Dude,where's my country?

I'm halfway through reading this book,and frankly,it is fascinating.Even if you can't stand Michael Moore,if you are an American voter,I'd urge you to read it.I'll make a special request of any of the pro George Bush camp to read it really carefully[or have it read for you,if neccesary].I'd be delighted if any of dubbya's flag- waving buddies can answer any of the seven key questions that he raises about events leading up to, and immediately following the WTC/Pentagon attacks.

The seven questions for George.

1. Dear Mr. Bush, is it true that the bin Ladens have had business relations
with you and your family off and on for the past 25 years?

2. Dear “Mr. President,” what is the “special relationship” between the
Bushes and the Saudi royal family?

3. Dear “Mr. President,” who attacked the United States on September 11th—a
guy on dialysis from a cave in Afghanistan, or our friends, the Saudi
Arabians?

4. Dear “Mr. President,” why did you allow a private Saudi jet to fly around
the U.S. in the days after September 11th and pick up members of the bin
Laden family and then fly them out of the country without a proper
investigation by the FBI?

5. Dear “Mr. President,” Why are you protecting the "Second ammendment rights" of potential terrorists?

6.Dear “Mr. President,” Were you aware that while you were governor of Texas,the Taliban travelled to Texas to meet with your oil and gas company friends?

7.Dear “Mr. President,”What exactly was that look on your face in the Florida classroom on the morning of September 11 when your chief of staff told you"America is under attack"?

Obviously,this is only a synopsis of part of this most excellent book.It delves far deeper into American affairs of state than most Americans are used to.Some of the little nuggets of information along the way could form whole threads by themselves.

If you are at all interested in any of these questions,I urge you to read the book.Even if it is to just look for ways of picking holes in it.The more people who voted for Bush at the last election read it,the better chance there is that he won't be back for a second term.

Amazon review...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0446532231/102-8595107-7732952?v=glance

Sounds good, ive watched Michael Moore videos, that man is a genius with a unique pont of view. I should check out that book, thanks for the recommendation:D

He's full of shit, a hatemonger who has lost sight of himself.

I wouldn't go that far to describe him,he's just a useful little lackey that the big corporations helped into the presidency.........

......Oh ,wait a minute,you are hating on Michael,aren't you?It's not hard to imagine that a man of your background may be a little biased,though.I'd have to do a fair bit of research to investigate all of the claims made in this book,but I'm still glad it made the bestseller lists in the States.Left-wing anger isn't the ideal solution to right-wing anger,but it's better than just sitting there and swallowing the White House lies without ever having access to an alternative viewpoint.

Reading it now. Into Chapter 2. Great XMas pressy. Will get back to this thread.

I'm surprised! I made it to this thread before Yogs could launch a vicious attack against Moore :iceslolan

The thing that distinguishes Moore from other moderates, and I say moderates, because he is NOT left wing, no matter what Americans are told, is that he has publicity, and he knows how to use it.

He has his head screwed on right, and it's too bad that most Americans refuse to believe anything but the massive web of lies that they are spoon fed on a daily basis by the mainstream media...

Hello eveyone. Just got myself back after a couple weeks so I've got some catching up to do.

I'd like to point out that I may be the only person on this board whos met and talked with this guy. He is an idiot. Most of his reasoning is that of a twelve year old. I've posted the results of our conversations in other theads (at least I think they were here on AF - but possibly on 3si.org or corvetteforums.com)

He is a perfect example of why this country is a good one. Even a moron like him can succeed. :iceslolan













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

i wanna see your conversations!! i think michael moore is cool!

He is a perfect example of why this country is a good one. Even a moron like him can succeed. :iceslolan

Have you read any of his books,Yogs?He succeeds because he asks the questions that the average guy would like answers to,and he succeeds because the questions that he asks would not otherwise get laid out in front of the ordinary people.The mainstream press is only just now starting to act like journalists when it comes to Iraq.From an overseas viewer's perspective,it's pretty obvious that the major news networks stopped doing their job during the middle of last year,and served only as a mouthpiece for Mr Bush's lies.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to write a book criticising a government's performance.What surprises me is that a man that you consider to be an idiot can make such a book into a bestseller simply by asking questions that no politician wants asked.


Are you not in the slightest bit interested in the Bush family's links to the Saudi royal family,and their oil,yogs?You don't strike me as the kind of boss who would go along with such dodgy business practices.

"He is a perfect example of why this country is a good one. Even a moron like him can succeed."

Right on.

http://www.revoketheoscar.com/

check that site out. It's on my favs list.

Hello eveyone. Just got myself back after a couple weeks so I've got some catching up to do.

I'd like to point out that I may be the only person on this board whos met and talked with this guy. He is an idiot. Most of his reasoning is that of a twelve year old. I've posted the results of our conversations in other theads (at least I think they were here on AF - but possibly on 3si.org or corvetteforums.com)

He is a perfect example of why this country is a good one. Even a moron like him can succeed. :iceslolan
Welcome back Yogs. I don't know if you have posted your conversations with him, but you may have before I joined.

To me the guy is childish. He has the biggest infatuation with "Mr. Bush" as he likes to call him I've ever seen. The questions don't seem to be very logical ones, and more based on his opinion. If he's so obsessed with 9/11, then why doesn't he ask Clinton why he didn't look more into al queda(sp?) when he had the chance? I doubt I'll check this book out, but just cuz I've never liked the guy. And my dislike goes back before his Bush bashing.

If he's so obsessed with 9/11, then why doesn't he ask Clinton why he didn't look more into al queda(sp?) when he had the chance? I doubt I'll check this book out, but just cuz I've never liked the guy. And my dislike goes back before his Bush bashing.

Maybe because Clinton either didn't think Al Qaeda was a significant threat to US soil, or maybe because Al Qaeda was a CIA intelligence asset...

Also, Clinton had been out of office for nearly a year when 9/11 happened... I don't see how you could possibly blame this one on Clinton.

Why is it that anyone who criticizes Bush is called a Bush basher? That's absolutely ridiculous. Bush is probably the worst president the US has ever had, and he rightly deserves criticism.

Clinton may have been a heartless whore for big business who sold out the US, but not only is Bush worse in that regard, he has put the final nail in the coffin of the US economy, alienated the US from all of it's allies, given control of the UN to the European Union, and has most likely given birth to a generation of terrorists who will make the current crop seem like girl scouts.

Hello eveyone. Just got myself back after a couple weeks so I've got some catching up to do.

I'd like to point out that I may be the only person on this board whos met and talked with this guy. He is an idiot. Most of his reasoning is that of a twelve year old. I've posted the results of our conversations in other theads (at least I think they were here on AF - but possibly on 3si.org or corvetteforums.com)

He is a perfect example of why this country is a good one. Even a moron like him can succeed. :iceslolan

My last post got a little of topic, back onto it again.

If Michael Moore is an idiot, it just goes to prove the point. Even an idiot can see what Bush is doing is insane, and only serves to benefit a slim minority, while the vast majority will have to pay for it.

Maybe because Clinton either didn't think Al Qaeda was a significant threat to US soil, or maybe because Al Qaeda was a CIA intelligence asset...

Actually, you can look back at budgetary spending from 1992-1999 and see a steady decrease in allotments to national defense and intelligence organizations under the Clinton administration. While I agree that Clinton is not SOLELY responsible for the attacks, I feel a strong argument can be made for his priorities (or lack thereof) in the intelligence community as a whole, contributing to the lack of knowledge before the attacks.

If Michael Moore is an idiot, it just goes to prove the point. Even an idiot can see what Bush is doing is insane, and only serves to benefit a slim minority, while the vast majority will have to pay for it.

I'm a little confused about this statement. First, what exactly is Bush doing? (I.E. What actions are you referring to in particular?) Second, how do these actions only "serve to benefit a slim majority"?

While I don't necessarily agree with many of the things performed under this administration's leadership, I disagree that the "insanity" as you put it, outweighs the positive side.

Having not read the book (Yet) I can't comment on the Saudi's and/or the AlQuaeda ties.

JM

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Cbass
Maybe because Clinton either didn't think Al Qaeda was a significant threat to US soil, or maybe because Al Qaeda was a CIA intelligence asset...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, you can look back at budgetary spending from 1992-1999 and see a steady decrease in allotments to national defense and intelligence organizations under the Clinton administration. While I agree that Clinton is not SOLELY responsible for the attacks, I feel a strong argument can be made for his priorities (or lack thereof) in the intelligence community as a whole, contributing to the lack of knowledge before the attacks.


That would be because of Clintons foreign policy, which didn't require a large military to defend a nation that had no aggressors...

There was plenty of intelligence on the terrorist attacks, it seems that noone acted on them... That includes Bush, who was in office for quite some time before 911...

Another question that begs asking, where the hell was the air force on 9/11? When radio contact is lost with an airliner, and it changes course, fighters are scrambled immediately. 4 aircraft dropped from radio contact and changed course in the span of a few hours, over the most important part of the country.

An interesting note is that the crash of Flight 93, which supposedly crashed as a result of passengers overpowering the terrorists who were flying it. It appears that the crash evidence is not consistent with this at all, and is instead consistent with the plane being shot down...

http://www.flight93crash.com/


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Cbass
If Michael Moore is an idiot, it just goes to prove the point. Even an idiot can see what Bush is doing is insane, and only serves to benefit a slim minority, while the vast majority will have to pay for it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm a little confused about this statement. First, what exactly is Bush doing? (I.E. What actions are you referring to in particular?) Second, how do these actions only "serve to benefit a slim majority"?

While I don't necessarily agree with many of the things performed under this administration's leadership, I disagree that the "insanity" as you put it, outweighs the positive side.

Having not read the book (Yet) I can't comment on the Saudi's and/or the AlQuaeda ties.

JM

I have posted this countless times in other threads, I should really just have a .txt file I can cut and past from. :lol:

To start with, I find the economic ideals of Bush to be insane, in an open economy he gave a $7 trillion tax cut. In an open economy, you can expect about 30% of that to actually stay in the economy, meaning that some $4.6 trillion of that is going to be taken directly out of the economy, through foreign investment mostly. Add to this an already massive trade deficit, and you have the bearings of economic disaster. The US economy at this point is dependent on foreign nations buying US dollars, chiefly China and Japan. Foreign banks want US dollars for trading in oil and minerals, which have mostly been traded in US dollars for the last half of the 20th century, because there has been no alternative.

Now there is an alternative, the Euro. Several countries have already switched to the Euro as their commodity currency, including Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and Syria... Hmm, all countries currently on the US hitlist... Every day the dollar slips compared to the Euro.

http://www.x-rates.com/d/EUR/USD/graph120.html

This graph only counts back 4 months, and keep in mind that when the Euro was introduced in 1999, it was worth less than $1 USD. Now it's worth about $1.30, and it keeps climbing compared to the US dollar. This makes the dollar less than attractive to other nations, when the Euro is available. Add to this the dismal future of the American economy, and it becomes quite possible that key Asian countries could start trading in Euros. Bush is making all the wrong moves during all of this, choosing to punish countries for switching to the Euro, while his narrow agenda makes the dollar less appealing every day.

Bush is taking away freedoms one by one in the US, he already got PATRIOT through, and he is tacking bits of "PATRIOT 2" onto completely unrelated legislation to get it passed. The government can label you a terrorist, and shuttle you off to Guantanamo bay without trial, where they can hold you indefinately without rights.

In the name of anti-terrorism, Bush and Ashcroft are attempting to ammend the constitution so that they do not need a warrant to enter a house or business if they suspect anyone who may at that time be in the house or place of business. The whole point of a warrant is to prevent unreasonable search and seizure, it's a basic right in the constitution. They do not have to prove to anyone at any time that there is any reason to suspect a victim of terrorism, they can raid their house, "detain" the individual so they do not get a trial, and whisk them out of the country. They are not even required to inform anyone of what they have done, they can simply make people disappear!

This hasn't gone through yet, but it doesn't look like anyone will or even can stop it from happening... All they have to do is suspect you of being a terrorist... Or just say that they do, and they will have legal justification to do anything they want to you. I don't know about you, but that scares the shit out of me.

I'm not even going to get started on his foreign policy, as that doesn't concern most Americans...

I think many people are seeing this as a black and white issue. Many of MMs comments, assertions and questions are based on half truths. For example, you know the Lockheed Martin factory in Littleton Colorado he accused of making WMD (or similar)? They, in fact, only make rockets for launching weather satelites there.

Also, when he was in the bank receiving his shotgun or rifle in BFC, it was staged at his requests. It takes 6 weeks of background checks to get a gun under than system at that bank.

Also, the title of the movie "Bowling for Columbine" is based on early rumours that the boys who purpotrated the shooting were 10 pin bowling earlier in the day. In fact, the police proved those reports wrong. MM knew about that, but kept the title for commerical reasons.

That said, I treat most of his works as comedy/farce that can blow a bit of smoke up some Political ass.

:)

Maybe because Clinton either didn't think Al Qaeda was a significant threat to US soil, or maybe because Al Qaeda was a CIA intelligence asset...

Also, Clinton had been out of office for nearly a year when 9/11 happened... I don't see how you could possibly blame this one on Clinton.

Why is it that anyone who criticizes Bush is called a Bush basher? That's absolutely ridiculous. Bush is probably the worst president the US has ever had, and he rightly deserves criticism.
I'm in no way blaming Clinton on 9/11. There really is no one president in my opinion that could be blamed, b/c the borders were poorly patroled for years and years.

Not everyone who criticizes Bush is a Bush basher. If those who have a logical and very well thought out reasons for their criticizm I can totally accept their stance. All of the Democratic candidates have very good reasons why they oppose the Presidents stance on things. This is includes Howard Dean. Michael Moore just continues to loop his questions in continual circle.

Lastly, please don't mistake my appreciation for the President as a straight forward conservative and everything else is wrong. I don't agree with Bush on everything he does. Including the bill proposed today. If that passes congress, I will rethink my vote in November. You can count on that.

T, Cbass

I have read his stuff. I have talked to the guy. He is an idiot. You can think what you want about Bush etc. but that does not negate the fact he is an idiot.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Cbass,

Thank you for an articulate and well presented response. It's nice to see there are people here who don't flame you simply because you don't agree with their views.

I'm going to go off digging through my economic statistics, but I wanted to at least give a precursor to one of your statements:

"To start with, I find the economic ideals of Bush to be insane, in an open economy he gave a $7 trillion tax cut. In an open economy, you can expect about 30% of that to actually stay in the economy, meaning that some $4.6 trillion of that is going to be taken directly out of the economy, through foreign investment mostly. Add to this an already massive trade deficit, and you have the bearings of economic disaster. The US economy at this point is dependent on foreign nations buying US dollars, chiefly China and Japan. Foreign banks want US dollars for trading in oil and minerals, which have mostly been traded in US dollars for the last half of the 20th century, because there has been no alternative." (Sorry for the lack of "QUOTE" as I didn't know I was going to reference it until I got started..)

As I indicated above, I'm not sure of the exact number, but I believe it's been estimated that less than 20% of the population pays more than 80% of the entire tax revenue that this country collects. While I don't care to take this discussion towards the "flat tax" argument, I would like to point out that the tax cuts were designed to provide some relief to a smaller portion of the population that bears the larger brunt of the tax liability of this country. (I.E. the "upper middle" class.) To the best of my knowledge, there have also been similar tax legislations aimed at collecting more taxes from the remaining 80% of the population. (Thus part of the reason Bush is so unpopular with many people.) As a result, if you were to look at the US economy as a balance sheet (as indeed you would with any publicly traded corporation), you would see a debit in the "middle class" column and a credit in the "other 80% column." Net result : yes, there's an immediate $7 trillion tax cut, but you'll see some of that money recovered through other demographics. (In future years - at least in theory.)

I also wanted to discuss your comments about the Patriot 2 agreements / legislation. Great Britain has had the "Prevention of Terrorism Act" in place for quite some time now. (Please don't ask me to look up the exact years, but I will if you insist! :-) ) The basic gist is the same : if you are "suspected" of having terrorist ties, motives, or intentions, you can be detained without due process for an indefinite period of time. I personally have no problem with this approach, then again, I've always been a "greater good" type of moralist. In essence, people are very "above board" about their intentions in Great Britain, and thus most people don't have anything to worry about. (For some reason, I must look like a terrorist, as I get stopped and questioned any time I travel through Europe - especially in and out of the UK. I have no problem with this approach to anti-terrorism.) Yes, it means Americans must accept that it is possible for "innocent" members of the populous to be "incarcerated" for periods of time if they are suspected of terrorist activities. I'm personally willing to deal with this possibility. What would it mean for the vast majority of Americans? - Absolutely nothing.

I look forward to your response.

JM

It's not hard to imagine that a man of your background .....

Care to explain?

Hi.

Got the book for Xmas.Read it twice already.Interesting thing-most of his facts are backed up with notes,on what and where the info came from.Easily checked facts,too-I did it on several of his points.Came back good.

There seems to be an awful lot of info on the relationship between the Bush's and the bin Laden family.Lots on Halliburton,Enron,oil deals involving pipelines going through Afghanistan ,helped along by the Taliban,who visited the White House for meetings about getting their cut from the US oil dudes.This goes back a LONG time and is documented in many different places.Moore just puts it all together in one book;makes it much easier to see the patterns emerging involving greed and backstage manipulations.

Also makes extremely interesting points on the state of the people of the USA;very surprising,as I'm a Canadian who gets his view on what's going on primarily from US news,media,etc.Doesn't add up.If the US truly is the way Moore sees it,then it's time for the population to get together and change stuff,as he believes it could be done.If the US is the way the media portrays it,as in news,movies,etc.then y'all are screwed-the rest of the world WILL hate you.I don't believe it personally,as most Americans I've met are no different from us Canucks.Of course,I've never met a RICH American-they seem to be a different breed.

Anyhoo,sorry for the rant,but to all the Moore-haters who hate him just because he suggested taking away your precious guns,get your head out of your ass and do yourselves a favor;get the book,rip off the cover and prevent someone else wrote it;then read it with an open mind and THINK about what's in it.

Then go vote for Oprah.Your problems will be solved

get the book,rip off the cover and prevent someone else wrote it;then read it with an open mind and THINK about what's in it.



Nice.Welcome to the forum,it's good to see some original thought added to our choreographed posturing. :cheers:

Thanks.And I think I meant to type "pretend"

oops

Naki, may I have an answer please.

HEY!!!

It's 1:05 am in Canada right now(Ontario)

Michael Moore is on Conan O'Brien RIGHT NOW talking about the book(it's a repeat,but hey...)

Naki, may I have an answer please.

You should check your mailbox more often. :icon16:

HEY!!!

It's 1:05 am in Canada right now(Ontario)

Michael Moore is on Conan O'Brien RIGHT NOW talking about the book(it's a repeat,but hey...)

We have 'The Awful Truth' later tonight.It is awful,very clumsily staged,and the satire can be weak in places,but it's still the truth.Michael Moore is more ballanced than his opponents give him credit for.He was very good at bagging Clinton as well!

You should check your mailbox more often. :icon16:

Reackon! It's just so small up there!

Just to add an article to the discussion. www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/07/1073437343402.html (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/07/1073437343402.html)

Michael Moore's invective and half-truths play right into the hands of the Republicans, writes Damian Thompson.

If the title Stupid White Men doesn't mean anything to you, then you can't have been anywhere near a bookshop last year. Either that, or you are so used to picking your way through the piles of Michael Moore books that you no longer notice them, or the accompanying recommendation: "Staff pick! Really cool - the book that exposes Dubya as a fascist."

Moore is the American slob in a baseball cap who likes to hint - only hint, mind - that President George Bush had a hand in the September 11 attacks.

Moore has a huge following on campuses on both sides of the Atlantic: he, more than anyone else, has persuaded British students that the occupant of the White House is, like, just such a moron.

Stupid White Men was the bestselling non-fiction hardback in Britain last year after the Atkins New Diet Revolution; it's now top of the paperback list. Bowling for Columbine, the feature-length documentary in which Moore blames a high school massacre on the Republicans, won an Oscar.

Moore's new book, Dude, Where's My Country?, offers his most sophisticated critique to date of American foreign policy: "We like dictators! They help us get what we want and they do a great job of keeping their nations subservient to our galloping global corporate interests."

It takes Moore just a couple of paragraphs to absolve Osama bin Laden of the destruction of the World Trade Centre. "How could a guy sitting in a cave in Afghanistan have plotted so perfectly the hijacking of four planes and then guaranteed that three of them would end up precisely on their targets?" he asks.

Viewers of Bowling for Columbine may find this puzzling, remembering the film's insistence that "Osama bin Laden used his expert CIA training to murder 3000 people". But Moore regards consistency as the hobgoblin of little minds. And besides, his fast-morphing conspiracy theories are all built on the same, unshakeable foundation.

Everything in the world is the fault of stupid white Americans - in which category he apparently includes the September 11 plane passengers: he has a stand-up routine in which he suggests that if the victims had been black, rather than white "scaredy-cats", they would have had no trouble overpowering the hijackers.

The American right used to dismiss Moore's material as unfunny agit prop, unworthy of attention. That is not quite fair. Bowling for Columbine is a brilliantly constructed documentary; it's hard not to cheer when Moore embarrasses the Kmart chain into banning the sale of live ammunition to teenagers. The books are dismal by comparison, but even they evince the odd chuckle.

With sales of Stupid White Men creeping up towards 4 million, the right has changed tactics. Its new approach is to denounce Moore as a liar - a more promising line of attack. And it is certainly true that Bowling for Columbine turns out to contain more half-truths than an Enron corporate video.

For example, Moore says that Lockheed Martin manufactures "weapons of mass destruction" in Littleton, Colorado, the town where the Columbine killings occurred; he even grills a company executive in front of a scary-looking rocket in the local factory.

Lockheed Martin doesn't make weapons in Littleton; it makes weather and communications satellites that are launched by rocket.

Then there's the scene in which Moore opens an account in a rural bank and is given the free shotgun offered to new customers. "Don't you think it's a little dangerous handing out guns in a bank?" he asks.
It's a good question. And the answer: the bank doesn't normally do anything of the sort. Customers have to wait six weeks for background checks. According to the bank, the scene was staged at Moore's request.

Even the documentary's title is dodgy. It's based on reports that the Columbine killers went bowling on the morning of the massacre. Police investigators later concluded that the reports were untrue. The film makes no mention of this.

So generous is Moore's notion of artistic licence that the internet is crawling with websites exposing his "lies". Some of his critics have gone further and attempted to turn his methods on himself.

A documentary maker, Michael Wilson, has been following Moore, badgering him for an interview - just as Moore used to do to bloated chief executives. But Moore isn't talking.

Meanwhile, Dude, Where's My Country? is sitting happily in the bestseller lists. Moore's fans don't care how many fast ones he pulls because, hey, he's a funny guy. There is nothing the right can do to dent his popularity. And perhaps it shouldn't even try.

The truth is that George Bush owes Moore a debt of gratitude. He wouldn't be President today if it weren't for the Green candidate, Ralph Nader, who vacuumed up votes that would otherwise have gone to Al Gore.

Moore was Nader's biggest celebrity backer. So we can be reasonably sure that at least 538 Florida students voted Green because Mike told them to, thereby handing Dubya his winning margin.

And the next time? Strange though it might seem, Moore may help Bush achieve a second term. There he stands, inciting his audience to ever greater heights of Bush-hatred. The snag is that although this goes down a treat in cappuccino-sipping Berkeley, it doesn't play so well among blue-collar voters who think Saddam Hussein deserved to get his arse kicked.

Histrionic invective directed against relatively popular sitting presidents rarely pays off, as the McGovernites discovered in 1972 and the Clinton-haters did in 1996. The sheer incontinence of the attacks on Bush by Moore and his Hollywood friends could help deliver the midwest to Bush.

And Bush knows it, too. There's a curious passage in Stupid White Men in which Moore confesses that on the rare occasions he has met George W. or Jeb Bush, they have teased him in an almost affectionate fashion.
Indeed, the more vigorously Moore attacks the President, the better Bush's approval ratings. Funny, that. And Moore's lifestyle has been awfully lavish of late. One doesn't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it makes you think, doesn't it?

----------------------------------------------------------

The article was more entertaining then his books. :iceslolan













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Nice find Yogs. And congrats on your new position.

Mr. T, could you tell me how long this book is? I'm interested in maybe checking it out, to prove myself(which I feel I already have) to be as open minded as the next guy. The reason I ask how long it is though, is b/c I'm starting a new semester in less than a week. Which means studying begins. If its too long it will take me too long to finish the book to really matter in this discussion.

Yogs has a new position? So I can't have him as philosophical sparring partner... damn

Yogs has a new position? So I can't have him as philosophical sparring partner... damn

I didn't know I was going to become a moderator (nobody asked me). So when I saw that I had a new position, I thought to myself, "Gee, I'm sitting at my desk like always." :p













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I think many people are seeing this as a black and white issue. Many of MMs comments, assertions and questions are based on half truths. For example, you know the Lockheed Martin factory in Littleton Colorado he accused of making WMD (or similar)? They, in fact, only make rockets for launching weather satelites there.

Also, when he was in the bank receiving his shotgun or rifle in BFC, it was staged at his requests. It takes 6 weeks of background checks to get a gun under than system at that bank.

Also, the title of the movie "Bowling for Columbine" is based on early rumours that the boys who purpotrated the shooting were 10 pin bowling earlier in the day. In fact, the police proved those reports wrong. MM knew about that, but kept the title for commerical reasons.

That said, I treat most of his works as comedy/farce that can blow a bit of smoke up some Political ass.

:)

Very good post, Oz.

His movie seemed to leave out important tid-bits of information so he could spin up whatever info he wanted to.


That is exactly his tactics in his latest book that you guys find to be intriguing. To put such a spin on things as to produce a half truth of assumptions and rhetoric. Micheal Moore is a very influential man in Hollywood, but he is a person who's life and career has been built on a lie. He is an actor. They are paid to believe and be something they aren't. And as far as I'm concerned, his political opinions hold as much merit as any average yahoo out there.

I'm giddy to think some of you give this book merit after stating in many seperate threads that the bible cannot be completely true becasue it is just a book. LOL. Double Standards would be expected from some of you.

We have 'The Awful Truth' later tonight.It is awful,very clumsily staged,and the satire can be weak in places,but it's still the truth.Michael Moore is more ballanced than his opponents give him credit for.He was very good at bagging Clinton as well!

Because he is so extremely liberal he is too extreme for the likes of even Clinton.

Cbass,


As I indicated above, I'm not sure of the exact number, but I believe it's been estimated that less than 20% of the population pays more than 80% of the entire tax revenue that this country collects. While I don't care to take this discussion towards the "flat tax" argument, I would like to point out that the tax cuts were designed to provide some relief to a smaller portion of the population that bears the larger brunt of the tax liability of this country. (I.E. the "upper middle" class.) To the best of my knowledge, there have also been similar tax legislations aimed at collecting more taxes from the remaining 80% of the population. (Thus part of the reason Bush is so unpopular with many people.) As a result, if you were to look at the US economy as a balance sheet (as indeed you would with any publicly traded corporation), you would see a debit in the "middle class" column and a credit in the "other 80% column." Net result : yes, there's an immediate $7 trillion tax cut, but you'll see some of that money recovered through other demographics. (In future years - at least in theory.)


JM

Very good post. I believe the stat on taxing is 1% of the population pays 50% of our taxes.

We have discussed this before, and I think that the flat tax is a very good idea nad the most effective for boosting the economy, as we are discovering right now. The upper middle class pays the most taxes for a simple reason:they make the most money. But there is a reason they make the most money. The money they make directly benefits the economy more-so than any other class. So giving them back their money to do whatever they so choose with is logical for a number of reasons. 1. They will put it back into their business. 2. they will use it to hire new employees, creating more jobs. 3. they will put it into the stock market, which obviously is a good thing. 4. they will put it in bonds, which as of right now are a very good idea and when used correctly, will benefit both the economy and the bond-owner very well.


The bottom line is this tax-cut is not falling into an empty well. The money will find its way back into the economy in one way or another by putting it into the hands of the right people. That is what many politicians in this country don't realize. Throwing this money away would be putting it back into certain social programs.

Very good post. I believe the stat on taxing is 1% of the population pays 50% of our taxes.

We have discussed this before, and I think that the flat tax is a very good idea nad the most effective for boosting the economy, as we are discovering right now. The upper middle class pays the most taxes for a simple reason:they make the most money.


You should really make a distinction between "upper middle class" and rich. If you have two income earners in a family, with a combined income of $100K a year after taxes, that makes them upper middle class. If you have someone making $1 million a year through economic enterprises, be they business owners, or just wealthy individuals managing their money through stocks, that makes them rich.

The biggest difference is, the family making $100K a year is probably paying off a mortgage on a nice house, have a couple of nice high end cars they are paying off, and are saving what money they have left over for retirement. The guy making $1 million a year however, probably has his house, or houses, paid off in full, along with his car, or cars, and is most likely going to sock that money into the bank, or invest it.


But there is a reason they make the most money.


The reason they are making the most money is because they have the most to start with, which left them enough after paying for generous living expenses to make more money. Unlike the majority of tax payers, who live paycheque to paycheque, because they don't make enough to pay for the western lifestyle.


The money they make directly benefits the economy more-so than any other class.


You demonstrate a poor grasp of economics. The money that benefits the economy the most is that which consumers spend at the base level, buying domestic products.

Give $100K to a business owner with a net worth of $5 million and an anual income of $500K, and see where it goes. The best case scenario you will see is him reinvesting it in his own business, to make it more profitable for him. There may be small side effects, like him providing another job, but $100K doesn't go very far in creating a new position, unless it's part time minimum wage work. Most likely he'll do what he does with the rest of the money he doesn't spend. Hand it to his stock broker to invest for him, to make him more money.

Give 10 families $10K each, and what will they do with it? They'll spend it on products, and services. You know, the things that businesses sell, to make money? That pays the wages of the employees, that makes the profits for the business owners, that fuels the economy

The biggest failing of the flat tax cut philosophy is that it puts the money into the hands of the people who are selling things, which doesn't mean more things get sold. Think hard about where that money comes from. It comes from the federal coffers, which means a smaller budget, higher deficits, or both. When Bush took office, there was a modest budget surplus. Now, a $500 billion deficit, growing by leaps and bounds.


So giving them back their money to do whatever they so choose with is logical for a number of reasons. 1. They will put it back into their business. 2. they will use it to hire new employees, creating more jobs. 3. they will put it into the stock market, which obviously is a good thing. 4. they will put it in bonds, which as of right now are a very good idea and when used correctly, will benefit both the economy and the bond-owner very well.


Unless putting it back into their business means upgrading their equipment, so that they require less employees to operate it, thus cutting a dozen jobs and making his business more profitable...

This is assuming that the taxpayer in question is a business owner, which is a rather bold assumption.

Bonds? A 5% return rate, that's certainly going to entice an entrepeneur away from the stocks. More likely than not, it will be wisely invested by a firm, which will seek out the most profitable opportunities. Do you so blindly believe in this BS that you think that's going to be in the US? The most profitable companies are either overseas, or manufacture their products, or export their services overseas. This translates to money being leeched out of the economy.


The bottom line is this tax-cut is not falling into an empty well. The money will find its way back into the economy in one way or another by putting it into the hands of the right people. That is what many politicians in this country don't realize. Throwing this money away would be putting it back into certain social programs.

Ok, first point. Somehow, that money will make it back into the economy, by putting it in the hands of "the right people". They already have so much money, we might as well just entrust them with more, so that they can have more! That's a great idea. :loser:

Throwing the money away in certain social programs? I suppose welfare is on that list? Maybe extended unemployment insurance benefits to those who lost their jobs during Bush's tenure as president? Health care, who needs that! If you can't afford to see a doctor, you don't deserve one!

If you don't see that every dollar you invest in any one of these social programs goes directly back into the economy at the lowest level, then you are a complete fool, who can't even understand the basic principles of economics.

It's a direct form of government subsidy, just like the military is, it's the goverment putting money back into the economy at the base level, instead of just giving it to the rich.

Increased spending is a much more sound fiscal policy than flat percentage tax cuts. Hell, flat figure tax credits are a better idea, if you want to reduce spending and put money back into the pockets of taxpayers.

I just read that the Dow Jones dropped 130 (+/-) points,based on the revelation that the US job market sucks.They had forecast 100,000 jobs being created in december.Got around 1,000.

Is this right? 1,000 jobs created in a country of how many million?Could someone please explain to me what a "jobless recovery" is?I couldn't even find how many jobs disappeared in the same month.

I'm no economics major,but I personally think that this means bad news,from a "real guy" standpoint.Guys like me who have a couple of kids,a rather un-useful college education(industrial design?Want a job?MOVE TO EUROPE),a hum-dinger of a mortgage....you get the picture.Being somewhat unemployed for three years,I opened my own performance-minded auto shop.Doing pretty well,despite the fact that there's no small-business startup help or anything for an auto business thanks to it being ecologically unpopular.You have to go it alone on your own dime and your own time.It seems that if there were some programs to REALLY help new businesses that it would get more people working who saw their old jobs move to Mexico.Of course,when a plant closes and 2000 people lose their jobs,only so many can do anything on their own.Lots of factory workers never finished high school-they went for the bucks working at the plant,put in too many years to do anything else and then got shafted when they moved 'er down south.

Anybody see "Roger and Me?" Bet a lot of you see THAT one as mere "Liberal propoganda" that never happened,just like several really nasty events in the '40s....

We've discussed 'Roger and me' before.Yogs lives in Michigan,and apparently,it wasn't GM's fault.;)

Riiiiiight,,,and closing St.Therese in Quebec(the last Camaro producing plant) had absolutely nothin to do with it being the worst plant GM had in terms of quality

Flint was just one of the BIGGEST examples of GM's(or maybe all of Detroit's) assault on working people.Ship the jobs overseas or to Mexico-great freaking idea.Think your own ex-employees are going to buy these things?Don't think I would.

Hmmm. I don't like Micheal Moore, or GWB. I'm not sure I could stand to read this book.