oh I am a liberal democrat, out next party manefesto involves getting Charles Kennedy to start drinking again, to reintroduce slavery, and to bring back captial punishment.
lol, I watched, "The New Statesman", all the series over the past week. Funny stuff. I was too tired to watch Troy... I'll watch it today or something.
Watched "Fahrenheit 911" on election day. Well, Michael Moore ... kind of populistic. I still am unsure, if he is trustworthy in all, what he is telling in his movies. However, all in all - I enjoyed it. Even the election itself was driving me towards depression again ...
I don't think so at all, if you watch his other stuff, he's just a very strong liberal and this is threatening to lots of americans because its largely a conservative nation, and don't have enough humility to realise when critism is just criticism, and not an attack on the country. I have to feel sorry, embarressed and appauled for the reception he gets, its shameful that when someone speaks out, they get treated like scum. He really doesn't deserve that. He sure as hell doesn't get that recpetion over here when he's criticising britain (which he has done, and rightly so).
And he's not even suggesting anything bad most of the time, he got this kind of shit right from when he started as a penniless redundant guy campaigning about downsizing (Downsize this and the film 'The Big One', and then onto medical care (or lack of), media control and corporate crime, Gun crime).
Don't judge a person, but what a person says. If there's no truth in your eyes behind his comments about medical care, downsizing, corporate crime, the judicial system, gun crime, tv, terrorism, that's fine... but its worrying that people want him dead just because he speaks out. That's blind patriotism for you.
I think most stuff surrounding Mr Moore is smearing his name because he speaks up when there's no strong voice against the kind of shit that happens in countries. He single handedly takes all the shit since theres a distinct lack of any major criticism from what I've seen, and that's deeply disturbing for a democracy. I'm not surprise he wants to discredit bush (who in all fairness doesn't really need any help from Moore to do that), he seems to have done a lot of stuff Moore is opposed to downsizing, war profiteering, etc.
In the uk, we do have some strong critics of the government, but no one would be so stupid as to suggest they don't care about the country, to the contrary, they care a great deal, people just argue down their arguement. They'd probably be abused, and labelled a <s>commu</s> terrorist and anti-patriotic in many other nations. Blind patriotism is one of the worst offenders in modern times, right after religion, in screwing up countries.
So with that in mind, don't think about it as if he's lying, because I really, really, doubt thats even remotely true. He maybe wrong, but thats only because he doesn't agree or just wrong. His motives haven't been to lie in any of the material I've ever seen by him, just investigate what he sees and express a questioning or opinion on the matter (which is why its not counted as a documentry as such btw).
With the whole election I observed a recurring comment when referring to Kerry, and why they didn't vote for him. "I don't trust him". The reason this is the case is a 12 month smear campaign run by every media station in the states. Of course people are going to think that, but this isn't about relevance, its about discrediting an arguement by discrediting a person, which is the cheapest thing you can do. There's a constant smear campaign of his character going on which is really disturbing, because people tend not to even address his material in doing this.
Don't think about him as lying, he's made a movie, you just need to see if you believe it or not, if you think he's wrong or not, not if he's lying or not. People can be wrong without lying, and from my experience of Mr Moore, he gets carried away with the crap that happens, but he's always pointing out stuff that is at least remotely true, or at least relevant.
F911 is a strange one, but I don't recall him talking about george bush being a former alcoholic and a convicted drink driver, etc. He may have done, but I really don't recall that. So it wasn't exactly smearing, its mostly an attack on his alleged misconduct in the office. It would be very easy to totally drag bush through the mud because he's done an awful lot of shit. In that sense it did stick to some kind of attack on the Bush administration, and not a tasteless smear piece.
Bowling For Comulbine was a much better documentry come analysis, because it was more rounded.
Whilst talking about documentries, I would
highly recommend 'Fear' the three part documentry that has run on BBC2. Its essential viewing in my book