Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/8/03 09:01 PM, DeathPartyStar wrote:

At 6/8/03 03:16 PM, nailbomb wrote: WHO CARES IF HE'S LIVING IN A CASTLE MADE OUT OF SOLID GOLD? DOES THIS PROVE THAT ANY OF HIS FACTS ARE FALSE? *smacks a lot of people in here in the back of the head* :

No, it does not prove that his "facts" are false. For if a person does not practice what they preach does not make it wrong. However, it does damage ones ethos and effectiveness when it comes to pursading those people who are rich and wealthy to lend a helping hand.

I don't think he's ever said people havve too much money, and I dont think he's ever said people shouldn't have money. He speaks aout against corporations that use tax breaks and corporate loopholes to steal money from decent, hard-working Americans.

As a side note, Bowling for Columbine is not a documentary and his Oscar should be revoked.

Does anyone kno wwhere I can get a copy of that movie?

At 6/8/03 10:35 AM, AnRkeyPenguin wrote: werd up homles, dat war schizzle be wack but wut up the hizzy wit sadaam yo? HOLLA

No doubt son son i dont know kidd that guy is frontin hidin out and all that shiiiiztach, he better come out before da gangstas come in and get em out.....

At 6/9/03 10:22 AM, XkwiziTOnE wrote:

At 6/8/03 10:35 AM, AnRkeyPenguin wrote: werd up homles, dat war schizzle be wack but wut up the hizzy wit sadaam yo? HOLLA

No doubt son son i dont know kidd that guy is frontin hidin out and all that shiiiiztach, he better come out before da gangstas come in and get em out.....

OK, maybe the Second Ammendment has its good points...

At 6/9/03 01:00 AM, bumcheekycity wrote: Does anyone kno wwhere I can get a copy of that movie?

It'll be on DVD August 13th

At 6/9/03 01:00 AM, bumcheekycity wrote:

As a side note, Bowling for Columbine is not a documentary and his Oscar should be revoked.

Does anyone kno wwhere I can get a copy of that movie?

It's been available on DVD in the UK since last month. I should know, I own it.

And, yes, his Best Doc Oscar should be revoked. Give it Best Film, instead, on the understanding that Donnie Darko gets everything else (including Best Foreign Film, for the Spanish dubbed version). Meanwhile, can anyone justify calling A Beautiful Mind a decent film, let alone best of the (Oscar) year?

By God, OnionClock, you are truly pissed off by Michael Moore, aren't you? Unless he raped your family in front of you as a kid, I have no idea where this petty, bitchy little hostility of yours comes from, unless it's part of the brainwashing process called television.

At 6/10/03 12:56 PM, D2KVirus wrote: It's been available on DVD in the UK since last month. I should know, I own it.

Right, I'm going to buy it tomorrow.

By God, OnionClock, you are truly pissed off by Michael Moore, aren't you? Unless he raped your family in front of you as a kid, I have no idea where this petty, bitchy little hostility of yours comes from, unless it's part of the brainwashing process called television.

Probably part of the brianwashing process Americans call 'Patriotism' whereby your country is right and nothing can ever make your country wrong because Bush is the best and America is the best and we own yo' ass anyway.

Michael Moore is without a doubt the biggest dumbass I have ever known to exist. Sure he cares about starving children in Africa, while he's stuffing his immense face with burgers. He's probably starved more children than I could shoot with a gun if i tried.

At 6/8/03 03:28 AM, OnionClock wrote:

+He sends his daughter to the numberone elitest private school in jacksonvile. When he condemns the upper class for doing it.

It might be his daugters choice about which school she goes to, maybe he is just respecting her wishes.

+He owns a 2.9 million dollar apartment in New York, and a 2.4 million dollar apartment in seatles. Very beorgeoise for a man that fights for the people

Even landlords need business, same with apartment maintenance workers and cleaning service workers, you could say hes creating jobs

+He owns a 1995 Ferrari F50

Italian car manufacturers also need business, and their factory workers need money, so do the importers, the dealers...

Micheal Moore is a phony. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Way to judge

Alright i never saw this program on TV so i cant say if its the truth or not, or even if it existed at all, but i think Micheal Moore has some good ideas and has made some good points which are factual regardless of his choice of lifestyle, Im not trying to start an argument at all, Im just giving some ideas.

At 6/10/03 08:16 PM, Conard wrote: Michael Moore is without a doubt the biggest dumbass I have ever known to exist. Sure he cares about starving children in Africa, while he's stuffing his immense face with burgers. He's probably starved more children than I could shoot with a gun if i tried.

I see that you never read any of his books or didn't see any of his documentaries and instead you judge him on his appearance. Very convincing argument Conard.

It's ironic (read: hypocritical) that the same people who are defending Michael Moore from criticism about his lifestyle, looks and from being personally judged are the same people who attack Bush with the same criticisms.

At 6/11/03 12:09 AM, Commander-K25 wrote: It's ironic (read: hypocritical) that the same people who are defending Michael Moore from criticism about his lifestyle, looks and from being personally judged are the same people who attack Bush with the same criticisms.

Do I do that? I hope I dont.

This is for the word count.

At 6/11/03 01:38 AM, bumcheekycity wrote:

At 6/11/03 12:09 AM, Commander-K25 wrote: It's ironic (read: hypocritical) that the same people who are defending Michael Moore from criticism about his lifestyle, looks and from being personally judged are the same people who attack Bush with the same criticisms.

Do I do that? I hope I dont.

This is for the word count.

Suprisingly I can't recall one time you mocked bush, that might only be because your insults are somewhat lacking :-P

At 6/11/03 12:09 AM, Commander-K25 wrote: It's ironic (read: hypocritical) that the same people who are defending Michael Moore from criticism about his lifestyle, looks and from being personally judged are the same people who attack Bush with the same criticisms.

Did I ever criticize Bush because of his haircut? Besides, Moore isn't the president of the United States of America.

At 6/10/03 08:16 PM, Conard wrote: Michael Moore is without a doubt the biggest dumbass I have ever known to exist. Sure he cares about starving children in Africa, while he's stuffing his immense face with burgers. He's probably starved more children than I could shoot with a gun if i tried.

So in other words, he's one of the 345 million-strong herd?

People dislike Mr. Moore because he is fat.

At 6/14/03 06:04 PM, nailbomb wrote: People dislike Mr. Moore because he is fat.

Well, I guess you figured me out. I also dislike him because he's ugly.

And he wears funny glasses therefore everything he says is a communist lie.

At 6/12/03 12:35 PM, nailbomb wrote:

At 6/11/03 12:09 AM, Commander-K25 wrote: Moore isn't the president of the United States of America.

Praise The Lord

At 6/10/03 05:32 PM, bumcheekycity wrote:

At 6/10/03 12:56 PM, D2KVirus wrote: It's been available on DVD in the UK since last month. I should know, I own it.

Right, I'm going to buy it tomorrow.

Naturally, there's gonna be a Special Edition DVD coming out, with additional footage showing that Charlton Heston gambled away his right to sleep comfortably at night, but naturally all the Anti-Moore Brigade will stand up for him as he has Alzheimers, despite the fact he states that you should have a lethal weapon in your home at all times, as you have "the right."

I'm fresh outta Rizlas, and there's hell to pay...

At 6/14/03 06:04 PM, nailbomb wrote: People dislike Mr. Moore because he is fat.

Personally, I don’t like Moore because, like most young modern liberals, he’s cynical and childish. I would have figured that someone who chooses to devote his life to ‘exposing corrupt politicians’ would have a more professional attitude.

Listen, Micheal Moore isn't a genius. However, he does talk about issues and events that most Americans fear discussing in the face of heavy criticizm (gun control, US policy, etc).

I don't think that Micheal Moore goes against rich people in general, but more so against the particular upper class of today. It's not a problem if he's rich, too, because he's not going to follow the upper class sleeziness that he criticizes. What I'm saying is that he doesn't really criticize being rich in general, but he criticizes what the wealthy do with their money.

Also, I don't believe too much of that Bowling for Columbine thing. I possibly would if they said that he may have edited some things out, but not that he went around bribing people for the video. Please, that's just stupid.

In any case, I guess it just comes down to do you believe the smaller author and film maker who goes against the big business film maker, HBO, or do you believe the big business film maker who goes against the smaller author and film maker who is against him, Micheal Moore? I'm not saying that either is right, but I would definetly not put HBO's valitity before Micheal's. Especially considering that their type of business is the one he's criticized.

All in all, even if Micheal isn't the greatest of America's stars, at least his being and popularity in itself is getting more people to be interested in American issues and politics, whereas we only used to have people discussing movie stars and crap in holly wood, now we at least have people discussing how they feel about the issues in Micheal Moore's books, regardless of whether or not they agree with them. I think his being and activities has made people more aware of the world around them and has let them grow from "the only good issues worth talking about are movies and sports" image, something which many Americans need.

So, even though you may have mocked him, in all irony, by doing so he has even succeeded in touching you with his beliefs, by making you more aware of the issues he discusses. So there. ^_-

At 6/11/03 12:09 AM, Commander-K25 wrote: It's ironic (read: hypocritical) that the same people who are defending Michael Moore from criticism about his lifestyle, looks and from being personally judged are the same people who attack Bush with the same criticisms.

I think that that's double ironic that much of the same people who are criticising Micheal Moore about his lifestyle are the same people who defend Bush from the same criticisms.

I don't hate Bush because he's rich, I hate Bush because:

a) He halted FBI investigations surrounding the 9/11 attacks to attempt to continue negotiations with the Taliban for that oil pipeline through Afghanistan into Central Asian oil (controlled by Russia) which was the earlier hope of his father's administration when his father was head of the CIA and helped put the Taliban in power and sent millions of dollars and weapons to train them to fight the Zuraki government at that time. Yet, at the same time, Bush was giving his famous "we will not negotiate with terrorists" speech. If he didn't temporarily halt the investigations, Bin Laden might not have gotten away.

b) I hate him for not dropping out of the Caryle Group (unlike the Bin Laden family nobley did) after 9/11 despite the fact that is family, too, was a partial cause to the rise of and terrorism produced by the Taliban, just so they could make even more millions in the resulting war.

c) I hate him for condemming Saddam for "killing his own people" when the US has killed over half a million Iraqi children alone through the purposeful Contaminated Water incident which happed only about 10 years ago, conveniently neglecting to mention that this is more innocent casualties caused by the US than Saddam has ever caused in his entire reign.

d) I hate him for dropping the Arms Control policies in Korea and allowing them to build WMD despite the fact that this goes against US regulations (and despite the fact that Korea is suspected of having plans to attack the US in the near future, has an army that depends heavily on terrorism, has an economy that is capable of handling a war with the US, and has the support of the people for a war with the US. And is overall, much more of a threat than Iraq). And yet, he got on Iraq's case for possibly having WMD, which would go against UN regulations. So basically, he dropped the arm control policies in Korea and now they have WMD (which we know), which goes against US regulations and he lets this happen, yet he causes a war with Iraq for possibly having WMD, wich goes against UN regulations? And he does this possibly because Korea has no oil, while Iraq has the second largest supply in the world. I then hate him for causing a war against a defenseless people without actually finding out if there was really a need to in the first place.

f) I hate him for condemming Iraq for possibly having WMD and Biological Weapons which would go against UN regulations, while conveniently neglecting to mention that the US was the one who supplied Iraq with WMD and Biological Weapons, and the technology to build them (which Iraq didn't have before) in the first place, during the Iranian Conflict only about 20 years ago for the sake of keeping control over it's oil trade, which, might I add, was also against the same UN regulations.

So, I'm not going to hate Micheal Moore because "he's rich." Boo hoo. He's definetely no Bush, so I'm not going to criticise him like one. lol.

Ninja_scientist, will you marry me? I never heard such a well organized statement about michael Moore and Bush.

At 7/2/03 06:09 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: Listen, Micheal Moore isn't a genius. However, he does talk about issues and events that most Americans fear discussing in the face of heavy criticizm (gun control, US policy, etc).

I don't think that Micheal Moore goes against rich people in general, but more so against the particular upper class of today. It's not a problem if he's rich, too, because he's not going to follow the upper class sleeziness that he criticizes. What I'm saying is that he doesn't really criticize being rich in general, but he criticizes what the wealthy do with their money.

Thats a oxy moron. He owns a Ferrari F-50, a car valued at over a 1.1 million dollars. He owns a apartment thats costs 2.67 Millions a year in seattle. He sends his daughter to the St.John Prep school in new york (the school featured in finding forester) thats costs 25,000 a year. Sure he has every right to contradict himself. But if someone else besides him does it they're bad. Can't you see? Liberals + frivalous spending = acceptable. Conservatives + friavlous spending = unacceptalbe.

Also, I don't believe too much of that Bowling for Columbine thing. I possibly would if they said that he may have edited some things out, but not that he went around bribing people for the video. Please, that's just stupid.

Its true check on http://www.snopes.com .

In any case, I guess it just comes down to do you believe the smaller author and film maker who goes against the big business film maker, HBO, or do you believe the big business film maker who goes against the smaller author and film maker who is against him, Micheal Moore? I'm not saying that either is right, but I would definetly not put HBO's valitity before Micheal's. Especially considering that their type of business is the one he's criticized.

Double Standard *yawn*

All in all, even if Micheal isn't the greatest of America's stars, at least his being and popularity in itself is getting more people to be interested in American issues and politics, whereas we only used to have people discussing movie stars and crap in holly wood, now we at least have people discussing how they feel about the issues in Micheal Moore's books, regardless of whether or not they agree with them. I think his being and activities has made people more aware of the world around them and has let them grow from "the only good issues worth talking about are movies and sports" image, something which many Americans need.

He eats the ethiopean children out of hut and farm animals

So, even though you may have mocked him, in all irony, by doing so he has even succeeded in touching you with his beliefs, by making you more aware of the issues he discusses. So there. ^_-

Lets just hope his cholesteral catches up with him ^_~

At 6/8/03 05:56 AM, bumcheekycity wrote: Again, so what? As long as it isn't General Motors.

What's wrong with General Motors?

At 7/3/03 01:29 AM, OnionClock wrote:

Thats a oxy moron. He owns a Ferrari F-50, a car valued at over a 1.1 million dollars. He owns a apartment thats costs 2.67 Millions a year in seattle. He sends his daughter to the St.John Prep school in new york (the school featured in finding forester) thats costs 25,000 a year. Sure he has every right to contradict himself. But if someone else besides him does it they're bad. Can't you see? Liberals + frivalous spending = acceptable. Conservatives + friavlous spending = unacceptalbe.

No, making money and spending it = ok.

Its true check on http://www.snopes.com .

Nowhere in the site does it talk about Bowling For Columbine.

Double Standard *yawn*

Blind Moore-hater *yawn*

He eats the ethiopean children out of hut and farm animals

And Bush drills baby seals's skulls for oil, what's your point?

Lets just hope his cholesteral catches up with him ^_~

You don't have to be overweight to have high levels of cholesterol.

At 7/3/03 01:29 AM, OnionClock wrote:

Thats a oxy moron. He owns a Ferrari F-50, a car valued at over a 1.1 million dollars. He owns a apartment thats costs 2.67 Millions a year in seattle. He sends his daughter to the St.John Prep school in new york (the school featured in finding forester) thats costs 25,000 a year. Sure he has every right to contradict himself. But if someone else besides him does it they're bad. Can't you see? Liberals + frivalous spending = acceptable. Conservatives + friavlous spending = unacceptalbe.

Um. You did read the part where I said the Conservative Bush wasn't bad because he was rich, right? Boy, for someone who seems to want to be so politically correct, you sure seem to hold a lot of stereotypes towards those with political backgrounds that differ from yours. I hope you also realize that this may cause come of us to doubt your opinions on Micheal himself. Afterall, how do we know you just don't like him because his views are different than yours, considering that that's a large part of what you attack in our statements.

In fact, none of us who were in favor of Micheal previously even touched the idea that you being right-wing was a "point" that should make your views of him biased. Why does attacking political backgrounds make up a large part of your argument? It's not very effective.

Also, obviously when I said he criticises what they do with their money, I was refering to business loop-holes (such as the SUV companies), buying out smaller companies, etc, etc. None of which he has done.

I don't think we should criticise him for buying nice things, just as I don't criticise Bush for buying nice things. I was talking about dirty money and dirty doings with that money. I don't quite see how sending his daughter to a good school and buying a fancy care is "dirty doings."

Its true check on http://www.snopes.com .

.....so, the only source you can give me is from an urban legend page? lolololol.

Double Standard *yawn*

Well then, why don't you answer it? Why is it you believe the larger film maker over the smaller film maker (I'm not saying, of course, that either are correct. I just want to know why you feel that way.). What makes them different? Could it just possibly be because one supports your background while the other doesn't?

Once again, I think you can understand now how your frequent attacking of political backgrounds may cause us to doubt the reasons behind your logic.

He eats the ethiopean children out of hut and farm animals

lol. And where did you get that one? The Urban Legends link again? In any case, that has little to do with what I've said.

Lets just hope his cholesteral catches up with him ^_~

Boy, reading this makes me think that maybe there is something to the "you hate him cause he's fat" theory. In any case, I would appreciate it more if you would respond to my actual points instead of targeting his weight problems. Hmmm. I wonder if "all conservatives hate him just because of his weight now." lol. ^_-

all i can say is that i hate micheal moore. i hate him so much i wish he would die!!! that is all.

At 7/3/03 02:04 AM, BootlegJones wrote: all i can say is that i hate micheal moore. i hate him so much i wish he would die!!! that is all.

Why? Did he touch your no-no parts when you were little? DID HE TOUCH ALL OF YOUR NO-NO PARTS?!?!

He didn't? Then why are you all so angry at him?

At 7/3/03 01:47 AM, 70TA wrote:

At 6/8/03 05:56 AM, bumcheekycity wrote: Again, so what? As long as it isn't General Motors.

What's wrong with General Motors?

GM has been doing shady dealings for years. They did a tax-loop hole just recently on SUVs. Ever wonder why they've been pressing SUV's on people? Well, SUV's are cheap to make (in fact, they've taken out the majority of metal in the "off-road" vehicles to save money, even though this has caused the deaths of thousands of thousands of people due to SUV rollovers), and most importantly, since SUV's are new on the market and basically SO BIG, they AREN'T YET CLASSIFIED AS ANY TYPE OF CAR.

Therefore, GM can get away without obeying any of the vehicle restrictions emposed on other cars by law. One such restriction is the "gas-guzzler's tax." You know how cars that waste less gas pay less tax and vise-versa? Well, since SUV's aren't classified as any type of car yet, THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY ANY TAX. Guess who makes up the tax gap? The American tax payer. @_o' Meaning, of course, you and I. It is estimated that GM has caused a 1.1 BILLION DOLLAR tax dept to ALL US citizens just so they could pocket that same amount of money. Of course, they could have just past this savings on to consumers.....but I guess they just didn't want to. They wanted their big pools too bad. lol. Now THAT is dirty money. Not Micheal Moore's.
------------
Here's a site on the SUV issue if you're interested in it. They get all their information from books and reliable newspapers, which you can look up on the bottom of each page, if you're interested. ^_^

http://www.suv.org/economic.html
http://www.suv.org/environ.html
http://www.suv.org/safety.html

Great information. ^_^