RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Lets send Micheal Moore to Iraq(17 posts)

Lets send Micheal Moore to Iraqhycobob
Mar 28, 2003 7:59 AM
I saw a corperate slamfest on cable TV a while back that Micheal Moore made. It seems, according to him profits shouldn't even be a concern. Letting employees go due to lagging profits must have been made a sin when I wasn't looking. I refuse to watch the new one though about Columbine, I don't want to think about how he twisted that tragedy. This guy is to journalism and film-making as corn is to the digestive system. His stuff passes for simple-minded entertainment, but try to digest it.

How about we send him over to Iraq and let him replace one of the embedded journalists. Some here say that the reporters there aren't objective enough since they rely on the soldiers for food, water, cover, transportation and protection. I think Moore would be perfect; since the troops would only interact with him when absolutely necessary.

Here is an example of a typical interaction:
Moore: "can I have some water?"
Troop: "you've had more than anyone else today...NO!"
Moore: "where are we going today?"
Troop: "to war."
Moore: "where will we be exactly?"
Troop: "stop asking stupid questions."
Moore: "where do I ride?"
Troop: "we walk...there's no limo service here."
Moore: "when do we eat?"
Troop: "here."
Moore: "whats this bag?"
Troop: "cold supper you dipshit...Look what do you think we're doing here? This is war, you don't get a star trailer and catered meals, no paparazi and studio re-takes here. So if you don't shut that damned light off someones going to get shot, and it won't be me."
Moore: (to TV camera, with fingers crossed behind back) "get me outta here now...please. I'm sorry, I'll be good."
I was hoping Geraldo would go interview SH about now... nmDougSloan
Mar 28, 2003 8:13 AM
He'd love it thereCaptain Morgan
Mar 28, 2003 8:21 AM
No corporations beating up on the workers over there. Of course, there are no corporations there to do it. Anyway, just ask United Air Lines what the benefits are of keeping a work force to the detriment of corporate profits.

When he first came on the scene, I thought Moore was interesting because he was kind of tongue-in-cheek. Now that he takes himself so seriously his innocence is gone, and I find it difficult to take him seriously.
He'd love it thereAlpedhuez55
Mar 28, 2003 8:39 AM
I agree with you on that one Captain. I loved "Roger & Me" and he should have got the Oscar for that. Though the same people he called up on stage last sunday blocked him from the catagory back then.

Now he has become a joke of what he was. The only good thing about Sunday was all the boos he got from the crowd. He could have made a statement about the war with some class. He is certainly smart enough to make that type of statement. He chose to make himself look like an idiot ranting about a "ficticious war" at the same moment the news was talking about a finding a suspected chemical weapons factory.

It will be hard to take a moie of his seriously after that.

Mike Y.
Why don't you ask UAsacheson
Mar 28, 2003 9:07 AM
about the benefits of keeping a top-heavy upper management employed and at full salary when the people that keep the airline running are discarded like they don't matter.
DiscardedCaptain Morgan
Mar 28, 2003 10:32 AM
If you are saying that leaders of corporations are heavily overcompensated, I have no quarrel with that. However, your comment "people that keep the airline running are discarded like they don't matter" is unsupported.

You have pilots that work 30-35 hours weeks (that includes time waiting on planes, sitting in the cockpit at the gates, etc.), not actual flight time (note: Southwest, one of the few airlines making money, is the exception -- pilots get paid for actual flight time, and at a rate considerably lower than the major carriers). You also have people whose sole job is to push the planes away from the gates. You could have baggage handlers do that job, but the unions effectively had the airlines by the balls and forced them to hire people to sit around with only one job function. Basically, it has forced UAL to be inefficient with its labor management by limiting what they can or can't do. That is the major reason why they are losing money, and not because of a few million dollars paid to a few execs.
say what you will about mooreColnagoFE
Mar 28, 2003 8:30 AM
sure i dont agree with some of what he says, but you gotta give him credit for having the balls to say what he thinks and not be a jingoistic cow like a number of people in show biz and the media are these days.
Jingoistic...I can't believe thats really a word nmhycobob
Mar 28, 2003 9:43 AM
.
from dictionary.comColnagoFE
Mar 28, 2003 11:05 AM
jin·go·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (jngg-zm)
n.
Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jingo·ist n.
jingo·istic adj.
jingo·isti·cal·ly adv.
It comes from a British song about the Russo-Turkish warMe Dot Org
Mar 30, 2003 10:57 AM
We don't want to fight,
But by Jingo if we do,
We've got the ships,
We've got the men,
And got the money too.
We've fought the Bear before,
And while we're Britons true,
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.
So, when you read that over this morning . . . .Silverback
Mar 28, 2003 8:38 AM
. . . did you have poster's remorse? Or just go on thinking that you can say anything you want, but anybody who disagrees with you has to keep quiet?
Poster's remorse...absolutely not!hycobob
Mar 28, 2003 10:03 AM
I was raised in the news media...not docu-drama. When we praise someone for his insightful investigative journalism, although it isn't based in (not on) fact, we elevate the National Inquirer and Star to real news level. If his is the trend (TIC) broadcast news will soon have lead stories about wolfboys and Hillary Clinton's alien lovechild. Feel free to beat your chest and disagree...I helped defend your right to do just that from 1982 to 1987.
Fine - disagree with him ... I did ...sacheson
Mar 28, 2003 9:04 AM
... but at least make an educated decision to disagree with him. You speak of not watching his Columbine film. If you didn't shelter yourself from the things you disagree with, you might learn that it was very loosely associated to the Columbine tragedy.

Few things frustrate me more than those (on both sides of the spectrum) that won't educate themselves across the whole spectrum before forming their opinions.
Very true...yethycobob
Mar 28, 2003 9:52 AM
I choose not to have somebody poke me up the keister to know I don't want anything to do with sodomy either. I also have never watched an episode of "Survivor", does that mean I can't form an opinion on supposed reality TV? Am I out of touch with modern society and a danged homophobe? I think not...its free will.
How did he even win?jaybird
Mar 28, 2003 10:28 AM
I didn't think Jackass was even nominated...
Bowling for Columbine. Another free thought exposition. nmSpunout
Mar 28, 2003 10:44 AM
So you thnk Michael Moore gets a Star Trailer...Me Dot Org
Mar 30, 2003 12:00 PM
...when he's doing documentaries on the cheap about things he cares about?

and by the way, exactly what is a "Studio Retake"? What does it have to do with documentary films?

Making documentary films is not the traditional way to star trailers and catered meals. I don't think of Ken Burns and Jacques Cousteau when I think of Hollywood Glitterati.

One of the things you'd find out if you watched the film is that Michael Moore was a card-carrying member of the NRA. He grew up in Flint Michigan in a culture of hunting and guns. His beliefs are not because of his upbringing, but in spite of his upbringing. Moore doesn't try to hide his biases. I didn't agree with everything that Moore postulates in his documentary, but it got me thinking. And getting people to think and talk about the causes of violence in our culture is a good thing.