# Michael Moore has gone into hiding....



## Jeff Boler (Nov 4, 2004)

http://www.michaelmoore.com

He of all people should be happy with the results of the election.  That's just four more years he has to make movies about the Bush foreign policies.

On a slightly different note, is anyone surprised at the lack of "younger" voters in this race?  Turnout was much, much lower than initial estimates.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Nov 4, 2004)

I believe that the young voter turnout was the same as in the 2000 election, which is a shame....

Aren't they all worried that P Diddy will find them?  

Seriously, it's ridiculous.  I was so delighted and tried to be very informed and cautious when I first got to vote.


----------



## Jeff Boler (Nov 4, 2004)

In talking to some of the college aged students that I have, they simply stated that they didn't like either candidate, therefore, didn't vote.  The one common thing that I did hear was that they were tired of the negative campaign attacks, and it simply turned them off.

I have to admit, the candidates from both sides of the fence were pretty weak in a variety of different areas.  Something that I hope will be corrected next time.

Any predictions for 2008?  I'm expecting a Clinton vs Guiliani (sp?) showdown.


----------



## PeachMonkey (Nov 4, 2004)

Jeff Boler said:
			
		

> Any predictions for 2008?  I'm expecting a Clinton vs Guiliani (sp?) showdown.



If the Democratic Party actually thinks that Hilary Clinton would be a viable, decent candidate... let's just say that my third-party leanings would be dramatically reinforced.


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Nov 4, 2004)

You know, it is quite possible that Michael Moore was in this for more than just to make money off of movie sales...his documentaries seems to have a deeper agenda behind them.  

As for younger voters, I sure know I voted, as did my friends from undergrad and in law school.  I don't think I've heard anyone so far say that they haven't voted.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 4, 2004)

Michael Moore has gone into hiding????

I don't see how someone so fat could hide......the man is truly disgusting to look at. 
I find Moore an obnoxious moron that seemed to remain fairly quite when Clinton was running around dipping his wick into half a dozen females and baulking as President in so many areas. Moores myopic fixation with GW Bush seems nothing more than a self serving way to get richer.and fatter. His movies play on the fears and anxieties that many people have and dont really enlighten anyone. 

Mind you I disliked both candidates this election....I just disliked Kerry more. If Colin Powell ran as an independent I think I would have voted for him instead.


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 4, 2004)

> I find Moore an obnoxious moron that seemed to remain fairly quite when Clinton was running around dipping his wick into half a dozen females and baulking as President in so many areas.



Yup.

Because economic prosperity (resulting in a rather large surplus which Dubya subsequently squandered), record employment rates, revitalized social security and welfare, and --- surprise! surprise! --- nothing even remotely similar to September 11......

.... all indeed are indications of him "baulking as President".

But, hey, none of that matters as long as our Good Ol' Boy dudn't sleep around none, neh??


----------



## auxprix (Nov 4, 2004)

Jeff Boler said:
			
		

> In talking to some of the college aged students that I have, they simply stated that they didn't like either candidate, therefore, didn't vote. The one common thing that I did hear was that they were tired of the negative campaign attacks, and it simply turned them off.
> 
> I have to admit, the candidates from both sides of the fence were pretty weak in a variety of different areas. Something that I hope will be corrected next time.
> 
> Any predictions for 2008? I'm expecting a Clinton vs Guiliani (sp?) showdown.


An ex of mine is a hardcore domestic politics person (and she has the degree to show for it) so I asked her what she thought. Her bet for the republican was on Frist from TN. As for the Democrat, Hillary is unlikely, apparently.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 4, 2004)

I'm hearing people talk about Evan Bayh, not Hillary.  Hillary might run, but she'll never get the nomination.

Bayh is actually squeaky clean.  Never smoked dope...I mean he really didn't.  I heard this from someone who tried to get him to take a toke.  He was a few years behind me at I.U., I recall.  I don't think he'll get the nomination either.



Regards,



Steve


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 4, 2004)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Yup.
> 
> Because economic prosperity (resulting in a rather large surplus which Dubya subsequently squandered), record employment rates, revitalized social security and welfare, and --- surprise! surprise! --- nothing even remotely similar to September 11......
> 
> ...




Yeah right..Clinton was responsible for only good things and made no mistakes 

Nothing like the Internet boom/ computer and the subsequent technology boom in the mid 90s that created literally millions of jobs, in America and world wide, over the next decade had nothing to do with the economy. 
Oh but thats right Al Gore claimed to have invented the Internetso yeah I can see how that was part of Clintons economic plan. 
I would bet dollars to donuts that if Columbine happened on GWs watch Moore would have tried to blame him for it. 

You also forget that it was Papa Bush and many of the programs his administration started that either made or started that economic surplus that Clinton stepped into. And you also forget at the end of Clinton's years the economy wasn't doing that hot either.

Clinton was just as dirty as any other President and made plenty of mistakes at home and abroad but since Moore seems to be a Democrat so it makes it easy for him to look the other way at the mistakes of Clinton and Mr. Waffle Kerry when he is out hunting for material for another one of his cheap movies.
I do have to give some props to Kerry though. At least he had the stones and class to concede and didnt whine like the big baby Al Gore did 4 years ago.

I think people like Moore are just pissed at the way Bush go into office the 1st time.obviously enough people want him around a second time since he won both the popular and electoral votes.


As far as 9-11 and Bush go.these terrorist cells didnt just pop up over nightthey had been growing for years..one could argue that if Clinotn had been doing his job then 9-11 might not have happened
And Bush gets stuck cleaning Slick Willys mess.I seem to remember a certain federal building blowing up in Oklahoma.. that happened on Slick Willys watch.


----------



## Seig (Nov 4, 2004)

Robert,

Let's not forget the economic plans set in motion by Ronald Reagan. As I recall, he told everyone that we would have a boom period that would followed by a recession if steps were not taken within ten years to prevent it.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 5, 2004)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> ...........But, hey, none of that matters as long as our Good Ol' Boy dudn't sleep around none, neh??




No actually what matters is he did sleep around not once but on several occasions, then lied to his wife about it, and THEN lied to the world about it!

Lets not forget that Clinton was such a great President that he was impeached!!
Only two U.S. presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson, the seventeenth chief executive, and William J. Clinton, the forty-second.


----------



## Jay Bell (Nov 5, 2004)

> nothing even remotely similar to September 11......




C'mon bro...I can't even believe you'd post that bit.  As Dick Morris explained, "Sure, we'll give Bush 8 months of blame regarding September 11th.  If we do however, we must give 8 *years* to Bill Clinton."  On more than one occasion, Morris was present when the threat of Al Queda was brought to Clinton's feet, and he waved it away, saying he wanted to do nothing about it..


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 5, 2004)

Here is Moore's latest email bash on Bush:


_
11/5/04

Dear Friends,

Ok, it sucks. Really sucks. But before you go and cash it all in, let's, in
the words of Monty Python, 'always look on the bright side of life!' There
IS some good news from Tuesday's election.

Here are 17 reasons not to slit your wrists:

1. It is against the law for George W. Bush to run for president again.

*2*. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since
Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults
(Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are always
wrong and you should never listen to them.

4. In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the
country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don't approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don't try to figure this one out.  It's an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)

5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the
Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the
Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say "if the Democrats do
their job?" Um, maybe better to scratch this one.

6. Michigan voted for Kerry! So did the entire Northeast, the birthplace of
our democracy. So did 6 of the 8 Great Lakes States. And the whole West
Coast! Plus Hawaii. Ok, that's a start. We've got most of the fresh water,
all of Broadway, and Mt. St. Helens. We can dehydrate them or bury them in
lava. And no more show tunes!

7. Once again we are reminded that the buckeye is a nut, and not just any
old nut -- a poisonous nut. A great nation was felled by a poisonous nut.
May Ohio State pay dearly this Saturday when it faces Michigan.

8. 88% of Bush's support came from white voters. In 50 years, America will
no longer have a white majority. Hey, 50 years isn't such a long time! If
you're ten years old and reading this, your golden years will be truly
golden and you will be well cared for in your old age.

9. Gays, thanks to the ballot measures passed on Tuesday, cannot get married
in 11 new states. Thank God. Just think of all those wedding gifts we won't
have to buy now.

10. Five more African Americans were elected as members of Congress,
including the return of Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. It's always good to
have more blacks in there fighting for us and doing the job our candidates
can't.

11. The CEO of Coors was defeated for Senate in Colorado. Drink up!

12. Admit it: We like the Bush twins and we don't want them to go away.

13. At the state legislative level, Democrats picked up a net of at least 3
chambers in Tuesday's elections. Of the 98 partisan-controlled state
legislative chambers (house/assembly and senate), Democrats went into the
2004 elections in control of 44 chambers, Republicans controlled 53
chambers, and 1 chamber was tied. After Tuesday, Democrats now control 47
chambers, Republicans control 49 chambers, 1 chamber is tied and 1 chamber
(Montana House) is still undecided.

14. Bush is now a lame duck president. He will have no greater moment than
the one he's having this week. It's all downhill for him from here on out --
and, more significantly, he's just not going to want to do all the hard work
that will be expected of him. It'll be like everyone's last month in 12th
grade -- you've already made it, so it's party time! Perhaps he'll treat the
next four years like a permanent Friday, spending even more time at the
ranch or in Kennebunkport. And why shouldn't he? He's already proved his
point, avenged his father and kicked our ***.

15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very
dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two
scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the
Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear
that he should spend these last four years building "a legacy" so that
history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for
too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and
arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such
major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from
office.

16. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting
age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it
means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million. If you had 58 yards
to go before you reached the goal line and then you barreled down 55 of
those yards, would you stop on the three yard line, pick up the ball and go
home crying -- especially when you get to start the next down on the three
yard line? Of course not! Buck up! Have hope! More sports analogies are
coming!!!

17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the
candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total
number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore.
Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for
a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time
since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has
always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is
that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact,
that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones
who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November
2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of
surprise in 2008.

Feeling better? I hope so. As my friend Mort wrote me yesterday, "My
Romanian grandfather used to say to me, 'Remember, Morton, this is such a
wonderful country  -- it doesn't even need a president!'"

But it needs us. Rest up, I'll write you again tomorrow.

Yours,

Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
_
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Yes, and let us not forget what a BAD (sarcasim) President Woodrow Wilson was....  


 Thomas Woodrow Wilson
Born: 12/28/1856
Birthplace: Staunton, Va.
Presidency

Wilson's gubernatorial record brought him to the forefront of national politics. Although Champ Clark was the leading contender for the presidential nomination at the Democratic convention in 1912, he could not muster the necessary two-thirds vote, and after he had exhausted his strength, Wilson won on the 46th ballot. He was helped by the switch to his side of William Jennings Bryan (prompted by Edward M. House). The split in the Republican party, which divided into the regular Republicans supporting William Howard Taft and the Progressive party backing Theodore Roosevelt, gained the election for Wilson, who captured 435 electoral votes.
Domestic Policy

Wilson revived the custom, abandoned in 1801, of addressing Congress in person and immediately called for a series of reforms, which he had called the New Freedom in his presidential campaign. During his administration the tariff was drastically decreased (1913; see Underwood, Oscar Wilder); the Federal Reserve System was instituted (1913); the La Follette Seamen's Act, regulating labor conditions aboard ship, became law (1915); the Adamson Act, establishing an eight-hour day for railroad employees, was enacted (1916); and the Federal Farm Loan Act, providing for loans to cooperative farm associations, was passed (1916). Wilson continued the policy of curbing monopoly by creating (1914) the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and expose unfair practices of corporations, pushed the passage (1914) of the Clayton Antitrust Act, and instituted antitrust proceedings in 92 cases. The Seventeenth Amendment, providing for the direct popular election of U.S. Senators, the Eighteenth Amendment, which instituted prohibition, and the Nineteenth Amendment, by which women received the vote, were all launched while Wilson was President.
Foreign Policy

In foreign affairs the Wilson administration was faced with mounting difficulties. In Mexico, a revolution brought (Feb., 1913) Victoriano Huerta to the presidency. Wilson refused to recognize Huerta on the grounds that he had gained power by assassinating his predecessor, and instead resorted to a policy of watchful waiting. In 1914, this policy ended when U.S. marines landed in Veracruz in retaliation for the arrest of U.S. sailors in Tampico. Mediation by Argentina, Brazil, and Chile prevented war but failed to settle the aggravated situation. After Huerta was driven from power, new troubles arose from the internal situation in Mexico. The raid of Francisco (Pancho) Villa across the U.S. border resulted in the punitive expedition (1916) into Mexico led by John J. Pershing. Border incidents continued, and relations between the two countries remained unfriendly. During this period, Wilson also sent U.S. troops to Haiti (1915), the Dominican Republic (1916), and Cuba (1917), and established protectorates over the first two. In his East Asian policy, notably his refusal (1913) to support loans to China by American bankers, Wilson openly rejected dollar diplomacy.
World War I

The outbreak of World War I in Europe overshadowed all other problems. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, who scrupulously favored neutrality, resigned (1915) and was succeeded by Robert Lansing, who tended to favor intervention on the side of the Allies. Wilson during his first term nevertheless sought by all diplomatic means to maintain an impartial neutrality. American public opinion, however, increasingly mounted against Germany, and the sinking (May 7, 1915) of the Lusitania by a German submarine aroused a storm of protest. After the sinking (Mar. 24, 1916) of the American vessel Sussex, Wilson issued an ultimatum to which Germany responded with a pledge to cease its unrestricted submarine attacks. Trouble over shipping also occurred with Great Britain in its effort to enforce the blockade of Germany. In the 1916 election, the Democratic campaign slogan, He kept us out of war, helped return Wilson to the White House; Charles Evans Hughes was defeated by a very close margin. Wilson immediately attempted to mediate between the warring nations, but without success. Relations with Germany became more and more tense, especially after the announcement (Jan. 31, 1917) by Germany of a renewal of unrestricted submarine warfare.

On Feb. 3, Wilson broke diplomatic relations with Germany. Several more U.S. vessels were sunk, and on Apr. 2, 1917, Wilson asked Congress to declare war on Germany. In his war message Wilson stated that the world must be made safe for democracy and that the United States would wage war for liberty and peace. War was declared Apr. 6. Wilson's speeches, elaborating his war aims, did much to consolidate U.S. opinion behind his policies as the country mobilized. In addition to the establishment of a fighting force, war industries were placed under government control and the President was given wide powers over the production and distribution of food and fuel. Late in Dec., 1917, Wilson put the railroads under government operation. The Committee on Public Information was established to propagandize for the war.
The Fourteen Points and the Peace Conference

In Jan., 1918, prompted by the publication by the Bolshevik revolutionary government in Russia of secret treaties that revealed the imperialistic war aims of the Allies, Wilson presented the Fourteen Points to Congress; these outlined the basic provisions that he believed the peace settlement must cover. As the war drew to a close and preparations were begun for a peace conference, Wilson was generally looked upon in Europe as the savior of the future. In the United States, however, he suffered an electoral setback in Nov., 1918, after appealing for the return of a Democratic Congress as an endorsement of his foreign policy; the Republicans captured both houses of Congress.

Shortly afterward (December) Wilson set sail for Europe as head of the U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Conference; his attendance broke all American precedents. Angry at Republican criticism, Wilson did not include any active Republican, or any Senator, on the peace commission. Wilson was received in Europe with warm ovations and set about trying to create a new world society, which would be governed by the self-determination of peoples, which would be free from secret diplomacy and wars, and, most important, which would have an association of nations to maintain international justice.

At the peace conference he became involved in long and bitter wrangles with Georges Clemenceau, David Lloyd George, Vittorio Orlando, and the other representatives of European powers. The resulting treaty (see Versailles, Treaty of) was far from being the fulfillment of his dream, although he did secure the adoption of the covenant establishing the League of Nations. Wilson accepted the treaty as being the best obtainable.
Disillusionment and Death

At home, opposition to the League had been growing, and when Wilson returned (July, 1919) with the signed treaty, his accomplishments at Paris were received with mixed feelings. In the Senate, quarrels over the ratification of the treaty and the proposed amendments broke out immediately. In the group that emerged as opponents of the League, Henry Cabot Lodge was outstanding. Nevertheless, despite the agitation of a handful of irreconcilables, the Senate would probably have ratified the treaty if certain reservations protecting U.S. sovereignty had been added. Wilson, however, refused to compromise and sought popular support by making a speaking tour of the United States. He was on his way east from the Pacific coast when fatigue and strain brought on a sudden physical breakdown in Sept., 1919, and forced him to cancel his trip.

On Oct. 2, 1919, the President suffered a stroke, which incapacitated him for several months. He never entirely recovered, and for the remainder of his second term, Wilson, bitterly disillusioned, was virtually detached from the political scene. It has been postulated that he was so ill that his wife, Edith Bolling Wilson, made virtually all his political decisions for him. He continued to be uncompromising in his refusal to accept reservations on the League. Three years after the expiration of his term he died. His character and policies have been the subject of acrimonious debate, but even those who have doubted his wisdom have recognized him as one of the pivotal figures of American and world history.

4) Obviously a majority the American people didnt like where Kerry said he was going to take us otherwise he would have won..Moore can you say sour grapes.Moore is just pissy because he was denied any sort of election foul up in Florida and therefore couldnt make any money from it. 

7) Now he is blaming Ohio for the rest of the nations voting habits. Get a friggin life Moore!

10) A typical Moore response.which actually sounds kind of racist if you think about. Is he saying the only reason those people were given those jobs is because they are black and not because they are qualified? what was the name of Moores movie.oh ya..Stupid White Men.I hope he included himself in that category. 

11) I dont careI dont drink Coors.

12) Lame.


----------



## Jeff Boler (Nov 5, 2004)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Yup.
> --- nothing even remotely similar to September 11......




Uh...I think you forget the fact that Clinton was offered Bin Laden on multiple occassion, and refused.  So.....had Clinton done his job, 9-11 may have never happened.

That's the selective memory that the Democratic party has....


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 5, 2004)

*Lets not forget that Clinton was such a great President that he was impeached!!*

For lying about a hummer.  The entire Whitewater investigation drums up nothing on Bill and Hillary.  Lacking anything to hit him on, they go for the stain on the dress.  Big whoop.

Bush lies...but not under oath, admittedly...and he gets us into an unjustified war and over a thousand American's get whacked.  The country gets polarized.  Our national treasure is depleted.




Regards,


Steve


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 5, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> *Lets not forget that Clinton was such a great President that he was impeached!!*
> 
> For lying about a hummer.  The entire Whitewater investigation drums up nothing on Bill and Hillary.  Lacking anything to hit him on, they go for the stain on the dress.  Big whoop.
> 
> ...



It sucks that more Americans have to die and that the people that are trying to put Iraq back together pay for that privilage by having their heads cut off by some thugs. 

What would you have done if you were in chanrge?
I can say as I would have taken the same route as Bush by going into Iraq...but I certainly wouldn't sit around and take it up the backside like Clinton did.

Maybe we should be like the French.......NOT!!!


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 5, 2004)

Jeff Bohler said:
			
		

> That's the selective memory that the Democratic party has....



I'm a Democrat?? Hold on, lemme check...

*fumbles through wallet*
*checks voter registration card*

... nope, 'fraid not. Registered independent. Actually voted for Bush in 2000, too (much to my shame).

Nice try, though.  :asian:


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 5, 2004)

RRouuselot said:
			
		

> I can say as I would have taken the same route as Bush by going into Iraq...



I wouldn't.

If I was planning on blasting the hell out of any country on the basis of them being an active threat to the United States, supporting terrorism, having potential WMDs, and being uncompromising in diplomatic discussions --- then, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia would be on the top of my hit list. 

Iraq, unfortunately, doesn't meet any of these criteria.



			
				RRouuselot said:
			
		

> Maybe we should be like the French.......NOT!!!



Ah, the "French card". How delightful. Good to know the Right is being consistent on that issue, at the very least.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 5, 2004)

*
What would you have done if you were in chanrge?*

Given the inspectors the time they requested.  

Prior to the invasion they were saying the very things Bush's man David Kay is saying now:  There were no WMD's.  Iraq had no capacity to make nuclear weapons.  

Prior to the invasion many Democrats, a few Republicans and some members of the intelligence community were saying the very thing the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission is now saying:  There was no credible Iraq/9-11 connection.

*I can say as I would have taken the same route as Bush by going into Iraq...but I certainly wouldn't sit around and take it up the backside like Clinton did.*

Nor would I.  Last I checked, Clinton wasn't on the ticket for this election.  The issue is whether we should be doing at George Bush is doing it _now_, not how Clinton did it _then_.  Complaining about Clinton does nothing to solve the problems facing our country now. 

I note you try to steer the argument away from the issue at hand by brining up old dead issues that are irrelevant.  This indicates an inability on your part to debate with confidence.  In order to cover up that inability, you attempt to shift the focus.  Like below:

*Maybe we should be like the French.......NOT!!!*

Also irrelevant.  As Heretic pointed out, you're pulling out "The French Card", as if that lends any weight to your arguments.  It doesn't.  Maybe we should be like the Polish?  They're part of the "Coalition of the Willing".  Maybe we should be like the Papuans?  They too support our war in Iraq.  

I suspect you don't want to be like them either, do you?  Bringing them up is every bit as ridiculous as lambasting the French.  It solves nothing.  It says nothing.  It means nothing.

But it does add a healthy dose of Omega-3 rich fatty acids to your diet via a serving of red herring.



Regards,


Steve


----------



## Ender (Nov 5, 2004)

WAH..WAH...WAH....*gotta love it!*G


----------



## Flatlander (Nov 5, 2004)

*Mod Note:*

Please review the sniping policy here:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=281006#post281006

Thank you for your attention.

-Dan Bowman-
-MT Moderator-


----------



## Melissa426 (Nov 5, 2004)

:idunno: 

Dumb question...What does "sniping" mean?

Thanks


----------



## Flatlander (Nov 5, 2004)

No, it's not a dumb question at all.

Sniping:



> Sniping is insulting, backbiting, insinuation, or other hidden rude behavior.  Caustic, Condesending, or challenging credentials off the topic when they are not pertinent to the discussion.


----------



## MisterMike (Nov 5, 2004)

Actually looks like Michael Moore has gone on a cruise from this newsgroup posting.



> We at Carnival Cruise Lines: didn't forget that a lot of entertainers had promised to leave the country if George W.Bush were to be re-elected President.
> 
> With that in mind, we have a Special Offer for those who still want to keep their promise!
> 
> ...



Hehe..I got a chuckle.


----------



## qizmoduis (Nov 5, 2004)

Jeff Boler said:
			
		

> Uh...I think you forget the fact that Clinton was offered Bin Laden on multiple occassion, and refused.  So.....had Clinton done his job, 9-11 may have never happened.



I believe this nonsense has already been refuted handily on this very board.



> That's the selective memory that the Democratic party has....




 :whip: 

It ain't the dems with the memory issues.  You guys need to stop rewriting history.  Next thing you know, you'll be claiming that Clinton is actually bin Laden in disguise.


----------



## Brother John (Nov 5, 2004)

Jeff Boler said:
			
		

> http://www.michaelmoore.com
> He of all people should be happy with the results of the election.


I personally could care less what the loser does now.
Never have.

Your Brother
John


----------



## phlaw (Nov 5, 2004)

Jesse Ventura in 2008!!!


----------



## PeachMonkey (Nov 5, 2004)

Ender said:
			
		

> WAH..WAH...WAH....*gotta love it!*G



When you can't refute points, juvenile mocking is always a fun next step.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 5, 2004)

RRouuselot said:
			
		

> I *can't* say as I would have taken the same route as Bush by going into Iraq..



Sorry for the typeo, my bad. it should say *can't*


----------



## Sapper6 (Nov 5, 2004)

michael moore gone into hiding...?  oh no, he was aiding in the clean-up efforts of a tanker spill :idunno: 



> *Tanker Spills Liquid Chocolate on Highway
> Part of a highway in the Finger Lakes region was closed for five hours Thursday evening after a tanker truck crashed, spilling 45,000 pounds of slippery liquid chocolate that hardened*.
> 
> State Police said there were no serious injuries in the crash shortly after 5 p.m. A road grader was used to scrape the northbound lanes of Interstate 390.
> ...


----------



## MisterMike (Nov 5, 2004)

:lol:


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Nov 5, 2004)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Actually voted for Bush in 2000, too (much to my shame).


YOU DID WHAT??!!


----------



## BlueDragon1981 (Nov 6, 2004)

lol...this is all so funny to me. We are all stupid for choosing sides based on party alone. How many of you bashing democrats are republican, how many democrats are bashing republicans. This is just dumb. Do your own research...then throw it out you know why...because it is going to be written by a republican and or a democrat...hence it will be bias. Don't just go with what your party is...go with your gut...then you know what you may have to throw that out because you may already be bias...I think you get my point.


Look at it this way even if Clinton did sit then why is the war in Iraq with this Administration. Bin Laden is not in Iraq. So you are giving up American lives to go after the wrong country/person. You are arguing that Clinton could have gotten Osma...but do you know for sure without a doubt that he had all the information. Just like Bush probably doesn't have all the information. Go after Bin Laden and make that your concentration not Iraq.

Bush has the worst record for the enviroment the earnings of American citizens have never gone down as much as it has under Bush. Except one other time the first Bush. Why do we overlook this fact a lot of the time.

Okay if you choose to go to war would you give great amounts of tax cuts? I wouldn't if there was a surplus and I went to war I would hope that surplus would help in the payment of the war. The American people are paying for this war not the government. 

Okay another thing is that lying for a reason to go to war is an impeachable offense. Clinton lied about sex which is a person matter. War is a national matter (although the war in Iraq is a personal matter for George number 1). There are no ties to Al Queda and no weapons of mass destruction...so should we be at war with Iraq...Why couldn't we impeach bush...well simple the majority of both the house and senate is Republican and they would never impeach someone from their party (same goes for democrats).

Does it concern anyone that Bush has oil interests...Does it concern anyone that Bush is not going full heartedly after Bin Laden...Does it concern anyone that the forcast for the economy are puposely being over estimated to make it look like Bushes plans are working for the economy. I don't call having to barrow 142 billion in the first quarter an economic recovery. Bin Laden wants to bankrupt the United States...could he know George Bush more than even George Bush knows himself.

Al Queda, and Bin Laden were around even before Clinton. So whose fault is it. America is at fault for letting politicians control the nation and not allow American citizens decide what we should do...if you look at it we do not get to decide much in the presidential race...only between two major canidates whom neither one represents the true American citizen.

I don't think Bush is the man to lead this country but you know what I don't think there is a politician that is right for the job...they all lie, they all cheat, and they all brainwash people to see things incorrectly. What can we do...well not much unless we get a canidate who is an American not a politician from America.
My opinions of course may be bias you may disagree with some of my logic...but keep an open mind before bashing it...look deep into yourself and you may realize no president is ever totally right for this country because this country has way to many people and life has way to many circumstances.

One other thing is...why bash the president...why not bash the ideas not the person...it gets personal way to many times....I agreed with one thing I heard Kerry say in a documentary. A media person asked if he were elected president what characture would he be seen as....for example Gore was considered "Boring" and Bush is considered "Dumb". Kerry remarked that the media was wrong for creating these charactures and he did not think Gore was stupid or that Bush was dumb... I have a lot more I could say but unless people have an open mind then it won't be worth writing. By the way I can argue points for and against probably any president.

Did you know that Adlai Stevenson would probably had won the Presidency if television debates were held then. My personal opinion is that each president did something good and each did something bad. We only ever concentrate on the bad when it comes down to most political arguements. Specially cross platform...a democrat is never going to commend a republican and a republican will never admit a democrat did something good.


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 6, 2004)

> Specially cross platform...a democrat is never going to commend a republican and a republican will never admit a democrat did something good.



Actually, when he was on the Daily Show, Bill Clinton stated he had a lot of respect for Sen. John McCain.


----------



## BlueDragon1981 (Nov 6, 2004)

lol...yeah but was it during a campaign.


I have respect for most people but not most politicians.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Nov 6, 2004)

Hey, what's the difference between Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh?

No, not weight. 

Michael Moore isn't a junkie.


----------



## Jay Bell (Nov 6, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Hey, what's the difference between Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh?
> 
> No, not weight.
> 
> Michael Moore isn't a junkie.



Moore lies, Limbaugh is just a loon.


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Nov 6, 2004)

Alright, here we go with round 4087.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Nov 6, 2004)

Nope. Stand corrected, since Rush did not enter rehab for an Oxytocin addiction, and is not presently being investigated by the State of Florida for various abuses of possession of drugs.


----------



## Dan Anderson (Nov 7, 2004)

As well he should.

Dan


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 7, 2004)

Just a quick note to the 2 cowards that dinged my reputation points on this thread (see below) but didnt have the stones to write any comments. Those things are anonymous so next time instead of just being gutless and leaving it blank feel free to write something.  I can respect others opinions but I can't respect someone that is so gutless and weak that they sneak around and ding someones points without any comment.you dont agree with my postfine by me but at least say why you dont agree.







			
				RRouuselot said:
			
		

> Michael Moore has gone into hiding????
> 
> I don't see how someone so fat could hide......the man is truly disgusting to look at.
> I find Moore an obnoxious moron that seemed to remain fairly quite when Clinton was running around dipping his wick into half a dozen females and baulking as President in so many areas. Moores myopic fixation with GW Bush seems nothing more than a self serving way to get richer.and fatter. His movies play on the fears and anxieties that many people have and dont really enlighten anyone.
> ...


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 7, 2004)

Moore's latest email........



November 7th, 2004

Friends,

If there was one group who really came through on Tuesday, it was the young people of America. Their turnout was historic and record-setting. And few in the media are willing to report this fact.

Unlike 2000 when Gore and Bush almost evenly split the youth vote (Gore: 48%, Bush: 46%), this year Kerry won the youth vote in a LANDSLIDE, getting a full ten points more than Bush (Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%).

Young people were the ONLY age group that voted for Kerry. In every other age group (30-39, 40-49, 50-59, etc.), the majority voted for Bush.

In my state of Michigan, observers noted that it was the record youth vote that helped to put Kerry over the top in the state (AP: "Young Voters Played Big Role in Kerry's Michigan Victory").

Contrary to all predictions and to tradition, MORE young adults (18-29) voted in last week's election than in any other since 18-year-olds were given the right to vote in 1972.

It was the first time that a MAJORITY of all young adults came out to the polls: 51.6%.

Young adult turnout was UP more than 9% higher than the 2000 election ("Big Voter Turnout Seen Among Young People").

4.7 million MORE young adults voted in this election than in the last one. All these numbers are likely to go up when the millions of provisional ballots (and absentee ballots) are counted later this week (it is believed that young people were among the hardest hit in being forced to vote provisionally and students away at college make up a large bulk of the absentee ballots).

Rock the Vote and MTV's "Choose or Lose" had set the seemingly unattainable goal of getting 20 million young people out to vote. In the end, nearly 21 million youth voters cast their ballots last Tuesday -- A RECORD.

From the beginning, I believed that young adults and "slackers" would rise up in this election. As we began our slacker tour in Syracuse's football stadium on September 20, we could tell that this election would be like no other. It was no longer uncool to talk politics like it was five or ten years ago. Now, you were considered a loser if you didn't know what was going on in the world.

After speaking to the 10,000 gathered in Syracuse, we went on to hold rallies in 63 cities, mostly on campuses. Every night the events were packed, with anywhere from 5,000 to 15,000 people showing up. We registered thousands to vote and got tens of thousands more to sign up to volunteer with Move On, ACT, the College Dems and other groups like Vote Mob and the League of Pissed Off Voters. We reached perhaps a half-million people in person and millions more on local TV and radio in those 63 cities (all but three of them in swing states).

To be honest, this tour was a killer and not the easiest thing to do for a guy who isn't 18-29. Two (sometimes three) cities a day for over a month, crisscrossing the country, is enough to make you want to sleep for a year. But I was deeply inspired by what I saw. The level of dedication and commitment amongst everyday, average citizens was overwhelming. Each night from the stage I could see it in people's eyes that they were not going to give up -- and they, too, would not rest until Bush was removed from the White House.

In every town, this movement was being fueled and often led by young people. I don't ever want to hear another adult talk about how apathetic the youth are or how they don't have "it" in them. What you are about to see in the coming months is going to shock you. These kids aren't going away. They have a resilience that cannot be snuffed out by older people's whining and moaning about the state of America. THEIR America has yet to be formed as they see it, and this one setback is not going to stop them.

Witness the students at Boulder High School in Boulder, Colorado on Thursday, two days after the election. These kids can't even vote yet but that was not going to get in their way of expressing their outrage over what we adults had just done. The high school students took over the school by staging a sit-in and would not leave the building. They stayed there all Thursday night. They told the media that they were protesting the election results and putting Bush on notice that there was no way they were going to allow the draft to come back. It was the most uplifting moment of the week.

In the day after the election, the pundits were spewing their hot air about how the youth vote didn't matter this year. I wonder, even though they have the same facts available to them as I do -- the ones I've cited above -- do they just chose to ignore them because it doesn't fit into their tired old routine they call "conventional wisdom." I guess it is easier to simply repeat the same broken down clichés than it is to find out what the truth really is.

And it's even more important to kill what smells like teen spirit to them. God forbid if young people ever realized their true power and used it. Maybe what young adults need to continue to do is keep creating their own new media and news sources on the Internet and through other new technologies. Just bypass the old farts on Fox and CNN and all the rest. One thing's for sure -- by never challenging this president on his lies that sent our young off to war, they have proven which side they are on and it isn't on the side of the young or the future.

Congratulations, 18 to 29-year-olds -- you rocked.

Yours,

Michael Moore
www.michaelmoore.com
MMFlint@aol.com (if full, try mike@michaelmoore.com)


----------

