?
As far as the money spent in Iraq:
l. The bridges should have been fixed long before we went into Iraq
BUT THEY WEREN'T.
2. NO received lots of money over the years to fix those levy's. Where did it go? THE GOVERNMENTS RESPONSE IS STILL A DISGRACE!
3.Education & health care was a mess also, long before we went to Iraq. SO HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY GOING???
Unfortunatley, there will ALWAYS be the poor class (just as there ALWAYS has been). And do you think that just maybe lots of middle class people are trying to live of the lives of the people that really have the money to to so? HUH?
How many middle class are living WAY beyond their means? If you make $50,000/yr, you don't spend like your making $150,000.I think there is alot of "class envy" that exists in this country. Everyone wants what everyone else has but not everyone is willing to work for it.I THINK YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT, MOST MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS ARE VOTING AGAINST THERE BEST INTERESTS BASED ON FEAR AND PHONY CULTURAL ISSUES.
And, "Republicans are either millionaires or fools". Really! I believe all the Hollywood millionaires are mostly Democrats. Or is it OK to be a millionaire if one is Democract and/or liberal?
I THINK YOU MISSED THE POINT HERE TOO. If you subscribe to REPUBLICAN VALUES and are not a Millionaire you are a FOOL!
Global Warming: It may be a problem but please don't say VAST MAJORITy beleive so. There are as many scientists that say there is no great threat as there are those who say it is. And yes, the Dems.ARE using global warming as a scare tatic to get the spotlight away from the real threat. AND WHAT MIGHT THAT BE??
.As far as being a Republican goes: There is some point in everyone's life where they have to either GROW UP or WISE UP! CORRECT!
We hope you do both.
Thanks!
Wow. I haven't actually heard from anyone that denies global warming.
Even if you don't want to hear about scientific evidence, numbers, measurements etc....you can't deny things that you can SEE WITH YOUR OWN EYES. Talk about "Wake up/Wise up."
Anyone who thinks that GW doesn't exist and won't affect you or your children IN THIS LIFETIME is living in a fool's paradise.
I just hope everyone can swim.
And when it comes to New Orleans...what does it matter that they've been given money to rebuild when they clearly need so much more help. Doesn't it anger you that this all that death and destruction happened right there in America, that thousands of people unaccounted for, warzone neighbourhoods, citizens murdered by the military and on and on.
Or is it okay because it wasn't a couple of airplanes, some jet fuel and a dictator at the core of it all?
Shoes: Skeptical is one thing-paranoid is another (ur later).
1.Bridges should have but weren't fixed BEFORE Bush.
2. Again, where did the money go the fix the levy's? (BB)
The response was a diaster. Who's fault was that. Dem mayor, Dem. governor. They knew what a diaster this could someday be but were not prepared in the least.
3.How do you know why every American votes the way they do?
Global warming threat takes away from real threat - TERRORISM (whether you like that term or not)
Shirley: Did not deny global warming. Said it is not the great threat that Dems. say it is. And if you haven't heard that before you need to find some new web sites or change the channel.
And, what difference does it make how much money NO received prior to Katrina? Are you serious? Didn't use the money for repairs so what? Do they just keep getting more?
Shoes: I've already grown up and wised up. NOW IT YOUR TURN!.
Maria said...
1.Bridges should have but weren't fixed BEFORE Bush. THE WHY, IF HE'S SO GREAT, WHY DID HE NOT FIX THEM? WHERE'S THE MONEY?
2. Again, where did the money go the fix the levy's? (BB)
The response was a diaster. Who's fault was that. Dem mayor, Dem. governor. They knew what a diaster this could someday be but were not prepared in the least. HECK OF A COMMENT, MARIA!
3.How do you know why every American votes the way they do?
Global warming threat takes away from real threat - TERRORISM (whether you like that term or not)IS NOT AS GREAT A THREAT AS YOU WANT TO THINK IT IS, GLOBAL WARMING IS.
Shirley: Did not deny global warming. Said it is not the great threat that Dems. say it is. And if you haven't heard that before you need to find some new web sites or change the channel.
And, what difference does it make how much money NO received prior to Katrina? Are you serious? Didn't use the money for repairs so what? Do they just keep getting more?
Shoes: I've already grown up and wised up. NOW IT YOUR TURN!.
WE BEG TO DIFFER, YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE
LACKING IN SUBSTANCE AND BELEIVABLILTY. BUT THANKS ANY WAY!
Shoes: Minnesota DID receive money to fix the bridges THEY are the ones that didn't do it. Indeed, WHERE DID THAT MONEY GO!
2. The local & state governments are the first responders to disasters-NOT the feds. And they did such a piss-poor job initially, it was utter choas by the time the feds. were asked to step in. You can't answere the questions "where did the money go for the levy repair" so, all you can say is "HECK OF A COMMENT MARIA". Well, a HECK OF AN ANSWER to the question.
Shoes: So, you are actually denying that there are scientists who disagree with the scientists regarding the urgency of global warming? You don't want to hear what they have to say so, you just deny their existence.
Typical lib. reaction: You don't agree with me so shut up & go away.
And they did such a piss-poor job initially, it was utter choas by the time the feds. were asked to step in.
AND THEY DID A HECK OF A JOB WHEN THEY FINALLY DID, didn't they.
The levels are constructed by the ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, not the state.
Regardless, N.O. is a national (REPUBLICAN) disgrace. So much for your fucking "compassionate conservatism". Where is that in N.O.
Shoes: So, you are actually denying that there are scientists who disagree with the scientists regarding the urgency of global warming? No, but there are also "scientists" that promote "intelligent design." They are fools.
You don't want to hear what they have to say so, you just deny their existence.
Typical lib. reaction: You don't agree with me so shut up & go away.
You are welcome to stay and make what ever unrealistic comments you want, feel free.
"For those who still don't grasp the scale of the failure of the Army Corps of Engineers in constructing the defenses Congress mandated them to build to protect New Orleans, Sunday's Times-Picayune offers the Corps' own study of the crucial, and crucially compromised, 17th Street Canal. The good news, according to the Corps: with the building of the floodgates at the mouth of the canals, the canal's fearfully mis-constructed walls are no longer the front line of defense against flood surge. The bad news: the floodwall, rated to protect against a 13-foot surge, actually couldn't withstand a seven-footer:
Corps officials had hoped to be able to raise the (safe) level another foot or so, but they backed off after finding too many weak links.
The most troubling area is on the New Orleans side of the canal near the Veterans Memorial Boulevard bridge, which the analysis indicated couldn't safely tolerate more than 6.3 feet of surge.
Katrina's surge at this spot was no more than ten feet. The American people paid the Corps to be almost four feet short of protecting the city. Too many weak links indeed."
Shoes: I believe the "open" forum on this site just became a wide open sewer with the use of your foul language (but that's OK YOUR SITE-YOUR LANGUAGE).Just remeber that when someone else let's loose.
You're so quick to criticize the feds. because of the bad job they did but do not even mention (again) the piss-poor job the locals did. Why? Because the piss-poor mayor and the piss-poor governor were DEMOCRATS. You pound the republicans because of the fisaco but give the DEMS. a free pass on their piss-poor job.
Did I say I was a "compassionate" conserative?
Shoes: My, my what language! Thought you said this was an open "forum" not open "sewer".
OK to if you are so quick to attack the feds. on the job they did or (didn"t
do, how can you not even mention the piss-poor job the locals did. Why? Because the piss-poor mayor and the piss-poor governor are DEMOCRATS that you defend.
The feds. cannot come into the state until the governor has asked them to do so. So, therefore (Again),THEY WHERE THE 1ST RESPONDERS (that did a piss-poor job)
No one seems to address the question of "where's the 'compassionate conservatism' or does that only apply to white, upper middle-class Republicans?
You're so quick to criticize the feds. because of the bad job they did but do not even mention (again) the piss-poor job the locals did. Why? Because the piss-poor mayor and the piss-poor governor were DEMOCRATS. You pound the republicans because of the fisaco but give the DEMS. a free pass on their piss-poor job.
so let me get this straight, you are claiming that the Feds, who were responsible for the flood control in the first place (Army Corps of engineers) did a GREAT JOB? They were responsible for the many DEATHS, the Local government at least didn't KILL anyone.
2. The local & state governments are the first responders to disasters-NOT the feds. And they did such a piss-poor job initially, it was utter choas by the time the feds. were asked to step in. You can't answere the questions "where did the money go for the levy repair" so, all you can say is "HECK OF A COMMENT MARIA". Well, a HECK OF AN ANSWER to the question.
OK, Maria, last time I checked the
FEDS (The Army Corp of Engineers, look it up) are responsible for building and maintaining flood control in N.O. Not the locals.
Regardless, the Feds did and continue to do "a heck of a job."
Not rebuilding N.O. is a national disgrace, but obviously quite a few Americans (the 29% who still support this administration) have NO shame.
Go see "No End In Sight" or read "Fiasco", then we'll talk.
I wouldn't waste my HARD EARNED money on moron Michael Moore's "Fiasco".
With the knowledge that a Hurricane could wipe-out NO at anytime they should have been prepared. I do feel bad for the people there but the local govt. was initially responsible. How could they not have an evacuation plan in place? (Remember all the school buses that sat idle?) If blame the feds. for deaths then certainly the locals were responsible for some, too. And what about the people that refused to leave? Let me guess....
Alright, you don't want to see a Michael Moore documentary.
How about Spike Lee's "When The Levees Broke"
It's a 4 DVD series. Got the time?
Anonymous said...
I wouldn't waste my HARD EARNED money on moron Michael Moore's "Fiasco".
We hate to resort to internets shorthand but we're ROTFLMAO...
FYI Anon, Michael Moore had nothing to do with "FIASCO" it was a BOOK by Reporter Thomas Ricks, available on Amazon, you might enjoy it. Michael Moore has a movie out called "SICKO" about the health care system in America, again, go see it, you might enjoy it.
Spike Lee, friend of the show.
Have not seen his N.O. doc but will put it on the list, thanks for the recommendation!
Shirley: SPIKE LEE! Your are kidding. I can only guess that "When the Levy Broke" (or whatever it's called) is about how Bush hate's blacks so that is why they broke & that is why they weren't rescued. Spike Lee's version was surely a racial one.
Shoes: Once again, I don't waste my money or time on MORON Michael Moore's propaganda movies.
Well it's great to know that you have great, affordable heath insurance and are in good health, otherwise you might enjoy viewing MM's latest film "SiCKO"
Shoes: Not saying health insurance situation is perfect in this country. But, I'm sure MORON MIKE blew it WAY out of proportion.
And you actually listen to a man who thinks things are great in CUBA? Why doesn't he (& maybe you) go and spend the rest of your days Castro's wonderful country?
Anonymous said...
Shoes: Not saying health insurance situation is perfect in this country. But, I'm sure MORON MIKE blew it WAY out of proportion.
DID YOU ACTUALLY SEE THE MOVIE?
Anon: ARe you actually implying there isn't a racial element to the rescue New Orleans?
I think that if you took the time to watch even only Part 1, and just ignore any racial slant (since you seem to be racially motivated) you would see that what's STILL happening there is a human issue.
YOUR GOVERNMENT IS LETTING THIS CONTINUE. YOUR PRESIDENT. YOUR "LEADERS".
Shoes, I hope you will take the time to see the doc.
Peace.
Sorry about that....
I'll repost without the profanity. I just get so whipped up.
ANON:
"And you actually listen to a man who thinks things are great in CUBA? Why doesn't he (& maybe you) go and spend the rest of your days Castro's wonderful country? "
YOU'VE GOT TO BE HIGH! It is obvious you didn't see this doc.
He took 9/11 RESCUE WORKERS to Cuba to try to get them medical attention at the AMERICAN MILITARY BASE. A base in a communist country that is providing FREE HEALTH CARE to the TERRORISTS that George is "protecting" the USA from.
The only place "things are great in Cuba" is at Guantanamo.
Get a clue!
Shirley is right, anonymous. You have to actually see the movie before commenting. Unless, of course, that doesn't matter to you, and all you're here for is to bash Michael Moore and anything Rushbo doesn't endorse.
We second that motion!
Michael Moore is a fat asshole.
That is the most eloquent and well thought out response since the days of LB@200.
He'll be missed...
Shirley: "The only place "things are "great in Cuba" is Giamo??
So, you're telling me that we abuse & torture these guys THEN give them the BEST health care.
Sorry, can't have it both ways. Which is it?
Please do your homework, go see SiCKO.
Thanks!
Won't waste my time & money on Moron Michael Moore's sick flicks.
Maybe you'll have to explain (or not). Thanks
You own it to yourself to go see SiCKO, you can also download if search for it on the internets.
Then we'll talk.
Thanks!
Here... http://tinyurl.com/354ny2
You can download it and watch for FREE! Plus have the double satisfaction of knowing you're taking money out of Michael Moore's wallet by doing so. In fact the more you watch, the more he loses...it's a win win.
Shoes: Read slowly. I WILL NOT WATCH MORON MICHAEL'S sick flicks. So, I guess we won't talk.
So, who cares if he would be losing money. I'm sure all the "hits" on his site would be taken as everyone agreeing with him. No, thanks.
You might just enjoy SiCKO and even learn something.
Thanks
"Michael Moore is a fat asshole."
"That is the most eloquent and well thought out response since the days of LB@200."
"He'll be missed..."
Oh....I'm still here....just watching all the other "neo-cons" take it to you. Pretty funny....I try and tune in at least once every other day or so for a good laugh.
Oh, yeah, LB, the "neo-cons" sure are taking it to us. Whoa, I'm so impressed with their iron-clad logic and their knowledge of "facts" that it's just about all I can do to keep a straight face! What awesome adversaries. Really keeping us on our toes here -- NOT.
Come on LB! Don't you know by now that only lefties have all the "facts"???!!
As the saying goes...a laugh a day!
Please go see, No End In Sight, now playing.
Anon said:"So, you're telling me that we abuse & torture these guys THEN give them the BEST health care."
Um, yes that is exactly what I'm saying. If you think for one moment that those people are NOT being tortured and forced to confess WITHOUT LAWYERS PRESENT then you are living in a fool's paradise.
Torture is something that the US Military rarely comments on, but doesn't deny.
"Sorry, can't have it both ways. Which is it?"
I don't want it "both ways." I just want the right way.
How about you?
Try doing some homework on the situation.
Take a look at SiCKO, the link is posted here somewhere. Then comment
Thanks
Shirley, you nailed it -- the trolls reside in a "fool's paradise," where ignorance is bliss and everything's very simple -- black or white, you're with us or you're against us, libs bad, cons good. It's too bad they don't teach critical thinking or logic or debate skills in most schools anymore.
MoneyS - In your little paradise you believe that all cons. are bad and libs. are good. So, what's the difference between my paradise and yours-you believe what you want and I'll believe what I want
Hey, Janet, I think you're missing the point (AGAIN)! I do not judge people by labels, but by who they are as individuals. I do not make snap judgments about a person's character based on something so simplistic as what political party they prefer.
That's the difference between us. My mind is open to questions, challenges and learning. You are making it clear by your posts here that you prefer hackneyed right-wing talking points, rather than careful consideration of opposing points of view.
Okay,now it's your turn. Go look up the word "hackneyed" and write your little screed on how horrible liberals and post a reply. I'll be here waiting. I could use another good laugh.
Moneysmith - you don't judge by labels? Troll, neo-cons, war-mongers, chickenhawks, Bush-backer as "dead-ender allies in the Republican party" & hackneyed right-wing politics. Any of those labels sound familiar? They should because you used them all.
Aren't you putting people who watch Fox News and listen to "Billo" and "Rushbo" into a "group" and then giving that group a "label"?
Spin it any way you like. This site & you are left-wing ultra liberals who would like eveyone to believe that you minds are "open" to anything and anyone. Talk about a good laugh!
...and Proud of it!
Go see "No End in Sight" and then let us know what you think of YOUR Bush-team!
If you actually READ what I said, lee, you'll see that I do judge people by who they are as individuals. And as you and your pointy-headed friends have made abundantly clear, you are indeed deserving of labels like "troll."
You are not here to discuss the posts, are you? Why not? Why are you so threatened by a movie that you feel you have to change the subject and engage in personal attacks?
MS: You do not judge by individuals because you are always putting those individuals into groups with labels. Neo-cons, pointy-headed? And where are you getting PERSONALLY attacked?
Why are you avoiding answering my questions, lee?
Why didn't you answer my questions MS? How are you being personally attacked? Because someone disagrees with you. Don't be so paranoid.
Now, what questions didn't I answer? I do discuss what is on this site but it is not what you want to year so it interpet it as a personal attack.
I'm hardly threatened by a movie.
And what "subject" am I changing. There seems to be a hell of a lot of different subjects being discussed here.
What other questions do I seem to be avoiding?
Lee, the original post is about the number of anti-war movies being released. I don't see any comments from you about that. All you're doing is making accusations about "left wing ultra liberals."
The majority of the American people no longer support the war or the president, so I guess that makes you the minority.
Of course Hollywood would only make movies focusing on the downside of the war and of course, the New York Times would give it a thumbs up. That's why newspapers are filled with bad news - it sells.
You have not made any accusations about neo-cons?
And since you've put me in a minority, you better be nice or I'll cry "hate-speech".
You're really boring me, lee.
MS - I guess we're even then.
We're not even close to being even, lee. Check the polls. The majority of Americans believe this war was a mistake and want it to end now. And commander guy's approval rating is at a historic low. Looks like my side is winning.
*Smile*
MS - What do the polls have to do with us being even? When I said we're even, I meant I am bored with you, too. So, we're even. Got it?
But since you brought up the subject of polls. Bush doesn't run the country according to his "approval" rating (thank God).
And, just what is "your side" winning?
Post a Comment