I hate Michael Moore
 

Yeah, I know this is generally a common theme for a lot of people, and I don't really have anything entirely constructive to add... But god damn.

http://media.michaelmoore.com/_media...bush-small.jpg

Talk about playing politics with the dead.

I find this incredibly disrespectful.

:mad:

Edit - Sorry for being an idiot - This is a collage of the soldiers who have died in Iraq made into the face of Bush by Michael Moore.

um.... what?

Get used to it.

4 more years, remember?

Michael Moore is a fame-chasing bastard who believes that all Republicans and Bush-supporters are the world's worst evil. He lies in his movies and produces media to get votes for Democrats through the use of persuasive, faulty facts.

-Lasereth

Are those suppose to be the faces of the dead us troops? I wish he would use the faces of the dead Iraqis, he could probably do the entire body of Bush's front and back side.

i agree, what is that picture and why is it disrespectful??

I don't hate him, and I plan on watching F 9/11 now that it's on DVD, but I really think that image is disrespectful no matter what your opinions of Bush are.

i believe that is a picture collage formed from the portraits of soldiers who have died while Bush has been in office.

It's disrespectful because I'm 100% sure he didnt even bother to ask the families to use their dead son/daughter's face. Or even bother to ask if they supported the war or not.

Having OBL come out and parrot Moore's talking points didn't help the Democrats.

If you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you pick up some fleas.

He's hard to like...

I myself am turned off by his huge ego. He thinks he's the shit because he considers himself a powerful cog in the liberal media machine. In Fehrenheit 9/11, he brought up how he casued a stir by calling him a deserter, and it really had nothing to do with the particular point he was making about Bush trying to hide his ties with someone who is connected to the Bin Laden family. I think he does more harm to his cause than help.

And it was annoying when, in Bowling for Columbine, he solemnly put the picture of that girl at Charlton Heston's home entrance.

I'm sure I could go in and on, but I'll let others do that.

Ahhh I see.

I remember programming a script to generate a picture like that (that's composed of smaller pictures with a "common" color) 2 years ago.

Next comes the rippling water java effect!

I don't think it is disrespectful at all, but then again, i'm too lazy to foster righteous indignation let alone direct it anywhere.

How is the picture connected with mm?

Guys like Moore helped get Bush elected more than they hurt him. I think the celebrities in general didn't help the candidates much. Except maybe for Arnold Schwarznegger, what could be more American than the Austrian oak, LOL.

Very true. I feel the same way. Most americans are smart enough to be able to see through some of the media and form opinions of their own.... at least i hope we are... :rolleyes:

well 1st off, moore didnt make that image, that image has been going around the internet for ages.

2nd, for all the people who want to trash on moore because of his ego, I think he deserves to have one.

He's more politically active than most people his size. He didnt get to be a fat bastard by watching fox ya know?

If you've seen his other documentaries like "The Big One" you know he's more against the mistreatment of the common man than against republicans, he trashed on clinton too. He only supported kerry grudgingly because he's "not bush"

Hell, I voted, I live in Idaho which was 70% to bush, I voted kerry and wrote in "Ficus" for every other office up for grabs cuz they were mostly rebublican, some people didnt even have an opponent!.

The guy just wants everyone to have a fair shake, if you hate him for that, then I dont know what to tell you.

I read an interview with Michael Moore and in it he stated that he produced movies to entertain. His subject matter however does seem to get peoples interest, as most good movies do.

When I first saw this thread....I dreaded it. We decided to let it run its course.

Just a note to those who are new to the politics board....we are not kind to deliberate trolling, and this is borderline. I unfortunately cannot find anything on the pic, and whether it has anything to do with Mr. Moore. I would appreciate the thread starter submitting a link or data attributing it to Moore, as clarification.

the pic is from the initial splash page on michaelmoore.com as of 6PM central time. it's been up on his site since early today.

I was wondering about this thread, at any rate techoyah, this pic is hosted on a "Michael Moore" site, the URL=h**p://media.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/home/bush-small.jpg

I hate Michael Moore threads :)

Given the incredible amounts of vitriole expended on him, you would think that he was running for office.

verified source....and thanx

Sad part is, whether he is sane and truly believes what he said in the movie or is totally whacked out and a greedy fuck not caring, I believe MM was trying to get votes for the Dems with F 9/11, unfortunately what he did was probably cost the party the election of a President and some congress members.

His and his way lefty kin with hate spewing and total holier than thou better and my shit don't stink attitude turned off a lot of Dem fencesitters and undecideds.

The problem is the right can get away with their hate spewing because for some reason "it's the family values party" and the Dems can't because their spokespeople act so self righteous that attacks begin to sound hypocritical. Look how can you have some Hollywood star talk about the environment and SUV's when it comes out they own a Hummer, have a 5 acre house run on natural gas with it's own power generator, and on and on and on.

The nice thing about the right is they'll say way out things like "all drug addicts should be exported or put into prison" and then when their biggest non "political" talking head has drug problems, it's poor guy look how the left is beating him up wanting his Dr. records to see if he was illegally doctor shopping, OR he did it because he was in pain and the operation that would relieve his pain could have affected his voice.

I don't think he actually made that picture. And I have that same picture on the cover of a progressive liberal magazine. Are you going to hate them too. The cover was actually the reason it caught my attention, and why I bought it. You going to hate me too?

Like anti-fishstick said obviously Michael Moore did not produce that image himself. The loss of life caused because of desicions made by the Bush Administration is the point that im sure Moore is trying to get across. Probably not the most respectful way to do it, but still an affective way to give his thoughts through art.

I assure you there has been lots of room for politics in art throughout history. Just as "disrespectful" or offensive as this picture. Art is political and it always has been. Just look at Dadaism post WWI. When there is war, people are going to dissent, and people are going to talk, get organized, or hell just express. I think this picture is justified in showing the horrors and reality of what's happened so far...

Michael Moore is a communist, he needs to be deported back to "fat ass land, with no brain", unless that was innappropriate, in which case, Michael Moore is a communist, and is not a good person. Take it as you will

Dan

I understand the meaning behind it and everyone on here knows I'm against the war, but that picture is disrespectful not to Bush I don't give a damn about him, but to those who have lost their lives doing what they felt was their duty to protect this country. I think it is things like that that totally turn away anyone that was on the fence.

I know if I were a member of their family or a friend I'd be upsetandfeel hateful of the Dems for doing this.

that picture would have accomplished far more if the pictures used were of Haliburton, wallets filled with money and oil. But to disrespect the troops by using their pictures is just without taste and shouldn't be done.

I'm a Dem, but things like this make me ashamed to be on the side of these type of people that would play games like this.

===i found my drinken rant.
i vaporized my drunken rant.
sorry folks.
a momentary loss of control.==========

I was going to say what Pan said... but couldn't find a finer method. Good post.

Another thanks to Pan.

Sorry I didn't write anything except that I was pissed off. I had to jet and I'm not able to form cohesive thoughts very well when I'm sitting there being emotional about one thing or another. Which is why I'm not a major player on the politics board.


A lot of it is that I don't think it's fair to play politics with the dead.

You're welcome Irate and Gatorade.... not all us Dems are total whackjobs.



Ok Roach a few questions:

How and when the Hell is using pictures of kids that died truly believing they were doing what was best for their country, OK?

How can you sit there and be against this war and yet make smart ass painful to any sane person comments like this quote and expect people to take what you say seriously?

I have always been of the belief the Dem party was built for love and peace not anger, hatred and malicious attacks on innocent people.

How is showing soldiers that die for what they believed benign to their families, friends and those who support the troops, I personally find it offensive and malicious? Or don't those families, friends, vets and people who take offense matter to you and their votes don't matter?

Did you ever think that trying so hard to offend the right also offends some of us more moderate liberals, so much so that perhaps your "art" and way of communicating cost us the election and Congress?

Is that ok for you because us moderates are GOP in sheeps clothing? Is that your belief? Because son, if it is and that is where you want the Dem party to go you may as well sign the country over to the GOP or hopefully leave the Dem Party and take your hate elsewhere.

Where on these boards can YOU EVER find me being GOP on anything? But now I am because I was offended by this "art" and am ashamed of the people in my party with the mentality that this is ok? Much like I know moderate Gop members that are ashamed of their extremists.

So in the next four years you are going to make more art like this and think it is ok? If so do me a favor and claim to be from a different party, because your "art" in no way represents what I want in my party.

And by the way just so noone can say anything........ I may despise this "art" and find no value in it whatsoever......but I do appreciate and respect the fact that something even this dispicable can be made without fear. to me by allowing it to be made not only shows freedom BUT allows those of us with some decency to point to why the Dem Party lost an election they should have won handily and why we should not allow this to be claimed by anyone in the party.

pan - the answer to most of your questions can be summed up with these two sentences:

Art does not need to make you feel good. Art simply exists to make you feel.


And based on the passion of your response to this art, it seems it has been very successful.

He never said he was against the war. I liked what Roach said especially in the end. "your sanctimonious reactionary drivel is the best commercial anyone could ask for." This is summed up also in the post above. Simply put, art is reactionary... It's there to evoke response and because of that, it is also marketing. Art is advertising.

I don't believe it's disrespectful to use shoulders in a picture that is trying to convey a very compelling, very real message. I think it is more disrespectful to the soldiers to put them in battle without the necessary tools, or best equipment that funding could offer.

sure, why not?

I'm feeling pretty hateful lately ;) don't blame me though, it's probably all the war-mongers rubbing off on me...

I think it's well deserved. Here's a larger version:

The War President

It is what it is. The same type of collage could be created for any President who presides over a war.

The issue here is the nature and tone of our comments.

i wish i had not posted last night after a session of drinking.
because the basic point in the post could have been said otherwise.

basically, conservatives really should learn to react less to some kinds of artistic provocation. they function often as a kind of inverted legitimation of the work they react to.

personally, i kind of enjoy how thin-skinned many conservatives are for precisely that reason.
i do think that you are going to see alot of work being generated that is explicitly political and explicitly oppositional in the coming months/years.
everyone i have talked to who is involved with making things seems to be coming to something like the same position--[[obviously there is no zeitgeist claim in this, much as i might like to make one---i am not really speaking about a "spirit of the age", about artists in general--only those i talked to over the 24 hours as an index of what i think is a wider response]]---people are shocked by this election--they feel powerless in the face of it---but they are already thinking that they should focus on their work and try to push it in a more political direction--because they understand continuing to work as in itself a gesture of defiance in the face of this.

i see it that way as well.

What I find interesting is our inability to separate the message from the messenger. I can imagine that picture being on a pro war site. The message might then appear to be something along the lines of: the lives of these soldiers are in support of this president.

I'm with Roachboy on this - by reacting so strongly, people do themselves a disservice. The best lesson I think is from the gay community. The pink triangle is a pride symbol, now.

But to illustrate my point, I'm guessing the conservatives can't learn a lesson from the gay community. The messenger is the message, right?