Bowling for Columbine (page 2)

talesin

{{{swickley}}}

it's okay, I'm not a nationalist. or is it patriot?

durn, i'm so confused ....

t

Swickley and Talesin, thank you for being indulgent with me. I'm a brat, I know. Michael Moore is such an inspiration to me. He so unafraid to say what he thinks and I admire that alot. I love people who are blunt and unafraid to say what they think. We need more people like that!

~Aztec

PS Swickley, you're comments are on target! Stay at home and get commercialized...LOL! Big business is the real enemy in my opinion.

talesin

Az,

I couldn't agree more. He is one of my favourite 'public' people and an amazing social activist. Yr so right about him speaking exactly what is on his mind. Moore is a true original.

Wouldn't ya love to sit down and shoot the sh*t with him for the evening?

I also admire the fact that he is making his passion work for him as a career. A good example to all.

No indulgence here - just pur-D agreement, y'all!

t

jelly

M. Moore might be entertaining but he is very inaccurate. Do a google search on his name, and check out some of the press he has. For example.

http://www.salon.com/politics/col/spinsanity/2002/03/26/moore/index_np.html

Obtw, Salon is not a right wing publication so no its not just the right wingers. Moore has lost a couple of court cases for being 'fast and loose' with the truth. And in 'bowling for columbine' he does some clever editing to make people appear to say things they did not; or he puts a persons words in a contextual frame that does not exist.

I am not going to argue about, M.Moore is like religion to some people but the information is out there if you want it, just google.

Terry

joannadandy

I saw this movie three times while it was in the theaters and just rented it again a few weeks ago. I loved it! I thought it was clever, thought provoking, honest, funny, and sad.

Actually I don't know that his conclusions are that off...there has been a lot of research done on this element of fear among people who watch a lot of tv...his name escapes me now, (studied this in my media lit. class...I will have to crack the book again to find it). And he did a study where people admited to how many hours of TV they watch, and then they asked them social questions. Like "Do you think violence is on the rise" etc.

The people who watched the most tv seemed to have the most warped sense of reality.

They didn't think interracial couples were unacceptable and very rare, they thought violence was on the rise, they feared being rapped and robbed, they felt minorities and gangs were to blame for most of the crime, they felt most minorities were middle and upper class citizens and affirmative action was a waste because racism was a problem of the past. (probably because the huxtables are so typical of most african-american families right?) and it went on and on. It was shocking!

Also Moore interviews an author, his name escapes me now too, who talks about this element of fear being pumped in the media. You might recall his quote that while crime rates fell, the coverage in the media boomed like 600^% or some ridiculous number. Anyway--he has a book, I have yet to read it, I have just seen the reviews, he seems to provide a lot of evidence and data that would support this fear claim.

(I will have to check on that television reasearcher's name and get back to you all)--he's not the only one tho...there are people who actually count how many minorities are on tv, how they are portrayed, how much of a news cast is devoted to death and mayhem, etc.

Adbusters is a great magazine to keep up to date with things like this too.

blaid

that was one of th emost enlightning dvds i have ever seen. very well done, and yet very astouding.

proplog2

I like Michael Moore. I tend to be liberal. I found the movie entertaining but it was a lousy documentary.

Michael Moore failed to explain why Canada has guns without as many murders. Moore like most liberals are blind to "black" crime.

Why is Brazil one of the most violent countries?

I think Dick Clark was put in an awkward position. Moore was trying to make it seem as if Dick Clark was responsible for the school shooting in Flint. Moore didn't mention anything about what Dick Clark gives in the way of charity.

Moore was also shooting at an easy "target" - a senile old white guy - Moses Heston. But Moore conveniently fails to thoroughly discuss the so-called "ethnicity" problem Heston brought up.

talesin

jd

it wasn't Noam Chomski (sp), was it?

t

jelly

People forget that Heston stood up for equal rights before it was popular and was friends with MLK. Trashing an old man is a bit cheap.

Terry

talesin

jelly

Trashing an old man is a bit cheap.

But this particular old man is the head of the NRA. He is the spokesperson and, as such, is a fair target (so to speak heh heh) for Michael Moore or anyone else who is critiquing the NRA. If he is not capable, in his old age, of defending his office, then he should step down.

IMO, just 'cause he was Moses, doesn't mean he's got some special kinda protection.

tal

Bowling for Columbine

Share this