...whew, thank Jeebus it's not NSFW. With you fukers around you never know!

The dude is rich, but it's riches earned, not inherited. He also pays 2x his taxes, which I imagine are considerable, and lives a relatively modest life. He's got an apt in the upper-class neighborhood because he thinks he can influence more rich folks that way.

I lived in Flint for 5 years, and I will tell you the Davison _is_ very much 'Flint' where Moore used to live at. Yeah, it's not the downtown, but nobody can live in the downtown but the bums and junkies, it's pretty bad, especially towards the North Saginaw. And let's not forget that 'twice the value' of homes in Davison is still damn cheap. It ain't Grand Blanc, and not even Swartz Creek.

So let me see, anyone who's rich but speaks on behalf of the poor is a hypocrite? Well then, all Kennedys, and pretty much any US president we've had so far, are hypocrites.

Let's see what else, he splices some videos together? He didn't splice sentences together from words, did he? Were they complete, with objects and subjects, and punctuation? I think so. I think he spliced entire paragraphs together. It's not like he put words in people's mouths.

Fint = not a nice place to be.

Anyone who wants a first hand look at what happend when you pull the plug on a cities economy, turn your back on it and pretend it isn't there - needs only to visit downtown Flint.

...and if the outsourcing of US jobs continues, there will soon be a Flint near you. Regardless of where in America you live.

He's an entertainer. Why do people think that attacking him weakens the democratic party? It's like saying bill orielly is an ass so republicans are wrong.

I believe this critism as unquestionably as I believe Mr. Michael Moore.

Cracka: Let's see what else, he splices some videos together? He didn't splice sentences together from words, did he? Were they complete, with objects and subjects, and punctuation? I think so. I think he spliced entire paragraphs together. It's not like he put words in people's mouths.

It's functionally like that, yes, if not exactly like that. I've finally found the site I think I've been looking for forever and thought lost; it's an analysis of Moore's manipulation of the existing facts into a tapestry of what I have to consider bullshit. I'll not reject his ideas, but I reject his interpretation of them wholeheartedly.

I cannot trust a guy to inform my political and social views who would do shit like this:

Heston's 'cold dead hands' speech, which leads off Moore's depiction of the Denver meeting, was not given at Denver after Columbine. It was given a year later, 1300 miles away in Charlotte, North Carolina, and was his gesture of gratitude upon his being given a handmade musket, at that annual meeting. Even the 'I only have five words for you' is edited -- it was five words for Al Gore, who was running for election on a gun control platform.

Who cares where and when the speech was given? It represents Heston's views, which I am sure were well-formed even at the time of Columbine, and have not changed even now. You think he had turned a 180 degrees from his views, and made this speech as a result of mind-bending epiphany? That Heston was rabidly anti-gun at the time of Columbine and swiftly became a pro-gun nut? No, not really. These are his words and his views.

Vasudeva: 'I cannot trust a guy to inform my political and social views...'

You shouldn't trust anyone to inform your political and social views. Look at everything and make up your own mind.

I'm just sayin'.

*yawn*
its the same shit, over and over again. in a generation, everything will be the same: all fucked up. who cares...we're all fucked and doomed anyway, why bitch about it?

'He's got an apt in the upper-class neighborhood because he thinks he can influence more rich folks that way.'

Riiiight. And I've got some Gulf Coast property for you to buy as well.

Cracka: Who cares where and when the speech was given? It represents Heston's views

Because they were used as source material to create factoids out of whole cloth which bear very little relation to the truth. That's falsity, but is being presented as documentary.

Here, I'll do it to your post to illustrate:

Who cares where and when the speech was given? It represents Heston's views, which I am sure were well-formed even at the time of Columbine, and have not changed even now. You think he had turned a 180 degrees from his views, and made this speech as a result of mind-bending epiphany? That Heston was rabidly anti-gun at the time of Columbine and swiftly became a pro-gun nut? No, not really. These are his words and his views.

becomes:

Cracka: Who cares, Columbine? I am a rabid gun nut. Really.

Clumsy, but if it helps you see what I'm getting at...

Anyone remember when MMs bodygaurd got arrested in a plane for carrying a gun? I thought that was pretty cool.

vasuline: 'Cracka: Who cares, Columbine? I am a rabid gun nut. Really.

Clumsy, but if it helps you see what I'm getting at...'

Well, no not really. What are you getting at? In the case of Moore's timeline antics, the only thing that was changed is when the statement took place. The sentiment remained that Heston would give up his gun when it was pried from his cold dead hand. (a long held slogan of the NRA for more than twenty years that I can remember) In your example, the entire statement has been fabricated. Maybe you were being a little overzealous to make your point but I think that by doing so you have gone too far and lost the support and respect of at least one person that was otherwise on the fense about this.

Bravo vasudumbass you've become the interent equivilent of anne coulter.

Also, it's been a while since I watched bowling for columbine but if I remember correctly it was never implied that heston's cold dead hand speach was in any way related to columbine. I think it was more closely linked to another school shooting where a fifth grader shot and killed a classmate.

You're still the Internet equivalent of barch, and are either being willfully stupid or aren't paying attention. For the sake of you being a niger, let's pretend it was a different school shooting over which Moore was warping Heston's speech to vilify Heston -- and not Columbine.

Does that change anything about my argument?

I think you may even be right; I seem to remember that too. It doesn't matter, though, does it?

And you call me Ann Coulter. Fuckwit.

But, your majesty, Fukvas the 3rd!

Cracka: Who cares, Columbine? I am a rabid gun nut. Really.

Read my comment. I insist that he didn't splice sentences together from separate words, that he used whole paragraphs, if you will. That *is* Heston's stance. Your example is null and fuckwad.

Barch's comment about timeshifting and not connecting to Columbine is right on. Although calling *anyone* Ann Coulter is cold, man. Watch yer tongue, barch.

Like I said, the example was a little heavyhanded. I was trying to illustrate a point in text. Read MY comment, you punch-n-Judy niggat. The words are being taken out of context and applied to situations that aren't relevant. Heston crying 'WHEN THEY TAKE IT FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS' is him accepting a gun as a gift. Through the manipulation of cause and effect (timeshifting and juxtaposition) Moore posits this as a staunch refusal to bend his gun-lovin ways re: the barely post-Columbine NRA rally.

My example is only null and fuckwad if you want to join fuckwad barch in being a null--minded literal ass-drone. None of this is really that complex, especially if you hit the link I posted earlier and give it a quick read.

Cracka - so what you're saying is that you can take a word out of context, but not a sentence?

Quotes, like statistics, can be manipulated to make them appear to say anything you want them to say. That's why the phrase 'out of context' exists for fucks sake.

What annoys me more than the 'cold dead hands' bullshit, is the bullshit like Heston turning up in Flint 48 hours after the Kayla Rolland shooting at a hastily arranging 'pro-gun rally', when he actually turned up ten months later at an election rally.

Ironically, the only thing that makes me want to take an automatic weapon and start pumping lead into innocent schoolchildren is listening to the incessant stream of shit that comes out of Michael Moores mouth.

vasudummass:
'You're still the Internet equivalent of barch, and are either being willfully stupid or aren't paying attention. For the sake of you being a niger, let's pretend it was a different school shooting over which Moore was warping Heston's speech to vilify Heston -- and not Columbine.

Does that change anything about my argument?

I think you may even be right; I seem to remember that too. It doesn't matter, though, does it?

And you call me Ann Coulter. Fuckwit.'

You just used an awful lot of words to say nothing at all.

vasudummass:
' The words are being taken out of context and applied to situations that aren't relevant. Heston crying 'WHEN THEY TAKE IT FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS' is him accepting a gun as a gift. Through the manipulation of cause and effect (timeshifting and juxtaposition) Moore posits this as a staunch refusal to bend his gun-lovin ways re: the barely post-Columbine NRA rally.'

This is just fucking stoopit. He's accepting a gift? Yeah, no fucking shit. Moore never said heston was speaking directly to the families of columbine victims. The sentiment of his 'thank you' has (as I've mentioned previously but you chose to ignore because it's discredits your argument) long been a slogan of gun ownership advocates.

'You'll take my gun away when you pry it from my cold dead hands.'

Meaning that I will never give it up willingly. I will fight to the death to keep my gun. No price is too high to keep my gun. No matter how many innocent lives are lost, no matter how manny children are murdered, no matter how unsafe everyone else is, I will never give up my gun.

Again, you waste my time, you labile twat.

Yeah, I read your explanation about the slogan. I ignored it because it's thoroughly irrelevant, and you know this, or would, if you'd be a part of this conversation and stop unplugging your tampon all over the screen.

I think you're letting one of your blockhead kids run your computer. That, or you got your wierd little feelings hurt when I posted to your last journal entry (another rollicking, entertaining barch bitchalogue about having emotional problems with everyday life) and have decided to really 'stick it to me' with this extremely lame 'vasudummass' business you seem so fond of. Which is it, you menstruating lemur?

Please, start paying attention, or start being entertaining. Wasting my time on you like this is a luxury I don't often have.

again, a whole lot of words that really say nothing at all. completely irrelevent personal attacks do not discredit my argument.

As for my journal entries, you can see the author's name before opening them. You know EXACTLY what to expect when you see my name. A waste of your valuable time? maybe but no one's to blame for wasting it but you.

You have no argument. I'm done here. My condolences to your family, at least until the end of this lunar cycle.

so, you forfeit?


TEH BARCH WINS!!!111!!ONE!!11

I think of it as strategically refusing to waste any more time arguing with a shithat.



Welcome to your victory; it's the kind where everybody loses.

hat of shit or no... I win and you lose.

and that's good enough for me

O.K. Fly on the wings of an eagle, you brave soul!!!!

What's up with the dude takin' a picture of the dude takin' the picture?

Whats up ya'll I just got here. Did I miss anything ?

Aw come on, kids, break it up. It ain't worth losing that feeling like you're part of a big family.




Of retards.