My brother's never been much of a Prince fan, but he had to tell me how much he loves this song. He started singing it to me over the phone the otha' night. "Yeah, that's the ****!"


edit: and my brother's a republican, by the way. no matter the party, y'all!
[This message was edited Mon Jul 26 17:06:50 2004 by Snap]

chrisslope9 said:

I agree. Although Prince may have to think about the ball-grabbing though.

YES!!!
YES!!!
YES!!!

chrisslope9 said:

babydoll,
I saw Bowling for Columbine. Again, an entertaining film, but one filled with gapping holes in the truth. I'll give you that Mr. Moore is great at entertaining, but as I said before (and I am not the first) anyone who believes every word in his films doesn't get the big joke. He is a political satirist and isn't supposed to be taken as fact. He is pointing out the truth as he sees it, but he isn't presenting the entire story. Did you read the site I mentioned (it is a long list of corrections he has made on the "facts" in F. 911 but well worth the read if you are intellectually curious). Regardless, this is what makes our country great, and as PT Barnum once said (and Michael Moore likes to prove) "There is a sucker born every second".

Hope the light doesn't burn your eyes too much when they get opened. And even if you don't think so, I was once a serious Democrat.

Bsunshine said:

Greetings Bsunshine,
Lay it on us if you will: where is there a "hole" in the Moore's "docupinion", F/911?
I've sworn off the P&R forum of the org, 'cause all the right-wingers over there do nothing but complain about Moore's lying from the first reel to the closing credits. Yet they are consistently unable to deliver one example of a single falsehood. Go figure! So Bsunshine, prove 'em all wrong and show 'em whatchugot! Bring on the M.Moore collection of lies dressed up as satire and entertainment (After all, wasn't Columbine just a gut-buster? Ha ha! Footage of young people with guns commiting random acts of violence! What a sham!)! It's about time the lid was blown off this thing! Let's hear it and remember one thing: in your own words--just like the cereal, cutting and pasting are for kids.

BTW, two enormous thumbs-up to "Mr. Man" as a single and video, definitely.
[This message was edited Tue Jul 27 0:32:33 2004 by emmanuel]

emmanuel said:

Hey E-
Thanks for asking. Mostly I don't care what other people think but I've got a minute or two before I have to run out the door so I'll tell you the ones that bothered me the most:

1-The "trans-Afganistan pipeline that was supposedly the big reason for some of this invasion of that region was never a consideration of Bush's. The plans for the pipeline did exist, but were scrapped back in the late 1990s making it irrelivant. This has been documented in Newsweek as well as many other places.

2-Moore doesn't seem to list all of the countries involved in the coalition (look at the map he leaves out England and several other countries to make it look small).

3-The Florida election: Moore claimed that Gore would have won using any criteria. This is blatently false.


A six-month study that combined research from the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN shows how false this claim is. USA Today summarized it on May 11, 2001:

Who would have won if Al Gore had gotten manual counts he requested in four counties? Answer: George W. Bush."

"Who would have won if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand recount of undervotes, which are ballots that registered no machine-readable vote for president? Answer: Bush, under three of four standards."

"Who would have won if all disputed ballots — including those rejected by machines because they had more than one vote for president — had been recounted by hand? Answer: Bush, under the two most widely used standards; Gore, under the two least used."

It is very misleading to say that Gore would have won all of them. To me it is funny, When Arizona was won by Gore by a little over 200 votes, Bush didn't demand a recount and that was much closer than Florida. The bottom line is that if Gore had won his home state (like just about everyone else had done-including Mondale!), we wouldn't be having this conversation, but the people that knew him best voted against him.

4-Bush Vacations (enjoyed the GoGo's song but again-it was misleading). Bush away at vacation 42%? if you include time at Camp David in meetings and weekends, perhaps, but if you are working (which is what he was doing much of the time at Camp David) then weekends don't really count. If I was to count weekends off, then most of us are on vacation around 29% of the time. If you drive away for the weekend on Friday evening using these calculations, you are pushing 35-40% of the time on vacation. Again, this is misleading.

I could go on and on about Congressional sons being at war (there are 7 in the military including John Ashcroft's son-actually as a percentage, there are more congressmen who have children in the military then the general population), using Condi Rice's quote about connections out of context and incompletely, using quotes from Bush mocking himself ("the have and have more's" quote) at the Al Smith benefit dinner as him being arrogant (Gore gave a speech there too and mocked himselfm Hillary was there, Gulliani was there, etc.), and on and on.

Personally it is your choice to believe Moore or not. I really am not concerned. I just suggest people look it up for yourself.

i respect Moore as an entertainter ($100 mill is nothing to sneeze at! even if you are sneezing gold! hahaha). He is making people talk, but they should probably look into it and check out the facts a little bit before they make up their mind (I say this to people who only watch Fox news as well).

I have issues with Bush as well (damn it I am a lesbian!! By law I have to have issues with him) but fighting a lie with other lies isn't the way to do it. If you have a strong case, then present the truth.

Now this is the wrong forum for this but you asked and I hope I helped.

Thank,
Becky

check out http://www.davekopel.com/...it-911.htm if you are more curious. It is a very good link that presents both sides (including Moore's responses). Some of his stuff is crap or reactionary, but look at all of his links at the bottom (both pro and con 911). They are filled with cool research. He voted for Nader last time so he's got some cred in my book. Again, research everything, trust nothing. Especially if someone is asking for money for their comments! lol
[This message was edited Tue Jul 27 7:29:19 2004 by Bsunshine]
[This message was edited Tue Jul 27 7:54:21 2004 by Bsunshine]