Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

We’ve Got Another Review Of AN AMERICAN CAROL, And This One’s Gonna Make Dr. Hfhurrhurr Cry!

Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here. Considering how many of you rant and rail at us that AICN only publishes things by “lefties” and “socialists,” I was shocked how many of you blasted me for running Dr. Hfhurrhurr’s review of AN AMERICAN CAROL. I love that he wrote so passionately about it, and even if I think the film looks terrible (and I do), I still think it’s important to approach the way I approach any movie: with some degree of optimism. Today’s spy is determined to kill that optimism dead, though. He thinks Dr. Hfhurrhurr is insane, and he’s got to have his say. I have a feeling no one’s going to be indifferent to this film. It’s going to make you react, one way or another, and this guy certainly did:

AN AMERICAN CAROL REVIEW by Joe Somebody David Zucker’s AN AMERICAN CAROL made me think, but not about politics. It made me wonder about the difference between parody and satire, as well as the hypocrisy of a filmmaker that once said axe grinding, namely “belaboring an ideological point past the humor of the joke” was a rule never to be broken. AN AMERICAN CAROL breaks the rule for eighty-three minutes. Even with this short running time, the film’s laugh quotient is near zero. I laughed harder at MUNICH, but the failure of CAROL isn't due to proselytizing. It’s just not funny. Mission NOT accomplished yet again. Zucker’s movie, like other parodies, cobbles its plot from a familiar source: Dickens’ A CHRISTMAS CAROL. There’s been some debate the film draws its inspiration from an old Porky Pig cartoon called OLD GLORY where Uncle Sam gives the little swine a history lesson so he'll learn the pledge of allegiance. The main character of Zucker’s tirade is another famous pig, or at least that’s how he’s shown, an “anti-American filmmaker” named Michael Malone who is played by Kevin Farley, Chris’ surviving brother. Malone is a superficial caricature of Michael Moore. Farley plays him pretty well, except for mugging that’s one of the many blunders of this director. Zucker comments so much on the proceedings, there’s no need for a director’s track on the DVD that’s already scheduled for release on 1/6/2009. Zucker chooses a big target with Moore and misses by a mile. Malone is not an interesting character, just a fat loudmouth that always has a burger or a Big Gulp in his hand. He makes documentaries with on the nose titles like “Die You American Pigs”. Zucker’s “humor” never goes beyond simplistic and broad, not even reaching sophomoric. This is grade school mocking of “the big fat guy”. Satire is supposed to go deep, Parker and Stone inject more nuance into their paper cutouts than Zucker can with live actors, although hiring Leslie “One Foot In The Grave” Nielsen barely qualifies as living. (I will admit I don't love NAKED GUN movies. One of this site’s best reviewers just looked at the original PINK PANTHER movies. If there’s a drinking game about how many jokes GUN stole from Clouseau, you’d get wasted in ten minutes. I liked TOP SECRET better because it was more original.) Zucker goes for the cheap and obvious in every frame and it’s numbing. He could have made a ten-minute You Tube video and hit all the same points instead of this uninspired miscarriage of cinema. One of the major mistakes the film makes is to adopt the same knackered style of humor from decades of sucko parodies, namely dudes getting smacked in the face, kicked in the balls and tired "see it coming a mile away" sight gags. A more appropriate title for this film is AMERICAN MOVIE or MEET THE PATRIOTS because it’s consistent with shitty recent parodies. This is not SHAUN OF THE DEAD. No place is this made clearer than in the casting of Kevin Sorbo, Dennis Hopper, Gary Coleman and James Woods who all show up on their way to the local autograph show. While this is definitely a WAS AM convention, at least Hopper’s send up of the guy he played in LAND OF THE DAD shows somebody with a persona to spoof. The rest look like they took the gig cuz they gotta' eat. The style of ZAZ parody is as outdated as Arsenio Halls’ woofs. It can still work with good writing and if the batting average for jokes is high, but Zucker swings and misses over and over again. Sure, occasional lines are kinda amusing (“The Taliban does jobs Mexicans won’t.”), but he seems more interested in ranting than entertaining. Satire is supposed to tear down hypocrisy and demolish abusers of power, but this is a movie version of the The ½ Fox News Hour. It’s a bunch of rich and arrogant people making fun of free speech, dissenting opinions, minorities and being middle class. That’s not to say it couldn't have somehow worked, but Zucker is a poor marksman and his shotgun approach winds up shooting himself instead of making a point. A joke about a slave named Barack comes off racist, while Mel Brooks was able to hit the target in BLAZING SADDLES and bitch slap bigots with no backtalk. And yeah, there’s lots of slapping of in this film. The worst comes from asshat Bill O’Reilly who smacks Malone around and is depicted reverently by Zucker. Had he shown true satirical chops, Zucker would have made O’Reilly somehow parody himself and not realize it. Here, he’s a figure to be worshipped instead of whipped. David Zucker hasn't had his mojo for a long time. The torch wasn't passed, it was fumbled and BORAT and HAROLD AND KUMAR and HOT FUZZ picked it up and ran with it. Those films are more subversive than this conservative crapfest pretending to be the shit. The comedy here is about as edgy as a Comedy Central roast of Gallagher. Zucker also equates criticism of America, the desire to see the country improve or discuss its mistakes, as heresy. He depicts disagreement as unpatriotic. Malone is bratty, so it’s impossible to get invested in his journey that has a predictable outcome thanks to the source material and the lack of creativity of the whole film. For reasons that aren't worth recounting from such a risible plot, Malone champions a self-aggrandizing attempt to abolish the 4th of July. Viewed as undermining his own country by terrorists, he becomes the not entirely unwitting pawn of a fanatic named Azis. Robert Davi plays this character for real and gives the film’s best performance. He’s badass and scary and shows real comic timing. His deadly serious attitude enlivens the staleness of the jokes. Davi reminded me of how early parodies utilized straight actors playing ricockulous for real, as opposed to The Big Nielsowski who lost his mad skill after a few outings. Nielsen fancied himself a comedian and switched from deadpan to canned ham. Amazing he’s still alive while Heather Ledger and Bernie Mac ain't. Predictably, since Zucker is following Dickens’ playbook, Malone gets visited by apparitions that send him on a triptych to learn the error of his ways. The spirit of John F. Kennedy appears first and is played by some guy named Chriss Anglin. This is not a good impersonation. He doesn’t look or sound just like JFK, Bruce Greenwood nailed that in another flick, and when he calls Malone a “douche bag” it isn't funny, just weird. Not a single laugh the whole sequence. The other guides through history are General Patton, played by a real miscast Kelsey Grammar with all the macho of Keri Russell and Jon Voight as George Washington. Voight plays the role with Keifer gravitas and participates in an over the top sequence where he lectures Malone while standing on ground zero, accusing the filmmaker’s bad 'tudes of provoking 9/11. WTF? Liberals are demonized in this film, as Zucker takes complex issues that involve shades of gray and distills them into black and white, right wing and wrong. You watch this film and seriously wonder about the filmmaker’s IQ. Forget what side you're on, the angry voice in this movie conveys as much smarts as a shovel. Even when it tries to make a good point about the outcome of WW2 had America lost, the jokes are as dumb as JOE DIRT. One might argue the founding fathers were the liberals of their day and if Zucker had shown more level-headedness, he might have depicted George Washington lecturing both the left and right to stop weakening the Divided States of America and band together. Instead, we get partisan rhetoric that blames everything on leftists and claims war is the right answer every time and no matter what must never be questioned. You know, it's easy to be pro-war when you're a rich Hollywood dude in your sixties that doesn't have to worry about the paying rent or military service. Man, how kickass is that? I’ve read interviews where Zucker claims he became a Republican after 9/11. He’s also complained about the higher taxes he pays under Democrats. (Jimmy Carter is shown saying: “Higher taxes are good for you!” ROFL!) At the end of the day, Zucker comes off as an old nerd, a male cheerleader sidling up to the jocks for attention he can't get elsewhere on the campus of Hollywood High. How else would the director of “Baseketball” and “Scary Movie 3 & 4” get invited on a news show to discuss politics? That’s like asking Carrot Top to talk about global warming. Zucker’s depictions of testosterone fueled jingoism are more laughable than comedic. He’s a wanksta. Jokes here bomb leftist and right, but the film really takes a big plop when country star Trace Atkins appears as the final “Angel of Death”. What Atkins represents is the kiss of death for acting, culminating in an attempt at rabble rousing through a badly shot concert scene and lame ass song. Malone is converted, enlightened to all that’s made America great. We get an ending with all the political impact of SCROOGED and yet another tired Zucker sight gag as the closer. David Zucker has said many times that if AN AMERICAN CAROL doesn't do well, his career is over. His career, without Jerry Zucker and Jim Abrams to help his ass, ended with MY BOSS’ DAUGHTER forcing him to suck off the Wayans to get movies made. AN AMERICAN CAROL like this year’s other bad shitfest THE LOVE GURU is a bomb, but way more fascinating to watch. Visually crude, it plays like TOS MIRROR, MIRROR version of Uwe Boll’s POSTAL, with Boll showing more balls and better comic timing. That’s a statement I never thought I'd say, but Boll took no prisoners and made fun of himself. Zucker says with a straight face that he’s smarter than us and Big Brother Knows Best. Satire has been defined as using humor to ridicule stupidity. AN AMERICAN CAROL proves David Zucker isn't a satirist. He’s just really stupid.
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:50 a.m. CST

    It took GUTS for Zucker to make this film....

    by Angry Mike

    and it's probably no more funny than any of the other dozens of site gag movies to flood the market in the last few years.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:51 a.m. CST

    I thought this looked idiotic

    by TheAD

    I didn't and still don't have a desire to see it.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:53 a.m. CST

    So.... did he like it?

    by blindambition238

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:59 a.m. CST


    by odo19

    Fuck this movie and fuck Zucker for finally making me lose all respect for him.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3 a.m. CST

    Obviously just a leftist...

    by leisuredrummer

    This whole review has nothing to do with the film and is simply fueled by liberal bullshit. It is clear from early on when he says "Mission NOT accomplished yet again." If your going to write a review, try to look not so desperate to be biased. It like a Nazi reviewing Schindler's list. Also do some research or proofing before posting, I believe it was Jim Abrahams that Zucker has worked with, not Jim Abrams.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:01 a.m. CST

    How many LIBERAL movies come out of Hollywood every year?

    by Angry Mike

    So one "Righty" movie comes out it it really seems to annoy people. Regardless if this movie is funny or not, it's a step in the right direction. Oh, and by all means AICN, keep showing your disdain for conservatives at every step. You can change your name to AintItCoolLiberalNews.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:19 a.m. CST

    Fantastic review.

    by The Gospel According to Bastardface

    It's all about common sense.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:20 a.m. CST

    Who the hell is "Heather Ledger"?

    by Leafar the Lost

    I quote, "Amazing he’s still alive while Heather Ledger and Bernie Mac ain't." I assume you meant Heath Ledger, Joe Somebody, but a mistake like this is unacceptable. I know its just two letters, but after the guy gave the performance of a lifetime as the Joker in Batman Begins, and then died, you should have been more careful. That one unforgivable error ruined a very good review. I agree with you 100%. The reason that there are not more conservative type movies in Hollywood is because most of them are unwatchable. It isn't because Hollywood is so liberal. The studio heads only care about making money and if conservative movies made money then we would see alot more of them. "An American Carol" sucks, I will not waste money on it, and conservative Republicans are responsible for the current financial crisis in America. By the way, rest in peace HEATH LEDGER...

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:22 a.m. CST

    It is beyond laughable that liberal is considered an insult

    by The Gospel According to Bastardface

    And socialism a dirty word. My God, how ignorant are republicans.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:30 a.m. CST

    This movie looks incredibly unfunny...

    by KISSman24

    Admittedly, this film is not going to jive with my political view, however, I can begrudgingly give credit when something is funny or well done even when I disagree with its politics. The premise of this movie is utterly retarded. Oh sure, the hardcore righties hate Michael Moore, but this movie fails incredibly hard by choosing him as the central character. You see, liberal movies are always smarter than that. They often inject their politics into movies without making it as obvious as this. IMO, this thing should have had a central character who was just a regular, liberal guy who needs to be shown 'the light'. To go with Michael Moore makes the whole thing implausable. He's never going to change his views. And to just make him into this bumbling idiot who probably gets abused throughout will only resonate with a very select audience. This movie relies on the most passionate, left-hating righties to come out of the woodwork to see this movie and, I predict, that it won't happen. And the fact that it's terrible will only cause even less people to go see it. Good.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:31 a.m. CST

    I Picked The Wrong Week To Release A Right Wing Movie

    by DangerMan

    Not the best weekend to release a pro Republican movie. Are Jerry Zucker and Jim Abrahams retired?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:42 a.m. CST

    Forgetting the politics, what if it's just not very good?

    by Shan

    Such a thing is possible, right?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:03 a.m. CST

    There are 5 million really terrible Liberal movies.

    by Alucinor

    One really terrible Conservative movie and it's the end of the world. Also, yes... Socialism is a dirty word. It is dumb. Thanks for not voting on the bail outs Liberals!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:17 a.m. CST

    Leafar the Lost

    by Virtual Satyr

    Ledger played The Joker in The Dark Knight...not Batman Begins.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:20 a.m. CST


    by Grinning White Skull

    Wake me when the DVD of this film is selling for two bucks at Wal Mart. Zzzzzzzzzzz...

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:29 a.m. CST

    ASTONISHING! Fox News meets the Spartans ISN'T Funny!!!

    by G100

    What were the odds of that ! I mean the Fox News half hour News hour was... Oh riiiiiiiight.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:46 a.m. CST

    I gues it will be along idealogical lines on this one!

    by ViktorBC

    Clearly, at least so far, tradional Americans and Conservatives will eat this up and laugh at it while Progressive thinking Liberals (Joe Somebody showed his hand on that one) will hate it. I guess it is doing what it was meanto to do!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:48 a.m. CST

    The founder fathers

    by ViktorBC

    Fought for rights they thought they already deserved. They were NOT liberals.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:54 a.m. CST

    terrible reviews for AMERICAN CAROL?


    ...on this site!? I'm shocked to say the least. Of course I'm being sarcastic. The bad reviews are as predictable as sunrise.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:57 a.m. CST

    LOL. Up to early this morning...

    by ViktorBC

    Founding Fathers. I am going to get his for that one.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:58 a.m. CST


    by ViktorBC

    One good, one bad so far.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:04 a.m. CST

    looks like a friedberg/seltzer pos.

    by alice 13

    that is all.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:16 a.m. CST

    fuck the bigoted American Christian right-wing

    by Ray Gamma

    your time is up.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:20 a.m. CST

    Joe Somebody is to movie reviews as AIDS is to sex

    by Paulseta

    and that's being polite. <P> He doesn't think the Naked Gun films are funny? Fail. He doesn't know there's already an actual movie (a very good one) called American Movie? Fail.<P> "while Mel Brooks was able to hit the target in BLAZING SADDLES and bitch slap bigots with no backtalk."<P> No, Richard Pryor's script was what did that. That is why it worked, combined with Brooks' sledgehammer (and very funny) direction. <P> "(Jimmy Carter is shown saying: “Higher taxes are good for you!” ROFL!)" <P> At least they didn't show him organising a helicopter rescue. That would have been outrageous!<P> "Zucker says with a straight face that he’s smarter than us and Big Brother Knows Best."<P> Horrible thought - maybe Zucker is actually smarter than you - who's the hit director with all the money, power, track record and babes? Zucker. You damnnnnn right.<P> Also, I find it well nigh impossible to believe that this guy became unfunny simply because he crossed some sort of artistically uncrossable line. Why does freedom of speech bother this reviewer so much?<P> I am increasingly wanting to not be a part of left due to rantings of failed college majors in Che's Film Theory 101 who believe the only way they could ever cop a feel is to pretend to be so hypersensitive that a dolphin exploding makes them cry, instead of laugh like the rest of us.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:20 a.m. CST

    Ray Gamma

    by ViktorBC

    It is always funny when you guys call the original abolitionists and founders of the civil rights movement ALL bigots. Sigh.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:29 a.m. CST

    Paulseta Went Full Retard

    by DangerMan

    The second Naked Gun and third were awful. So was High School High, Baseketball, My Boss's Daughter, Scary Movie 3 and 4 and Superhero Movie. No AFI Lifetime Achievement Award in sight.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:50 a.m. CST

    I like the Naked Gun movies

    by The Amazing G

    I don't like this however

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:53 a.m. CST

    "Thanks for not voting on the bail outs Liberals!"

    by SilentP

    Wasn't it... the republicans who didn't vote on the bail outs? I thought the majority of democrats did.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:05 a.m. CST

    George Washington stating that war is good?

    by RenoNevada2000

    Really? Is this the same George Washington who, upon his leaving the Presidency, warned the country in a speech to avoid foreign intanglements?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:17 a.m. CST

    American Garbage would be more like it

    by HcReeve24

    Come on does anyone truly think JFK would approve of this war? The whole Barack joke is juvenile and stupid. How can the party of Lincoln have fallen so far? When things are bad in politics that is when the blowhards release something as unwatchable as this thing looks. To my Republican friends the party's over for now at least, accept change or get out of everyone's way. The walls are in fact closing in on you, and your dream is over. Now we can make a better country together or we can do it while you kick and scream. Frankly I don't care either way.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:40 a.m. CST

    Moriarty doesn't understand that...

    by Chishu_Ryu

    ...this film was made by and for brainwashed conservative Republicans. Clearly, he doesn't get it.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:44 a.m. CST

    I mean Joe Somebody doesn't understand...

    by Chishu_Ryu

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:46 a.m. CST


    by ViktorBC

    He understands that. Thanks to his Liberal brainwashing.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:10 a.m. CST

    I'm writing a screenplay

    by SuckLeTrou

    to appease all the pussy-ass right-wing whiners who are obviously too lazy to make their own movie website to bitch on or even make their own movies. (News flash: nobody's stopping you!) It's a love story about how awesome it is to have a low IQ (no elitism allowed!) forsake all logic (let's have a VP who believes men rode dinosaurs!) and have closeted gay sex in toilet stalls. I'm calling it "Republicans Are Totally Awesome And Everyone Else Totally Hates America And Is A Terrorist For Even Thinking Our Dear Leaders Might Ever Do Anything Wrong! (And We Love Free Speech And Freedom So Let's Vote Against Our Own Self-Interests To Make America An Oppressive Theocracy Where We Kill People Who Don't Follow Our Selective Interpretation Of The Bible While We Blindly Follow And Trust In Everything We Are Told By The Lying Hypocrites Who Don't Believe Any Of The Garbage We Voted For And Just Fed It To Us So They Could Take Control Of Everything Without Interference!)" Sounds awesome, I know.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:17 a.m. CST

    Movie's probably lame, but...

    by SkinJob69

    I wouldn't base that on this reviewer's opinion. "Mission not accomplished, yet again", "asshat O'Reilly", "attack on free speech and dissenting opinion", etc. The guy's a flaming partisan liberal, and his bias has clearly impacted his opinion of the film in a major way.<p> Still, watching the trailer it seems that Zucker has gone for broad, unsophisticated humor, which is a disappointment. There are certainly several over-the-top liberals who are long-overdue for an intelligent satire. Too bad this film probably isn't it. I hope someone in Hollywood tries harder next time.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:18 a.m. CST


    by ViktorBC

    They have made that movie a few times already.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:20 a.m. CST

    Obvious communist hippie reviewer

    by CreatureCantina

    Can we get a review from somebody who isn't on the DNC payroll for this one, please? PRETTY PLEASE??!!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:32 a.m. CST

    So you can't not like this movie and not be a liberal?

    by I Dunno

    Based on the trailer, it just doesn't look funny. This type of "spoof" movie invariably gets panned, without exception but when this one does, it's because of the LIEbruls? <p>And by the way, this liberal vs conservative, red vs blue state partisan horseshit is what's fucking up this country. Well it's ONE of the things fucking up this country. Is it possible to GASP think for one's self and be liberal about some things and conservative about others? No? Have to pick a team, huh? Fucking simpletons.</p>

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Utter shit

    by RobFromBackEast

    Anything that doesnt make O Reilly look like the fucking nutcase that he is will be ignored by the vast majority of the public. It took balls for Zucker to make this alright; it's just a pity they're where his fucking brain should be.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:35 a.m. CST

    Alucinor, my sarcasm detector is offline

    by I Dunno

    Did you just deride socialism and support the bailout in the same post?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:36 a.m. CST


    by DiverseNerd

    Are we supposed to believe that Joe Somebody isn't Moriarty himself or anyone other than an AICN regular contributor? That review was written too well for me to believe otherwise. For the record, I agree with this review and the "author's" political leanings, but COME THE FUCK ON.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:37 a.m. CST

    Says the neo-con dumbass Nazi Jesus-freak pedophile :

    by PTSDPete

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:38 a.m. CST


    by PTSDPete

    Fuck you.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:41 a.m. CST

    What Would It Take for these Bush Republican Bastards :

    by PTSDPete

    To be lined up the wall and SHOT ?!?!? Shut the hell up, I mean. Yer all fucking dead.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:48 a.m. CST

    And to state the fucking obvious :

    by PTSDPete

    If any living person deserves to be bitch-slapped by the Founding Forefathers, it's this David Zucker fella. Him with his ' guts '.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:51 a.m. CST

    You are all idiots!

    by Godovhellfire

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Why are you lefties so nasty?

    by Rolling_Stone

    Never a good argument. Just name calling, smears, and gutter language. Is that all you got?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:53 a.m. CST


    by ViktorBC

    That's mature. Another sign of liberal intellectual superiority. Once again: Conservatives disgree with liberals. Liberals HATE conservatives.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:06 a.m. CST


    by BackwardGalaxy

    How do you criticize a film for being right wing nonsense when your review is just left wing nonsense? Dude, seriously, if it isn't funny - and like we needed anyone to tell us that - just say, "It ain't funny."

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:18 a.m. CST


    by Hawaiian Organ Donor

    You want to know why lefties are so nasty? Because all Republicans are mindless jerkoffs. All we hear from guys like Bush and McCain is, "Do you really want the government coming between you and your doctor?" but when it comes to socialism that's going to earn votes and help out their millionaire friends, suddenly socialism is the cure all. Conservatives are only capable of talking out of both sides of their mouths. If socialism is bad, then it's bad PERIOD. No bailouts, no government funded schools or government controlled pensions. But don't have the balls to tell me the government has no place helping me pay a hospital bill that's going to bankrupt me when you're eager to bail out irresponsible immoral fat cat banks that took struggling Americans for all they were worth.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:24 a.m. CST

    Politics and humor aside...

    by OBSD

    Whatever your politics are and whatever your sense of humor is, you've got to admit, the timing on the making of this movie is waaaay off. The zeitgeist for this kind of movie passed us by about 4-5 years ago. With a parody film, you have to be on top of the thing you're making fun of. Look at Men In Tights. That came out 4 or 5 years after Prince of Thieves, and it bombed. Partly because it wasn't that funny, but also partly because nobody gave a shit about Robin Hood like they did 5 years previous. There was a window of about a year after Farenheit 9-11 that this kind of movie may have done well. But then Katrina came and now with all of the scandals and the infrstructure crumbling and the Wall street clusterfuck sane people have woken up to the fact that this administration was fucking them in the ass. And much less people give a shit about the middle east when they're spending $5.00 for a gallon of milk and bridges keep collapsing and they might not have a job or a home next month.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:39 a.m. CST

    uninspired miscarriage of cinema

    by kafka07

    Thanks for making the important point that this is not even satire, even though it will be obvious to all when it is widely released. Satire is essential in making fun of ourselves and others politically and socially. But when people just take other opinions that don't agree with and blatantly shit on them it has no comedic, social or intellectual value whatsoever. A political film should question or make fun of political figures, policies and beliefs with the point of bettering ourselves and society overall. Instead this film is just a giant crapfest. I'm not an Obama endorser, but a slave named Barack is in this film?? Come on! That should make any self-respecting human being cringe. That's just plain racist.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:40 a.m. CST

    Heres the deal.

    by greg39

    There are hundreds of over sites where I can go to get the same news with getting the political views of every jerkoff with a computer. Harry seems to think that for some reason we give two shits about his political views, so fuck off. I'm gone. You guys may now finish your circle jerk.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:55 a.m. CST

    I love the Circle Jerks!

    by OBSD

    That band was great!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:55 a.m. CST

    I can't wait until Massawyrm reviews this.

    by John Maddening

    He's a conservative, and I'll bet you a Republican-led Socialist Wall Street bailout that he hates it, too.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:04 a.m. CST

    I don't think you'd have to be a Conservative to enjoy this

    by Richard Cranium

    I think you'd have to be a fucking retard. Regardless of its politcal message, I can't imagine this being anything other than a God awful unfunny piece of shit.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:10 a.m. CST

    Dennis Hopper in

    by Alkeoholic77

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:10 a.m. CST

    Dennis Hopper in "LAND OF THE DAD?"

    by Alkeoholic77

    Did that movie star Heather Ledger also?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:11 a.m. CST

    We lost Heather Ledger this year too?

    by daroru

    My God I didn't even realise...

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:22 a.m. CST


    by The_Hanged_Man

    I'd write it off as the reviewer has differing political views and can't get over himself and give an honest review. However, this movie looks really, really bad... now, I laugh at the IDEA of Patton speaking to Michael Moore, but it doesn't seem like this movie will pull it off in any effective way. I thought Trace Atkins looked amusing as the Angel of Death until I heard that he sings... ugh. Just seems like a mishmashed mess destined to not have any audience. Liberals won't see it with their attitudes already piqued for November, and Conservatives will be too busy trying to raise false allegations against Obama. The average joe has 0 interest in it. This should have been released much earlier before everyone was in serious "Fall Election Mode". Then maybe 3 or 4 people would've gone to see it.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:23 a.m. CST

    What goes on in the minds of half the people here?

    by SamuelJackson1

    Seriously, there is such a blatant refusal to recognize reality in these kinds of talkbacks that they make me sick. Someone mentioned that the bailout didn't get passed because of liberals. ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS!?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Left, Right, Center, of wherever else....

    by Gungan Slayer

    Doesn't matter. Movie still looks like shit, regardless of whatever political affiliation you might have.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:42 a.m. CST

    i'm on the right and it looks bad even to me

    by HarrysNemesis

    The previews just don't look funny... I don't trust any reviewer who's an obvious leftie like this guy because there's probably not much in it for them to like, but not going to support a film just because it starts from a right slant... it still has to be good -- this one just doesn't look that good from the previews.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:42 a.m. CST

    I'd rather watch Disaster Movie.

    by Grayskull

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Conservitives & their revisionist history lessons

    by OBSD

    This is what I hear whenever neocons try and give me a "history lesson" like Zucker is trying to do: "Now, my story begins in 19-dickety two. We had to say dickety 'cause that Kaiser had stolen our word twenty." And this one: "Anyway, about my washtub. I just used it that morning to wash my turkey, which in those days was known as a walking bird. We'd always have walking bird on Thanksgiving with all the trimmings: cranberries, injun eyes, and yams stuffed with gunpowder. Then we'd all watch football, which in those days was called baseball." Republicans are out of touch with the American people. It's like when your grandfather would give you a nickel and proudly say "go buy yourself an ice cream." Gee...thanks?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:50 a.m. CST

    83 minute campaign ad

    by yomomma

    This isn't supposed to be good, just ideological enough to rile the Palin-voting base. Look at the timing of the release, a few weeks before the elections. This is just base pandering to the sector of the public who think mocking the weak is satire, and America exists to wage war for Jesus. True comedy is subversive. Making a film that states that we should do as we are told, and that our glorious wars are righteous isn't subversive, it's propaganda. It doesn't matter, though. The people this movie is aimed at are convinced that they should do as they are told. So because some right-wing pundit somewhere will tell them this is funny, they will find it funny. So the all people who are young enough to understand the internet and enjoy tasteless comedy, but who get all their opinions in pre-digested form and feel the need to whine about "liberal bias" while the nation in the throes of chaos brought about by republicans will enjoy this movie. There's at least $40 box-office right there. Oh, and you idiots, it would be so easy to mock the Democrats in a funny matter. I know Hannity and O'Reilly always try to talk up the Liberals as weak, but wouldn't it be more damaging (and funny) to point out how the Democrats are time and again part of the dysfunctional power structure that is ruining this country? It is the Democrats (including Barack, who got millions from Wall Street) who are the major supporters of the bail out bill, and who gave Bush war-crime-cart-blanche. How about a movie showing all the harsh partisan rhetoric, followed by a behind the scenes look at all our politicians cozying up together at the big-corporate glory hole?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:54 a.m. CST

    As far as the bailout

    by HarrysNemesis

    If you're going to spout your political shit, at least look it up. Bush may be for the bailout, but guess what: A) he doesn't represent all conservatives or republicans and B) he's NOT a conservative, never was -- remember he ran as a 'compassionate' conservative. As for the bailout failing, yes the democrats are responsible. They have a majority in congress. If they vote for it, it passes -- period. Here is how the vote breakdown went for the bailout. Tell me the republicans are behind this wall street bailout now. This is from BBC news. Among the 205 "Ayes", there were 65 Republicans - or a third of the party's house membership - compared to 140 Democrats - three in five. Among the 228 votes against were 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:02 a.m. CST

    Bottom Line

    by CaptainWalker

    THIS movie wasn't funny.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:02 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Now Zucker's gonna blame Nancy Pelosi for his movie failing. Damn.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:03 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Can't wait!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:13 a.m. CST

    So, Mori, ever think of slapping a spoiler tag on this post?

    by WillowFan2001

    That is all.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Politics in movies

    by BCfreeB

    Heres food for thought....Parker and Stone are CONSERVATIVE in the traditional sense. In fact, they're libertarians and their movies reflect this. They mock the left, right, and center, and anyone who wants any government control of anything. I disagree with their politics as a self-proclaimed leftist, but they're funny, so who cares? They make good movies, and people laugh, and that is all anyone cares about. Even the socialists laugh at their movies. So why does the right bellyache about no "conservative"'s just no neo-con movies, really. And to make those, since they are a very specific set of ideology and principles, many of which contradict each other, is, by definition, preachy. So they don't get made, because while we tolerate politics in movies, we will not tolerate being reached to (except for Michael Moore documentaries, and though I'm far left they annoy even me (that is, anything made post Columbine))

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:21 a.m. CST

    Coming soon to web page near you...

    by crankyoldguy

    Ain't It Great to Be Rich News, sponsored by the fair and balanced (hah!) Fox with a grant from Halliburton. All who make a quarter mil a year and up are welcome. If you make $150K, they'll think about it. If you make under $50K a year, we need you as our paid slaves to keep the neo-con society machine running for us and pay all the taxes since you're not allowed loopholes. But if you complain, protest or act liberal, your citizenship will be revoked and you don't get to fuck emaciated bitch Ann Coulter up the ass, either.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:26 a.m. CST

    I think Michael Moore is a douche

    by smackfu

    and I'm a Canadian, and my views on conservative/liberal issues are pretty mixed. But from what I've seen of this film, the ONLY people who are going to enjoy this film are the really nutty, extreme conservatives who admire Bill O'Rielly and have a savage hate-on for Michael Moore. I mean *I* don't like the guy, and for that very reason I don't want to watch a 'spoof' of him any more than I would be amused by watching a spoof of Bill O'Rielly. I simply don't like either one, have zero interest in what they have to say, and therefore like any sane person have zero interest in watching a characterization of them for 90 minutes, spoof or not.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:31 a.m. CST

    If this were really a spoof of Michael Moore

    by smackfu

    rather than a Neo-con ego strokefest, it would have worked VERY well as a mocumentary, spoofing how heavy-handed his methods are, ie editing a completely rational person's viewpoint into a one sentence blurb taken out of context that makes it appear that the person is driving home the exact point Moore wants to make, even if the context of the quote was completely different. Moore needs a documentary ABOUT HIM, that underscores how deceitful his documentaries really are.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:39 a.m. CST

    This movie is not for liberals

    by GeorgieBoy

    So it's no wonder reviews on this site are bad. Socialist liberals are the people the movie is making fun of (and they can't tolerate that, but claim to be for free speech. Odd.) Conservative Republicans *WILL* find this a laugh riot. You guys need to learn to laugh at yourselves once in awhile.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:40 a.m. CST

    The opinion of a Moderate...

    by LoudmouthCracker

    Being a Moderate in the U.S. (as I am) means three things: (1) you're an enemy to pretty much everyone else; (2) you will never have accurate representation in government; (3) on the plus side, you're free to ridicule both sides of the aisle. So while I think Michael Moore is, by and large, a lying, self-aggrandizing dick who can occasionally cobble together something that's at least mildly amusing in its gross misrepresentation of actual events, I have every bit as much contempt for raging conservatives who pull the same shit. The problem here is that "An American Carol" looks so staggeringly unfunny that no matter WHO it's attempting to pimpslap, I can't in my wildest dreams imagine it being worth a damn. The trailer is terrible beyond all quantifiable degrees of shittiness. The impression I'm left with, from the trailer, is that the whole thing is a clusterfuck of fat jokes and similarly sophomoric grabassery, with no real intelligent argument to make. And some of the casting is goddamned atrocious. Kelsey fucking Grammer as Gen. George S. Patton? Are you kidding me? As for the above review, it appears to primarily be a diatribe from someone who disagrees with the film's politics, and that's bound to happen... but I really could do without the barrage of "cutesy" puns and plays-on-words. Utterly vomitous.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    There are at least 2 documentaries like that. Plus books and entire websites dedicated to just what you're talking about. Trust me, the realm of reporting against Michael Moore has been well mined.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:53 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    Free speech doesn't mean you can make shit up and call it the truth and then expect everybody to believe your lies as the truth. That's called living in fantasyland. Every time you neocons lie, there will be a progressive to expose your lie. And THAT'S why Republicans hate liberals so much. Because we won't eat your bucket of shit lies and then say "my, that was yummy. May I have some more please?" We'll scream out "Hey! This Guy's got a bucket of shit! Stop eating from the bucket, people!"

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:04 a.m. CST


    by polyh3dron


  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:12 a.m. CST

    great review that doesn't talk about specifics

    by T 1000 xp professional

    lol i could've sworn i only read one or two specific concrete examples from the actual movie that supported this guy's descriptive yet vague and incoherent would think it would be easier just doing a movie review that bashes a movie that supposedly looks this bad..I just wonder why this cynic had such a hard time.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:12 a.m. CST

    When this movie bombs

    by kafka07

    and undoubtedly and deservedly it will utterly bomb at the box office for the piece of shit that it is, some of you will blame the so-called liberal media for sabotaging the film. There really is no getting through some of your thick skulls that this film is just really fucking dumb. But hey go right ahead and eat from the trough of shit that Zucker and company are feeding you. If anything is funny at all from this movie it will be seeing the extremely few fans sporting their shit moustaches.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:21 a.m. CST

    Too bad Heston died this year.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    He should have been in it.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Hey T 1000 xp unprofessional

    by DangerMan

    Ever heard of A CHRISTMAS CAROL? What more is there to say about the plot? The Barack and taliban jokes were enough. And Kevin Sorbo.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Hey, this guy did GHOST

    by Darth_Kaos

    I know, I know it has it's moments of sappiness, but it was a well made movie overall.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Thank goodness for this movie.

    by HoboCode

    This will only put Obama over the top when people see how fucking moronic and hateful the right-wing really is. Thanks David.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:56 a.m. CST

    anti war movies = liberal ones in retarded people's eyes

    by awepittance

    it's hilarious to me how often conservatives get off on labeling things as liberals.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:13 p.m. CST

    It can't be as bad as CRASH.


    That's your atypical, smarmy feel-good lefty movie. Manipulative, self-congratulating, and smug. Sure, An American Carol is probably not very good, but there are SO MANY terrible liberal movies that one bad conservative one means NOTHING. And this "review" was terribly written. "Land of the Dad" sounds like an awesome zombie movie, though.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Oops, I meant typical, not atypical.



  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Kid Idioteque

    by DangerMan

    Glad you criticized a typo when you made a truly dumb ass grammatical error. I love hypocrisy, which is why I won't see this trash

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:25 p.m. CST

    The Founding Fathers.....

    by Jobacca

    Were a bunch of hippie,leftist rebels that overthrew their corrupt government and turned a small british colony into the United States of America. All you right-wing big brother republican lovers were secretly rooting for the red coats during history class werent you? Whenever I listen to republicans talk,I always get the feeling that they'd love nothing more than to elect W as King George the First!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:48 p.m. CST

    I'm buying a ticket anyway - maybe four

    by bismarckf

    and maybe not even use the tickets. Sure, the movie looks crappy, but I'm voting with my dollars -- the only type of voting that gets Hollywood's attention. Besides, the liberal slant in many movies has disenfranchised me. ;)

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:53 p.m. CST


    by uberman

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 12:57 p.m. CST

    The spoof has been dead for years

    by drewlicious

    I'm not entirely sure why it happened. It's basically just slapstick and absurdism, which really never gets old if done correctly. Case in point: Airplane and the Naked Gun movies never get old. Yet Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie aren't remotely funny for even ten seconds. It's because the modern spoof lacks any real wit. They just reference something from pop culture and hit someone in the balls. It's just lazy humor, there is no comparison. It looks like American Carol, from what I can tell in the previews, is not branching from the current trend.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Re: "the original abolitionists and founders of the civil rights

    by Matthew Martinez

    I always find it fairly amusing whenever conservatives/Republicans bring this sort of thing up. They seem to conveniently forget about the fact that the Democrats and Republicans went through a bit of an ideological shift in the first half of the 20th century. Many southern Democrats defected to the Republican party after Democratic leadership embraced the civil rights movement. (They went with the party that would protect the Southern way of life, and in doing so started the Republican party's shift to the right.) In other words, modern Democrats have far more in common with the Republicans of the abolition and civil rights movements than modern Republicans do.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:17 p.m. CST

    He didn't direct GHOST, his brother did.

    by SnapT

    Jerry Zucker directed GHOST, not David Zucker. Jerry's the sane brother.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Indeed...they were called...

    by Darth Macchio

    Dixiecrats. Look it up.<p>I repeat: these "neo-cons" are not real republicans much less conservatives.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:37 p.m. CST

    "Malone is a superficial caricature of Michael Moore".

    by Cotton McKnight

    I stopped reading after I read that line. What, you mean there is actual depth to Michael Moore? You think Kevin Farley missed his subtle nuances? Come on. The guy is a political hack and he has an agenda. Nothing wrong with satirizing that.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:39 p.m. CST

    " a joke about a slave named barack"


    Thats all you need to know. The right is bad at governing and bad at jokes. They are good at getting elected and getting rich. Such commentary has no place in an election where one candidates latent racism was so prominent at the first debate he couldnt look Obama in the eye and came just short of calling him "boy" I hope the right crashes and burns with this mess theyve made of the country, but im sure theyll just blame leftist elites as the door is hitting them in the ass on the way out....

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:41 p.m. CST

    neo cons sure control a lot for "fake" republicans...


    the other republicans had no trouble backing them on every shit thing theyve done. That argument is so lame. You mean the neo cons arent the republicans of 30 years ago.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:43 p.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    Wow, so you accuse McCain of racism based on that...? That's really reaching. I'm voting against Obama because of his policies -- does that make me a racist?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:49 p.m. CST

    To call Michael Moore unamerican is the same as calling McCain t

    by TallScott

    That's my biggest problem with the film. Anyone with a brain can see that we love america no matter where you stand. Its how wrong the rabid right are on Micheal Moore. The guy is far from a flaming troop hating flag burning lib. Hes been anti taliban since his days in TV Nation. Never said anything bad about our efforts in Afganistan. He just hates cooprate greed and naturaly they fight back with propganda. I mean if caring that amercians have jobs and healthcare is unamerican then what the fuck!?! It seems the film is made by a man who gets his information only from Fox News and Limbagh. Hey satire is great no matter where you stand. Everyone deserves a hit. This seems like more like a million dollar hate letter from a shut in.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:51 p.m. CST

    Message to the "Right"

    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    I'm a Canadian and I really have no political leanings or opinions on anything in Canada, but I have to say I am fascinated with the Conservative Right in the US. On a daily basis there is enough bat-shit crazy, non-sensical, hate-filled things being thrown out by the conservatives of the US that its like they are a satire of themselves. I've never heard an argument come out of a republican that didn't: a)contain completely made up facts, b) blame the Democrats for all the things that have gone wrong under their own direct control, c) use a 1,800 year old morality tale storybook (or at least the parts they agree with) as a basis for all desicions and discriminations, or d) just be an angry personal attack. Seriously, you people fascinate me. You stand so firmly behind your ideals of "Being American" and it seems with you "Being Christian" is directly attached to that, but the ideals you attach to both things almost always directly oppose the original intentions of "being American" and "Being Christian". Since when did "being American and Christain" mean being against free speech, being against providing for the poor as opposed to the rich, being against allowing peoples from other countries, hating thy neighbor if they are gay, hating thy neighbor if they don't hold the same beliefs as you, etc, etc. My god I'm glad I live in Canada.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:55 p.m. CST

    P.S. Oh I cant BELIEVE Zucker used JFK!

    by TallScott

    What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then ... we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." JFK[September 14, 1960] Someone should fax Zucker this. I guess Zucker think JFK should have nuked Cuba during the missle crisis

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Michael Moore.

    by HoboCode

    I put out this challenge in the Slacker Uprising TB and I'll do it here for any newbies...<p> I challenge any person reading this to name one single factual error or lie in a Michael Moore film. Just one. And don't bother with "You can't walk into a bank and get a gun." because I've already debunked it twice. It happened.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 1:58 p.m. CST

    If by 30 years...

    by Darth Macchio mean pre-Reagan republicans, then yes, I'd agree with you. But I wonder if there are any real republicans left in any government position on the federal level at this point. If there are, then I have to feel a bit sorry for them watching their party unraveling before their eyes much less the abdication of many traditional conservative philosophies. And it's not my argument, I'm not a republican nor a conservative. Don't forget all the 'knee shaking' "democrats" who capitulated to Bush time and time again like Charlie Brown actually expecting Lucy to hold the god damn football *this* time. Again. And again. And again.<p>These binary thinkers, in either party, are a major part of the problem...dissent is treason, discussion is weakness, contemplation is indecisiveness, etc, etc, etc...

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:01 p.m. CST


    by GaiustheBrave

    I need to preface this by saying I think everyone in the world is a stupid jackass fucktard, and that if you lined up all the hardcore liberals and hardcore conservatives you'd still wind up 20 iq points short of Paris Hilton. But, Hawaiian Organ Donor must have made a slip and donated his neo-cortex instead of his left kidney (it's a mistake, it happens in medicine all the time; the best thing to do is sign an agreement that you won't sue and go back to masturbating)because your post about an all or nothing approach to politics (or anything, really) just sounded about as fully baked as my girlfriend's cookies are when she's baked, herself. You can have some governmental intervention and responsibility without having to collapse into all out socialism. Yes, in fact, you can pick and choose when to accept a given method or not. Government-funded school system, okay...bailout for cocksuckers who over-extended themselves for money (and, by the way, will end up okay no matter what happens, I promise), not okay. I just don't think we want the same people who fucked up SSI, the education system and (add your own list here)to fuck up the healthcare system, too. Now, let's all get back to lesbian porn and call it a day.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:02 p.m. CST


    by Darth Macchio

    That's the thing. I'm not a fan of Moore on a personal level but other than "caging" shit to make a stronger there one outright lie he's made about the big stuff? Someone mentioned documentaries about Moore from the they cite specific evidence to prove he is lying? Or just attack him personally? Do they just talk about the caging and not the fact that his context is what is important and also not a lie?<p>I don't know myself but I see people calling him a liar and if you lie about someone in a movie, correct me if I'm wrong, but that's grounds for a lawsuit over slander and defamation right?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:03 p.m. CST


    by Darth Macchio

    ...not "movie" but "documentary"...apologies (no freakin edit button)

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Michael Moore is a hypocrite

    by bobbofatz

    He makes statements and docs about gun control, the environment, and world hunger yet has armed guards, travels by jets and limos and has more than his fair share of nutrients. Kind of like another great man... Al Gore.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:14 p.m. CST

    Anybody that is that far up either parties....

    by liljuniorbrown

    Ass is a joke and beyond sad. To clarify, if you feel like your side is totaly right all the time and the other side is to blame for all the problems in the world,you are fucking retarted. Think about it, if you really truly think that anyone living in a "red state" or that registers republican is a gun carrying christian maniac,then how are you better than a racist? Same thing for the left, if you feel like anyone voting democrat is a limp wristed anti American zealot, that makes you the worst kind of single minded idiot. Get real, both sides are fucking us hard because they don't want to look bad to there respective parties.Deomcrats and republicans voted no on the bail out, more democrats voted no that anyone,but the republicans that voted no claim that a partisian speech pissed them off. Get over it, people are losing there homes all over America at an alarming rate. One final thing, Micheal Moore is as much a liar as Bill O'Reilly or anybody else that leans the truth in there direction to prove a point.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:15 p.m. CST


    by frozen01

    I think you missed something.<br>Someone very early in the talkback said, using sarcasm, that it's the liberals' fault that the bailout failed. Except, as you showed in your post, it wasn't. The reason the bailout failed was quite bi-partisan... tons of Democrats didn't support it, and even more Republicans voted it down, too. Even a good portion of the people, Republican and Democrat alike, who voted "aye" did so while holding their noses.<br> Personally speaking, although I consider myself liberal, I'm glad the bailout failed. I don't actually think it was a "liberal" or "conservative" measure, as the bill just gave lots of money (generally opposed by conservatives) to corporations (generally opposed by liberals). It was a REALLY expensive band-aid on a GIGANTIC festering wound.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:19 p.m. CST

    Oh fuck off Liberals. This film is funny and

    by hatespeech

    you know it. You just can't stand being shown as they hypocrits you are. Fuck all yous haters!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:19 p.m. CST


    by frozen01

    "if you lined up all the hardcore liberals and hardcore conservatives you'd still wind up 20 iq points short of Paris Hilton."<br><br> Friggin' hilarious!!! Kudos on that one! <br><br> "You can have some governmental intervention and responsibility without having to collapse into all out socialism. Yes, in fact, you can pick and choose when to accept a given method or not. Government-funded school system, okay...bailout for cocksuckers who over-extended themselves for money (and, by the way, will end up okay no matter what happens, I promise), not okay"<br> With ya so far...<br><br>"I just don't think we want the same people who fucked up SSI, the education system and (add your own list here)to fuck up the healthcare system, too."<br>Wait... I thought you said that government-funded education was okay? So, although the screw up education, it's okay to have the government run the schools... but it's not okay to have them run health care because they'll do the same thing they did to schools? Huh?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:21 p.m. CST


    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    I agree with Darth, Michael Moore is annoying, but I have to admit he frames facts in way to make Republicans look bad while Republicans either just yell and call him an idiot/liar or make up facts to make Moore look bad. Even though I find him annoying he has facts on his side while his detractors just have hate. The basic argument seems to go: Moore: "look at all this stuff that is bad because of Republicans, look at these photos and these records: see, they're evil!". . . Fox News: "Fuck you, Moore! Shut up, you fat fuck!"

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:22 p.m. CST

    Some people let politics ruin their life

    by fastcars

    And this movie was made by one of them. Blind allegiance to one political party, no matter what, is firstly dumb, and secondly death to comedy. What people don't understand about Daily Show and Colbert is that they put comedy first, and make fun of both sides, no sides, whatever. Whereas stuff like this and the Half Hour News try and tape flimsy jokes to their militant agenda. In short, I haven't laughed at any clips of this movie, and it has nothing to do with my political leanings. For smart, funny mocking of the left, see South Park and Team America.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:23 p.m. CST


    by frozen01

    Actually, and I could be wrong on this, I thought more Dems voted yes on the bailout (I wish more had voted no). <br>But I totally agree with you on the point about Republicans blaming Nancy Pelosi's speech. The majority of your party votes no and then turns around and blames it on a SPEECH? What does that say about your party?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:39 p.m. CST

    Zucker has his place

    by Shut the Fuck up Donny

    but it's not in the political film arena. Satire involves subtlety, and Zucker's style of comedy doesn't allow for that. Mix this with a heavy-handed political agenda, and you're left with a film that insults all and enlightens none.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:40 p.m. CST

    Daily Show / Colbert

    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    Granted that shows like these which showcase actual "satire" make fun of Republicans more than Democrats, but that's only because they give them more material to work with. Every once and awhile the Democrats give them something to mock, but the Republicans are spewing out comic gold on a daily basis. If Republicans started sounding reasonable and sound-minded when they spoke and didn't directly negate what they said a week ago on film and claim they never said such a thing, these shows would have nothing to work with and they would go under. It is the Republican party that is keeping "left-wing" shows like this on the air. So Republicans, if you really want people like John Stewart, Steven Colbert, and even Michael Moore to just dissapear, all you have to do is stop doing crazy shit! Give it a try, see what happens.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Dark Knight and Iron Man were both GOP films

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    Iron Man was a thoroughly dumb GOP puff piece. Dark Knight was at least intelligent. But if you honestly think that movies are promoting liberalism beyond a few "issue" films (films that few people see) the vast majority of films are extremely conservative if not reactionary. Do any of you ever analyze what you're watching?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:49 p.m. CST

    And if you want some generally funny conservatives,

    by Shut the Fuck up Donny

    look into people like Christopher Buckley, Jonah Goldberg, or John Derbyshire (although he's VERY dry). <p> Aside from Buckley's occasional foray into Hollywood, I think conservative thinkers have found that film is not their medium and tend to stick to the written word. In fact, sensible conservative thought is alive and well outside of film and television. <p> It's just the unfotunate fact that the American populace as a whole is stimulated heavily from visual medium, and the only conservatives they associate with are the colorful extremists and attention-seekers.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by Shut the Fuck up Donny

    are you my evil twin from an alternate universe?!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:24 p.m. CST

    The Dark Knight transcends politics.

    by HoboCode

    It exists in an independent world where politics are moot.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:26 p.m. CST


    by Darth Macchio I analyze a fictional film to determine it's political leanings? No. Why would, or should, I do that? I don't watch fictional works to justify or foil my own politics...why would anybody actually do that? What's the point?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:29 p.m. CST

    Leslie Nielsen is still alive...

    by Blue_Demon

    While Bernie Mac and Heath Ledger are dead because Nielson does not have sacroidosis nor is he taking massive amounts of drugs.<p>Just clearing it up for the reviewer. :)

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:30 p.m. CST

    It is unfair and untrue...

    by hillvalley claim that Michael Moore is "Anti-American". He loves America and he loves Democracy. That he has an opinion on what's best for America is not Anti-American. <p>Now, whether or not his opinions are true or not is debatable. Whether or not his views are realistic is debatable. <p> But characterizing the man as "Anti-American" does not contribute to a debate. Its purpose is to remove its target FROM the debate. After all, what place does someone who is "Anti-American" have in a debate about what's good for America? I would say that the Bush administration has been dead wrong on what's good for America, but I would never call anyone involved as "Anti-American". <p> I do not 100% approve of Michael Moore. I respect his compassion and determination in looking out for the working class and agree with his positions on most subjects. I also know that his methods are questionable and the facts in his movies and books are manipulated to drive home his points. Not manufactured, but manipulated. <p> That he manipulates his information and resorts to hyperbole all too often (asking Charlton Heston to apologize for the gun-death of a Flint girl is a bit much) makes him less credible. <p> If you're going to satirize Michael Moore, satirize his methods (I admit, it's ripe material). But to put his patriotism under question isn't satire. It's muckraking.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Allow myself to introduce...myself

    by hillvalley

    Whoopsy on paragraph 2, sentence one. Don't call the grammar police!

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:35 p.m. CST

    So we HAVE to give it a good review

    by Larry of Arabia

    Because it's a conservative movie. Hey, everyone has a bias, but it's possible to be conservative and just not funny. There are a ton on unfunny liberal movies as well.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:48 p.m. CST

    Darth Macchio

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    Not that you have to, but it's important to be intellectually critical of the media you consume. Iron Man was racist, sexist, misogynistic, and little more than a puff piece promoting the validity of the war on terror and the idea of WMD's in Iraq.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:48 p.m. CST

    So will this play on a double bill

    by skimn

    with W. ?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:53 p.m. CST

    hillvalley: Charlton Heston

    by HoboCode

    Good post, however, I have to disagree on asking Heston to apologize. First of all Moore didn't ask Heston "to apologize for the gun death of a Flint girl." He asked Heston if he wanted to apologize to the people of Flint for coming there and staging an NRA rally shortly after a 6 year old boy had shot a 6 year old girl to death, when that community was still healing. He wouldn't even say he wouldn't have had the rally had he known about the incident. <p> He also asked him if he wanted to apologize to the people of Columbine for staging a rally shortly after that tragedy as well, to which Heston indignantly and arrogantly replied "You want ME to apologize?" <p> The point of the scene was to illustrate the insensitivity of the NRA to the feelings of people affected by gun violence, and to question why it is that the NRA holds rallys in communities where these incidences have recently occurred. Could it be that they fear people will sour on guns in general and seek reasonable restrictions on them?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:56 p.m. CST


    by leisuredrummer

    Look like you little democrats are pissed that Rebublicans are expressing free speech. It's ok if you don't think it looks funny but that's not what any of this is about, is it? No, it's about your pansy-asses not being able handle people having a different view other than your own. You guys are brainwashed by the eco-movement. A fabricated energy crisis that you guys buy into. Remember, gas prices didnt jack up until the Democrats took over Congress.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:57 p.m. CST


    by Shut the Fuck up Donny

    So, since Iron Man is originally Marvel's baby, are we to assume then that Marvel was pushing a conservative/republican pro-war agenda? I suspect Stan Lee would be surprised by that.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Sorry, S0nic, I didn't mean to come off as snarky

    by Shut the Fuck up Donny

    but I respectfully disagree that Iron Man was used as a vehicle to push the political agenda you say it does.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 3:59 p.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    I'm guessing you've already debunked Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11...? If so, please give me a compelling reason to believe you rather than Dave Kopel.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:05 p.m. CST


    by Baked

    The man is a horrible shitstorm of a director. He just made another bad movie. If you defend it just because your politics agree with him, you're a twat. Period.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:06 p.m. CST

    The conservatives have websites...

    by yomomma

    Put up some movie reviews at Free Republic if being exposed to non pod-people is so distressing and shows such a liberal bias. Modern conservatism is solely based on either being dumb, rich, or having a small penis (or a combination of those factors). If you are dumb, you are conservative because, "those elites don't know better than you what's right" or you believe the world is 6000 years old, and the science which is the basis for all modern technology is some kind of gay conspiracy. If you have a small penis, then you're obsessed with proving you're better than everybody else, and therefore support killing thousands of innocents to support your own empty nationalism (USA USA USA), and boosting your own poor self esteem. Rich folks just manipulate the stupid, poorly-hung Americans to get them to vote against their own self-interest so they can run off with all the money. None of the above make good comedy, since they are either too dumb or mean to write good jokes, or too profit oriented to care about quality. Republicans should stick to making action movies.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:08 p.m. CST


    by Blue_Demon

    How DARE you speak that way of the Party of Tolerance and Diversity?!<p>Okay, well, they don't really tolerate when I divert but...Nevermind. Carry on.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    The man is a horrible shitstorm of a director. He just made another bad movie. If you defend it just because your politics agree with him, you're a twat. Period.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:11 p.m. CST

    Its not the matter of not being able to handle

    by skimn

    people with a different view, its not being able to handle people with a STUPID view based on their own partisan, conspiracy-fueled theories.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:16 p.m. CST


    by leisuredrummer

    exactly. <br> One more thing, I think its adirable that Zucker has made so many movies and never (as far as I can remember) taken a stab at the Democrats before. Most directors and writers use their work as a place to throw in a quick one liner. He has always remained professional in that manner. I hate when people take movies that have no context to politics and try to throw in cheap jabs.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Iron Man and Dark Knight weren't GOP films at all.

    by Baked

    For one thing, Batman is staunchly against the death penalty. The whole movie revolves around his resistance to use the same methods as his enemies to combat them. And it's also about his fight to keep from crossing the line the Republicans constantly cross and how he would rather let the law fight these battles because his vigilantism creates MORE villains. <p> And Iron Man's story revolves around an arms dealer who realizes he's funding the same people he's fighting and tries to stop selling weapons while going around the world to clean up his own mess. <p> These aren't GOP stories, they're pretty much your typical gray-area real world liberal practical allegory using "converted" transitional figures: Rich, privileged men who evolve into responsible figures fighting not for security but against the excesses of society they themselves created.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 4:26 p.m. CST

    One bailout does not equal Socialism. Desperate times.

    by Alucinor

    I was kidding about Liberals not voting for the bailout... it was a Bush plan... Liberals don't like Bush... Har Har.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:13 p.m. CST

    HoboCode- I'll take your challenge

    by SkinJob69

    You may have seen this before, but please read the following PDF<p><p> You can defend the 'facts' in Moore's movies all you like, but you'd be completely full of shit if you didn't at least agree with this:<p> Regarding F911:<p> Instead, notice the film's meticulousness in saying only (or mostly) "true" or defensible things in support of a completely misleading impression. In this way, Kopel's care in describing Moore's "deceits" is much more interesting than other critiques I have read, including that of Christopher Hitchens. Kopel's lawyerly description of Moore's claims shows the film to be a genuinely impressive accomplishment in a perverse sort of way (the way an ingenious crime is impressive)--a case study in how to convert elements that are mainly true into an impression that is entirely false--and this leads in turn to another thought.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:28 p.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    Careful now... HoboCode might have a more impressive resume than Kopel.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:29 p.m. CST

    thank you, baked

    by Matthew Martinez

    I think you said it much better than I could have. To say that Iron Man and Dark Knight both pushed a conservative agenda is an overly simplistic reading of each film. They both examine moral gray areas, but since they're primarily action films, they're kind of obliged to have their protagonists blowing stuff up or beating the snot out of people.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 5:59 p.m. CST

    More Moore B.S. for you, HoboCode...

    by SkinJob69

    Regarding Sicko and the fantastically misleading segment regarding healthcare in Cuba:<p><p> Yeah, Cuba as a paragon of medical care. WTF. I know he's a communist, but I can't believe Moore could film that segment with a straight face.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6 p.m. CST


    by Darth Macchio

    I agree 1000% actually. If anything I'd agree so much that I have to specifically keep it in check and I think that's *why* I can't agree with you in theory. <p>This is only on a purely fictional level of course.<p>I have always felt that analyzing a film in such a manner requires a degree of objectivity and to achieve that you have to distance yourself from the material. Which, in the case of a creative work, does what I believe is a disservice to the author/s of the material.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6 p.m. CST

    looks funny....

    by slkboxrman

    especially the part with the arabs in the desert..... "mohhamed!!" twenty arabs stand up......"we must use last names, hussein!!" the same twenty stand up again.... funny shit

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:08 p.m. CST

    And three more from BFC...

    by SkinJob69

    These are pretty simple, straight-forward errors (but you said- "any factual error in a Moore movie"<p> Factual error #1: The site identified as the Rocky Flats nuke weapons plant, NW of Denver, is not Rocky Flats.<p> Factual error #2: Moore states when talking about Canada that ,"13 % of the country is Non-White, so the Canadians are pretty much like us". He uses that figure while trying to figure why the deaths caused with guns is so high inthe US compared to other countries. Problem is the US, as of the last census (2000), was nearly 25% "Non-White". Now 13 and 25 percent don't seem that far away but not only is the US percentage almost double Canada's "non-White" population, but that 25% equates to over 70 million people in the US over two times the entire population of Canada (which as of their last census was 32 million).<p> Factual error #3: After the shooting of Kayla Rolland at Mt. Morris, MI, just north of Flint, Michael Moore says "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, [NRA President] Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally" When in fact Heston's speech was given at a "get out the vote" rally in Flint, which was held when elections rolled by some eight months after the shooting (Feb 29 vs Oct 17) In fact, then-presidential candidate George W. Bush, then Vice-President Al Gore, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, and Moore himself all spoke at the rally.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:16 p.m. CST

    Errors for HoboCode, part 4: Roger & Me

    by SkinJob69

    Michael Moore lie #1: In the movie, it is suggested that the subject of the documentary, Roger B. Smith, was not available for commentary, despite several attempts. Years later, in the documentary Manufacturing Dissent (2007), it was revealed that Michael Moore did film a conversation with Smith, but it was intentionally left out.<p> Moore lie #2) This is the only movie where there has been a successful lawsuit against Michael Moore - filed by former friend Larry Stecco who successfully argued that his portrayal in the movie was not an accurate reflection of his character ("False light invasion of privacy" is the legal term) and won. Stecco was interviewed attending a society fund raising ball and was made out to be a high-society rich pig who partied while people where starving outside. He was actually a lawyer who worked pro-bono for the poorer residents of Flint.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:32 p.m. CST

    A parting shot, HoboCode, from IMDB...

    by SkinJob69

    Regarding F911:<p> "A headline from the Pantagraph (a newspaper in Bloomington-Normal, Illinois) dated 19 December 2001, is shown in big letters to read, "Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election." In fact, the only time those words appeared in that newspaper was in a headline over a letter to the editor dated 5 December 2001.<p> Sorry, man, but that's what happens when you seek to defend someone like Moore. It should matter little whether his politics are in line with yours; the man is at best a deceptive teller of half-truths, giving only one side of an argument while omitting pertinent opposing data and viewpoints. At worst he is a lying, adipose-laden communist who lacks any credibilty or relevance as a documentarian.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Ah ha!

    by somethingcool

    The truth is revealed. I knew this movie was shit.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Shut the Fuck up Donny

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    Don't worry. I'm mature enough not to get mad at internet postings. I don't know if Lee meant it to be the way it is, but to me, Iron Man wasn't even subtle in its war hawk conservatism.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:22 p.m. CST

    Darth Macchio

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    You know what, you're right. However, I tend to view films from a sociological standpoint. they are the cultural artifact that we will likely be judged from by future cultures.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:25 p.m. CST

    Iron Man was total Bush Doctrine

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    Cable news is accurate. Women are punished for owning their sexuality. Women are helpful only in the arena of secretarial work. Minorities are submissive to whites. There are only 2 types of Arabs. Terrorists and people who die to benefit white men. The validity of preemptive strikes. WMD's are where we say they are. Christ allegories. White men need to save brown folks.-------these are the themes of the film.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 7:42 p.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    I'll get back to you while I'm at work tomorrow.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 8:05 p.m. CST

    hobocode, my answer to michael moore challange

    by chipps

    did you read my post when you previously put that forward? is the that why you changed it to 'movie'. here is a clip from the awful truth: it revolves around a group of congressmen who want to put the ten commandments in schools (not something i actually agree with) in order to show them as hypocrites he asks them questions about the ten commandments. on person is dave weldon whom he asks to name the 8th comandament. dave responds that it thou shalt not steal. moore tells him it is don't lie. so he's a hypocrite right? wrong. there is no generally accepted listing of the ten commandments (it is a list of 15 statements that each faith lists so as to make ten, but numbers them differently) consequently within weldon's faith, (as with most americans) the 8th commandment is in fact don't steal.<p>when someone is right and you claim on tv that they are wrong in order to make out that they are a hypocrite, that is lying. Maybe moore didn't do any research. maybe he really thought he was right. but not doing research and showing a person up without giving them a relpy is still lying. i would call it either lying or willful ignorance, which is also lying. for example, either george bush lied about wmd in iraq or more likly he was willfully ignorant. they come to the same thing and are as bad as one another.<p>i am actually a fan of moore and largly agree with his politics. but he certainly twists the truth. and this is just something that i have picked up with my own personal knowledge, while watching a film maker i enjoy. i havn't gone through his stuff nit picking. I'm sure if someone did they would come up with more.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:48 p.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    I responded to your post already. you can find it in the Slacker TB.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 9:54 p.m. CST

    not my second post,

    by chipps

    or the end of the one above. when you say of some one 'you are wrong' and they are not wrong, what would you call that? he portrayed this guy as thrusting the ten commandments on others but not knowing them himself. which was wrong. what do you call that?

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Obviously if you don't like this move...

    by Barrock

    You're a yellow liberal Socialist. Like Micheal Moore. Obviously... /sarcasm

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:19 p.m. CST

    here is your reply:

    by chipps

    Are you kidding me? Keep grasping at straws. That's not a "lie." That was happening to not know that commandments differ by denomination. Like it fucking matters.<p>doesn't really answer it does it? george bush didn't do his research either. guess he also didn't lie. oh what? if you are going to say something you check if it is right first? clutching at straws i guess.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 10:33 p.m. CST

    I don't get it.

    by Stevie Grant

    Why does AICN keep giving updates on this (I'll wager most anything) piece of shit flick? I gotta assume they are trying to concentrate politicn' away from other posts.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Iron Man

    by yomomma

    He IS the most neo-con of characters in the books, isn't he? Wasn't he working for the MAN in the civil war series? So the movie is just being accurate. Also, anytime you try to distil complex issues down into a ridiculous cartoon, a shallow 2-dimensional characture in which no real meaning or sense can be found, it seems Republican, because that's how they see the world. That's why right-leaning hollywood actors are usually action stars, and the best right-wing movies are action movies (more 300 than Iron Man).

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:44 p.m. CST

    Dude, fuck this movie. Seriously.

    by Dwide Shrewd

    What a typical offering in an election year. Does Toby Keith sing about killing foreigners being "the American way" on the soundtrack? The right wingers love to get down to that shit.

  • Sept. 30, 2008, 11:57 p.m. CST

    The 9/11 scene sounds retarded.....

    by TheWaqman

    this movie sounds retarded. And all you dumb Conservatives have to say is "Biased review! This movie is great! Its just a biased review".

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Pretty funny...

    by thot you lefties like to knock Fox News. You guys have had NPR, CNN, CBS and NBC news in your pockets for decades! Sure, Fox leans right but is sure as hell more balanced than the aforemnentioned could ever hope to be. An American Carol will be worth at least renting. Previews look decent.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:38 a.m. CST

    Thot, regarding NBC

    by Stevie Grant

    That was not only a business decision, but a beneficial business decree. I'm not going to argue that NBC hasn't been left of the center, I'm just saying the directive to be all Obama 08!!!... !!!!!...!!!!!!... !!!!!... was driven by a certain business minded individual who realized FoxNews routinely dominates the ratings by being the right-wing, go-to network... and he wanted to cash in on the Obama-as-the-second-coming crowd as much as he could. NBC's "news" ratings have been improved ever since. Don't blame a network executive for doing his job.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:49 a.m. CST

    Dwide Shrewd...

    by WillowFan2001

    You do know that Toby Keith has endorsed Obama, right?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:18 a.m. CST

    Everything you said could apply to every ZAZ film

    by KCMOSHer

    You didn't like the Naked Gun movies? Well, there you go, then. Just comparing Shaun of the Dead to anything ZAZ put out tells me you're kind of clueless when it comes to film comedy. SotD wasn't even remotely a satire or a parody. It was just a comedic entry in a genre that normally doesn't do comedy. They poked some fun at the genre at times, but that's hardly the point of the film and removes it dramatically from the work of ZAZ which sits firmly in over-the-top physical send-ups of pop-culture and famous films and genres. If you don't enjoy any of the Naked Gun movies, you will never like -any- of Zucker's movies, as the NG's are pretty much the creme of the crop with the exception of the first Airplace and Kentucky Fried Movie. (One wonders how someone who found the Barack line racist would handle Rex Kramer: Daredvil?) As for the rest, typical liberal whining. The left can and does spend hour after hour of cinematic screen time lighting up badly drawn caricatures of conservatives. None of you holler then. Someone from the right does it, and oh LORD they're being preachy and hamhanded and yadda yadda yadda. Feel free to call this all of that, but I want to hear the same sentiment when W. comes out.

  • Give me a about out of touch, and clueless. Somebody buy this guy a high school history book.....sheesh

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:23 a.m. CST

    Node- I accept, sirrah

    by Lost Jarv

    Moore has clearly lied twice. First time was when he portrayed Charlton heston as a human when the man was obviously a zombie and the second was when he made out the NHS is good. <P>that was so funny, I thought I'd repeat it for all the people that missed it last time.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:21 a.m. CST

    Some polite words regarding this review.

    by lotharius3rd1118

    First of all, any review of comedy (whether it looks like shit or not) by a man who pompously proclaims that the NAKED GUN movies weren't all that funny is not a review to be trusted. Any reviewer who thinks it is funny to misspell the name of a late and great actor like Heath Ledger to be read as Heather is not someone I want to hear from regarding any film. Your use of langauge like ROFL and wanksta are far from clever and makes me wonder how sad a fucking life that I have that I even bothered to read your review. I'm pretty sure, judging by your petty insults and shitty comparisons, that you really shouldn't consider yourself shrewd enough to assess the intelligence of others like Mr. Zucker. Lastly, this movie does not look good. Period. If you thought you needed to send a review to hammer this point across, then you have underestimated your fellow movie nerds. It is for an audience and if you weren't a part of that audience, then shut the fuck up and quit ruining the fun of others. I may be just as liberal as others on this site, but fuckfaces like Joe Somebody make it hard to maintain my cool. Joe Somebody is nothing but a heckler, and all of his percieved quips amount to nothing more that some drunk bastard yelling "Get off the stage!" at any hardworking comic. Don't you ever try to assume that you are better than those that seek to do nothing more than entertain just because you have different beliefs. Freedom of speech may be under constant attack in this country by the bullies on the right, but some of the brain dead loudmouths on the left make me not even give a shit. Fuck you, Joe Somebody and the humorless cunt that spat you out you fucking cocksucker. Whew! That felt better.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:23 a.m. CST

    not so polite

    by lotharius3rd1118

    oh well, this guy was an asshole.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:32 a.m. CST

    bismarckf: Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11

    by HoboCode

    Please. Kopel is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He's another psychotic libertarian who claims to have Democratic values but contributes to the National Review and works for a conservative think tank.<p> I don't know what a "Deceit" is according to Kopel, butit's not a lie or a factual inaccuracy. This link will provide you a break down of Kopel's proclaimed "deceits" and what Moore actually says in the film:<p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:37 a.m. CST

    SkinJob69: 59 "deceits"

    by HoboCode

    I covered the 59 "deceits" already in response to bismarkf and again there are no lies or factual inaccuracies proved in Kopel's article. The guy doesn't even cite sources.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:39 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    Wah! "I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant!" Wah! Ah, the old "tolerence" chestnut you neo-cons love to pull out. Sure, we believe in tolerence. But any group of people who think that the book 1984 is a "how-to" book for governing should be wiped off the face of the earth.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:47 a.m. CST

    SkinJob69: Sicko

    by HoboCode

    Does moore claim Cuba is a paragon of healthcare? Not that I saw. He took 9/11 responders not getting heathcare from our own lax system to Gitmo (American soil) to get them the better healthcare they were providing detainees there. Gitmo wouldn't let him in so Moore took them to havana where ones doesn't need to pay for a doctor's visit and the prescription drugs are vastly cheaper. That's all he portrayed in the film.<p> Anf you might want to provide a link to something that doesn't have a McCain/Palin banner at the top of it if you want to appear unbiased. Citing an article that refers to people giving positive response to Sicko as "enthusiast anti-American Europeans and followers of evil Stalinist snake Fidel Castro" is pretty offensive. not to mention that article once again does not provide any lies or factual inaccuracies by Moore but only criticizes what he doesn't show in the film. This would be a legitimate claim if the movie was about Cuban healthcare, but it's not, it's about ours and how it can be improved.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:50 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    It's sad that people think today's Democratic party is at all close to the once great party of JFK. <p> Not even close.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:54 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    It's also sad to think that Republicans still say "We're the party of Lincoln" As if to say that freeing the slaves was their idea. Please. You've been trying to fix his "mistake" for 120 years.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:58 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    Wouldn't Moore want to make a movie about Cuaba's health care system and how IT could be improved? <p> Not that the US health care system isn't a cluster fuck, but damn...If I'm Dr. Phil I don't go to Brittany Spears for advice on how to straighten out my life.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:05 a.m. CST

    Wow OBSD

    by DoctorWho?

    With that statement you just proved youself to be the most ignorant clown on AICN. And that's a deep well my brother!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:17 a.m. CST

    SkinJob69: BFC

    by HoboCode

    Can you perhaps cite yuor supposed three factual errors. That would help: Regardless:<p> Factual error #1: The site identified as the Rocky Flats nuke weapons plant, NW of Denver, is not Rocky Flats.<p> Oh boohoo. I can't verify if this is accurate or not but I can verify what Moore says about Rocky Flats in the film, whether the pictures he showed were a mistake or not. Moore says Rocky Flats "is the largest plutonium weapon making factory in the world, and now a massive radioactive dump" which was true at the time the film was made. <p> Factual error #2: Moore states when talking about Canada that ,"13 % of the country is Non-White, so the Canadians are pretty much like us". He uses that figure while trying to figure why the deaths caused with guns is so high inthe US compared to other countries. Problem is the US, as of the last census (2000), was nearly 25% "Non-White". Now 13 and 25 percent don't seem that far away but not only is the US percentage almost double Canada's "non-White" population, but that 25% equates to over 70 million people in the US over two times the entire population of Canada (which as of their last census was 32 million).<p> I don't see a lie. He said "pretty much like us." Hardly a measurable figure and trivial anyway.<p> Factual error #3: After the shooting of Kayla Rolland at Mt. Morris, MI, just north of Flint, Michael Moore says "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, [NRA President] Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally" When in fact Heston's speech was given at a "get out the vote" rally in Flint, which was held when elections rolled by some eight months after the shooting (Feb 29 vs Oct 17) In fact, then-presidential candidate George W. Bush, then Vice-President Al Gore, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, and Moore himself all spoke at the rally. <p> Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly what was recounted in the film. From the end of the narration setting up Heston's speech in Denver, with Moore's words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered there in Denver, just 10 days after the Columbine tragedy. Heston devotes the entire speech to challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the NRA "don't come here." You can read the transcript.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    Why? Moore isn't Cuban.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Really, doctor?

    by OBSD

    "If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so."- Ronald Reagan

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:30 a.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    So Kopel is "another psychotic libertarian who claims to have Democratic values but contributes to the National Review and works for a conservative think tank"... And your credentials might be...? Nonetheless, you responded as I expected, with a semantic argument. ...sigh...

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:35 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    EXACTLY...This person of course would be a BIGOTED ASSHOLE...but THAT is the price of liberty. HIS house, HIS business. He can do what he wants. <p> We are all free to be the best or worst we can be and will reap the consequences as such.<p> It may be a rather nuanced view or too subtle for you to grasp. With liberty comes great responsibilty

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    The arc of Tony Stark's story was his transformation from a pro-war weapons manufacturer to someone who wanted to get rid of weapons manufacture altogether (which was how he made his first enemy), after witnessing the battlefield deaths of soldiers firsthand. <p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:40 a.m. CST

    I love neoconservatives

    by Klytus_I.m_Bored

    They have this marvelous ability to find one (sometimes) little flaw in someone's argument in order to attack everything about the argument, including the ideas underpinning it. For example, neocons (who wouldn't want universal healthcare no matter WHAT argument you put in front of them) use the admittedly false arguments Moore makes about the Cuban healthcare system in Sicko to shoot down the ENTIRE movie and ALL of its arguments. I agree that his Cuba segment was sentimental bullshit but does that really mean that all arguments about how fucked the US health system is and how the US would do well to at least CONSIDER alternatives to what we have are incorrect. You can't even raise certain issues with these people. It's truly amazing. And no I'm not voting for Obama, I'm voting for Nader. Fuck Obama. AND it should be noted that REAL conservatives who counsel for fiscal responsibility and small government have some very good arguments and should be considered and worked with. They could provide a very well-needed voice in a rational society - which is something we'll NEVER have with neocons.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:41 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    You know, you never did answer my question about your thoughts on the crazy Rev. Wright. Or did I just miss it?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:49 a.m. CST

    Skinjob69: Roger & Me

    by HoboCode

    It was "suggested"? He was "portrayed"? I have not seen the film in a while but a suggestion, in any form, is not a lie or a factual inaccuracy, but somethign entirely subjective.<p> Regarding the Smith interview, however, the confrontation that MD cites was not recorded by Moore for the film but by someone else, and before Moore turned to filmmaking. MD also claimed that Moore conducted an interview with Smith in the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York in January 1988 but Smith himself said in a 1990 interview with the LA Times that "I've never stayed at the Waldorf." And how come GM (or MD for that matter) didn't expose Moore at the time and provide video of that interview if it existed? Baseless accusation.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:53 a.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    A semantic argument? That's what Kopel's "deceits" are in the first place, and I provide a link that goes through his "deceits" one by one andy provides actual facts. That's semantics? Fuck off.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:53 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    What was the question?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:58 a.m. CST


    by Klytus_I.m_Bored

    Please read my previous post. You're fighting a losing battle, my friend. Facts can't change "magical thinking." But cheers to you for trying.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:58 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    I asked what your thoughts were on the Rev Wright. Considering you were taking Palins crazy religious connections into such heavy scrutiny...I wondered what you thought about Obama's crazy preacher of 20 years.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:59 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Individual property owners are free to discriminate (refuse to sell to someone on any discriminatory basis) as long as they do not overtly state the reason, and do not advertise their property citing those reasons. All they have to do is keep silent on their real reasons. I don't really have an argument on that because I don't want to get into controlling people's thoughts, as long as they're not overtly harming someone else. <p> However, this is not the case if the owner sells or rents with the services of a real estate agent - there, the rules governing discrimination are concrete and stringent - as they should be.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:02 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    You don't need to cite Moore's film to argue against Universal Health Care...there's plenty of reasons already available.<p> Like someone once said..."You think ealth care is expensive now?...Wait unitl it's 'free'. "<p> Cool name btw.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:08 a.m. CST


    by Klytus_I.m_Bored

    What are some of these arguments? I understand this isn't the forum for really in-depth, cogent analysis, but I'm still curious to hear them if you'd be willing to distill them.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:09 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    So let's extapolate your argument a little here. This involves a little exageration to prove my point, so I hope you can follow it. Apartments don't have to rent and retailers don't have to sell to minorities if they don't want to. Check. So, theoreticly, if every homeowner decided to not rent or sell to minorities tomorrow, there will be 100 hundred million people homeless (and that's lowballing it. If the population according to the last census is 281,000,000, and the amount of minorities in the US is 39%, then 39% of that is 109 million. That figure doesn't include the gay community either, which is probably another 10 million or so. If you want to include discrimination against people with disabilities or women... well, you get the idea.) That's a shitload of homeless people. And that's fair, how exactly? Sometimes you have to legislate decency because people, as a whole, suck. And if we let people do whatever the fuck the wanted to do all of the time...well, actually we did. Have you seen Wall Street lately?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:17 a.m. CST

    Skinjob69: Parting shot

    by HoboCode

    Regarding F911: "A headline from the Pantagraph (a newspaper in Bloomington-Normal, Illinois) dated 19 December 2001, is shown in big letters to read, "Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election." In fact, the only time those words appeared in that newspaper was in a headline over a letter to the editor dated 5 December 2001.<p> Congrats Skinjob! You got me. I have to give you credit. This was a factual inaccuracy. Well that's ONE. It makes no difference to the editorial point of the film whatsoever, and many other newspapers took the stance Moore portrays the Pantagraph did, but it was inaccurate and most likely an unintentional mistake, so let's fry Moore!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:18 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    As a Liberal, but surely not a firebrand Progressive Leftist, I disagree with Rev. Wright in every way. Although I understand the source of his anger, I don't agree with how he directs it. It's not constructive and that's a problem with the Black community. <p> Keep in mind that Wright is a former Marine, and has arguably done more to have his views heard. <p> Barack Obama has repudiated Wright. Throughout Obama's career in Chicago, his goal was to help the poor, and apparently Wright's church was one of the biggest and most influential in the destitute Chicago neighborhoods Obama sought to uplift. His being entrenched in the religious community (Wright's church and Catholic organizations) enabled him to garner their support in helping poor people. <p> Was his participation in Wright's church partly a political move to achieve his goal of helping the poor? That's surely what it seems to be. I think that is justifiable. If Wright laid hands on Obama and talked to God, would I be more than a little freaked? Most assuredly. <p> Who has Sarah Palin ever helped? What communities of poor people has she helped? What make Palin so great? What real achievements can she boast about? <p> It's clear that her religious beliefs inform her policies (reducing aid to teen mothers, charging rape victims for rape kits), and are detrimental to the community. Where earmarks amount to a handful of dollars per capita in Illinois, earmarks in Alaska amount to thousands of dollars per person. <p> There's not been one argument in favor of Palin that has ever stood up to scrutiny. Not one.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:23 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    " Apartments don't have to rent and retailers don't have to sell to minorities if they don't want to." No. INDIVIDUALS don't have to. And they won't broadcast their discrimination either. Owners have the right to refuse service to whomever they choose. <p> Please explain to me and everyone here how you "legislate decency "? Your heading down a slippery slope my friend. <p> And no we don't " let people do whatever the fuck the wanted to do all of the time". We have these things called LAWS and you get in trouble if you violate them.<p> If you want the governmant to FORCE people to do what YOU think is "decent" then your going to have to reconcile everything YOU do and say with that same authority. <p

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:28 a.m. CST

    Plus, Doctor...

    by OBSD

    If I'm an ignorant clown, (thanks for the insult, by the way. Really classes up your argument) then how come the African-American community overwhelmingly votes Democtrat? Not just in this election, but in every one for the last 40 years? By saying that the Republicans are out to help the African-American community (or whatever argument actually was, I couldn't actually see one past the insult), then aren't you implying that the African American community are dupes and suckers by voting against the people who have been their bestest friends (the Republicans, according to you, as far as I can figure from your comment)for the last 40 years? Because if you truly believe that the Republicans give two tugs off of a dead dog's dick for the African-American community, I hereby reliquish my "Most ignorant clown" crown to you, sir.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:33 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Hard to argue on behalf of that. Driving women from their homes and villages because you think they're witches? What the fuck century is Alaska stuck in?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:35 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    That's quite a spin. He was married by Rev Wright and his kids were baptized by him. That's VERY personal...not just politically expiedient. Wright prayed with the Obama family as he launched his White House bid. OH MY GOD!<p> Obama spent 20 years with Wright. This is his mentor. He says he NEVER heard Wright give those kinds of sermons before. You think that's possible??<p> Obama AND his wife shares Wrights views. Being in Wrights church for 20 YEARS was not "a political move to achieve his goal of helping the poor". For someone like yourself who claims to strive to see thru the bullshit, you sure are willfully overlooking the obvious. The only political advantageous move WAS to repudiate Wright...throw him and their 20 yr relationship under the bus in pursuit of the Brass Ring.<p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:37 a.m. CST

    Doctor, you're right.

    by OBSD

    I shouldn't have said "let people do whatever the fuck the wanted to do all of the time". I should have said "Corporations". And if you think that your side doesn't regulate what "decency", your insane. This is coming from the party of banning gay marrige, teaching creationism as a "science" in schools, trying to get flag burners thrown in jail, overturning Roe v. Wade and making sure "Under God" is still in the Pledge of Alegience . People in glass houses, my friend.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:39 a.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    "I don't see a lie. He said 'pretty much like us.'" Tell me that's not a semantic argument.<P>"I don't know what a 'Deceit' is according to Kopel, but it's not a lie or a factual inaccuracy." Tell me that's not a semantic argument. (I'll agree that your "big pro-gun rally vs get-out-the-vote rally" argument isn't semantic, but more of an obfuscation.)

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:39 a.m. CST


    by OBSD

    "regulate what they think is decency" should have been what I typed, but didn't.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:42 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    That's what you choose to believe. I say different. Can you cite any quotes from Obama's long career that are anti-American? Because his actions, and his record, sure speak louder than words. <p> You're alone in seeking to place guilt on Obama by association. <p> What are Palin's accomplishments?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    You may need to drop the "Palin charged for rape kits" argument. Go to

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    Im from Detroit originally. That city has been ROCK SOLID Democratically run for decades now. Look how fucked up that city is. Look at New Orleans. Same thing.<p> Look at good old Chicago right now too. Senator Obama and Dick Durbin's state. NOT ONE REPUBLICAN in charge from Mayor on up...$44 billion state pension fund in debt.WORST in nation. 10.25% sales tax WORST in nation. Chicago school system WORST in nation<p> I ask the same question: "How come the African-American community overwhelmingly votes Democtrat? Not just in this election, but in every one for the last 40 years?"

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:47 a.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    Damned if I can find where you said Obama was anti-American... Where is that quote?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Why should he drop it?

    by Lost Jarv

    The police chief certainly did, and if you think for a second that she didn't know about it, then you're fucking deluded. <P>Also, Fact Check are wrong about both the book banning thing and creationism as well. <P>Republicans seem to be hung up on this false list (and I'm yet to see anyone claim that the list was true), and think the existance of it discounts the central point. It doesn't. <P>And as for their creationism argument- they're arguing semantics.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:54 a.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    A I've now proved, 99% of accusations of Moore's "lies" ARE semantics. I'm just fighting fire with fire. Someone saying that a country is "pretty much like us" when the white pulations differ by 12% is not a "lie," it's a subjective observation. I'm merely pointing out that fact.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    What is this long distinguished record BSB? Really...<p> As for Palin...she has spent a decade as a city council member and mayor of a small town. Don’t underestimate the enormous benefit this provides the governor in the campaign and beyond as she takes up the duties of a vice president. Local government experience means an immersion in the real problems of real people as well as with a myriad of issues from the details of budgets for road maintenance and police and fire forces, to land use, to parks and recreation and school construction issue issues. It also means appearing at thousands of the events that define small town life, from the Rotary to the start of the local fund-raising 5K, and the hiring and firing of staff that has to make the traffic lights work and oversee the trash collection. And mostly it means being able to connect with people who look to the local government to get the big things in small towns right. But by a very large measure these mayors, council members and commissioners are genuine public servants –and they get very smart, very fast about the communities they serve and the real successes and failures that define American life, whether in Wasilla or wherever. Spend a decade doing this work and you will have made tens of thousands of decisions –and votes—and seen the consequences of public policy decisions play out in a large way even though the stage is relatively small. And you will have developed style and insight into people and bureaucracy. And you will be skilled in performing in public. <p> Obama has no such real world every day experience. Fund raisers and voter registration in the Saul Alinsky mode are his forte

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:05 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    You just gave us a totally generic description of any one of thousands of local politicians in this country. <p> We're talking about Sarah Palin. <p> What are her specific accomplishments?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:12 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Palin stood by her sheriff in fighting off the opposition who wanted to drop rape kit charges. It would be an injustice to let Palin off the hook on that - for the good of women across Ameerca.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:22 a.m. CST

    Okay, HoboCode, I'll argue semantics

    by bismarckf

    You say the white population differed by 12%. (I would write "merely 12%" but I don't want to put words in your mouth.) I on the other hand say that Moore's calculations were 100% off. 12% vs 25% is DOUBLE. In other words, it's a terrible comparison.<P>This aside, you seem to me to be the kind of person who considers both sides of a story. Have you seen Michael & Me, Fahrenhype 9/11 or Michael Moore Hates America, just to get a little balance?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:22 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Let's reiterate the fact that Alaskans received thousands of dollars per person in earmarks. The rest of America - a drop in the bucket in comparison. <p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:23 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    It cuts both ways. What specific accomplishments for Obama? The same as thousands of other 'community organizers'?<p> I simply illustate that the duties of even a small town mayor out weigh any 'community organizing or 'get out the vote' programs

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:30 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Way to dodge the question, man. Not even one thing?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:31 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    In the case of this witch doctor...I recently saw the video.<p> As usual I'm not too suprised at your over reaction. can see how this might be disturbing to some. However, it is nothing strange in certain church circles. They are merely praying for her. It seems that the gentleman praying is a visiting pastor or evangelist, and he is offering a prayer for her. Praying like this is typical in some churches. It can be an uncomfortable experience as the person being prayed for may or may not agree with the prayer, but you want to be polite. I see nothing wrong, per se. Just awkward.<p> Should she have jumped up and ran out? When you receive a blessing like that you take it in the spirit that it was intended.<p> She was on stage with him for what?...5-7 minutes? Glad she hasn't been associated with him for 20 years...she would have to throw him under the bus.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:31 a.m. CST

    I don't know, I'm reading that FactCheck article

    by bismarckf

    And it's not saying anything about Palin charging for rape kits. It says the city did, and that the city did that before she became mayor...but damned if I can find anything about Palin being pro-rape-kit-charge. (And to use a semantic argument, since that seems popular on this TB, I seriously doubt that any money changed hands between Palin and any rape victim.)<P>Incidentally, does anyone know what the situation on rape kits in Chicago has been?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Holy crap

    by bismarckf

    I just came across this disturbing article on a very conservative website:

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:36 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I guess you didn't see the June 2008 video of Palin lauding Muthee for talking to God and sending her to the Governorship, and how it was "awesome". Well, now you know. <p> Back to the original point. What are Sarah Palin's political accomplishments?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:36 a.m. CST

    Palin's accomplishments

    by bismarckf

    And I'm only listing this because presumably I'm the only one who knows how to google "Palin accomplishments"... here's a website that lists some of her accomplishments. And because I'm all about fairness and balance, this page ALSO links to a page of Obama's accomplishments:

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:36 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    I listed half a dozen everyday real concerns that someone like you from a "real" city prabably takes for granted.<p> And you? Did I miss the roster of Obamas achievements?<p> And which is worse: Wanting to overturn Roe v. Wade and RETURN the question of abotion back to the states for the people to VOTE on?...OR... Voting AGAINST a bill to NOT KILL babies who somehow make it out of the womb and survive botched abortiions? That's just a freak show man!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:39 a.m. CST

    Oh I see BSB

    by DoctorWho?

    Palin said the experience was "awesome".<p> Well that cinches it: Devil worshiping whore. Glad you cleared that up for me.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:41 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Okay, I'll let you off the hook this time. Don't say I never did you no favors.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:45 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Why are you resorting to wild misleading hyperbole? Are you a McCain lobbyist? <p> It's a documented fact that Muthee drove a woman from her village by accusing her of being a witch, and turning the village against her. <p> You support that? What's wrong with you?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Obama's accomplishments

    by bismarckf

    I'll start the list with "voting 'present' 129 times." Say what you will, but that's no mean feat, and it's something he should be proud of.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:54 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:56 a.m. CST

    No I don't support that

    by DoctorWho?

    And he's not running for vice president either.<p> Now, if she befriended him and was mentored by him for say 20 years or so...then I could see her judgement was not sound and that she associated with less than desireable people.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 11:58 a.m. CST

    BSB-Palin/Obama's accomplishments.

    by DoctorWho?

    Just click on bimarckf 's links above. There it is bro.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:01 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I don't trust you. You're evil. You're the bad guys.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Obama's accomplishments

    by bismarckf

    #2 Bringing the word "uh" back into the American lexicon.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:06 p.m. CST

    I'm still waiting to find out where

    by bismarckf

    DoctorWho said Obama was anti-American. Link please?

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:21 p.m. CST

    I must get back to work now...

    by bismarckf

    ...but DoctorWho and BringSexyBack, I appreciate the debate, and I sincerely mean that. Next time I'll try to be less snarky, so my apologies for that.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:50 p.m. CST

    As if....

    by Darth Macchio

    ...people voted policy! Sheesh! How many of you have voted federally for members of both parties over the years? I know there are some humans who have but my guess is party affiliation is as traditional as the holidays and your favorite dessert or the side of the bed you sleep on. Yes people change...contemplative, introspective, considerate people who do not come to the table with their minds made up, change. They even vote across party loyalty lines but my guess would be that most people are so passionate about, and so intrinsically identify with, their party that there is practically nothing that would make them consider voting for "them", the opposition. It would be like voting against their own mindset. They might stay home and not vote, to be sure, but to be a lifelong republican/democrat and then vote for "them" because you are unhappy with your party's choice? Very uncommon, at best. Even with complete disregard/distaste with their current party's candidates, I think many would vote their party simply make sure the other team doesn't win.<p>I posted this theory in a nationally syndicated blog where the writer suggested that the primary reason Republicans won't cross party lines to vote for Obama given the current GOP candidates, is that they are simply racists. While I do think there are people who will absolutely vote along racial lines (for and against) I don't think all Republicans fed up with McCain/Palin/neocons who also cannot stomach voting Democratic are doing so only because of racism. He mentioned Alan Keyes and how no one voted for him but that's intra-party and far more worthy of his argument but almost every republican I know would never fucking EVER vote democratic. NEVER EVER. Did i say "NEVER"? NEVER! Anymore than a typical and traditional Democrat would consider voting across party lines.<p>YES, there are those who have...hell they're the ones all the politicians pander to typically but it is by far not the majority...enough to determine the winner, "tip the balance" yes, but not the majority meaning the person you are speaking with is not likely to be someone who would vote for "them". People of course said I was making excuses or "in denial" but I'm sorry, all of my Republican friends say the exact same thing: "Obama wants to tax the shit out of the middle class. He's a socialist, extreme-left liberal who wants to take my hard-earned money and give it to people who haven't earned shit. Some of the people he wants to give my money to aren't even US citizens!!".<p> Granted, that might be them masking their own prejudices or even racist views but I believe they are sincere because they've bought the talking point that ALL Dems are socialists who want to "keep your entire paycheck and dole out a shitty 7% to 9% for you and give the rest to lazy poor people and lazy people in this country illegally". These are the same people who think the entire health-care issue comes down to nothing but greedy lawyers and "ubiquitous" malpractice suits. They think global warming is a socialist coup because Al Gore travels around in a jet instead of in a horse and buggy. And they took Sheryl Crow seriously when she joked that she only uses one square of toilet paper in the crappa. It doesn't make them unmovable loyalist-obsessives but it does mean that their source of news is most of us in here. And if justifies their beliefs and thus their vote. The same thing happens with Dems too, it's a human thing not a right/left thing I think. But a country half filled with racists? I doubt that very much.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Palin accomplishments via Alaskan newspaper...

    by just pillow talk<p> and her accepting gifts...

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:56 p.m. CST


    by OBSD

    The price of Liberty is that some women get to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. It's HER body, HER buisness. She gets to do whatever she wants with it. Don't like abortion? Don't have one!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:57 p.m. CST

    No snark detected bismarckf

    by DoctorWho?

    Plus, a little snark/sarcasm is welcome (and funny) over the purple faced, intolerant rage and hyperbole that usually permeates the boards here.<p> Later.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 12:58 p.m. CST

    I misread your statements.

    by OBSD

    You still suck a bag of dicks.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Obama accomplishments...take it for what you will...

    by just pillow talk

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    liberty is when people get to VOTE on their laws not have them decided by the courts. <p> Why be opposed to the PEOPLE of each state voting on wheteher to ban abortion? In California abortion is actually a right written into their state constitution.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:15 p.m. CST

    the USSR will nuke the shit out of you before this gets a sequel

    by ironic_name

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:18 p.m. CST

    I call shananigans BSB

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    Tony Stark went from a weapons dealer to a WEAPON. He never really changed, he just changed tactics. He went from supplying weapons to making preemptive strikes himself.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Palin's accomplishments

    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    I don't care what her experience or accomplishments are, I wouldn't want someone who thinks science (RE: evolution) is a lie helping make decisions for my (or anyone else's) country. I would take an educated and reasonable, but less experienced, person over an "experienced" person who believes carbon-dating is part of the "liberal agenda" and that human civilizations co-existed with dinosours for centuries.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 2:08 p.m. CST

    The Trojan Horse, you see,

    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    was actually a stuffed T-Rex, that little detail just got changed in the translations. And the Romans didn't have Gladiators fight tigers, they had them fight Velociraptors. . . Now that I think about it, I like Palin's version of history better.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 2:20 p.m. CST


    by just pillow talk

    Palin's real accomplishments:<p>"As for that VP talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?" --Sarah Palin, interview with CNBC's "Kudlow & Co", July 2008<p>"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It’s Alaska. It's just right over the border." --Sarah Palin, explaining why Alaska's proximity to Russia gives her foreign policy experience, interview with CBS's Katie Couric, Sept. 24, 2008<p>"I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you." --Sarah Palin, asked by Katie Couric to cite specific examples of how John McCain has pushed for more regulation in his 26 years in the Senate, CBS interview, Sept. 24, 2008<p>"I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq." –Sarah Palin, interview with Alaska Business Monthly, March 2007<p>"I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that." –Sarah Palin, on the $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state, speaking to students the Wasilla Assembly of God, June 2008<p>"I watched with the volume all the way down. I thought it was hilarious. I thought she was spot on. ... It was hilarious. Again, didn't hear a word she said, but the visual, spot on." --Sarah Palin, on Tina Fey's "SNL" skit interview on FOX News's "Hannity & Colmes," Sept. 17, 2008

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 2:21 p.m. CST

    McCain's accomplishments

    by just pillow talk

    Not looking at the person you are debating.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 2:50 p.m. CST

    Here's some for ya Pillow

    by DoctorWho?

    “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12. <p> “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.” <p> On Tranlators:“We only have a certain number of them and if they are all in Iraq, then it’s harder for us to use them in Afghanistan.” The real reason it’s “harder for us to use them” in Afghanistan: Iraqis speak Arabic or Kurdish. The Afghanis speak Pashto, Farsi, or other non-Arabic languages. GRANTED: Palin wouldn't know this either. But then again, she's not running for president.<p> Over the weekend in Oregon, Obama pleaded ignorance of the decades-old, multi-billion-dollar massive Hanford nuclear waste clean-up: “Here’s something that you will rarely hear from a politician, and that is that I’m not familiar with the Hanford, uuuuhh, site, so I don’t know exactly what’s going on there. (Applause.) Now, having said that, I promise you I’ll learn about it by the time I leave here on the ride back to the airport.” <p> "The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a TYPICAL WHITE PERSON, who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society." TYPICAL WHITE PERSON?? I like you Obama, but go fuck yourself with that nonsense.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Here's some for ya Doc

    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    Palin: "I believe we have a creator; and many THEORIES of evolution" on teaching creationism alongside evolution in public schools: "teach both. Don't be afraid of information" Misstatement of numbers of states or death tolls by Obama is nothing compared to these statements. Obama's are most likely accidental errors in speech or comments not thoroughly thought out beforehand, while Palin's comments are statements that inform us that her basis for judgement and reason is horribly off-base and incongruent with historical accuracy or scientific fact.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:32 p.m. CST

    You're mistaken

    by DoctorWho?

    Religious belief is not based on scientific fact or historical accuracy. It's based on FAITH.<p> Don't get me wrong...I don't buy into creationism at all. I'm just not scared of someone who is. What are you afraid of? That her OPINION is that both should be taught in school? Allow me to calm the hysterics out there: THERE'S NO WAY SHE COULD MAKE THAT A REALITY EVEN IF SHE WANTED TO. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN AMILLION YEARS. <p> Shhesh...the leaps of logic you guys make from one quote all the way to living under a brutal, tyranical thoecracy is amazing.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:34 p.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    Where did you get tour TB name? A movie? It sounds vaguely familliar

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:46 p.m. CST


    by chipps

    at first i didn't really care. You set a challenge and off the top of my head i remembered watching a clip in which moore was intellectually dishonest. It didn't worry me because as usual he was making a point that i agree with in an amusing way. I thought your challenge was real, but it wasn't it was a rhetorical challenge. Because my answer didn't conform with your view of st michael or your attempts to lionise him you blew off my answer saying 'like it fucking matters' before reissuing your challenge to a different group of people. You main point (though really you didn't have any point) was that he didn't know he wasn't speaking the truth. Considering moore constantly brings up the fact that he went to seminary school in order to train to be a priest i find this hard to believe. Particularly since catholics put a lot of emphasis on learning the difference between their faith and others. Even if he didn't know, we hold journals, politicians and yes documentary makers to a standard where by if they are going to say something they had better check if it is correct first. when you have a team of people at your call specifically to research things not knowing you are lying counts as willful ignorance, which is pretty much the same thing. since blowing me off with 'like it fucking matters' you have ignored me. fine. but i expect that you will keep reissuing the challenge of st michael in order to 'prove' to group after group that everything he says is correct and that whenever it goes unanswered you will appear triumphant. so i will do a similar thing. whenever you issue the challenge i will answer it until such time as you show me that i am somehow wrong. that moore in fact was in some way correct. It is bizarre that i'm in this place. i like his documentaries.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:49 p.m. CST


    by Darth Macchio

    On the federal level? You're probably right...for now. But before you think this ended with Inherit the Wind:<p>Even if I was the most die-hard neo-con conservative, I'd balk at voting for someone who would take a blessing from a "real" witch-hunter, or someone who claims to be one. Hate America if you want, my guess is you only see the negative, even if that is quite a bit in your life...but there IS positive otherwise what the fuck are any of us doing in this TB? But being anointed by a pastor who claims to have hunted down and banished a "witch" in Africa scares me and makes me sad at the same time. It scares me that an adult in the 21st century would hear that statement and think it not completely batshit fucking nuts. It makes me sad to think that apparently it is a big deal in Africa with these small minded misogynist frauds running around and beating women and chasing them out of their homes and probably killing them as well in the 21st century!!! (no, I don't know that for sure).<p>The fact that anyone can condemn Obama for his petulant loud-mouthed preacher and not Palin for her batshit fucking nuts preacher speaks far more than your simple opinions about policy. A guy who hates America is just misinformed or seeing through narrowed eyes. A man who "banishes" witchs is batshit crazy. WITCHCRAFT for the love of edible panties!!! God damn witchcraft! In the freakin 21sst century!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:53 p.m. CST

    Lotharius Needs To Get A Life

    by DangerMan

    The guy wasn't talking about whether Naked Gun was funny but saying most of its jokes are stolen. They make jokes about it on the posters. I keep reading this new movie is ripped off from a cartoon. Go back and watch the Crystal Skull dvd and be in heaven.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:55 p.m. CST


    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    I'm fine with people having personal beliefs. All I'm saying is that to have her specific beliefs requires ignoring history and scientific fact. I wouldn't want someone who is comfortable ignoring history and scientific fact in a position of immense power. Personal beliefs are fine if they don't interfere with the well-being or personal beliefs of others, but in a government position she would, and has, tried to interfere with the well-being of others with her attempts at anti-same-sex-couple and anti-abortion legislation. If she kept her personal beliefs personal I would have no problem with her. all I'm saying. Oh, and my name is from The Big Lebowski

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 3:55 p.m. CST

    If I were an atheist

    by bismarckf

    I might say that Wright is a batshit fucking nuts preacher, too. As it is, I'm not an atheist, but I still say that Wright is batshit fucking nuts.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    This wacko travelling African preacher is NOT her pastor. He was making his way thru Alaska (Don't ask me why) and she just met this guy. I will re post what I said here to save you from scrolling up. Here:<p> can see how this might be disturbing to some. However, it is nothing strange in certain church circles. They are merely praying for her. It seems that the gentleman praying is a visiting pastor or evangelist, and he is offering a prayer for her. Praying like this is typical in some churches. It can be an uncomfortable experience as the person being prayed for may or may not agree with the prayer, but you want to be polite. I see nothing wrong, per se. Just awkward. Should she have jumped up and ran out? When you receive a blessing like that you take it in the spirit that it was intended. She was on stage with him for what?...5-7 minutes? Glad she hasn't been associated with him for 20 years...she would have to throw him under the bus.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Point taken and agreed Bis...

    by Darth Macchio

    Indeed. If you only see the bad then either you're not looking past your own lifetime or you're just blind. that said, someone who claims to be that which we stopped doing or believing in a couple hundred years ago is more scary. Just for the unpredictability factor alone. Watch the Crucible (amazing Day-Lewis as always) but holy shit...and I think it's based on a true story? Even with good intentions, when man takes on the mantle of God, innocents suffer and die. Is history not replete with examples?<p>Personally, I'm not an atheist but anyone talking about the more esoteric aspects of religion and also is in command of the world's most powerful military makes me concerned. I would hope it would also make you concerned. Concerned about the maturity of an adult who claims to believe in witches or keep company with those who claim to battle them. I have friends who condemn America, they're assholes. I don't think I'd want to be friends with someone who thinks we should be hunting down and banishing "witches".<p>I don't think Obama is Wright (who was a Marine) anymore than Palin is Muthee but let's pretend they are; a semi-anti-American petulant president would be horrible, maybe even catastrophic but a "believer in witchcraft" president might get us all killed in their own personal 'end of days'. Neither is going to happen of course....but if I had to answer as honestly as i can I'd say I can understand but completely disagree with anti-American sentiment but I cannot respond to a claim of actually hunting witches as being remotely credible or not superstitious claptrap. It's one thing to claim faith in the is quite another to point to a woman, call her a witch and then attack her in any way, shape, or form.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:21 p.m. CST

    No, he's not her specific Preacher...

    by Darth Macchio

    ...but so much is lumped together and played over and over that if Obama supporters *must* defend and justify his run then maybe you need to do the same with Palin. If this is the way it is, then all bets are off (I think it should be this way no matter what, this is the most important gig in this country after all!). Obama repudiated Wright and gave a rather eloquent speech about Wright's attitude and why such a thing exists. Palin has neither said yay or nay about the Witch-hunter Muthee. I'm not saying it disqualifies her and I get what you're saying about the polite thing. I think you've got a bigger fight trying to pretzel out the logic of the 'foreign policy experience due to geographic proximity' idea than some back-asswards preacher spouting off on nonsense we stopped seeing as valid a long time ago.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:30 p.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    Lebowski, now I remember...but who said it?<p> My take is this: It doesn't matter who is in the White House; a Mormon, a Jew...I will most likely be at odds with their personal beliefs. But our system and constitution safeguard us from any ONE person dictating this stuff. You don't think Obama's personal beliefs don't affect his thinking or choices? It's impossible not to. This country and our laws are all extensions of personal belifs and values. Look at the personal belifs and values of the ass clowns who run the show in Iran. Now THAT'S a clusterfuck.<p> But I digress. I wouldn't balnket both "anti-same-sex-couple and anti-abortion legislation" as being against people's well being. No one is "anti-same-sex-couple"...rather against redefining marriage. And surely you can see a pro life view being a positive one that DOES focus on the well being of an unborn human. They are alive you know.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:35 p.m. CST

    Going back to work

    by bismarckf

    but once again, thanks for the debate. Darth Macchio, I maybe disagree with you on some aspects, but I respect your opinion. DoctorWho, you make some great points.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:36 p.m. CST


    by bismarckf

    John Goodman was the one who kept telling Steve Buscemi to "shut the fuck up, Donnie"

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 4:39 p.m. CST

    Believe me Donnie...

    by DoctorWho?

    In Africa, these guys are EVERYWHERE and they take it real serious. Casting out demons, casting spells etc. I have a friend who's been there and he said you would not believe the level of superstition there.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 5:03 p.m. CST


    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    I believe her attempted bill to not allow homosexuals the healthcare benefits provided by the State that are available to everyone else is against their well-being. And I believe that forcing a young teen to have their child even if the pregnancy may be disasterous to their health or to their options in life from there on is against their well-being, as is forcing a rape victim to have the child of their attacker and raise it. These are extreme examples, I know, but still examples that Palin fully stands behind. I know there are two almost equally populated sides to the homosexual rights debate and the abortion debate that are never going to agree, so some say how can you say which is right in terms of the law, but the pro-gay-rights and pro-choice sides give the public freedom and choice. If the pro-choice/pro-gay-rights people had their way, you can still choose not to have an abortion or not to engage in a relationship with someone of the same sex (not that its a choice), but if the other side of the debate had their way, there would be no choice allowed, and it would be limiting our freedoms.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 5:24 p.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    Gays have the exact same rights we do. I can't marry anyone of the same sex either.<p> And no one is banning people from living a free fullfilling life and engaging in relationships with any sex they choose. But it comes to the very specific case of REDIFINING marriage (which has NEVER been done in ANY civilization EVER) that becomes contentious. How about letting men have 2 or 3 wives. Or let a man marry his sister. Why not if they truly LOVE each other? Who are we to say? These a perfect examples of redifining marriage too. If it ain't broke don't fix it.<p> And don't oversimplify these abortion issues. This isn't th 1800's when there was good possibilty of complications during child birth. That percentage is virtually nil.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Oh and...

    by DoctorWho?

    This bill "to not allow homosexuals the healthcare benefits provided by the State that are available to everyone else" I call bullshit on that one. Purely unconstitional. I bet it was a bill restricting benefits ABOVE AND BEYOND what eveyone else gets based on sexual orientation. Who knows.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 6:09 p.m. CST

    DoctorWho? does it affect you

    by bacci40

    if same sex people get married? and if you cant see the difference between same sex marriage and polygamy, then you have your eyes tightly for abortion, it is a religious and moral issue...there are cultures that will not assist a dying newborn, because they do not believe the soul has entered the body yet...who is to say they are for this looks like shit...and it will bomb in the theaters, cuz the demo they are looking to grab, doesnt give shit one about politics

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 6:19 p.m. CST


    by chipps

    not to pick a fight, but what is the essential argument in favor of same sex marriage? I would have said that if you have two grown adults capable of making their own decisions about their love lives. who are we to stand in their way. If they love each other and are able to make a free choice, why should we be against that. I lived in a muslim country, and have read numerous articles by women who support polygamy. now i would agree that in some countries (and in parts of america) the women have no choice. But what of a woman that does have a choice (where i lived the wife had to agree and was involved in choosing the second wife). wouldn't it essentially be the same argument. If all parties are adults and can choose, who are we to stand in the way? what about polyandry (a women with several husbands) would you be against that? I'm not necessarily in favour of polygamy i just want to know which arguments that favour same sex marriages don't also favour polygamy or polyandry.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 6:26 p.m. CST

    oh and this is clearly wrong

    by chipps

    'But it comes to the very specific case of REDIFINING marriage (which has NEVER been done in ANY civilization EVER)'<p>it certainly has been done. plenty of societies have allowed marriage between siblings (ancient egyptians) and plenty have gone back and forth between polygamy and monogamy. Hell, the old testament allows polygamy.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:20 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Classiest ads ever on this site.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:29 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Disturbing. <p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:36 p.m. CST

    i'm telling ya

    by chipps

    he's the manchurian candidate

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:39 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:44 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    at the Des Moines Register, flashing that temper he's been trying keep bottled up for months now. He needed a good slap from one of those women. <p> Videos for all to enjoy ... and yes, he brought up his POW status in a question about healthcare. Surprise, surprise. <p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:45 p.m. CST

    do vote!

    by chipps

    i am working on a doco of my i was just writing this (i was having some beers though and it is very rough)<p>Please, lets be left wing. The rise of the left in the first world was both a reaction to, and an integral part of greatest increase in prosperity the world has ever seen. There is a massive link between our economic prosperity and free education and free health care, there is a massive link between our ability to secure our boarders against two separate totalitarian threats (three really) in the 20th century and universal suffrage. Healthy people fight better and pay more tax. Smart people fight better and pay more tax. Enfranshed members of society fight like rabid dogs to defend their way of life, and pay more tax. But please, let us remain within the sensible left. The charm of a conspiracy is the seduction into the belief that no matter what you do, a sinister all powerful organisation will prevent you from achieving. This charm is most appealing to those at the low end of society and lead to apathy and hostility toward the system. This apathy, this hostility is something that we in left can not afford. The tools one would use for social change lie in our very hands. Are you are aware that a major reason that the united states is the most right wing western democracy is a combination of the facts that it is one of the few with non compulsory voting and that a vastly greater percentage of the wealthy vote than the poor. This is due simply to apathy and hostility toward the system. It does not liberate you, it holds you back. Rather than say there is nothing that I can do, the powers that be will never allow change, take hold of your government, vote! No one would say that it is not easier to achieve for the rich than for the poor but this is not be against self improvement. It will be harder for you, no doubt, but study, work, invest and you will achieve. The insidiously sinister element of a conspiracy theory is that it playing into the hands of right, of the very people it opposes. It does this by creating an apathy based on impotence. This apathy and feeling of disenfranchisement has pushed the us govt to the right not the left. As soon as an individual realises that it is they thought their own choices who control their fate, they state to make better choices. Stop believing in your own lack of consequence and take hold of your life. You have nothing to lose but your chains.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:51 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Great post. Fantastic. The Republicans will never commit to improving education because they rely on ignorance, for the most part, in their base. You need to move to America.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:53 p.m. CST

    just reread it

    by chipps

    man, it is rough. but seriously, the major reason that your government is to the right of mine is that poor people vote in a smaller percentage than rich people, left wing people vote in a smaller percentage than right wing people. what other possible outcome do you hope for? bsb, the right rubs it's hands together when you say stuff like that.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 8:57 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I think you might like find Ohio appealing to make a new life. Bring your wife and extended family. Or you might like Pennsylvania. Just pick a swing state and get your Aussie asses over here dammit!!!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:02 p.m. CST


    by chipps

    i'm sorry mate and i would never put down an american, but i truly love my home. love is the right word. we assusie don't wear it on our sleeve like you guys did but a lot of my family died in the wars, and i lived overseas for a bit and when i get home, the heart just feels light. truth be told i don't even like people from other states.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:07 p.m. CST


    by chipps

    for the offer though. one of my mates (who has a phd in history, he did it on the shift in the political landscape of the us due to nixon) once said (i think he was quoting someone else) 'america may not do the right thing, but it is the only country that has ever tired' i don't fully agree with that, i think us aussies do pretty good too, but he meant major power, and that is true. you guys do go around the world fucking it up, but you are by far the most rigious dominant power the world has ever know. look at people critising iraq. you would never have seen that in russia, china, rome or whatever. it truly sets you guys apart.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:09 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    for the sake of Ameerca.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:12 p.m. CST

    i'll throw it back at ya

    by chipps

    come out here. 'queensland, beautiful one day, perfect the next' its just starting to get warm so we'll be surfing soon. I'm currently sitting in the sun drinking a 4x

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:14 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    LOL!!!! <p>

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:19 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    I briefly considered moving to New Zealand after watching Lord of the Rings. I'm sure Australia is beautiful - your travelogues look great on my HD TV. <p> Bush tried his best to suppress American protests but goddamn if there aren't some outspoken and determined citizens here taking their rights seriously. <p> And you wouldn't find a forum like the Great Harry Knowles gives us here in China. Those damn commies would've shut Harry down a long time ago for promoting free speech.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:26 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Lady in the back pushes her husband's arm down, and then puts up both hands for Obama. <p> God bless you lady!!!

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:29 p.m. CST

    i'm currently watching farenhype 911

    by chipps

    which is why i'll go back to your links later. on balance it has very rare good points. it has a lot of stuff that no one would argue with, such as the terrorists are evil, there are people who want to destroy america. sadam hated america. ect. previously i took hobocode's challange. this is more out of a sense of intellectual fairness than a disagreement with moore. in any way that they critesise moore, this doco is worse.<p>i went on an army trip to nz at the start of the year. it is very diff to us. big similarities in atitutes, but also huge local rivalries. phyiscally it reminded me of scotland. my country would be most simular to california. but make no mistake it is a hard country, barren over most of it, which is why my country out marches most others. we train in the stifling heat.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:32 p.m. CST


    by chipps

    forgive my jingoism, i'm getting drunk.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:36 p.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Friendly rivalries are fine - nothing jingoistic about that.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:39 p.m. CST

    it is actully shit

    by chipps

    far more intellectually dishonest than moore, but, like a good catholic, i put a lot of effort into giving the other guy a chance to speak, so that my own opinion is not ignorant. plus i'm treading water before i go and watch babonlon ad

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 9:44 p.m. CST

    in fact

    by chipps

    and i'm not picking a fight here, but i am writing a doco, and the main impeus for it was you, who challanged me to watch a bit of alex jones. having previously watched loose change and zeitgeist i wanted set some of their points right. thus the post above about conspiracy theories helping the right by promoting apathy

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:01 p.m. CST

    a major point these guys are making

    by chipps

    is that moore is one sided. see, they too are one sided. one of their major criticisms, is true of themselves. the difference being, they pose as fact checkers and moore is unapologetically partisan. he admits to being one sided. they claim independence.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:34 p.m. CST

    these guys

    by chipps

    their main if only point, which they use to critise moore, is that america was attacked, some people hate america. does anyone disagree with that? i think not. the question, which they don't go into, is what do we do with this infomation? before 911, as a young fella i lived in a muslim country where my parents worked. the topic came up between my father and a women one time. her statement resonates with me, even now, as man in our militia. she said 'you think we want a war with the west? we are not stupid, we know will lose. i have four sons, and if there is a war with the west i will loose them all. the last thing we want is a war with the west' that was in 96. i imagine if dad spoke to her again her opinion would would be different. because a rat in a corner will always fight.

  • Oct. 1, 2008, 10:46 p.m. CST

    now i go and watch babolon ad

    by chipps

    i've heard it's really good.

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 1:31 a.m. CST

    David Zucker's last good film was Baseketball...

    by Paul T. Ryan

    And I still say this will go straight to DVD in just about every other country. That said, will evangelical church groups block-book theatres for this like they just did with Kirk Cameron's Fireproof?

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 3:41 a.m. CST


    by David Cloverfield

    That was the funniest thing I saw today. Thank you

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 3:47 a.m. CST


    by Lost Jarv

    Chipps- you miss one essential point in your excellent do vote post. <P>Apathy is actually a reaction to the lower/ middle classes being disenfranchised. When you feel that your vote makes no difference, and you are cut out from the process as badly as we (in britain- I don't know about America) are- to the extent that you see the same fuckers representing both the right and the left- then the natural reaction is one of "fuck it". <P>APathy is a symptom not the cause of the current failures of democracy. <P>Have you ever seen 4 such piss poor candidates standing in the US elections? I haven't. <P>The sad fact is that it would take something seismic to disrupt the ruling class and get parties in that actually represented what they were supposed to. And we both know this is never going to happen

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 3:58 a.m. CST


    by chipps

    i party agree. i think it is circular

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 6:13 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Let's get Herc to post it in the new TB. It's a good one!

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 9:23 a.m. CST


    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    Actually, redefining marriage has occurred in several european nations and my own country of Canada. And God hasn't smited us yet. In fact all the european countries with legalized gay marriage and Canada seem to be doing much better than the US (not only in terms of the economy but in terms of crime rates, life expectancy, poverty and unemployment rates, etc.) Secondly, comparing homosexual relationship to a polygamist setup is not a fair comparison. I suppose in THEORY I don't have too many technical problems with Polygamy, its just that in actuality, Polygamist sects always subjugate women. Even in the ones where women are shown to have a say in certain things, there is always some element of cult-like brainwashing there. I don't think a polygamist relationship can exist if all parties are of a sound mind and are fully aware of what they want and strive for in a lifelong relationship, there are two many technical and emotional difficulties with a setup of that type and it just doesn't work in reality unless the women are brainwashed and subjugated. That is why I have a problem with Polygamy, and why I believe the moral consensus of north america has a problem with it. Now why I say Polygamy is an unfair comparison is that, as you say, its a "choice" among adults. The fact that its a choice of lifestyle puts it on a completely different playing field. Gay people can no more choose to not be gay than you could choose to stop being attracted to women and start enjoying having intimate sexual relations with other men (I assume you're male, correct me if I'm wrong). Saying that gays have the same rights as us because they are free to enter into a heterosexual relationship is rediculous. If you want to look at it this way: God brought them into this world as homosexuals. God made them with the biological chemistry to be attracted to the same sex. It's impossible for them to go against their nature (or "God's will") just as it is impossible for you to go against yours.

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 9:37 a.m. CST


    by shut_the_fuck_up_Donnie

    All that the gay rights proponents want is equality, no more and no less. They are not asking for additional rights over heterosexuals as you claim, only to be free to be the person that Nature (or God) has made them just as the rest of the population are, and have all the same rights. Saying they have the same rights because they are allowed to have a heterosexual marriage is the same as someone before women's rights to vote saying that women have equal rights because they have the same right to have been born as a man and vote just us men had the same right to be born as a man and vote. The fact is, those women were born as women, and they still deserve the right to vote as women, and those gays were born as gays and they still deserve the right to be married as gays.

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 10:53 a.m. CST

    It just doesn't look funny

    by Gozu

    It's not a political issue. Something's either funny or it's not. Nothing I've seen from this movie looks appealing or thought provoking.

  • Oct. 2, 2008, 11:24 a.m. CST


    by DoctorWho?

    "All that the gay rights proponents want is equality, no more and no less."<p> Thats what we have in the US. Neither I (and yes I am male) nor a gay person can enter into marriage with a member of the same sex. The fact that I wouldn't because I'm a flamming hetrosexual is irrelavent. Our RIGHTS are the SAME.<p> But I do hear where you're coming from. Your arguements are both thoughtful and compassionate. I mean, at first reaction one has to think "Hey, who am I to tell these people THEY can't marry their loved one?" But the idea is no to RESTRICT people from doing something so much as it is to PRESERVE the INSTITUTION of marriage.<p> Is it "fair". No, perhaps not. But life is and never was "fair". The institution of marriage is NOT broken. But some people want to "modify" it to fit THEIR situation. It's the "all about ME" syndrome.<p> I've said it before I'd fight to the death to defend anyones right to love who they choose and yes "some of my best friends are gay"...but redefining a centuries old institution which works fine (even with the best intentions)smacks of narccisism.<p> Some years ago a family was trying to sue the Boy Scouts to permit their daughter to join. It's that kind of vibe.