Interfector,

Man, those are some fancy words you�re using. But you�re right: big words don�t make for an argument. Neither do insults. If you�d care to make a point, preferably one about Bradbury, since this is, after all, a Bradbury site, feel free to do so.

May I make a correction, though? I haven�t quite posted three thousand times. (Yeah, I know. You�re using a rhetorical flourish. Sort of like the big words you like to use. We get it, all right? Sheesh.) According to records, it�s more like 352 since April of 2002. To save you time researching, that�s somewhat below the average for a long time poster on this board. But I will concede that you managed, in three posts, to make yourself look like a bigger fool than than I could�ve in 352. For that kind of efficiency, I commend you.

Best,

Pete

pterran

Take the interfector as just another chap from the Windy City. Do you think he knows anything about Green Town, just a few miles north of his typewriter?

Nard,

Maybe he'll tell us.

Best,

Pete

I wonder just how many of those words interfector knows the meaning of. And if interfector's truly from the Windy City, well, I'm just happy I reside in another state.

Are you sure he's from the Windy City or the Blowhard City?

Ray Bradbury has called Michael Moore an "asshole" and a "thief", complaining that his book title was stolen. Is Bradbury a right-wing hack, or just an old curmudgeon? He has acknowledged that book sales for Fahrenheit 451 have risen as a direct result of Moore's movie, yet is screeching like a cat in a hot tub. Does he also think the producers of "Escape form LA" stole their title from "Escape from New York"? If Bradbury is so wounded, why doesn't he just sue Michael Moore (the publicity of which would cause his book sales to soar)? It would certainly be in character for a conservative(?) to promote censorship, and (win or lose) make money in the process. Really Ray, who's the asshole?

I love how anyone who disagrees with Moore and can't stand his approach to filmmaking is automatically a right-wing hack or an old nut who's lost their mind to age. Really, accusations like these are becoming tiring when repeated over and over and over and over...

Paddyryan,

Megadittoes.

Best,

Pete

It seemed to me I'd heard that song before.

Petey, you've really proven yourself. You say that insults do not win arguments, and I concur. Funny, then, that you would end your response with an insult. Funny, as in: queer. Queer, as in: curious to thinkers and imbeciles alike. Perhaps you are a bigger hypocrite than Bradbury. More than a possibility, I would wager, given your status as resident henpecker. I wasn't trying to best you in any argument, and anyone who knows what an insult looks like would attest to that. No, I was merely excercising a bit of self-restraint by not telling you what I really think of you. And for the record, I know all of the words I use. I know, for example, that our dear Petey suffers from copremesis, one of the more pleasant symptoms of what President Bush might refer to as "miseducation." The Windy City, incidentally for all of you addlepated lusus naturae, is so called because of blowhards. Ergo, any joke connecting such themes is both indefatigably weathered and (for all those who care about silly things like concinnity) none too subtle. But hey, who am I to complain? Oy vey, the humanity! Well, sadly, I must leave you for another day. I have things to do, unlike someone who admits to having posted so many times to a single web-board. I wonder how it must feel to be so stupid. Does it hurt? Do you really believe that your opinion of me, based solely on inferences made after having read less than a page of my words, is somehow, magically acceptable? If so, I question your deliberative strategies, your laughable struggle with fairness, and more than anything your opportunistically finger-wagging portrayals of people you don't know in the least as misguided know-nothings. I could make your head spin with words you'd never comprehend, even if you had all the dictionaries, and while this may not assist yours truly with his arguments, neither does baseless self-assuredness, you mewling coprophage. Cry me a river, won't you? I'm not going to hold your hand any more, but I'm certain that yours shall be a star of brightest luminance. Please refrain from humiliating yourself any further, at least until you have mastered the art of breathing through your pemphigoid nose, exclusively when necessary.

There was a big fight at the ball park in Chicago either yesterday or the day before. Anyway, the fight was in the stands, between two brothers, and a father with his little kids. Two brothers are in jail right now. And the police commisioner said it all: " Don't argue with someone who won't listen to reason."

And there's a lot of 'thems' around here.

F911 definitely arose my interest in the book, and I'm not quite the level of moron that would get the two confused. Nor do I think I've even met one. But if someone did, wouldn't it just be more publicity for the book? It�s an old book. Honestly this is what brought me here. I have to say I'm losing respect very quickly for Bradbury.

As for the movie, it's great. It's biased, no doubt. Don't think it isn't. So are Fox News, CNN, CBS News, etc. Horribly biased. And their bias is in the opposite direction, as they've been behind Bush and all the money he�s made them 100%, right from the beginning. These wars have been the most profitable thing that corporate media could ask for. What Moore is doing is showing the other side. I won't even go so far to say he's entirely right, but it's the side no one has been shown. And don't tell me it's un-American to not back your government's actions. I hold that as just about the most American thing about America - the fact that people take action when we don't like what's happening. I'd like to think we couldn't be led into a Holocaust.

Moore is biased and sometimes misleading, but from everything I've seen he doesn't lie. He's got lots of rich enemies that often try to say that, but from all of the research and reading in to these accusations, I've found nothing. And that�s out of all of Moore�s stuff.

Perhaps all of this mess can teach us how easily people are programmed. It�s not our fault really, there�s just so info much out there, and unfortunately all the people that deliver it have opinions. Strong ones.

Oh yes, Mr. Dark... I write for both reasons, thanks. Depending on my mood, of course. I'm quite sure that I could take you to task over your fledgling "communication," but that is not (generally) my policy. I like a writer who can achieve that golden mean, who can express himself one way or the other, and anyone who knows anything about words knows that they are innocuous vessels. People often infer what we do not imply. No two people in the world, for example, will define the word "government" in the same way. How, then, do we presume ourselves capable of such feats of communication, if the very language we use is inadequate? In other, less challenging, words, if we can't agree on what the words mean, how do they serve us? Seems to me (and countless other lexicographers) that we serve them. I've expressed my feelings about Bradbury, and Petey opted to get into a shit-eating contest, which I am more than happy to say he would excel at without my departure. Many writers, and even some who I'm sure you've claimed to appreciate, have sought to obfuscate as well as communicate. That's the beautiful thing about language, and the one we're using now in particular. Go buy some Joyce, Samuel Johnson, Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromarty, Celine, Twain, St. John the Divine... practically anyone, really. Plenty of vitriolic instances there, I can assure you. And not to rub it in or anything, but since you don't have the foggiest idea who I am, how are you so sure that I'm not better than you at just about everything you suspect yourself (in a delusional stupor, no doubt) of being very good at? Did I communicate that well enough for your fimblefambling "mind" to devour without tragic incident? I am celebrated in my field... and you? I await news of your impending esteem, no matter how long it takes. Okay, sweetie? That goes for all of you. Bradbury included.

Hmmm, Wordy.
Nice topic. I was drawn here because of the whole F-9/11, F-451 fiasco. I like Bradbury's stance on it. It's painfully obvious that Moore ripped off the title. Give it back. I haven't seen the movie, (Moore's) I've read the book. (Bradbury's). I agree with Bradbury that his is not a political statement but rather a philosphical, sociological study and quite aesthetic at that. Moore can't possibly hope to achieve that in his wildest wet dream. Title or no title. The only consolation is that Moore will quickly be forgotten...

And who says? A sapient pundit such as yourself? Michael Moore has the number one film in the country at the moment; the first documentary ever to achieve such success. I'd put money on his staying power if I were you. For a film such as this to appear at only eight hundred theaters (roughly one-third that of most major studio films) and still claim the top spot is no less than amazing. Furthermore, this is the first film exploring the presidency of an incumbent during an election year to see wide-scale release, much less during a time of conflict. If you are an American, be glad you live in America, you undiscerning saprophage, where you are able to say and think what you like, and where you are allowed to vote without being killed. Michael Moore is as patriotic as a filmmaker could hope to be, and to not acknowledge the conspicuous intertangledness of this administration with the events of 9/11 is to completely miss his point. What? Were you born on Saturn? Now, onto your earlier point, the moanworthy assumption that this title was "stolen." What I see is homage, or at worst a visual pun, not theft outright. Plagiarism is a different matter, and this instance of using a title as the basis for your own is legally protected. What Moore has done falls nowhere within phraseological earshot of what Bradbury himself has done. While Bradbury has opted to use lines from other authors' works verbatim, Michael Moore has only done what plenty do freely and with impunity in this country. Isn't America grand? I do not wish you ill, friend, but there has been too much talk of Bradbury being in the right, when the law clearly states the opposite. Of course, this has little bearing on Bradbury's track record, what with *COMPLETELY APPROPRIATING* others' words sans permission. And as to whether said authors would agree or disagree with Bradbury's decision to do so, well... the jury has taken ceaseless leave, probably somewhere near Crawford, Texas. Now, there are others here who would tell you that I am merely at odds with them because they support Bradbury, which is clearly not the case. Moreover, I have never said that I am any kind of authority, but while my opinions have not always been aboveboard (as I don't altogether feel that a web-board is the place for this sort of refutation) I have not given ample reason for their extinction by way of the indignant dismissiveness presented since their arrival here. Neither have I made the case that Bradbury can't be angry, but to whine about it in public is just bad form, and what's more is that should know that. But of course, so should all of you. Shame on this vaniloquent lot, and God bless Michael Moore for enlightening America. If, as so many have inelegantly "elocuted," Moore has a reputation as someone who sensationalizes, distorts the truth, or plays on the weak-minded, let him. Who are any of you? How dare you think yuo would be any more fair. You don't have what it takes, and neither does Bradbury. You simpering blubberheads wouldn't know the truth if it invaded you anally and left its card on the nightstand. And what's worse is that you're afraid of the irrepressible fact that he may be right about better than fifty percent of it. You should be glad to have a voice such as his representing the little guy, and if you're not you should be forced to work for him. No... Michael Moore is not going anywhere, unless someone kills him. If you honestly believe that he's seen the end, you obviously don't keep up with world events, much less the Joneses. Go cry yourself to sleep now, all of you. Unavailing nitwits.