NCB

Yeah, I know MM is inconsequential, but this story is pretty intresting. It has to do with the Roger and Me film. Enjoy

http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.asp?S=2928401

By Eric Flack

(FLINT, Mich., February 10th, 2005) -- The name alone sparks debate: Michael Moore. The man behind some of the world's most famous and controversial documentaries. He's targeted everyone from the NRA to President Bush. His next project is aimed at the pharmaceutical industry, including Indiana drug maker Eli Lily. But first, WAVE 3 Investigator Eric Flack goes in search of the truth in Flint Michigan, the place where Moore launched his career, and left a city scorned.

There are places in Michigan too beautiful for words to describe. And places words can.

It's a city of 125,000 people, made famous by one man.

"You tell em you're from Flint," said resident Frances Patterson, "and they think of Michael Moore. And if they believe what he said about Flint, well it's not good."

Michael Moore is anything but a hometown hero.

"I think that the name brings up a lot of disdain," said Greg Nicholas, of the Flint Economic Growth Alliance.

Rhonda Britton and Fred Ross were two stars of Moore's 1989 documentary, "Roger and Me," the story of General Motors layoffs of 30,000 Flint workers.

Ross, a sheriffs deputy, was shown throughout the movie evicting residents. Moore's movie gave the impression the layoffs led to the evictions.

But Ross told us that was a lie. "They didn't have nothing to do with General Motors."

But did Michael Moore know that, we asked.

"Yeah he knew that," Ross said. "He had to. He talked to those people too."

Moore's movies suggests that Britton's eccentric money making scheme, selling rabbits for pets or meat, was also a result of hardships caused by the GM layoffs.

But Britton says the reason her husband stopped working for GM was because he died -- more than a decade before the movie was shot.

"He's a fraud and a cheapskate," Britton said.

Moore sold the rights to "Roger and Me" to Warner Brothers for $3 million. But Ross and Britton were all but cut out of the profits.

"He wanted me to sign a release," said Ross, "and that's where the trouble started."

A release obtained by WAVE 3 that was allowed for a paltry payoff for those who appeared in the movie.

"One hundred bucks," said Ross. "That's a slap in the face, man. A lousy hundred dollars."

Ross told Moore's representative he wasn't going to sign.

"He got Michael on the phone," Ross said. "So Michael told me at that time, if you don't sign the release, you can't ride in the limousine."

A limo ride to the premier wasn't enough to change Ross's mind.

"I got on the phone and talked to Mr. Moore," Ross said, "and I told him I had owned 10 Fleetwoods, so riding in a limousine didn't mean nothing to me."

But Britton took the money.

"Cause I have difficulty reading," said Britton, "so I didn't even know it was a waiver until years later."

And Ross took Moore to court, winning an undisclosed settlement. "It was more than $100," Ross told us with a smile.

Flint's residents slowly turned its back on a star, feeling he had turned his back on them.

"I'm not sure the community has much use for Michael Moore," Nicholas said.

In fact, economic development officials say more than 15 years after "Roger and Me," the city has yet to shake what it considers to be an unfair representation.

"A lot of times, they say Flint, 'you've got image problems,'" said Nicholas. "GM's no longer around. But then you have to bring them a dose of reality."

GM never left town completely as "Roger and Me" implies. In fact, the company has invested $2 billion in Flint since 1998.

But Flint officials say Moore hasn't put one penny of his millions back into his hometown. Maybe that's because it's not really his hometown.

"He ain't even from Flint," Britton said. "He was born and raised in Davison! He wasn't even raised here in Flint."

Davison is a white collar suburb 13 miles away. And even at his old high school, Moore's name evokes anger.

A $2,000 a year Michael Moore scholarship ended a couple years back, when Moore stopped returning calls from the principal. And a nomination to put Moore in the Davison High School Hall of Fame was shot down earlier this year.

"Mike is always out for Mike, Mike is always out for money," said former high school classmate Kevin Leffler.

Leffler is making his own documentary aimed at exposing the truth, called "Shooting Michael Moore."

"I have no problem with someone saying I'm going to make a lot of money," Leffler said. "By god, go do it, I think that's the American way. But don't tell me you're out for the little man, when in reality when you have the chance to help the little man, you screw the little man."

We wanted to know what Michael Moore had to say about all this. But e-mail, after e-mail requesting an interview, went unanswered.

So we did what Michael Moore would do, paying a visit to his $2 million lake house in Northern Michigan.

But Moore wasn't there.

And a staff member who wouldn't identify himself also wouldn't tell us how to find Michael Moore.
He did take our card, and promised to pass it on to Moore or one of his assistants.

But the man who makes a living out of forcing the high and mighty to answer his questions wouldn't answer ours. We never heard back from Michael Moore, or his staff.

Which does not surprise the people he left behind.

"He rips people off and uses 'em and betrays 'em," Britton said.

"I think somebody needs to say to the world, this is what Michael Moore is really like," added Leffler.

In 2003, Michael Moore won an Academy Award for best documentary for his film, "Bowling for Columbine."

But we found a number of misleading scenes and untrue statements, not just in that film, but also in his latest movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11."

You may have heard about the controversy surrounding that film, but Thursday night at 11, judge for yourself, as we break down the truth behind Michael Moore, from past to present.

__________________

kutulu

lol, more MM BS. I love how he makes conservatives run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

This is the best part:
As if someone cannot understand what is going on 13 miles away. Whatever.

zen_tom

Beh. How cares? The writer is using the same techniques as Moore does to discredit Moore. If the author dislikes Moore so much, why does he emulate him?

Personally, I really don't give a damn either way. Moore is a film-maker, a story teller, who chooses to make controversial pseudo-documentaries. He's very good at making controversial pseudo-documentaries. He's not a saint, or a movement leader, but a man who says what he thinks, and has built enough news around him for his voice to be heard when he does. He's not necessarily believed or trusted, but he is heard. I'm glad he's around, poking around, making life difficult for the establisment, it stops them from being lazy. But I do wish he had a little more integrity - but it isn't shock news to come out with the 'truth' about Moore saying he's not perfect.

kutulu

^^^
You are so correct. MM critics get so wrapped up in the details and forget the message - the govt and corporations are screwing us over.

NCB

When the details include the fact that MM portrays the woman as struggling everyday because GM laid off her husband, a man who no longer works at GM because he died 10 years prior to the filming, ithen these "little details" become significant.

__________________

God of Thunder

I don't usually get wrapped up in these political discussions, but this one strikes close to heart. You see, I live near Flint, and I work here. For the city to be specific.

Criticizing Moore because he grew up in Davison, not Flint is stupid, as has already been pointed out. I grew up in Clio, which is just north of Flint. That doesn't mean I don't know what is going on. Flint is the biggest city in the county and right in the middle of it too. You can't get from one community to the other without going through it. Besides, who knows where Davison or Clio is in Michigan? No one, unless your from here, so it's just easier to say Flint. It refers to the area.

Moore's point of the movie (I recently re-watched it) was that GM was making billions in profit and laying workers off to close the plants and move them to Mexico. Roger Smith lead a lavish lifestyle while the workers who busted their ass on the line got screwed. Once again, I know this. My dad, his brothers and most of my mom's brothers and sisters worked for GM. My friend's dad's and uncles worked for GM and so on. Basically most people I knew worked for GM or were somehow effected by them.

GM was the main income source for this area for many years, not just as an employer, but to restuarants, stores and the like. So the people the sheriff was throwing out didn't necessarily work for GM, they were still effected by them. Maybe the store they worked at shut down because no one shopped there anymore.



Rant to be finished later

__________________
I reject your reality, and substitute my own

-- Adam Savage

maximusveritas

When you can't attack the message, you attack the messenger. This is about as clear an example of that as you will find. Sure, the man is a distasteful and greedy bastard, so what?
You'll notice that all these Michael Moore criticisms never give a specific quote of something Moore says that is factually wrong. They always say he mistakenly "implies" or "suggests" something.

Lebell

And his defenders get so wrapped up in defending him that they either don't realize or they conveniently ignore the fact that MM IS a corporation who ISN'T afraid of screwing the little guy over to get what he wants.

Hell of a messenger you guys have there.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

wsuprincess

I must say that I really don't like Michael Moore. And I'll put a disclaimer in here....I'm not Republican, I'm not Democrat...I vote my conscience. I have problems with people that are really extremely left or extremely right because they tend to be blinded by their views and can't seem to focus on the bigger issue at hand. I've seen things in his films that have been taken completely out of context, but he uses it in order to further his agenda. I think everyone can at least agree on the fact that he's a money-grubber. I have a hard time believing politicians know anything about the common people here below. Most were born with a silver spoon in their mouth and have enough money to be able to run for office. I barely have enough money to pay for rent and bills, so how is it they understand what I'm going through?

Sorry, went off on a tangent there.

roachboy

presuambly, lebell, you find moore more indefensable than, say, limbaugh, ann coulter, sean hannity, george w bush, karl rove, rick santorum, on and on, a long list of obviously dimwitted spokesmodels who play fast and loose with facts at a level moore would never dream of?

by this point, these moore threads are beyond tiresome: i can see why conservatives would want to collapse and entire spectrum of political views etc. into the person of michael moore--but it is obvious in its tactical interest (destroy moore, destroy the position you pretend he stands for).

it is funny, however, to notice that the right, which defends its conception of individual prerogatives in ways that are almost---at times---maybe---in the same general area as something that would be internally consistent--- would expend so much energy trying to collapse roughly half the country into the person of a single film-maker.

it is also obvious that these endless attacks on michael moore are aimed primarily at conservatives themselves--maybe to help the process of sealing their ideological world off from "pollution" by other views, which often have the advantage over the right of being coherent.

maybe it is because they are about preaching to the choir that they have so little weight in the bigger world.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Lebell

Bad presumption.

I dislike anyone who plays it fast with the truth.

And I hate anyone who does it and presents him/herself as somehow exposing the truth.

Hence one of the reasons I hate MM.

But you won't find a post anywhere on this site where I've defended Rush or Coulter or anyone else that is spreading what can be shown to be out and out lies.

I've even said several times how much I don't like Rush.

So when you try to change the subject with, "oh yeah, but the other guy does it and you like it", at least make sure that I actually support that other guy.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Manx

Then I guess the question becomes - how many times have you attacked those people roachboy listed in comparison to how many times you have attacked MM.

So the synopsis is really:

"oh yeah, but the other guy does it and you don't express displeasure with it"

raveneye

Well that describes just about everybody in the known universe who has ever been involved in politics.

So that begs the question: why focus one's dislike on a harmless filmmaker, rather than on those actually in power and currently exercising that power?

There's an old Croatian saying: tell the truth, but leave the room immediately afterwards.

ShaniFaye

I would think that would be obvious...MM spends all his time telling his audience that HE IS telling us the truth the others arent........and he's not Roger and Me was full of the same kinds of twisted "lies" that Bowling for Columbine and F 9/11 was when he is "supposedly" telling us the truths nobody wants us to know.

/forest gump voice
and thats all I have to say about that

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

Lebell

I'm sorry, but I don't know anyone on this or any other forum that doesn't have their pet peeves and that they focus on them.

I could easily turn this around and ask you the same question, but first, no one here is accountable for the issues they choose to address or not address and second, within my own political/moral/personal agenda, I am very consistant on speaking out.

But again, I don't need to defend myself to you or roachboy, nor do you or he to me for what we decide to post about.

The point remains that roachboy decided to use a standard, if disingenious debate technique and I pointed it out.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Lebell

I've commented on why extensively. I believe that you can find the posts if you search the forum for posts made by Lebell in MM threads.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

tecoyah

Mr Moore is dishonest, Bush is dishonest, Clinton was dishonest, Limbaugh is dishonest.

Each will defend the above individual based on the agenda they wish to advance.
I would hope everyone understands that these men are imperfect, as are the opinions we all decide to express. This thread attacks Mr Moore and rightfully so...much of what is said in the article is truth. Much of what was said in F9/11 was also truth. I for one am pleased that the information in both is available to me, that I may formulate my own opinion.

Which will be flawed.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

kutulu

Another great line from the 'article':
The film was made in 1989, money invested in the town 9 years after the film's release is irrelevant to the film. Hell, any money invested in the town after the film is irrelevant to the subject of the film.

Of course that doesn't matter since the point is to make Moore look like a greedy bastard.

Lebell

Walks like a duck, talks like a duck, must be a duck.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

kutulu

Greedy bastard or not, he's seeing injustice and showing it to us. I guess it's just wrong to make money off of venting your frustrations and trying to make a difference.

Lebell

No, it isn't wrong to make money showing injustice.

It IS wrong to make money showing injustice by using unjust methods.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

ShaniFaye

lol didnt I just say that?

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

Lebell

1st rule of Tilted Politics is you do not talk about Tilted Politics

2nd rule of Tilted Politics is you DO NOT TALK ABOUT TILTED POLITICS.

3rd rule of Tilted Politics is that points must be made and remade. And then remade again next week in a new thread.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Manx

Not really. You altered and minimized roachboy's point in order to defeat it with a a marginal dismissal.

You don't have to defend anything that you post - but that doesn't mean someone else can't continue to question you on what you post. You were questioned, and your effective answer was only: because I choose to.

Which was obviously the case, though it is a non-answer answer.

Lebell

I just re-read roachboy's post and my reply to it and needless to say, I find your conclussion erroneous.

He didn't address anything that I said, but instead chose to question if I would attack lies made by right leaning individuals.

This is the sine qua non of attack by diversion, which I pointed out.

As to YOUR post, you also chose not to address the issues, but instead chose to reformulate the diversionary attack by the implication that if I didn't attack the right leaning with the same frequency, that my current point in this thread must be worthless and worthy of ignoral.

In other words, the same diversionary tactic in a slightly different flavor.

But in any case, I DID address his post (which you ignore) by saying that yes, I will point them out and have done so in this very forum.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Manx

I guess we see things differently.

God of Thunder

Well this thing has just turned into a schoolyard argument since I left, which is why I stay out of here in the first place.

Michael Moore lies...ooohhhh, stop the presses. We all lie, get over it.

The original post showed a story that used "Roger and Me" as an example of how Moore lies. I think most people miss the point of the original movie. He was just trying to show how the big coporation was screwing the little guy. The reason most people in the movie were so upset over it, was they felt they were deceived. In a sense they were. Moore never thought he was making a "feature film". He thought at the most it was going to get picked up by PBS as a documentary.

Fred Ross and Rhonda Britton complain they only got $100. So. Did I miss the part where it said "Starring Fred Ross and Rhonda Britton" at the beginning? Nobody else in the film got any money. It was a documentary.

The article talks about how he gave Flint a bad name. While he didn't help the image, he didn't hurt it. It put us on the map again. The problem was the politicians in the area weren't able to save the city after GM left.They put all of their eggs in one basket and kept spending after the money left. That mayor was recalled and the residents were dumb enough to elect a convicted criminal with a history of burning down his businesses as the current mayor. We can't blame Moore for that.

But enough of the ranting. I know now why I stay out of the political forum. But I simply caution anyone to start spewing facts about "Roger and Me" and what it did to Flint unless you live here.

Aside from all of that, it's still a good area and I'll buy any of you a beer if you feel like coming through.

__________________
I reject your reality, and substitute my own

-- Adam Savage

Seaver

Yes, we all lie. But we do not make fictional movies and post it under the title "documentary".

tecoyah

No...We simply make fictional stories and represent them as Newscasts

We place our own (unqualified) reporters in white house press rooms and coach them on what to ask.

We misrepresent data in order to create an illusion needed to justify invasion.

They All Lie in an attempt to forward an agenda.....period.
One would hope with this in mind, we could begin to guage the degree with which these lies effect the country we all profess to love.

One man lies and makes some money, pisses a bunch of people off, makes a fool of himself, and makes an administration look bad. But gives me a good chuckle.

Another Lies and people DIE.
He lies and diminishes the respect of our Nation in the eyes of the world (which does matter believe it or not). He lies and generates fear in my mind.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

host

I cannot, for the life of me........fathom a mindset that gets one so "charged up" about the actions and motives of someone who writes, produces, and directs documentary (or films billed as documentaries) films that convey a
theme or message one disagrees with, yet not only can give a "pass" to a
national leader and his administration that is caught lying to facilitate a war
of aggression, but also vigoroualy defends the war criminals.

With the, "well Clinton was the one who.....blah blah blah" all used up as response for any and all criticism of the current administration, Moore has become the Clinton surrogate for those who still cling to the dream that first Reagan, and now Bush, are somehow more than the mediocre sum of their
woefully inadequate (and greatly injurious to the country), heavily manipulated, parts.

Karl Rove and Michael Moore are both artists.......Moore uses film as his canvas, Rove uses an unlikely and unconventional medium; a remarkably under qualified, and unpredictable little man, who he does not even have to
wring a passable performance out of (ala last fall's presidential "debates") to
achieve the desired effect.

Look how red in the face you get, over Moore successfully presenting his message with an inconsequential outcome, compared to artist Rove's result that results in unsettling the world and in killing, injuring, and beggaring so many of the people in it.

raveneye

It's not really surprising when you think about it. People dislike Moore not because he lies, but because he attacks the foundations of their belief system, and does so very effectively. He's threatening, and the easiest way to neutralize him is with ridicule and insult.

That so many people are obsessed with demonizing him is actually a pretty good testimony to how persuasive and effective he is.

Disclaimer: I have never seen a Moore film or read any of his books. Anybody who generates this much debate and controversy though, I think is very good for political discourse.

jorgelito

Maybe people don't like him because he's actually right and he's kind of annoying about it and in your face.

Amnesia620

Roachboy, regardless that I usually agree with you, this is what I don't like about threads like these:

Everyone states how they *dislike* Michael Moore or Any Other Person because of the way he depicts people, groups and events in a controversial and/or negative way...YET, we express our dislike AND then have the AUDACITY to negatively insult other people?? Be careful when "sounding off", you could be seen as another hypocrite on a worn-out soap-box!!
And, yet, you preach about "obviously dimwitted spokesmodels" so there is some amount of choir who hold "little weight" with you, in this..."bigger world". Well, Roachboy, bravo!! You've succeed in the realization that you have practiced what you've preached even if it does make you appear a hypocrite.

__________________
For example, I find that a lot of college girls are barbie doll carbon copies with few differences...Sadly, they're dumb, ditzy, immature, snotty, fake, or they are the gravitational center to orbiting drama. - Amnesia620

Amnesia620

I applaud you for not lashing insults nor spewing the word HATE everywhere (that word is sickening). I hope to continue to learn from you...I hope many others do as well...

I will also add, that a person who films a documentary, makes a movie, writes a book, article or, even, poem, is a person who is expressing him/herself and showing their own human and very individual point of view. It is, maybe, how they perceived it or how they want it to be communicated to others. It is theirs, and because it is theirs - first and foremost, any and all people should show it respect. We don't have to like it, love it or subject ourselves to it, but if we want to be shown respect, we must give respect, otherwise we lose status as a Human.

How an artist chooses to portray his work is not for anyone to say it's right or wrong.

Which one of us here has the ability or power to say we're higher, more supernatural; with that, spew insults and tell others their wrong?? Please, we all need to work on being less judgemental and more diplomatic.

__________________
For example, I find that a lot of college girls are barbie doll carbon copies with few differences...Sadly, they're dumb, ditzy, immature, snotty, fake, or they are the gravitational center to orbiting drama. - Amnesia620

JohnBua

Yes one should respect Moore's message. That is you should always tell the truth, even if you have to lie to do so!

sob

Does that apply to Bush's "lies" about WMDs too?

That's what bothers me, all right. If he called his movie "fiction," or even "his opinion," that would be different. To call a pack of lies a "documentary" makes him look like Baghdad Bob (whom I miss deeply).

That's silly. No one who lives outside of Flint can possibly know anything about it?

Thanks for the beer. Glad to hear Flint survived MM's end-of-the-world "report."

sob

You got that right! I just had a Marine E3 come stay with me after he got back from Iraq. In the interest of not hijacking the thread, let's just say he was amazed at how the conflict over there is portrayed by (most of) the networks.

It looked like the Democrats invented that particular maneuver.

Care to specify who you're talking about here? I haven't posted my list of quotes from Al Gore, Clinton, Hillary, Kerry, and others in a while.

Ask any Vietnam vet how "harmless" that is.

And as a result, other people DON'T die. However, I'm glad that Clinton raised our world standing so much, as evidenced in this Danish parade.

Can't help you with the "fear" thing.


<img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SQDvAg0XMWrowm2hZnOCOnaQAbai8*Iz1fQ*Utf*dHLLb0WuJ9Fvl9E0TSJM4Gkv3SS7DknNK!LGgqBlqcF*mkTBdZFJrNeCLlqVtxMH8rr!zzknpKBFfw/parade.jpg?dc=4675512855120427105></img

wolf

I still like him. Though if he is going to point out that Flint is such a poor town, he should try giving something back. His movies are still very thought provoking.

__________________
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this.

Seaver

As posted already. If Bush lied, so did Gore, Clinton, Kerry, Liberman, and almost everyone in the UN. It wasn't a freaking lie, it was faulty intelligence. Stop with this "when Clinton lied no one died" crap already.

raveneye

Exactly when did "Moore" mutate into "Clinton"?

This guy Clinton sure has magical powers around here, being able to settle so many arguments with such deft rhetorical flourish.