Hollywood abuzz about 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2003
Hollywood abuzz about 'Fahrenheit 9/11'
712
Sun, 06-13-2004 - 2:23pm

"...and this country is really in the mood for somebody to tell ’em what they should think, what to do.”


That's exactly what democrats want--to tell the American people what we should think and what we should do. Unbelievable, he just gave away their secret! I'm glad I can think for myself, thank you.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5050832/


And how about the celebrity turnout for the premiere? Not a real shocker to see Martin Sheen, Demi Moore, Drew Barrymoore, et al excited to be there. And how about Camryn Manheim who was also there, quoted, "A lot of us look to Michael Moore to uncover the real truth." ROFL.


*sigh* These people...

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-01-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 9:04am
"Well I'm sorry your husband feels that way. But it's a real shame he doesn't understand the difference between disagreeing with our governments policy and blaming the troops. Because I sure do."

I'm sure you wish no ill will to our troops. However, the highly outspoken disagreement with the war will (and does) make our troops feel that American civilians do not appreciate what they are doing. How could one appreciate what they openly and blantantly criticize, belittle and scoff at?

Never have I been made more aware of this then listening to my close friend's father (who is like a dad to me as well) talk about returning home from Vietnam with the feeling that his service meant nothing to the American people. That had a tremendous effect on him. He said he came home to the country he loved, that he served proudly to simply be disregarded by many because they disagreed with him even being there.

And I am ashamed of all who tout pulling our troops out of Iraq now. It would simply be wrong to leave them in the state of political chaos that they are in at the moment. They don't even have an established or organized military right now. Pulling out would be opening the door for another dictator. It would be like leaving a newborn baby on it's own to take care of itself...and equally as cruel.

Take your opinion to the polls, not the streets, because the polls are where it makes the difference.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-01-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 9:10am
"I am a proud liberal democrat."

Why label yourself and restrict yourself to one political platform? It is virtually impossible for someone to agree wholeheartedly with the views of one particular party. Even candidates shuffle their views so that they may affiliate themselves as a democrat or republican...and that is sad. Why not label yourself as "an independent thinking American who evaluates each candidate up for election"?

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-28-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 9:39am
"I have no problem with you not seeing this movie because you dislike Moore, I am having a strong debate about that for this weekend myself. But people who have ridiculed this movie as nothing but lies and fabrications clearly havn't been paying any attention to the fact that that simply isn't true about this movie. You can say whatever you want about Moore and I will likely agree."

In any of my earlier post I never said it was all lies and fabrication. What I have basically said is this is a film by an extremely liberal individual who is going to slant it in the direction that will make it more controversial. One of the earlir post stated that it was 90% true in their opinion and they did not feel that any of the news clips were taken out of contest. In my opinion that was an irresponsible statement. I mean this is a man who likes controversy and as we all know both sides can stretch the truth.

I have read with much amusement, interest and scorn some of the statements that are being made about our current president. It makes me wonder what part of the country people come from? In my travels around the country I see specific areas that don't like Bush and specific areas that do like him.

**Just a note not directed at you but I just thought of it - To the individual who called Bush's election illegal. It was not illegal this has happened before in American history where one individual has won the popular and another has one the electorate. This was a safeguard put in by the founding fathers who not only saw the masses as ignorant but wanted to prevent a few states from controlling the top office in the land.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-02-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 10:01am
>>>Take your opinion to the polls, not the streets, because the polls are where it makes the difference. <<


Unless there is public discourse how are our senators supposed to know what their constituants have a problem with, how are we supposed to explore the issues before we go to the polls.

while some claim that troops might be bothered by the public questioning the governement decisions and that people should just shut up, there are those who served the military who speak up to, and families who have become advocates for their loved ones serving in the military. Do you suggest that all these veterans not speak out also, veterans whose best interests are for their comrades.

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/aboutVCS.asp

http://www.mfso.org/

what you ask is that some families of military families not speak out for the best interests of their loved ones because some say that troops will be demoralized. Well troops are demoralized, but that is because they keep getting told their tour of duty will be over soon and they get redeployed, or they are told they cannot retire,lack equipement, are tired, and the people they are helping them hate them. Families of military and veterans would be doing a grave disservice if they just kept their mouths shut.

Most military I know coming home on leave from overseas and iraq come home to the support of their communities and america in general. supporting our troops and resepecting and being proud of them is not compromised by disagreeing and questioning our leaders , even their own respected leaders (zinni whose best interests are the military so proudly served has spoken out). I think it an insult that people are asked to shut up questioning their govenment when the reason our young men and women are dying is to give the iraqi's the very privaleges we hold so dear.

alfreda

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-02-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 10:09am
>>>>Why not label yourself as "an independent thinking American who evaluates each candidate up for election"?<<

that doesn't help, I am an independent but because I don't cow tow to the belief that moore's new film is all fabrications and lies and question the policies of this administration I was accused of hating conservatives/republicans across the board. It was also insinuated that perhaps I really wasn't an independent. shrug!

alfie mother of a marine, independent thinker and voter. :)

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2003
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 10:28am
<>


Just because someone is "educated" and has a college degree, it doesn't necessarily mean they're intelligent. ;-)

Edited 7/2/2004 10:30 am ET ET by taunwe


Edited 7/2/2004 10:31 am ET ET by taunwe

"Without music, life is a journey through the desert"...

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 10:30am
<>

Some possibilities:

Some need the comfort and support of "belonging" to a group. A need to feel their belief system is approved.

It's easier than a lot of cumbersome research, cogitation, and sorting out conflicting information.

They identify with celebrities who are icons of that ideology.

This phenominom exists at both ends of the political spectrum.

JMHO

Graham

(sitting in for member Melinda)

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 10:57am
While I favor your point of view and take on Iraq, I will comment on one thing you left out.

A great many of the Vietnam veterans were Draftees. I won't defend the protesters of the 60's, but at least they could mount a decent argument about bringing the boys home. None of our current forces are draftees. All volunteered to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief.

This includes implementing US foreign policy as well as defending the shores. When the media shows an enlistee in Iraq (one of a small minority, to be sure) bleating about not coming home on time I find it irksome. Same with Guardsmen who are shocked to be called-up. And especially the chorus chiming that "we are protesting the war because of our troops". In an all-volunteer military, that is a bogus argument.

Graham

Vietnam Veteran (volunteer)

(sitting in for Melinda)

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-28-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 11:07am
"Moore's Public Service

By Paul Krugman

July 2, 2004

Since it opened, "Fahrenheit 9/11" has been a hit in both blue and red America, even at theaters close to military bases. Last Saturday, Dale Earnhardt Jr. took his Nascar crew to see it. The film's appeal to working-class Americans, who are the true victims of George Bush's policies, should give pause to its critics, especially the nervous liberals rushing to disassociate themselves from Michael Moore."

Mr. Krugman has got it wrong -- I was listening to the race last week and the commentators stated that Dale Earnhardt Jr encouraged his team to go and see the movie. But we do not know why -- so I have a problem with this article and the use of a celebrity who has not to my knowledge stated publicly what his politics are. For all we know he may have suggest it as a platform for his team to start communicating. It is well know that the #8 team has had communication problems in the past. Or maybe that is his politics. Either way to put Dale Earnhardt Jr in the league of working class Americans is interesting. I mean most working class people do not make 20 million dollars a year. I am a middle-class working American and I resent Mr. Krugman calling me a victim of President Bush's policies - I am not a victim of anyone's polices nor do I feel as though I am.

The question that people need to ask themselves is are they better off now that they were 4 years ago. Then vote the way one answers that question. But cosidering that unemployement is at approximately 5.6% over the last 4 years is lower than it has been on *average* for the 20 years prior to this adminsitration. I think he hasn't done too bad. (Oh I know we had some years of unemployement under 5% during the Clinton administration but it wasn't for the whole 8 years)But it is only my opinion. Then again one only has to look on the roads and see how many semi-trucks are out there moving goods to see how bad the economy is. We all act like nobody should be poor or without services but economics dictate that a certain amount of the population be poor and a certain amount be rich with the rest being middle class. What we dream of is a utopian society that never will happen and never has existed.

Now I am going to make alot of people mad with this next statement but I don't care. Alot of the industries having the most problems - Textiles (which have been on the downfall for about 30 years anyway) and the steelmakers particularly have only their unions to blame. When you consistantly protect the job of the perpetually unemployable how can you make a decent profit and then pass that on to your employees. I have an example - there is a company in Mansfield OH -- it is part of the larger AK Steel corporation. Approximatley 3.5 years ago the steel workers union demanded higher wages and better benefits - mind you AK Steel was nearly bankrupt. Management refused (they could not afford the unions demands) and the union walked off the job. Management turned around and hired non-union workers paid them the same rate as what the union was getting and gave them the exact same benefits. How do I know this I actually spoke to a former AK Steel union worker. The non-union workers produced a better product and more of it. About a year ago AK let back *some* of the union workers and one of the agreements was they either produced the same amount of work the non-union workers were doing or they would be let go. The union had no choice but to agree. Today it is one of the only plants within the larger corporation that is consistantly producing quality product. My hubby who drives a truck cannot stand to go into the union steel mills why you ask? because he consistantly has to wait 3-6 hours to get the load that was suppose to be ready when he arrived and they treat him and other truckers horribly. When he goes into a non-union steel mill -- the loads are ready then or within 30 minutes and he is given some respect.

Another example - Levi's - what is more american? But they had to move their last plant out of San Antonio to another country because if they made their jeans solely in this country the jeans would cost approximately $125 a pair. Does this make sense? Then people critisize the companies who move overseas but unless your a diehard fan of a certain product are you really going to spend that much on a pair of pants? I know I prefer to buy American and try to when I can but even I wouldn't pay that much for a pair of jeans. Would any of you?

If you do not believe me that this type of behavior happens then I suggest you read about the Hormel strike in the 1970's - there is also a movie out but for the life of me I cannot recall the name at this moment but if you want it I will be glad to go back to my notes and look it up.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-28-2004
Fri, 07-02-2004 - 11:11am
Well put and right on the mark. If they have a problem with fighting they should not have joined the military in the first place. War is always a possibility.

Pages