Hate to spoil the party, but can we PLEASE get back to the topic of Moore's actual theft. I agree with stevie, it is a slippery slope (Liberalism, Socialism,... Communism), but these are topics for another forum. Everyone has good points, but lets get back to the subject of the post!

-jesse

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 07-19-2004).]

airjesse123,
We do digress.
Seems to occur on nearly all threads.
Maybe when we begin to drift a new topic should be started.
Sorry.

Everyone,
That's quite alright, I think it is progressive discussion (all dicussion is somewhat progressive), I just think we should talk about the topic on hand, no need to apoligize certainly...

-Jesse

PS, I was looking back at my F451 book. I was especially looking at page 61 in my book (the part where Beatty lectures Montag). First of all, I feel this is one of the most well written pages of literature EVER. Secondly, I feel that Michael Moore completely violates the premise of this part: "If you don't want a man unhappy, don't give him two sides to a question; give him one. Better yet, give him none." Moore is doing exactly what Bradbury makes a point of NOT doing, that is, giving just one side of an arguement. Please respond, I am eager to hear what you guys think of this criticism.

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 07-19-2004).]

Wow, very brilliant assessment! He picks out just the facts he likes, and then highlights even those he chooses in misleading ways.

Panem et circenses!

It's ok for Bradbury to copy Shakespeare, Whitman and Yeats in his titles, but not ok for Moore to use Bradbury?

Double standards are so uncool.

I'm having a case of deja vu.....wasn't this covered some time ago??

Yes it was, ad nauseum...

"It would be like if i said George Bush is a terrible person because he has squinty eyes."

If this is true, why do so many people still pick on GWB for stumbling over a word or two on occasion? Isn't that judging someone based on an uncontrollable physical limitation?

Airjesse123,
Very good point, and fair and accurate, I must add. How does being anti death penalty make one liberal? I'm anti death penalty, but I wouldn't call myself liberal, at least not to my definition of the word, I think I'm pretty much middle of the road, but now I'm starting to wonder what really IS liberal. There are certain "liberal" things that have become widely accepted to the point of being trendy. Does not following a trend because it just doesn't happen to be what you believe in make you liberal or conservative? Veganism, for example, is becoming trendy. If I join the crowd, I'd just be following along, and therefore would NOT be free-thinking, and therefore would NOT be liberal!! By NOT being a vegan (simply because I do not have an interest in becoming one) am I therefore liberal? Okay, now I'm rambling. Later!

P.S. I guess my point is that some people confuse "conservative" with "old fashioned." The two might match on some subjects, but not all.

[This message has been edited by groon (edited 07-19-2004).]

Well groon, I am more of a conservative libertarian. I do not beleive in all of GWB's statements, but most of them I do agree with.
Please, more responses on my commemt above plz...

-Jesse

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 07-19-2004).]

I'm in agreement with your comment on Bradbury/Beatty/Moore. Moore, for all his professed "honesty" is more one-sided than most conservatives. It's an interesting way to look at it.

I read tonight that Linda Rondstadt got booed out of a theater for telling people to go see the Moore movie and that Moore is a great American. It got so messy, the owners of the theater threw her out and told her she'd never perform in their venue again. Moore, of course, called the theater anti-American. Anyone who disagrees with Moore, of course, IS anti-American.

Dark,

Good point, but off topic, please get back on topic guys. If your a conservative and feel you need you to express your beliefs. Protestwarrior.com is a great forum for this! I love Rrotest Warrior... it is for independent thinkers.
-Jesse

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 07-20-2004).]

Yes, Moore is giving only one side of the issue. I can't fault him for that. It is up to us to give the other view. The problem with Moore is that his statements are unfounded propaganda. Secondly, one should keep it in-house. Dissent is fine, but don't go over to a bunch of French snobs and badmouth your country to them.


And to stevieboy, so you know how to look up e.e. cummings, but you still can't write!!

Off-topic to the board, certainly; but not to the thread.