filtherton

Maybe you should start making distinctions between the "real" journalists and psychologists you are refering to and the rest of the "real" psychologists and journalists whose opinions you care not for. You could say, "The real journalists or psychologist who believe this, not the real journalists or psychologists who believe this.
Your straw man is you pretending to care about "the issues" when it seems you really only care about the idea that michael moore has nothing at all important or relevant to say.


Well, if you think any of those folks have any more "journalistic integrity" than mm i think we may need to call a doctor for you.
I think valid points are wonderful, i don't care where they come from. If i hear coulter or limbaugh, or even hitler say something that makes sense to me, and seems relatively credible then i will consider it, ponder what it means in relation to what i believe. I don't stick my fingers in my ears and scream LALALALALALALALALALA just because someone shows a lack of integrity. Shit, if it was only about integrity where would you get your news? Do you think every thing in the NYT is completely and patently false just because lacks integrity as "part of the liberal media?"

Who in the public eye doesn't lie, mislead, and distort his/her evidence rather than just show the facts? That is politics as usual. It doesn't start with mm and it doesn't stop with him. Do you think the president has been completely honest and forthright in all that he has said to the american people? You think g.w.bush or bill clinton, for that matter, never lied, mislead, and distorted their motivations instead of just showing the facts. Are you trying to hold mm to a higher standard than the president of the united states of america?