Michael Moore, Genius or Idiot?

But unlike SwiftVets Moore didn’t get any politically motivated funding to make his film

difference: the swiftvets made a commercial, which doesnt make money, only costs money. they needed funding. moore, making a movie, especially since he had made “successful” movies in the past, would obviously find it easier to find non-politically motivated funding, because it would turn a big profit for whoever funded him, they wouldnt care what the message was.

So one could argue that had there not been an election the SwiftVets would not have surfaced,

well DUH. what the heck is your point? if kerry werent running, who would care what his war record was, good or bad? no one! the only reason it makes any difference at all is because he is running for office.

but that Moore would’ve still made his film.

yes, for the same reason that swiftvets made their commercial. you really have no point in this train of thought.

. I would also add that not only did he smear McCain’s war record, but that his father did on Clinton in '92, and Dole in '88, and smeared Reagan in the '80 primaries. Negative campaigning has long been a trend with the Bush family.

are you kidding? negative campaigning is a trend with EVERY politician. not just the bushs. you are really showing your hatred of bush here.

@AgentSmith:

But unlike SwiftVets Moore didn’t get any politically motivated funding to make his film. So one could argue that had there not been an election the SwiftVets would not have surfaced, but that Moore would’ve still made his film.

Oh, no! However, Michael Moore hates W enough to spend his own money to make a movie(cheaply compared to today’s movie budgets) twisting facts, time and events to help defeat W. More importantly to make $$.
SOURCE :
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13583626_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-THE-AWKWARD-CONSCIENCE-OF-A-NATION-name_page.html

EXCERPT : “If you think you know someone who loathes Bush, American imperialism, big business, right-wingers, oh, and Tony Blair’s poodle act, then multiply their hatred by a hundred and you get close to Moore’s level of contempt.”

But let’s look at who’s spending money where…
SOURCE :
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40115

EXCERPT : "Broken down by amount, it means 24 high rollers gave $56,193,000 to left-leaning groups, while two donors gave $1,520,000 to Republican groups.

The Democratic Joint Victory Campaign 2004 has received the most donations this cycle, raking in $41,685,706. No. 2 is another anti-Bush group, the Media Fund, which collected $28,127,488.

The top conservative group in fund-raising is the Club for Growth, which took in $5,288,847. Many of the group’s donations came from individuals, some listed as “retired” and giving as little as $50."

@AgentSmith:

That’s exactly it Bush takes it as an insult, but he takes just about everything as an insult. Negative campaigning has long been a trend with the Bush family.

Negative campaigning is decried by young and old, voters and non-voters, but it works. There is no law against it and it has been used for the last 200 years.
QUERRY : Is it negative campaigning to point out an opponents attendance/voting/legislative/executive record.
I note that the W campaign has updated it’s former “Kerry’s 350 votes for higher taxes” to a more specific “Kerry’s 98 votes for higher taxes.” I still see flaws in that commercial, but it is closer to the truth of higher taxes.

You want to document W’s whining over the last year plus the # of attacks, verbally and in advertising, he has endured with tens of millions of $$s spent against him?

Yet, in the last month, J "F"ing Kerry has two, count them, two ads costing $150,000 each(production and air-time) and he whines like a stuck pig, calls his lawyers, threatens radio stations, asks the book publisher(Regner) to stop distributing the book “Unfit for Command”, begs bookstores to take the book off the shelves, and sends a lackey to ask W to break the law by having W stop the ads and book, thusly violating the Freedom of Speech banning books

As for where were the Swiftvets for the last 30+ years do a search…
(Swiftvets 1971) and you’ll find the origins of the argument. Kerry was debated on “The Dick Cavett Show.”
SOURCE :
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=KerryONeill

This argument has not had the $ to fight JFK as these vets had to live and provide for their families. However, When JFK appeared to be on the verge of winning the the Democratic the effort was ramped up. JFK was just one sleazy senator from a misguided state in many vets minds. But his potential presidency brought more light to the darkness in which he had lived_(20 years as a US Senator with his name on NO legislation in that time period.)_

Let’s drop this 30 year old argument and focus on the last 20 years. :D

@AgentSmith:

Well keep in mind that Socrates wandered Greece looking for the wisest man, one who knew he knew nothing.

If he knowd he knowd nuttin, then he knowd sumtin.
Besides dat; he be’d rong! :roll: :P