Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The film that made all Republicans hate Michael Moore
Topic Started: Jun 26 2017, 05:07 PM (710 Views)
_g R_
Member Avatar

What they did is prove to the world that they can't handle the truth. The FCC would not allow this film to air in the United States prior to the 2004 election. ( because of pressure from the Bush Administration obviously ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAkhdZxgBCE&feature=share
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

And before anyone posts "Fahrenhype 9-11, that counter- propaganda film has been thoroughly debunked as lies and misinformation.
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Fahrenhype 9-11, is a counter- propaganda film that has been thoroughly debunked as lies and misinformation.
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64eI0KdWj-M
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

Every film that Michael Moore directs makes Republicans hate him.

However, the FCC did not ban Fahrenheit 9/11. It opened in America 5 months before the election and broke all box office records for a documentary film. It was even on TV the week of the election.

Great as it was (and it was a great film), it had little effect of the 2004 election. Bush haters hated Bush more, and Bush lovers loved Bush more. But the majority of the rest of America gave Bush the Presidency for another 4 years.

Perhaps if Michael Moore (and Susan Sarandon) had supported John Kerry instead of Green Party candidate Ralph Nader - who knows?

President Bush 2004-2008 (chalk-up another victory for the Green Party)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

coverpoint
Jun 27 2017, 12:56 PM
Every film that Michael Moore directs makes Republicans hate him.

However, the FCC did not ban Fahrenheit 9/11. It opened in America 5 months before the election and broke all box office records for a documentary film. It was even on TV the week of the election.

Great as it was (and it was a great film), it had little effect of the 2004 election. Bush haters hated Bush more, and Bush lovers loved Bush more. But the majority of the rest of America gave Bush the Presidency for another 4 years.

Perhaps if Michael Moore (and Susan Sarandon) had supported John Kerry instead of Green Party candidate Ralph Nader - who knows?

President Bush 2004-2008 (chalk-up another victory for the Green Party)
Thanks for the correction. I did find one source so far that shows the film was blocked, not by the FCC but by Disney, the owners of Mirimax who financed the film.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/us/disney-is-blocking-distribution-of-film-that-criticizes-bush.html
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

Disney blocks Michael Moore film on Bush links with leading Saudis

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/06/usa.film
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

_g R_
Jun 27 2017, 09:41 PM
coverpoint
Jun 27 2017, 12:56 PM


Perhaps if Michael Moore (and Susan Sarandon) had supported John Kerry instead of Green Party candidate Ralph Nader - who knows?

President Bush 2004-2008 (chalk-up another victory for the Green Party)
A great president like Ralph Nader would have been too easy for us. Americans like to learn things the hard way.
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

_g R_
Jun 27 2017, 10:02 PM
_g R_
Jun 27 2017, 09:41 PM
coverpoint
Jun 27 2017, 12:56 PM


Perhaps if Michael Moore (and Susan Sarandon) had supported John Kerry instead of Green Party candidate Ralph Nader - who knows?

President Bush 2004-2008 (chalk-up another victory for the Green Party)
A great president like Ralph Nader would have been too easy for us. Americans like to learn things the hard way.
America learned decades ago that the Green party’s single purpose is to drain liberal votes from the Democratic Party. They don’t run congressional candidates. They crawl out from under their rock every 4 years for the presidential campaign as that is the time to gain some measure of personal fame and sell books. (note that your signature says “Green Party 2020”, not “Green Party 2018”)

Green Party percentage of votes in presidential elections:

2000 2.7% (when the Green Party cost Al Gore the presidential election)
2004 0.1%
2008 0.1%
2012 0.4%
2016 0.3% (when the Green Party cost Hillary Clinton the presidential election

I am sure that in 2020 they will again try to diminish the Democratic Party vote for President, grab their 1% of the angry liberal vote, sell a few books and gain a bit of notoriety for whomever they nominate. Hopefully, they will not screw up the election like they did in 2000 and 2016, and leave America with the likes of George Bush and donald trump.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

RALPH NADER: THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THE U.S. FROM THE “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY is at its lowest ebb in the memory of everyone now alive. It’s lost the White House and both houses of Congress. On the state level it’s weaker than at any time since 1920. And so far in 2017 Democrats have gone 0 for 4 in special elections to replace Republican members of Congress who joined the Trump administration.

How did it come to this? One person the Democratic Party is not going to ask, but perhaps should, is legendary consumer advocate and three-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader.

Nader, who’s now 83 and has been been based in Washington, D.C. for over fifty years, has had a front row seat to the Democrats’ slow collapse. After his bombshell exposé of the U.S. car industry, Unsafe at Any Speed, he and his organizations collaborated with congressional Democrats to pass a flurry of landmark laws protecting the environment, consumers and whistleblowers. Journalist William Greider described him as one of America’s three top models for small-d democratic activism, together with Saul Alinsky and Martin Luther King, Jr. Meanwhile, the 1971 “Powell Memo,” which laid the groundwork for the resurgence of the corporate right, named him as a key enemy of “the system,” calling him “the single most effective antagonist of American business.”

But of course Nader has been persona non grata with the Democratic Party since his 2000 Green Party candidacy for president. George W. Bush officially beat Al Gore in Florida by 537 votes, with the state’s electoral votes putting Bush in the White House even though he lost the national popular vote. (In reality, a comprehensive, little-noticed study released soon after 9/11 found that Gore would have won Florida if all disputed ballots had been recounted.)


LINK
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 12:16 PM
RALPH NADER: THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THE U.S. FROM THE “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY is at its lowest ebb in the memory of everyone now alive. It’s lost the White House and both houses of Congress. On the state level it’s weaker than at any time since 1920. And so far in 2017 Democrats have gone 0 for 4 in special elections to replace Republican members of Congress who joined the Trump administration.

How did it come to this? One person the Democratic Party is not going to ask, but perhaps should, is legendary consumer advocate and three-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader.

Nader, who’s now 83 and has been been based in Washington, D.C. for over fifty years, has had a front row seat to the Democrats’ slow collapse. After his bombshell exposé of the U.S. car industry, Unsafe at Any Speed, he and his organizations collaborated with congressional Democrats to pass a flurry of landmark laws protecting the environment, consumers and whistleblowers. Journalist William Greider described him as one of America’s three top models for small-d democratic activism, together with Saul Alinsky and Martin Luther King, Jr. Meanwhile, the 1971 “Powell Memo,” which laid the groundwork for the resurgence of the corporate right, named him as a key enemy of “the system,” calling him “the single most effective antagonist of American business.”

But of course Nader has been persona non grata with the Democratic Party since his 2000 Green Party candidacy for president. George W. Bush officially beat Al Gore in Florida by 537 votes, with the state’s electoral votes putting Bush in the White House even though he lost the national popular vote. (In reality, a comprehensive, little-noticed study released soon after 9/11 found that Gore would have won Florida if all disputed ballots had been recounted.)


LINK
“RALPH NADER: THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THE U.S. FROM THE “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY…”

And neither has the Green Party. In fact, the Green Party has done much to ensure the success of the Republican Party. So much so, one has to wonder if the Green Party is part of a Republican Party slush fund.

The Green Party has won no seats in the House of Representatives; no seats in the US Senate; never won a single electoral vote; never offered a piece of legislation and NEVER, EVER, cast a vote against corporate tax cuts, union busting or the Republican destruction of campaign reform.

All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM
_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 12:16 PM
RALPH NADER: THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THE U.S. FROM THE “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY is at its lowest ebb in the memory of everyone now alive. It’s lost the White House and both houses of Congress. On the state level it’s weaker than at any time since 1920. And so far in 2017 Democrats have gone 0 for 4 in special elections to replace Republican members of Congress who joined the Trump administration.

How did it come to this? One person the Democratic Party is not going to ask, but perhaps should, is legendary consumer advocate and three-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader.

Nader, who’s now 83 and has been been based in Washington, D.C. for over fifty years, has had a front row seat to the Democrats’ slow collapse. After his bombshell exposé of the U.S. car industry, Unsafe at Any Speed, he and his organizations collaborated with congressional Democrats to pass a flurry of landmark laws protecting the environment, consumers and whistleblowers. Journalist William Greider described him as one of America’s three top models for small-d democratic activism, together with Saul Alinsky and Martin Luther King, Jr. Meanwhile, the 1971 “Powell Memo,” which laid the groundwork for the resurgence of the corporate right, named him as a key enemy of “the system,” calling him “the single most effective antagonist of American business.”

But of course Nader has been persona non grata with the Democratic Party since his 2000 Green Party candidacy for president. George W. Bush officially beat Al Gore in Florida by 537 votes, with the state’s electoral votes putting Bush in the White House even though he lost the national popular vote. (In reality, a comprehensive, little-noticed study released soon after 9/11 found that Gore would have won Florida if all disputed ballots had been recounted.)


LINK
“RALPH NADER: THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THE U.S. FROM THE “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY…”

And neither has the Green Party. In fact, the Green Party has done much to ensure the success of the Republican Party. So much so, one has to wonder if the Green Party is part of a Republican Party slush fund.

The Green Party has won no seats in the House of Representatives; no seats in the US Senate; never won a single electoral vote; never offered a piece of legislation and NEVER, EVER, cast a vote against corporate tax cuts, union busting or the Republican destruction of campaign reform.

All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Meh, Trump has had to sustain full time attacks from the Dems, their media lap dogs and the “MOST VICIOUS” REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HISTORY…”

Posted Image
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM


All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Same old talking points. If Democrats had stayed progressive to begin with there would have never been a need for the Green Party...in fact they should have been invited to join the Democrats instead of being ignored and pushed aside.

But keep repeating history and blaming others for your own insanity. It's become your redeeming feature at this point.
Edited by _g R_, Jun 28 2017, 01:37 PM.
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 01:36 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM


All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Same old talking points. If Democrats had stayed progressive to begin with there would have never been a need for the Green Party...in fact they should have been invited to join the Democrats instead of being ignored and pushed aside.

But keep repeating history and blaming others for your own insanity. It's become your redeeming feature at this point.
There is little substantial “public policy” difference between the Democratic Party and the Green Party. Both parties have a focus on environmentalism, civil rights, equality of access and opportunity, worker’s and senior’s benefits and unionism.

The difference,however, is that the Green Party is an off-shoot of the Socialist Party USA. It is the easiest “legitimate” path for socialists to run for elected office - “The Watermelon Party - green on the outside and red on the inside”. Their membership is drawn from the Socialist/Communist wing of the Democratic Party and they are a cancer to liberal thought.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 02:11 PM
_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 01:36 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM


All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Same old talking points. If Democrats had stayed progressive to begin with there would have never been a need for the Green Party...in fact they should have been invited to join the Democrats instead of being ignored and pushed aside.

But keep repeating history and blaming others for your own insanity. It's become your redeeming feature at this point.
There is little substantial “public policy” difference between the Democratic Party and the Green Party. Both parties have a focus on environmentalism, civil rights, equality of access and opportunity, worker’s and senior’s benefits and unionism.

The difference,however, is that the Green Party is an off-shoot of the Socialist Party USA. It is the easiest “legitimate” path for socialists to run for elected office - “The Watermelon Party - green on the outside and red on the inside”. Their membership is drawn from the Socialist/Communist wing of the Democratic Party and they are a cancer to liberal thought.
You mean neoliberal thought.
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
I actually liked Stein until towards the end she went all moonbat with recounts...

Her twitter feed was a great follow....

Posted Image



Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 02:19 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 02:11 PM
_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 01:36 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM


All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Same old talking points. If Democrats had stayed progressive to begin with there would have never been a need for the Green Party...in fact they should have been invited to join the Democrats instead of being ignored and pushed aside.

But keep repeating history and blaming others for your own insanity. It's become your redeeming feature at this point.
There is little substantial “public policy” difference between the Democratic Party and the Green Party. Both parties have a focus on environmentalism, civil rights, equality of access and opportunity, worker’s and senior’s benefits and unionism.

The difference,however, is that the Green Party is an off-shoot of the Socialist Party USA. It is the easiest “legitimate” path for socialists to run for elected office - “The Watermelon Party - green on the outside and red on the inside”. Their membership is drawn from the Socialist/Communist wing of the Democratic Party and they are a cancer to liberal thought.
You mean neoliberal thought.
Neoliberalism has brought more wealth, security, access, opportunity, and social justice to more people than any other system in the history of the world! Exponentially more than socialism.

Socialism has very little to offer but the usual mix of heavy handed government regulation, onerous trade tariffs, state directed economy and high consumer prices (which hurt the most vulnerable). Your beef isn’t with “neoliberalism” but plain old "liberalism" — that is, freedom.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

clone
Jun 28 2017, 02:27 PM
I actually liked Stein until towards the end she went all moonbat with recounts...

Her twitter feed was a great follow....

Posted Image



She wanted a recount because she realized that she and her party was partially responsible for the trump presidency. The recount wasn't to find more votes for her, but to find more votes for Clinton, so she wouldn't be seen as the spoiler she actually was.
Edited by coverpoint, Jun 28 2017, 03:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
_g R_
Member Avatar

coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 02:54 PM
_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 02:19 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 02:11 PM
_g R_
Jun 28 2017, 01:36 PM
coverpoint
Jun 28 2017, 01:05 PM


All they have done (their single accomplishment) is to convince some liberals to vote against the Democratic Party and help Republicans to win the White House (TWICE). They serve no other purpose.
Same old talking points. If Democrats had stayed progressive to begin with there would have never been a need for the Green Party...in fact they should have been invited to join the Democrats instead of being ignored and pushed aside.

But keep repeating history and blaming others for your own insanity. It's become your redeeming feature at this point.
There is little substantial “public policy” difference between the Democratic Party and the Green Party. Both parties have a focus on environmentalism, civil rights, equality of access and opportunity, worker’s and senior’s benefits and unionism.

The difference,however, is that the Green Party is an off-shoot of the Socialist Party USA. It is the easiest “legitimate” path for socialists to run for elected office - “The Watermelon Party - green on the outside and red on the inside”. Their membership is drawn from the Socialist/Communist wing of the Democratic Party and they are a cancer to liberal thought.
You mean neoliberal thought.
Neoliberalism has brought more wealth, security, access, opportunity, and social justice to more people than any other system in the history of the world! Exponentially more than socialism.

Socialism has very little to offer but the usual mix of heavy handed government regulation, onerous trade tariffs, state directed economy and high consumer prices (which hurt the most vulnerable). Your beef isn’t with “neoliberalism” but plain old "liberalism" — that is, freedom.
Freedom. Like allowing third parties into the national debates or the freedom to crash the economy and bomb women and children in the Middle East ?
The real leftists are the silenced majority, the sleeping giant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · MFAB · Next Topic »
Add Reply