He is in the works on a sequel to his movie Farenheit 9/11

 

http://comingsoon.net/news/topnews.php?id=7160

 

This guy just doesnt get it. I hope the democratic party keeps standing behind this guy, and democratic Senators and congressmen show up in black tie to his movie

Very good article, this represents how I feel, like Ive said many a times, I am a registered Democrat, I believe in many aspects of the party, I also believe in many aspects of the Republican party, but I dont believe in the extreme right or left, and I feel that the Democrats are more to the left than the Republicans are to the right, and I fear that the Democrats are going even more to the left than ever before

Hopefully Michael Moore Hates America will meet it in theatres nation wide. The Democratic party should boost this film up, it's their best chance of launching Moore into oblivion.

Mike Moore is the left's Rush Limbaugh. If Limbaugh and others have succesfully made someone's views on what they feel is best for the country, the liberal, a full tilted insult. I didnt hear much complaining when Limbaugh and Coulter went hunting for Clinton's head. But being that you guys arent Clinton supporters, the subjective view makes that acceptable. The same goes for our side. The dems dont need to endorse him the way Reps havent with Limbaugh and Coulter. But just like the far right treats dems with venom, so the far left must be borne. Think objectivley. Moore did not hurt the dems.

 

 

And fishtank, Id like to to substantiate your view that dems are more liberal. What policies have dems pushed in the last 10 years that are liberal? Here is my challenge to you because it bothers me that you as a "moderate dem" think the dems are more leftist than Republicans rightists. I feel the opposite and Ill list it:

 

Stem cell research:

 

Most of the country wants it, Republicans havent allowed it. Dems left extreme?

 

Gays:

 

Most of the country wants no gay marriage allowed. Democratic party has not pushed for legalization of gay marriage. Just leave it up to states. Republicans want to amend the constitution. Dems left extreme on this?

 

Enviroment:

 

Putting CEOs in position of enviromental regulation. Yucca mountain and Kyoto? How is that not more right?

 

 

Welfare:

 

Clinton passed welfare reform. Left extreme?

 

 

War:

 

Dems passionatley supported Afghanistan. Many dems in power still voted and support Iraq. No dem wants to pull out now. Many antidems, including tonyi, legacy, and others, have stated they didnt think invading Iraq was right. Left extreme?

 

 

Taxes:

 

Cut middle class taxes. Governers like Ed Rendell and Mark Warner have passed tax cuts. Left extreme?

 

Guns:

 

Dems have only targeted assault weapons, have pushed for background checks, and security. Left extreme?

 

World trade:

 

Frikkin NAFTA was pushed through during Clinton's years. Kerry supported free trade.

 

 

 

Now as a challenge to you, how are the dems more left than Republicans right? And what issues do you side with dems on and what issues with Reps? Because frankly to me, when someone says they are a "registered dem," its like someone saying they know a black person right before they say a racist joke.

 

 

Please address the above issues and tell me what issue the democratic party has, in practice, been more left on?

I hope the democratic party keeps standing behind this guy, and democratic Senators and congressmen show up in black tie to his movie

612996[/snapback]

And Bush has gone on The Rush Limbaugh show before, so what is your point?

Stem cell research:

 

Most of the country wants it, Republicans havent allowed it. Dems left extreme?

 

Gays:

 

Most of the country wants no gay marriage allowed. Democratic party has not pushed for legalization of gay marriage. Just leave it up to states. Republicans want to amend the constitution. Dems left extreme on this?

 

Enviroment:

 

Putting CEOs in position of enviromental regulation. Yucca mountain and Kyoto? How is that not more right?

 

 

Welfare:

 

Clinton passed welfare reform. Left extreme?

 

 

War:

 

Dems passionatley supported Afghanistan. Many dems in power still voted and support Iraq. No dem wants to pull out now. Many antidems, including tonyi, legacy, and others, have stated they didnt think invading Iraq was right. Left extreme?

 

 

Taxes:

 

Cut middle class taxes. Governers like Ed Rendell and Mark Warner have passed tax cuts. Left extreme?

 

Guns:

 

Dems have only targeted assault weapons, have pushed for background checks, and security. Left extreme?

 

World trade:

 

Frikkin NAFTA was pushed through during Clinton's years. Kerry supported free trade.

 

 

 

Now as a challenge to you, how are the dems more left than Republicans right? And what issues do you side with dems on and what issues with Reps? Because frankly to me, when someone says they are a "registered dem," its like someone saying they know a black person right before they say a racist joke.

 

 

Please address the above issues and tell me what issue the democratic party has, in practice, been more left on?

613078[/snapback]

Stem cell research, George Bush has not banned stem cell reearch, he just feels that the Federal Gov't should not fund this, and I agree, let private industry do the funding

 

The President and VP are the first to say that it should be left up to the states, the Dems are the ones that are trying to make it legal, Mass. supreme court, mayor in San Fransisco etc

 

I agree with NAFTA, but do you agree with NAFTA, ask John Kerry if he agrees with NAFTA now after protests and riots, im sure much of his constituents dont agree

 

I side with the Republicans on taxes, security.

 

I side with the Democrats on issues abortion, I do believe personally abortion is wrong but it should be a womans right, however I believe it should only be done in early stages of pregnancy though, and on some social programs, such as food stamps, welfare, i agree with but I feel that many of these social programs have become impractical, I also side with church and state being seperate, and that pray should not be forced upon in school or in society, notice key word forced, I also believe in a form of gun control

 

Mainly I believe that gov't should be a guiding force not a telling force, I believe that Dems are trying to institute programs that are damaging to this country, free trade and free enterprise is what has made this country run for over 200 years, FDR had many programs that helped restimulate this country in a time of desperation, but many of these programs are outdated and must be reformed, not eliminated.

 

Mainly I registered a Democrat in high school, when I felt that the government should be responsible for many things, but the now that I am a bit older, I have made my own money, and I am responsible for many things, the govt should not interfere with my daily life, I definatly am more right than left now

 

The war in Iraq, many democrats believe this is some plot by W, to have American imperialism, give me a break, if you truly believe that this war is about accupation you are wrong, I genuinely believe that he went to war to protect this country

 

Clinton is and was not an extremist, he found a way to find the middle on many issues, unlike most of the Dem party, I liked Clinton on many domestic policies, I believe he dropped the ball on many foreign policies though and funding on such things as NASA and the military

fishtank, You have to be more specific than that. Your entire indictment of the democratic party is based on massive generalizations. "Many dems" believe this.."some dems"believe this...some constitutents believe this...

 

Would it be fair for me to say because Anne Coulter said we should force the middle east to convert to Christianity, the Republican party advocates a new crusade?

 

You said in clear and present terms:

 

I fear that the Democrats are going even more to the left than ever before

 

A patchwork of the left doesnt act as the democrats going to the left. What specific policy inititiaves have been taken by the party? What in the party platform?

 

Regardless, Ill address your points:

 

Stem cell research, George Bush has not banned stem cell reearch, he just feels that the Federal Gov't should not fund this, and I agree, let private industry do the funding

 

The mass majority of the nation wants it federally funded. Thats out of the mainstream.

 

The President and VP are the first to say that it should be left up to the states, the Dems are the ones that are trying to make it legal, Mass. supreme court, mayor in San Fransisco etc

 

A liberal mayor for a liberal city acting in accordance with his constitutents? Should the mayor of San Francisco act in accordance with the views of a Florida resident? This is federalism that is a Republican ideal is it not?

 

Plus the national party is being generalized by local officials. How is that fair?

 

ask John Kerry if he agrees with NAFTA now after protests and riots, im sure much of his constituents dont agree

 

 

He is a free trader, clear and present. Most dems are free traders. Give me proof that he opposes free trade. Youre gonna say he has voters who arent free trade? Bush has voters who want social security gone..can I make the leap too?

 

The war in Iraq, many democrats believe this is some plot by W, to have American imperialism, give me a break, if you truly believe that this war is about accupation you are wrong, I genuinely believe that he went to war to protect this country

 

Again, "many dems" doesnt mean much. This really makes no sense of democratic party moving to the left. Plus Pat Buchanan, legacyofcangelosi, and tonyi, all think we should not have started a war for various reasons.

 

 

 

Youve gotta do a lot better than that. Im not picking on you. But it bothers me when people claim this without backing it up with any substantial claims. Its fluff at best.

I hope the democratic party keeps standing behind this guy, and democratic Senators and congressmen show up in black tie to his movie

612996[/snapback]

And Bush has gone on The Rush Limbaugh show before, so what is your point?

613081[/snapback]

 

When Dumbaugh rants, does that shove people away from republicans? Obviously if there is any effect of this sort its not enough to lose elections.

 

When Moore rants, does that shove people away from democrats? Maybe...see recent election results.

 

Face it, Moore needs a set of cement overshoes and a political dirt nap. He's the kind of loose cannon the dems can't afford to have running around alienating voters anymore.

613114[/snapback]

Do you have specific evidence of a correlation or are you just engaging in fallacy of logic? Event A occurs. Event B occurs after. Event A causes event B? Youre using results as evidence of causation. Thats illogical. By that same lax standard, I can argue Bush won because people resented the Red Sox winning the WS. More evidence might be helpful.

F_M I give up, you win, youre right, Im wrong

 

And for the record, I think Lawyers are great !

I wont address the argument of whose further to the left or further to the right and so forth b/c thats a relative argument, and theres no guidleines based on degree of what rightness/leftness or a consensus on what exactly each term means. What i will say is that Moore has affected the dems more than limbaugh b/c of the medium he uses. Radio vs. National movie theaters. Moore comes out on all the movie award shows, if not b/c he wins but to present someone or what not. TV personalities are more well known than radio and recieve more clout. If a poll is done among high schoolers and college students, more people have probably seen a michael moore documentary, than the ones who have listened to rush limbaugh (b/c they wanted to not b.c they were scanning through stations and just so happened to pass by limbaughs show for 2 seconds). Moore is more mainstream, more of a household name (considering especially how much longer limbaugh has been doing his show compared to moore doing his work)

I wont address the argument of whose further to the left or further to the right and so forth b/c thats a relative argument, and theres no guidleines based on degree of what rightness/leftness or a consensus on what exactly each term means. What i will say is that Moore has affected the dems more than limbaugh b/c of the medium he uses. Radio vs. National movie theaters. Moore comes out on all the movie award shows, if not b/c he wins but to present someone or what not. TV personalities are more well known than radio and recieve more clout. If a poll is done among high schoolers and college students, more people have probably seen a michael moore documentary, than the ones who have listened to rush limbaugh (b/c they wanted to not b.c they were scanning through stations and just so happened to pass by limbaughs show for 2 seconds). Moore is more mainstream, more of a household name (considering especially how much longer limbaugh has been doing his show compared to moore doing his work)

613342[/snapback]

 

Give me an especific example and hard data of how Michael Moore has "hurt" the Democrats.

 

Michael Moore did what he set out to do. Energize the Democratic base and so he did. More than 55 Million people showed up to vote and he pushed the MoveOn.org movement through the roof.

The republicans didnt have a major motion picture and also brought millions to vote. Thats not the cause of the turnout. How he hurts the democrats, honestly is with the middle ground, including people like me. I honestly would vote for the candidate tha better suits my ideas, and it turns out that the dem. party IMO has gone too far to the left. The Moore element alienated ppl who might feel perhaps that for example abortion should be legal and that there should be tougher gun laws, but who does not like the president being called an idiotic liar regardless of the party.

The republicans didnt have a major motion picture and also brought millions to vote. Thats not the cause of the turnout. How he hurts the democrats, honestly is with the middle ground, including people like me. I honestly would vote for the candidate tha better suits my ideas, and it turns out that the dem. party IMO has gone too far to the left. The Moore element alienated ppl who might feel perhaps that for example abortion should be legal and that there should be tougher gun laws, but who does not like the president being called an idiotic liar regardless of the party.

613371[/snapback]

 

Legacy, I understand your point. But I don't see how Michael "Hurt" our cause, more than Rove's strategy of scaring evangelicals into the polls did.

 

I am not saying this because I am "defending" Michael. I am just telling you that you are wrong to think he hurt us. Without him, a lot would have not voted for Kerry, would have vote for Nader and the MoveOn.org movement would not have lift of.

 

We can seat here all day to talk about what the Democratic party did wrong and the truth is that they did absolutely nothing different from past elections. They actually benefited from the "anti-Bush" sentiment that Michael helped spread like a virus. We didn't lose this election because we made "mistakes", we lost this election because the Republicans outsmarted us in energizing their base with red meat for the evangelicals.

 

Rove won this election, the Democrats didn't lose it.

All we hear is anecdotal evidence that guys like legacy who "might have considered at some point back before" voting democrat now definitely wont because of Moore. I just dont think there was ever a chance in hell that some of you would vote dem. I dont think that has anything to do with Moore. There is evidnce strongly to counter these views however as the polls show undecideds broke for Kerry.

 

I think some of you just resent Moore and what he says and instead of putting that on Moore, youre going to drag all dems into it. We can sit there and argue the effect certain individuals have had on the populace. Limbaugh was extremely popular amongst working people who listened to their radio on the way to work because of his venemous tone. You simply cant deny that those guys have villified dems. Its been happening for a long time. Like I said...nobody seemed to care when the term liberal became equated with treason. Is it ok for Sean Hannity to write a book thats title is "Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty against Liberalism? I think this is, more than anything, the left fighting back. Moore is a new person. Hannity and others have been bashing dems for years.

 

I bet there is one way we can easily prove this. How many on the right on this board this dems are traitors to America? I bet many more than those on the left that would think the same of Reps.

I dont know if there's any concrete proof of michael moore scaring away voters, but it's not like these guys just pulled the idea out of their asses.

 

For the past week and a half, numerous talking heads on the cable news networks have been saying this...that's how theories like this get floated around.

I would not have voted for kerry, but i may have voted for clinton in 1996 (if i were old enough then)

Michael Moore did what he set out to do. Energize the Democratic base and so he did. More than 55 Million people showed up to vote and he pushed the MoveOn.org movement through the roof.

 

 

So why is it the lying moron gets inaugurated again rather than Kerry? With that "energized" base, and all the obvious flaws of the sitting president, this should have been a slam-dunk.

 

You "energized" something all right...RMN's silent majority.

613420[/snapback]

Logic of causation can be a difficult idea to wrap one's mind around.

What is absolutely certain, and without any doubt whatsoever, is that something caused Kerry to lose what should have been a no-brainer.

 

And by your logic, or lack of it, I can assert that my eating a danish for breakfast was responsible.

 

Nobody is in denial. I know in your long established war against democrats, it bothers you that people wont automatically accept your condecending views on what caused dems to fail.

 

Your theory has as much foundation as the millions of other ones put out there. Everyone has their views. Those anti democrat will say its because democrats are democrats. "If dems would adopt all the views of the right....they would win!"

 

One thing is true. You are the definition of a Monday morning QB.

Since you so love images, here is a book for you:

Concerning Stem Cell Research I want to specify a few things:

 

Bush did not block federal funding for stem cell research. "Researchers can seek grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH) to work on 64 human ES-cell lines isolated before August 9, 2001." - Nature 413, 345-346 (2001).

 

Basically there will be federal funding for those stem cell lines that were isolated before that date but none for new cell lines.

 

Also, this kind of research needs funding in the billions of dollars, not many private entrepeneurs have that kind of $$. Sure private funding is a good thing, but for the research to advance at a meaningful pace federal funding is necessary (which is why this is a big issue).

 

To say Bush banned stem cell research is wrong, he merely restricted it. Is that a good thing? In my opinion, no. But it could also be argued that "work on human ES cells is at such an early stage that US researchers will for now have plenty to do characterizing these lines and trying to determine wether any of them have any clinical potential." - Nature 413, 345-346 (2001).

It was a dem strategist suggesting Moore be thrown overboard.

 

 

Yeah so, there are Rep strategists saying it was Rove ranting to religious evangelics. Does that make them right for their mere stating it? It doesnt change the reality that you have absolutley no evidence to substantiate the claims. Talking heads and so call experts and talk and talk just to be heard. Guys like Bayh are eyeing a run at 2008 already. He is a Senator from the state of Indiana. What the hell do you expect?

 

That's one of the things about being in denial, you deny you're in denial

 

Thats one of the most idiotic things Ive ever heard.

Well, I for one, sincerely hope dems keep all the radical bomb throwers onboard, so I guess we're in agreement :lol

613478[/snapback]

 

No surprise.

 

When it comes to bashing a political party, youre right up there in venom spewing.

 

Man, you sure do rotate those signatures often. Put a lot of time and thought into them?

Well, I for one, sincerely hope dems keep all the radical bomb throwers onboard, so I guess we're in agreement :lol

613478[/snapback]

 

No surprise.

 

When it comes to bashing a political party, youre right up there in venom spewing.

 

Man, you sure do rotate those signature often. Put a lot of time and thought into them?

613479[/snapback]

 

Nope, mostly they're ripped off...

 

Do you have a problem with people changing signatures? Is this something we should discuss?

613482[/snapback]

 

No, just think its funny that all your sigs are based on bashing the democratic party and the left. :lol

No, just think its funny that all your sigs are based on bashing the democratic party.? :lol

 

 

Outstanding, I think bashing hapless dems is funny too...

613489[/snapback]

You must put a lot of time into it at the rate you change em.

 

 

But youre the one accusing others of divisivness.