Thor,
You are way out in left, I cant respond to you're comments because they are so far out there. Yes, I guess I did put those two titles together, andit is actually kinda funny because MM is just a carbon copy of Al Franken or vise versa. I think you are being a little closed minded. I never said I agreed with those Michael Moore is Gay websites, did I, in fact I rebutted them. I guess I will never get through to you Thor, and have an intellectual discussion like I was trying to have with Translator. Your posts are long-winded and weak, and most of the time drag the topic way off base. I think we should just get over our naming calling and agree to disagree. Okay...No?

"but dont take my word for it.....read the news....." HAHAHAHAHAH ROFL!!! 3 Words: Liberal Media Bias, I have some websites for YOU:
http://www.mediaresearch.org http://www.gargaro.com/bias.html http://www.thatliberalmedia.com

-Jesse


[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 07-29-2004).]

Thormachine,

What? You mean you have a life outside of this board? That�s unpossible!

Best,

Pete

P.S.

I, for one, was referring to Airjesse�s post of 7/26. He was shifting from his original question to a new question with a fine quote from F-451, a quote I�d contend that Moore was entirely unaware of. What�s your opinion of that passage?

Best,

Pete

Ok, I guess we'll have to do that. Sorry if I come out a bit rough sometimes; that's my nature. Too bad about fencing. It's a great sport (the touche part threw me off).
Thor, hey, I work on the computer - in between writing verses and fighting grammar I respond here and there.
Pterran, I have no energy to seek that post (and start a new thing). But I'll be back.
Cheers, Translator

Translator,

Here's the post that I was referring to. I'm especially interested to hear Thormachine's response to the passage about keeping a man happy by giving him only one side of the question. I'd guess that Thormachine's, and possibly your, response would be that Moore was giving us another side of the questions. I'd contend that Moore's movie gives us only one side, his side, and I find it ironic that Moore was either ignorant of or completed disregarded this passage when he chose to name his movie.

What do you think?

quote:

Originally posted by airjesse123:
Thormachine,
This was the question I posed, when I guess you were gone, to get us back on topic:
[b]
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. 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.

What do you think of this?

Dark, thanks for not bending to criticisms, I don't see why our replies are so bitterly subdued.

-Jesse[/B]

Best,

Pete

comments anyone, or is this thread dead?
-Jesse

I don't think MM had any clue about the content of 451. He is engaged in attacks on George W. and will do anything to make people come to his distorted way of thinking. What is different is that in 451 no one was capable of giving the other side of the issue. At least some of us can do that in our free society.

I don't think MM had any clue about the content of 451. He is engaged in attacks on George W. and will do anything to make people come to his distorted way of thinking. What is different is that in 451 no one was capable of giving the other side of the issue. At least some of us can do that in our free society.

Well, Pete,
I think that Moore, like just about everybody on earth, argues one side of the discsussion because he believes in the rightness of that side. It would be hard for him to argue against himslef while trying to persuade people not to vote Bush again - that would be like shooting yourself in the foot, wouldn't it be? His movie isn't an academic essay where he has the time to engage in an argument - counterargument - end off with a fully-proven thesis - sort of thing. As was mentioned here before, the general public is stupid. They go for the flag, the jingoismk, and the very short, uncomplicated argument. Moore is speaking to those people, and hence he cannot act like, for example, Noam Chomsky. He gives both sides of the argument, but he can, for he's speaking to a whole different set of people.

Cheers, Translator

Translator: you're premise is so wrong... people don't just go for the flag, they embrace it because they know what it stands for. IT IS SO EASY TO BE LIBERAL! In virtue, everything liberals say is so right, but to mainstream america it is wrong because the values behind the ideals are wrong. I think women are cool: I'LL JOIN THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT. Why cant women choose for themselves?: I'LL JOIN THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD MOVEMENT! The ideals are good but these liberals don't show the fire and brimstone that goes on behind closed doors. Also, if MM doesn't want to create a real documentery, DON'T CALL IT A DOCUMENTARY! If MM wants to call a mvie F911, don't steal a title, then go against a premise in the book, see above question. OK, call your movie bush sucks, don't pretend to be objective and be COMPLETELY BIASED. I would like to remind you of the dictionary definition for these two words courtesy dictionary.com:

Propoganda: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause

Ducumentary: Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film

Which is MM doing, honestly now?
-Jesse

Translator: you're premise is so wrong... people don't just go for the flag, they embrace it because they know what it stands for. IT IS SO EASY TO BE LIBERAL! In virtue, everything liberals say is so right, but to mainstream america it is wrong because the values behind the ideals are wrong. I think women are cool: I'LL JOIN THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT. Why cant women choose for themselves?: I'LL JOIN THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD MOVEMENT! The ideals are good but these liberals don't show the fire and brimstone that goes on behind closed doors. Also, if MM doesn't want to create a real documentery, DON'T CALL IT A DOCUMENTARY! If MM wants to call a mvie F911, don't steal a title, then go against a premise in the book, see above question. OK, call your movie bush sucks, don't pretend to be objective and be COMPLETELY BIASED. I would like to remind you of the dictionary definition for these two words courtesy dictionary.com:

Propoganda: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause

Ducumentary: Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film

Which is MM doing, honestly now?
-Jesse

Jesse: It scares me that someone your age thinks this well. As a teacher, I see so much non-thinking going on, it gets frustrating. You provide hope for the future. What are your career plans?

Translator,

Thanks for the response. I think you give MM more credit than he's due. I disagree, though, in that he didn't have time to present another side of the argument. True, it's his movie and he can say what he wants any way he wants to but I think he weakens his argument but not at least bringing up the other side if for no other reason than to knock it down. In light of this passage, if MM had been aware of it, I'd think he would've taken care to spend some time on the other side.

Best,

Pete

quote:

Originally posted by pterran:
Translator,

...if MM had been aware of it, I'd think he would've taken care to spend some time on the other side.

Best,

Pete

No he wouldn't, MM has a political adgenda, and theres nothing anyone can do to change that.

pabillsman,
I'll take that as a compliment. I would like to become a doctor like my old man. I don't want to be hated, so I don't wanna be a politician or lawyer. You know what they say: "whats the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?"..."one is slimy scum-sucking bottom-dwelling scavenger, the other is a fish."

-Jesse

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 08-02-2004).]

Arlenjesse, it scares me that there are some poeple your age out there who think the way you do.

Pterran,
I guess we have to disagree on this as well. But this is a samll point, I think.

Cheers, Translator

quote:

Originally posted by Translator:
Arlenjesse, it scares me that there are some poeple your age out there who think the way you do.

Thanks for getting my name right.
Is this a compliment or an insult? If it is an insult, it really doesn't make sense because I have backed up all the rebuttles I have given you...

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 08-03-2004).]