Thoughts on Farenheit 911...(m)
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 07-06-2004 - 10:58am |
Just got back from the theater....A very good documentary or what ever you want to consider it. I laughed ALOT which actually in itself is kind of sad. I also cried a little. Did I walk away angry? maybe a little. What did I learn that I didn't know before? The extent of the Bush family and their ties to the Bin Ladens and Saudi Arabia. If we don't question this as citizens of this country then we live with the consequences. If what Michael Moore says is untrue than why don't they sue him??? I have heard nothing from them at all. After seeing this movie I was surprised that the best argument that I have seen that this movie is made up is the part about the senator and his son being in the military. With so much to work with and that is the BIG LIE you all come up with??? Have I missed something while being on vacation??? To many funny parts to go into but one of my favorites was the scene with Ashcroft running aganist the Dead Guy in Missouri and losing. As a proud Missourian I can tell you that was sooooo true and everyone in the theater clapped at that part. But do not fear Republicans I think the hype is pretty much over, the theater was half empty. Also I will add that Michael Moore did not let the
democrats off easy either. He made it perfectly clear that they took it up the back side on the 2000 election. I understand that their hands were tied with what happened in Florida and this country could not afford to be without a Government while they fought the injustices that were done but it still painful to watch. For anyone reading this who is still not sure who to vote for, go see this movie and when you walk out think about why the Bush family is not defending themselves aganist this so call "Fictional" movie.
Let me ad that I am NOT a Michael Moore fan and have never seen his work before. The fact is that News Footage does not lie, paper trails don't lie the actual words spoken by this President don't lie...Any time the Bush family wants to discredit what was said.....I'll be waiting....

Pages
I absolutely agree, which is why it would have been better had he had the senator whose child is in the military be quoted. I have to wonder how the vote would have gone if it included the draft being reenstated;) Kind of interesting to note that the one senator whose son is serving and in various hotspots and combat situations is a democrat.
"Senators' Sons in War: An Army of One"
http://myhome.hanafos.com/~commo7/senators'%20sons%20in%20war%20an%20army%20of%20one.htm
Senators who don't and haven't seemed to encourage their own children (although we don't really know what they have discussed as career options with their children)towards a career in the military, and therefore are comfortable sacrificing others?>>
Almost...
I'm not considering their parenting skills at all. I am confidnent that how they raised their children was most likely exemplary and that they love them very much and that they encouraged them to live up to their full potential and to chose careers that would make them happy and use their talents to provide them with the best living possible (good parenting). I do however think that without anything personal like this at stake they would have been quite a bit more comfortable about sacrificing others. The decision to vote for the war was an objective one....not a subjective/personal one.
I suppose if that point was lost in how Moore presented this part of the movie then it was a weak part of the movie. To me it was obvious but it seems that it wasn't that clear after all.
In all likelihood, he didn't want to be quoted for a number of different reasons...to protect the privacy of his child and to avoid being tarred with the stigma of the Michael Moore brush.
I think if the senator had been quoted it would have been a powerful addition to the film.
I posted my opinion among the 600 on the other board. I think I really need to see the film again.
Here are some thoughts about the film.
Someone told me why no senators signed the complaint: because they thought a decision had been reached and they wanted to move on. I saw a senator on TV yesterday say the same thing, then the number of people who had been deprived of their vote crossed my mind, and I thought the senators had their mind in the wrong place. The question was not the outcome of the election, but peoples right to vote. Funny how when your in high places you miss the little peoples viewpoint. SAD
I thought MM allowed Bush to present himself as a doofus, and a part of me laughed because it's true and a part of me winced because it is disrespectful of the position. However, my son informed me that the clip in the classroom came from the teacher because the administration had confiscated all other clips. True or not, this is indicateive of the way this administration works--present a facade. How dishonest--then I didn't feel bad at all, imagin what would have happened if they hadn't tried to keep it a secret?
About people posting even though they haven't seen the movie; they have no credibity, and it is a real pain to keep reading the same rhetoric. Sometimes, in fact, I think I hear Limbaugh speak the words. Which is often the case.
Has anyone else noticed the number of youth that sign up for service to get an education?
Or worse yet, just to have something to do besides hanging out at the mall. For some reason this fact makes me very disappointed in America.
Yeah--your post says nothing that contributes to the discussion.
I feel the responsibility greatly. When they dedicated the WWII memorial I had a chance to reflect on the men(boys) who faught that war. My uncles and step-dad all went to fight for what they believed was a noble cause. It was a deadly war, but I never heard anyone question whether it was worth it. The country got behind the effort, some raised money by promoting war bonds, women went to work in the factories--everyone was involved; there was a since of unity. No engagement since then has had such an over-riding purpose.
While I was stuck in my reflections, I thought, now the responsibility of defending our country rests on the back of a few, and no one is asked to help. Life goes on for those uninvolved so it is easy to forget what the country is engaged in.
I thought we learned after Vietnam that we needed to understand more before we sacrificed our youth. Do we need wars periodically to remind us that war shouldn't be undertaken lightly.
This point gets lost on the republicans/conservatives who refuse to see the film. Moore did not reserve his critisism for only that side of the equation. He raised valid points (however "biased" they are) about the functioning of the government in general. Democrats and "liberals" were not spared even though much of the disdain was for the Republicans who happen to hold office at this point in time. Without bringing some of these problems to light, how is the general population supposed to know what really is going on and how things work in reality? He does show a side that happens to mesh with his personal piolitics but it is an important side to consider and should not be shrugged off so lightly.
<>
Actually, that footage I felt was a little unfair. True it showed how Bush was paralyzed into inactivity without his advisors nearby but like him when I heard the news I was paralyzed myself with all sorts of thoughts running through my mind. I even thought to myself, What is the US president thinking right now?
Seeing as he was in front of a bunch of children (who undoubtedly were looking foprward to his visit for days) it wouldn't have been seemly to suddenly jump up in a panic and flee the room however I think he should have taken charge a little faster. He should have stood up and said how happy and proud he was of the children of America and the president's job was full of obligations and emergencies and this was just such a time and he was very sorry but he had to leave. He did look lost and unsure of what to do wtihout anyone guiding him but he often looks like that.
One of my personal stories about that war was one about my uncle. He was a driver during the war and was stationed in Eurpoe. My mother's family was very poor and my Mom was much younger than my uncle. They used to send him care packages and my Mom used to save up and also contribute to the care package. In one particular package she saved up enough to send along a chocolate bar (a big sacrifce for a young child who never got any chocolate herself). There was also other food, and a scarf, socks and mittens knitted by my grandmother.
My uncle had just received this package and they were driving in a convoy in early spring past a line of refugees walking along the road to escape their village. He passed an old woman hunched and poorly dressed carrying a small child in her arms. She was at the very edge of exhaustion. He got out of the truck and gave her his package from home. With tears in her eyes the woman tried to refuse it but he insisted she take it. She fed some of the food to the half starved child and unpinned something from her clothing and pressed it into his hand. It was a lovely antique broach (18 KT gold) with beautiful workmanship. Probably the only thing of value the woman had and she insisted he take it. it is my most valued possesion. I wish I know who the family was.
I looked it up, and he was. so it seems the one senator who could empathize and had a stake in it did actually support pre emptive war. hum!!!!
alfie
Pages