Video courtesy of one American friend of mine, who btw is a liberal pro gun control pussy.
Video courtesy of one American friend of mine, who btw is a liberal pro gun control pussy.
ya don't say
wow, just wow.
fucking michael moore ...
Was going to say, that's from Bowling for Columbine isn't it?PuckMercury wrote:
fucking michael moore ...
I believe that's the one, yes.
Yes it is. Teacher showed it to us before. Don't think OMGS ITS THAT FAT ASS FAIL. Think about the video itself, not the creator.PuckMercury wrote:
I believe that's the one, yes.
oh I don't argue some of the messages or even the legitimacy of the base claims made over all ... but ffs ... fucking michael moore.
Michael Moore is undeniably woefully biased (the left wing equivalent of FOX News) but he does raise important points in his films. His problem is he cherry picks the facts and leaves out stuff that doesn't suit his argument.PuckMercury wrote:
oh I don't argue some of the messages or even the legitimacy of the base claims made over all ... but ffs ... fucking michael moore.
kinda a more eloquent way of saying what I was getting at ... fucking michael moore ...Braddock wrote:
Michael Moore is undeniably woefully biased (the left wing equivalent of FOX News) but he does raise important points in his films. His problem is he cherry picks the facts and leaves out stuff that doesn't suit his argument.PuckMercury wrote:
oh I don't argue some of the messages or even the legitimacy of the base claims made over all ... but ffs ... fucking michael moore.
Agreed. That said, I've only seen Bowling for Columbine, but I'm sure all his movies are the same.Braddock wrote:
Michael Moore is undeniably woefully biased (the left wing equivalent of FOX News) but he does raise important points in his films. His problem is he cherry picks the facts and leaves out stuff that doesn't suit his argument.PuckMercury wrote:
oh I don't argue some of the messages or even the legitimacy of the base claims made over all ... but ffs ... fucking michael moore.
rawr, AMERICA BAD!!!!
Well they all have that distinctive Michael Moore 'style'. Haven't seen Sicko yet but his other ones are very biased in that he uses a lot of music to connote a certain emotive slant to his films, he puts himself onscreen which I don't like in documentaries, he is occasionally prone to selective editing and he leaves out stuff that would be important and relevant to his argument. It's not that he lies, in fact I don't think I've ever noticed a blatant lie in any of his films, it's that he shows 'his' version of the truth.ghettoperson wrote:
Agreed. That said, I've only seen Bowling for Columbine, but I'm sure all his movies are the same.Braddock wrote:
Michael Moore is undeniably woefully biased (the left wing equivalent of FOX News) but he does raise important points in his films. His problem is he cherry picks the facts and leaves out stuff that doesn't suit his argument.PuckMercury wrote:
oh I don't argue some of the messages or even the legitimacy of the base claims made over all ... but ffs ... fucking michael moore.
which is really the same with any expositional film of that nature. See An Inconvenient Truth, Supersize Me etc. It's just facts presented through a lense which is fine so long as you realize that the lense is there.
EDIT: One of many reasons you should never get your news or facts from one source but from at least two distinctly opposed positions and sort it out for yourself ... you know ... like an intelligent individual.
EDIT: One of many reasons you should never get your news or facts from one source but from at least two distinctly opposed positions and sort it out for yourself ... you know ... like an intelligent individual.
Last edited by PuckMercury (2008-04-10 07:31:03)
What was wrong with Supersize Me? Not that I've bothered to watch it, but it's just a dude eating burgers, there isn't really much slant you could put on that, is there?
there's slant you can put on everything. I'm not saying it spoke to any particular political agenda necessarily, just that the facts were presented in a manner designed to convey a particular conclusion. I didn't find Supersize Me to be a beacon of slant or spin by any means, but it certainly wasn't void of such trappings.
EDIT: Also, facts are only really facts in context. It is a true statement that 2+2 = 20. However, that means nothing without the proper context.
EDIT: Also, facts are only really facts in context. It is a true statement that 2+2 = 20. However, that means nothing without the proper context.
Last edited by PuckMercury (2008-04-10 07:44:33)
Well it made people vilify McDonalds, and let other people have a free pass. If all I did was eat Outback steaks or Chinese buffet for 30 days non-stop, I reckon I would put on weight and have health problems. He really did not expose a damn thing. Yet people fell for it hook, line, and sinker.ghettoperson wrote:
What was wrong with Supersize Me? Not that I've bothered to watch it, but it's just a dude eating burgers, there isn't really much slant you could put on that, is there?
The Danes have a pretty good set of self imposed rules for documentary making called 'Dogumentary', based on the dogme philosophy of film-making. It's provides a good way of ensuring a certain level of objectivity.
Gross generalization and simplification are easy ways to set up straw-man arguments. Michael Moore is good at that, along with cherry picking facts. I doubt you'll ever hear him mention the 700,00-2.5million defensive gun uses, per year, in the US. Nor will he likely tell you that every male between 17 and 45 is part of the militia...or bring up quotes by the founding fathers that state things like "no free man shall ever be debarred the use of his arms"
If you want to villanize the American gun culture, limiting your view to puritans, the assault on Native Americans, etc. is a good way to do it.
If you want to villanize the American gun culture, limiting your view to puritans, the assault on Native Americans, etc. is a good way to do it.
he's a fat fuck who spews garbage everywhere he goes. hes the first one to criticize the liberty and free speech that he enjoys all because of other people's sacrifices. if it wasn't for the colonists, he wouldn't have a place to express his views. he's all for the plight of america and the poor, but i'd like to see just how much does that stupid fuck donates to charity. my guess is 0.
Gun sales have been going down for a very long time now (almost 80% since 1994).
You'd also be keen to take note that most violent crime is not committed by evil white-e.. Despite the fact they are the clear majority in this country.
Population
White persons, 80.1%
Black persons, 12.8%
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
Murder
Race of offender
White: 2,162 Black: 2,935
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offense … le_05.html
Your cartoon is comically skewed. Removing 99% of the historically relevant facts does little to promote the cause of Gun control.
You'd also be keen to take note that most violent crime is not committed by evil white-e.. Despite the fact they are the clear majority in this country.
Population
White persons, 80.1%
Black persons, 12.8%
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
Murder
Race of offender
White: 2,162 Black: 2,935
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offense … le_05.html
Your cartoon is comically skewed. Removing 99% of the historically relevant facts does little to promote the cause of Gun control.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
This was one of the weaker parts of Bowling for Columbine. Sicko was way better than that movie anyway.
I heard that he got in a bit of trouble for this little segment of the film because he 'accidentally on purpose' placed it directly after a segment involving the South Park creators and thus people presumed they had made the animation for him, which they didn't.Turquoise wrote:
This was one of the weaker parts of Bowling for Columbine. Sicko was way better than that movie anyway.
I didn't know that... What did they make it for?
If I remember correctly this video is a remake of a video they made pre-South Park.Turquoise wrote:
I didn't know that... What did they make it for?