Posted on 06/21/2004 4:25:32 PM PDT by The Raven
One of the many problems with the American left, and indeed of the American left, has been its image and self-image as something rather too solemn, mirthless, herbivorous, dull, monochrome, righteous, and boring. How many times, in my old days at The Nation magazine, did I hear wistful and semienvious ruminations? Where was the radical Firing Line show? Who will be our Rush Limbaugh? I used privately to hope that the emphasis, if the comrades ever got around to it, would be on the first of those and not the second. But the meetings themselves were so mind-numbing and lugubrious that I thought the danger of success on either front was infinitely slight.
>>>SNIP<<<
To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.msn.com ...
Heh, apparently, they are incapable of distinguishing themselves from "Congress".
Qwinn
Good article although I am down on hitchens for slamming Reagan so badly recently.
I'm going to steal "Unfairenheit 9/11"
Ping-a-ling
Lumpy Riefenstahl and brilliant Hitchens ping.
Who doesn't slaughter Moore, though? Any body with half a brain and a knowledge of history can. And for that matter, most of those who don't know crap about anything usually think that something is up with his bullsh*t and know that they should be taking what they are seeing with a grain of salt. That's why he's "Michael Moore".
There are no unbiased left-leaning intellectuals who try to defend Moore on fact, because you can't. It's hopeless.
Those who do listen to Moore, don't really care about politics, they are just contemporary American poser/narcisists who are trying to be "cool" by saying they like this knucklehead (see Quentin Tarantino).
For the most part his "fans" are idiotic college pukes who don't vote anyway - if they do vote it's for Nader.
Like Bradbury said about this film, "Who Cares?"
I wasn't sure how to reply to her hiding behind the "Free Speech" curtain, but here was my reply:
To: marketing@little-theatre.com
Cute. Lying is ok and protected. Thanks for protecting the little shi*.
Probably all for the better when folks see what an arse he really is. I hope so. He is such a little man, except for his girth.
*[MeekOneGOP's real name here]*
Eh, I think you should've concentrated on the difference between -government- censorship, and the responsibility of the media (which I would include movie theaters under) to not deliberately mislead the American people.
In no way did you request that she obey some Congressional edict that was impinging on Moore's freedom of speech. But she throws back a Constitutional limit on Congress's powers. It was completely non-responsive.
Unfortunately, your reply was kinda vulgar, and you probably lost whatever attention you were going to get as a result.
Qwinn
Debate is not one of my strong points, unfortunately. Point well taken. Thanks.
Man, that was absolutely scathing. Let Lumpy chew on that for a while.
That was one of the most thorough verbal smackdowns I've read in a while.
I'm still annoyed with Hitchens for ripping on Reagan, though.
Moore used to be funny. TV Nation was a hoot. Now he seems like a bitter angry man.
I could swear that Saddam Hussein issued a declaration of war against the United States of America in the late 1990s.
Maybe someone with a good newspaper archive could search for such an article. All I find when I google are blog exchanges pro and con on this detail, no specifics.
Ask her if they plan to show the pro-Bill Clinton documentary made by the Thomasons. Ask her if they showed Uncle Saddam back in 2000. Ask her if they showed Waco The Rules of Engagement (a movie nominated for an Oscar back in the late 1990s). Ask her if they plan to show the movie Michael Moore Hates America.
Tell her that if the theater wants to assume a liberal slant when it comes to documentaries (and sees no audience in movies of other political perspectives) that you can take your business elsewhere where you won't be demonized as a conservative.
Ask her if she supports CFR or opposes it.
Micheal Moore took Roger Ebert to task when Roger said that he agreed with the politics of Bowling For Columbine but reported the factual errors anyway.
You can bet that there are backroom negotiations to keep the left on the plantation with regards to this film.
That would be the Stark.
It was hit while patrolling the Persian Gulf during the Iran-Iraq Qar, in an effort to keep open the shipping lanes. We provided some assistance to Saddam during that war, and that was the thanks we got, although he termed it an "accident."
Right...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.