Politics As Usual

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The impressionable college student bloc isn't enough to carry Kerry. I don't see this movie changing too many minds, and those it motivates to vote are people Bush never had a chance with anyway. I love Moore's stuff, but I view it as salacious pseudo-fiction. I wouldn't take a thimble full of his statistics or "facts" to the bank.

Plus, the only people who are going to see it are people who are definintely voting for Kerry anyway. It's just like P.J. O'Rourke said about conservative radio: the hosts aren't trying to convince anyone with their arguments b/c no that can be convinced is listening. Am I going to read an Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reilly book? No. Are conseratives going to read Al Franken? No. These people aren't debating anything, they're stroking the collective cock of their bases.

Does anyone know of any news source that is as close to the middle as possible?

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Did they also mention the piece on how Hezbollah is fighting to get it screened in Mideast.

Strange bedfellows.

Judging by the standards for proof around here, this is ironclad evidence that Hezbollah and Miramax are thick as theives and plotting to kill us all. Has anybody asked Putin about this?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Plus, the only people who are going to see it are people who are definintely voting for Kerry anyway. It's just like P.J. O'Rourke said about conservative radio: the hosts aren't trying to convince anyone with their arguments b/c no that can be convinced is listening. Am I going to read an Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reilly book? No. Are conseratives going to read Al Franken? No. These people aren't debating anything, they're stroking the collective cock of their bases.

Does anyone know of any news source that is as close to the middle as possible?

I think Moore on Bush is perfect. Who better to do the definitive smear piece on a liar and embellisher than a liar and embellisher. Peas in a pod as I see it.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I wonder, then, if a movie like this will have an impact on the election. Clearly, it's anti-Bush, and Moore pushed for an early release so as many people as possible could see it before the election. If it is effective, what does that do to change politics, if anything? Are we going to have a slew of documentaries come out in every election cycle?

I'm actually worried about this. I think, especially when coupled with the media attention it will get, this is going to be bad for GWB and will set the stage for propoganda films being made from both sides down the line.

[SlaveNoMore]

ironweed
Judging by the standards for proof around here, this is ironclad evidence that Hezbollah and Miramax are thick as theives and plotting to kill us all. Has anybody asked Putin about this?

Don't believe Putin. His source is Chalabi.

[andViolins]

Russia 'Warning' on Saddam Puzzles U.S.

ASTANA (Reuters) - Russia warned the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks that Iraq (news - web sites)'s Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) planned to hit targets on U.S. soil, Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites) said Friday.

Putin's remarks looked certain to help President Bush (news - web sites), but officials at the State Department expressed bafflement, saying they knew of no such information from Russia.

* * *

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli told reporters he did not know anything about the information that Putin said Russia passed on. No such information was communicated from Russia through the State Department, he said.


"Everybody's scratching their heads," said one State Department official, who asked not to be named


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sia_us_iraq_dc

aV

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I'm actually worried about this. I think, especially when coupled with the media attention it will get, this is going to be bad for GWB and will set the stage for propoganda films being made from both sides down the line.

Worried? Its a good thing. Anything that helps to detroy the present system is good. The two party system is a fucking disaster. Needs to go. And the left needs a good firebrannd to even out the armies of religious loons and idiots who vote for Bush for all the wrong reasons.*

* I voted for Bush and probably will again. But not because I like him, trust him, or share a stitch of his views. I merely fear Kerry. Great option, huh? Vote for Nixon II (disabuse yourself of any notions Bush II is the new Reagan; neither Bush nor his old man were worthy to hold Reagan's jock) or vote for a tax-raiser who's ole platform is "I'm not Bush". Living in a monarchy ain't looking too bad these days.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Worried? Its a good thing. Anything that helps to detroy the present system is good. .

Why would it destroy it, as opposed to merely poisoning further the system as it stands? Do you really want a string of tell-all movies timed to coincide with elections, purporting to reveal the policy missteps, or perhaps even personal moral errors, of the candidates?

Instead of 30 second attack ads you'll have 2 hour attack movies.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by andViolins
Russia 'Warning' on Saddam Puzzles U.S.

ASTANA (Reuters) - Russia warned the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks that Iraq (news - web sites)'s Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) planned to hit targets on U.S. soil, Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites) said Friday.

Putin's remarks looked certain to help President Bush (news - web sites), but officials at the State Department expressed bafflement, saying they knew of no such information from Russia.

* * *

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli told reporters he did not know anything about the information that Putin said Russia passed on. No such information was communicated from Russia through the State Department, he said.


"Everybody's scratching their heads," said one State Department official, who asked not to be named


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sia_us_iraq_dc

aV

The title should say that the puzzlement lies with State, not the US. Given all the turf wars, is it so surprising that this would not have gone through State?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Why would it destroy it, as opposed to merely poisoning further the system as it stands? Do you really want a string of tell-all movies timed to coincide with elections, purporting to reveal the policy missteps, or perhaps even personal moral errors, of the candidates?

Instead of 30 second attack ads you'll have 2 hour attack movies.

Exactly my fear.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Exactly my fear.

That's why you're my running mate.

As to the two-party system, you're not going to destroy it until the voting rules are changed. Until we have multi-member congressional elections (e.g., a state has 3 districts with 4-5 members each) it's likely to remain. And even then, the President will still likely come from a major party, unless the president gets appointed like a PM.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Don't believe Putin. His source is Chalabi.

What day is it? I'm a little disoriented when my conservative friends tell me I should trust the former head of the KGB. And so soon after we learned that Reagan is a saint for standing up to the Soviet Union.

eta: Why distrust the guy? Dig a little and you come up with stuff like this:

"Putin's role in the blatantly misleading information issued by the government about the Chechnya offensive also has been criticized. His talent for creating legends has been evident in his explanations about the war. For example, Putin told the writers group that the military had been open with the news media, when the military has in fact hidden information about casualties, combat events, attacks on civilians and its goals and methods."

But if you can believe that we needed to invade Iraq to get to Al Qaeda, then you can also believe that the former head of the KGB just has our best interests at heart.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)


Instead of 30 second attack ads you'll have 2 hour attack movies.

This is fine. They can't force me to go and watch a two-hour movie in between innings of the ballgame's telecast.

This would just be more collective cock sucking.

That's just a fun phrase to type.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by ironweed
It's actually multiple choice when it comes to defending GWB:

The Administration's incompetence/flaunting of the law/misleading the public is irrelevant because:

(a) the terrorists have beheaded an American.
(b) of the horror of 9/11. Were you there? Then shaddup.
(c) Kerry is a pussy with foofy hair.
(d) Putin sez Iraq was fixin' to attack.
(e) all of the above.

As the man said, if you're not with us, your agin' us. So quit asking questions and get with the program, whatever it is.

What about Hillary?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
The title should say that the puzzlement lies with State, not the US. Given all the turf wars, is it so surprising that this would not have gone through State?

I thought Bush got rid of those turf wars with his Homeland Security stuff?

Weren't we going to win the war on terror by having our intelligence agencies talk with each other?