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?

Quite a poignant picture.

If the war in Iraq was a just war, then that picture would be in bad taste. Since it is a war of lies and vengance though, those who feel the picture is disrespectful shouldn't blame and pin responsibility of those deaths on Michael Moore but rather the man with who sent them there, George W Bush.

Yeah, sad picture.

I wonder how many murals you could make with all the nameless Iraq's killed in this conflict. I dont think its in bad taste either. People losing their life is a serious issue. This war is a serious issue.

It is a picture of U.S. soilders who have made the ultimate sacrafice to thier country. By having their pictures on his website is negating the honor they should have for being willing to die for what thier country beleives. Moore is a fat bastard who has probably gained 50 pounds because he is pissed his bullshit and twisted facts didn't make Bush lose the election.

I don't think it is disrespectful. Perhaps this helps keep the human nature of the deaths palpable, which is a good thing. These are people who have died, not faceless bodies in uniform. We must never forget that.

As Stalin said: "One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic." And he ought to know.

And for all of you who claim that every one of these soldiers died for what they believed in: shame on you. Shame on you for disregarding the individuality of every one of those soldiers. You don't know them or what they felt about being in Iraq.

I think if the purpose of this picture is to change people's opinion of the war it won't. It's divisive and hate filled. IMO!!!! I feel a better picture one that gets the point across much more meaningful, less hate filled and more apt to get righty's and centrist's eyes woul have been to have pictures of fat wallets, halliburton, oil wells, WMD's x'd out, and so on.

There has been far too much divisiveness in this country. We can peacefully and respectfully protest this war without shit like this that makes the vast majority hate and vote us Dems out even more.Noone listens to hate, noone will vote hate... give fact but give them with compassion and realize these men were people.

I'm not clear where you got that impression. Quite a few people listen and vote based on hate. You only need to look at the 11 anti-gay marriage initiatives that passed resoundingly.

Appealing to hatred is a highly motivating tactic.

To use the portraits of grieving families loved ones this way is despicable. Whether or not they agreed with the cause, they all made the ultimate sacrifice in service of their country and deserve our respect.

Shame on the artist for using their portraits for political propaganda. The party that endorses this disrespect will not convince many folks to their cause.

I understand and respect your opinion and certainly don't want to get into a pissing match with anyone but,...in a similar sense, minus any portraits, George Bush used the families and the images of the twin towers falling through out his arguement for war as a precurser to war in Iraq when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. That too could be considered political propaganda at the expense of innocent victims.

Amen. That was far worse in my view. Bush can be tied to the deaths in Iraq whereas Sadaam cannot be tied to the deaths on 9-11.

http://www.blogolution.com/images/mooremosaic.JPG
Revenge has been served

I'm sorry I meant hate talk of the war. I truly appologize felt I had implied it and said it and when i looked over the post I didn't.

I don't believe you can talk hate of a war we are in and win an election fr President.... and perhaps even Senator (depending on the state). Not right now at least, and as much as people talk about the 60's I don't think then. So this picture alienates more people from the Dems. Because the Dems. have aligned themselves willfully to MM. So in some people's minds when he does something like this picture, those moderates figure the Dem party no longer relates it is too far left and vote GOP.

What is sad is we have no Dems that came out against MM this election season and told him to "f-off and leave the party alone". Instead a couple ELECTED Dems that said .... "this is no longer my party, they no longer speak for me. The rest of the Dem party bent over backwards pleasing MM and making up excuses for the exodus of longtime elected Dems. And never sat dowbn and thought, "we just maybe pushing people too far left and they are leaving us. Perhaps we need to get our priorities straight and decide whether we try our best to serve ALL THE PEOPLE or just do whackjobs for special interest groups and Hollywood.

So yeah art is art and always has a statement and sometimes it is distasteful, and sometimes it serves a purpose and sometimes the purpose it is trying to get across is so inspired by negativity the message comes out too negative and the reaction is not what the intention was wanting to bring about.

If my comment was unnecessary, so was this one. @#(&$@(#$@#*)@

Ok, Micheal Moore is an activist. He uses his fame to speak out against what he thinks is wrong. I dont think it is right for anyone to exploit dead people with out the permission of imiddiate relatives, however I fine this image less offensive than when Bush exploited 9/11.

I'm going to post my response to a different person.

Okay, here's a scenario. Note that it's not a personal attack, but a hypothetical:

Let's say a family member of yours died in a car wreck. Let's further say that the cause of the wreck was alcohol-related. Doesn't have to be your relative who was drinking.

Would you be okay with a picture of your bloody relative, lying in the road, being posted widely as an admonishment not to drink and drive? After all, manx says it's okay. To quote him, "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."




Except for the 51% who voted for Bush.

I guess that you can add Mothers Against Drunk Driving to the "outrageous" list, as they constantly post billboards of persons killed by drunk drivers.

I don't know if you were addressing this question to me - I believe not as you deemed it acceptable to answer it on my behalf.

I would _certainly_ be "okay" with a picture of my relative (not necessarily a bloody, lying in the road picture of my relative) being used as an admonishment to not drink and drive. In fact, if someone else didn't create such a statement, I would do it myself.

But you are clearly making some assumptions about the word "okay". Is it "okay" that whomever created the Bush/Dead Soldiers montage did so? Is it "okay" to whom? The soldiers families? Maybe. Maybe not. Is it "okay" to you? I don't care. Is it "okay" to me? Sure.

Something being "okay" is very different from something being illegal. There may be legal ramifications in using someone's likeness without either their permission or the permission of the family. But the legality of the action is very distinct from the subjective consideration of whether it is "okay".

My statement on art is entirely applicable. And I would add that art does not have to be "okay" to anyone at all. Maybe it is illegal art, maybe it is not. Regardless - it was effective art.

I don't recall using the word "outrageous." Can you point that out for me?

I also won't dwell on the fact that the point of my message seems to have been missed.

However, do you think MADD does so with the knowledge that some of the families of the deceased disagree with the message promoted by the use of the pictures?

No, I QUOTED you. There's a difference.

And here I thought it was the REPUBLICANS who were supposed to be devoid of sensitivity and tolerance for the feelings of others.

Then again, it was Clinton who "loathed the military." I see that he represented his party accurately.

You're right about the "art" being effective, too--Bush got more votes than any presidential candidate in history.

The feeling I got from MM's post and the picture is similar to the feel I have whenever I visit the Vietnamn memorial in DC. It's sad to see the name and face of those that died. It makes it more personal, they are no longer just a statistic. MM I believe is trying to remind people of that. My feelings on Moore are convoluted, for I do like and believe in some of the things he does, yet he does go a bit over the top.

the picture itself is a powerful statement. Since I don't know where the artist or artists got these photos from (from families or media or other) I can't say whether he crossed the line by using the likeness of these people despite the wishes of the families.

This might almost work if the pictures of the soldiers were pictures of their dead bodies lying in the streets and deserts of Iraq. They weren't, so this example is pointless. The pictures look to be "official" type photographs taken of the soldiers while not at war and probably here in the States.

Were you to change your picture of a "bloody relative, lying in the road" to say a school photo or other such thing you would make a more compelling argument. As it is you're merely trying to incite emotive responses from people. You failed.

Be honest; you don't even know what communism is about, do you? You are blissfully unaware of what it stands for or how it is structured, where it originates from and from whom.

You are simply happy to use it as a derogatory word to associate with anyone that you do not consider to agree with whatever you personally feel America should represent.

I wasn't using the quotes as a direct attribution to you, rather, I was using them to signify that I don't agree with the emotional thrust. Perhaps that is confusing, so I'll try another signifier in the future.

How do you know that the families of the deceased disagree with the picture? Some may hate it, but all we have so far are assumptions.

Just my IMHO, but I feel the picture would be most poignant if it had the real culprit responsible for those deaths in the image instead of GWB.... Saddam Hussein.

Sure, why not. Let's forget that the majority of casualties have come after Saddam fell from power. It's always easy to blame the bogeyman.

Good, because I don't like being inaccurately quoted.


I live in a town where US Special Forces are trained. One personal friend of mine ran Operation K-Bar in Afghanistan. Another received a Purple Heart in Baghdad recently. A third is the head of the Special Warfare School here, and he makes a point of personally delivering the news of the death of men in his command to the families.

Having discussed the matter with him, I'm comfortable in saying that many military families (and I'd venture to say MOST active duty service members) think we're doing the right thing in Iraq, even though they have their complaints, and would prefer not to be there. My conversations with him also make me confident in stating that many of the families resent (or would resent, if they became aware of it) the use of pictures of their deceased relative in anti-war statements.

I'd say they probably feel about like Elizabeth Edwards would if someone told her she deserves cancer, because her husband got rich unjustly suing physicians.

Got a problem with that? Is it time to parse the word "okay" again?

As I said, it wouldn't surprise me if some families hated it. I'm still waiting for an example, though.

It's funny that you should mention that....

Where the hell did that come from? I "parse" strings for a living, but I don't believe that we've ever worked together.

you based all that assumption on what you gathered from 3 people?!

not to mention your acquantances most likely share similar ideas as you. yet, it doesn't seem odd to you in the least that they would reinforce something you believed a priori.

You need names? I recommend Google.



Perhaps you could let us in on the humor.



From one of today's posts. Did you read any?

Three well-informed people in a position to know, since the last one in particular works WITH the subject group. If you question the validity of his opinion, I'd be very interested to know your basis for doing so.

No, it seems odd that you disagree with my opinion, since it appears that you don't know anyone in the subject group, or anyone who knows many of its members.

I recommend backing your argument up. You did bring it up after all.

One of the more trollish of our fellow posters has already made a somewhat similar statement.

I've read many, some quite nonsensical. Specificity can be helpful.

you should ascertain more information before you spout off an ignorant opinion--especially when you claim to speak for someone else. I am a member of a very large military family. In fact, every male member of my family stretching from my grandfather (and his brothers) down to my brother (that goes down through father), my uncle's family, my grandmother's (her father) sister's descendents (her husband, three sons, and their sons) are and have been in every branch of the military. All the male members of my mother's side of the family were in multiple branches, too. That includes her father, her step-father, and her 2 brothers.

In short, I could sit here and list over 70 people in my blood family in the military.

I grew up in North County, San Diego. And lived out my teenage life in Point Loma. In case you don't know the military concentration in San Diego allow me to inform you that your 3 friends' opinions don't impress me with their breadth of knowledge as to how military families feel about what's going on in Iraq.

and I'm not going to give you a lesson on validity--I paid good money for my lessons.

oooh snap!


Whether this image is disrespectful or not is a matter of opinion. What i find questionable is the desire by some to express outrage on behalf of other people. If you aren't a member of a family of a fallen soldier, than you have no basis to be offended. How real is your outrage if you're outraged at the idea that someone else might be outraged? You're just posturing, maybe because getting all offended about something makes you feel important, i don't know.

Your indignation is misplaced. The Bush photomosaic was created in response
to the Bush administration's penchant for "playing politics with the dead", first
by suppressing all images of American war casualties and then by the
double standard employed in an attempt to justify their cheap exploitation
of the image of the remains of a 9/11 victim in a Bush campaign video.

Moore had nothing to do with the creation of this Bush photomosaic. Like
many other websites, Moore provided a prominent web address where this
photo compilation could be easily located and viewed.
Here are the comments of the man who created the Bush photomosaic:<a href="http://amleft.blogspot.com/archives/2004_04_01_amleft_archive.html#10813433295590473">http://amleft.blogspot.com/archives/2004_04_01_amleft_archive.html#10813433295590473</a>
<center><center><img src="http://me.to/svr015.gif">

Here is the news story and photo of the truly offensive, self interested display of the remains of a "war on terror" causalty:
<center><center><img src="http://me.to/svr009.gif">

Another straw man argument--if you can't do better than this, don't expect a reply in the future. For the record, the subject group was FAMILIES OF SERVICE MEMBERS KILLED IN IRAQ, NOT JUST MILITARY MEMBERS.

And, just so we're clear, I was IN the military, so even if your argument were valid, if we're going on numbers, I know hundreds of present and former military members.

But again, numbers weren't the point. The POINT was that SOME families of deceased servicemen don't appreciate photos of their loved one posted on Michael Moore's website to promote his warped opinions.


Well, how about that! We're neighbors!

I live in Coronado, California. Say the word, and I'll set up a meeting with the Rear Admiral in charge of the Naval Special Warfare School. He's the one I mentioned earlier.

I'll let you explain to him your opinion that it's not improper for Michael Moore to misuse their loved ones' photos. Don't forget--he travels to the family members to give them the bad news. He also takes it very personally when one of his teammates dies.

Better yet, let's have dinner at McP's, the local SEAL bar. I'll make sure your opinions are distributed widely throughout the establishment.

Yeah, I'd heard Wal-Mart's receipts are up.

To those who are offended by the mural, are you also offended by Bush's use of 9/11 footage (including coffins) for his own political ends?

actually, the only point you made that I was responding to with my credentials was this:



Yeah, let's set up a meeting and I'll repeat the only opinion I offered in this thread:


If he has a problem with me questioning whether you can speak in this forum for all members in Iraq or their family members based on just speaking to a few people, I'd be shocked.


I don't know anything about Wal-Mart, but you sure like to spout off some stupid shit and call people on logical errors.

Thinking about it, maybe we need to meet up if not for the fact that I can help fix your problem for you. PM me your contact info.

as for not repyling, why wait? I'm tired of your thread sniping anyway.


EDIT: when did I say this you fucking tool:

"I'll let you explain to him your opinion that it's not improper for Michael Moore to misuse their loved ones' photos."


...talk about logical fallacies, how about trying to read first!

Second edit:

if a mod or member takes exception at my last comment, before you temp ban me or anything consider how inflammatory it is to have some dude spouting off on an anonymous forum that he, and he alone, has ownership of how families of service people in Iraq or the people themselves feel or should feel based on his lunches with an Admiral in one of the cushiest places in San Diego. Fuck that and fuck anyone who wants to tell me how I should feel about my family members who have laid their lives on the line, who have given their lives for this country, and are currently risking their lives for this country.

Read my post above, or read the story at this link......Michael Moore did NOT
create the Bush photomosaic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=74993">http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=74993</a>

But.....the Bush re-election campaign did create the video that uses the
image of a 9/11 victim's remains, draped in an American flag as they are
carried out of the WTC rubble by a recovery team.....and.....Bush approved
the campaign ad.....and Bush reelection campaign spokespeople defended the
use of the images in the ad, and refused to retract the ad when they
were questinoned about their double standard, and their judgment.

Your post doesn't give me a lot of confidence that you wouldn't embarrass yourself, and me for bringing you. When he backs me up, are you going to call him a "fucking tool" also?

Looks like someone is a little piqued about having their ass handed to them after pretending to be such an expert on the military.

And you make it so EASY to point out logical errors!


After reading this post, I decline.


Hmmm. I can see why you call yourself "smooth."

You know, I was cautioned by a moderator for telling someone I doubted that anyone had much use for him. It will be interesting to see if our moderator has a problem with your above statement.

However, never fear. I've already saved it, and I'll remind you of it from time to time. That's the good thing about the web--it's hard to hide what you've said before.

Ask John Kerry how harmful that can be.

Don't worry. If they temp ban you, you can always get a job writing for a greeting card company.

Please read MY post. I said he MISUSED it.

OKAY.....consider this a Blanket warning....and I am pretty sure you all know who this is directed at

I am so tempted to simply shut this thread down....but let us see if there is some level of remaining civility in those of you who need to resort to personal attack.

I WILL be issuing temp bans if this continues......

Really? Did war-mongers like Saddam Hussein rub off on you also? How about war-mongers like OBL? Those guys rub off on you too? Just curious.

I am no fan of Michael Moore, however, I did watch both farehinhyeit 9/11 as well as Farenhype 9/11 I suggest you all do the same and then make your decisions. The preoblem with this culture is that we tend to see one side and then run with it, Check them both out and tell me who's struck you as true to your feeleing I am outta here......