The movie just came out. I don't know about you but Moore responded to valid criticisms of his movie with "Have you seen it? No? Then you can't talk about it." even though much of the content of the movie has been public for weeks.

Yes. Much of the content has been public but those are the verifiable facts that the media has come out with. However, there are other parts of the movie, such as specific interviews and some of Moore's conclusions that need to be seen for there to be an informed discussion. For example, recently the media has let everyone know that these flights were able to leave on 9/13. People who have not seen the movie may have come to the conclusion that Moore is mad that we made an exception for these people, however that is not the case; he is mad that bin Laden's family was allowed to leave without being questioned like what happens in murder cases where the accused and their families don't have connections. Almost all people can learn someting new from this movie, whether they agree or not, so you do have to see it to be able to criticize it.

Furethermore, since Moore has consistently been misleading and untruthful in the past, what's to assume he'd change his tune.

Considering that almost all the arguments against Bowling for Columbine have been nitpicky, at best, I would hope Moore would be especially careful to get the facts as true as possible this time and leave no room for the nitpickers. If there are any glaring misleading facts or flat out untruths, watch the movie, find the evidence to the contrary, and get back to us later.

Even if I didn't think Moore was a big, fat, pathetic loser who takes out his own depression on everyone around him with his non-stop torrent of hate speech, I'd still have a hard time believing anyone who was so full of himself that he must weigh 300 pounds.

Just because he's fat doesn't mean he's lying. His physical appearance has nothing to do with whether the facts in this documentary are untrue or misleading.

What else could explain that he so detests the very country where someone like him could become so rich and famous?

If he hated this country, he would simply move to Amsterdam or Canada and spark up a fat doobie. Instead, he cares enough about this country to show a darker side of our government that everyone should see. The drive to make our government better and oust the shitty is much more patriotic than being in denial and allowing it to continue.

There is no doubt in my mind that he is using his "satire" and "mockumentaries" to blur the lines between truth and his warped anti-American political views in order to to sway the ignorant, or more commonly these days, people too angry to bother with facts or reason. Any legitimate points he might make (however few) are far outweighed by his gross manipulation and distortion of facts.

See above about true patriotism and seeing the movie before you can dispute what is presented.

I have one suggestion to Bush's critics: If Bush is so bad, what would you do better? Even his opponent in the presidential race can't answer that question. Stop hating so much and start coming up with answers of your own. I'm so sick of hearing what's wrong with the USA and the current administration with no reasonable alternatives being offered except "Hate the rich!" and "Kowtow to the U.N.!" Let's hear some ideas for a change.

Here's some wacko liberal ideas; we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place and we probably wouldn't have gone to war if the Bush administration hadn't managed to weave such a huge web of lies. Liberals may seem to have no ideas this time, but we do; peace. War can only result from someone's idea to go to war. People and entire countries can stay at peace without anyone saying "Hey, we sure could use some more peace." I am not saying that we should quit fighting terrorism, but we can't win this war with the business ends of assault rifles. We need tougher diplomacy and we need to win the hearts and minds of the people in the Middle East. Otherwise we will just help recruit more terrorists. The war on terrorism is not a battle of Good vs Evil as the Bush administration might have us believe. Muslim extremists are just as backwards and fanatic as Christians were in the Middle Ages, except the middle ages Christian culture is more familiar and has people with white skin so it isn't considered evil. For this war to be over, we need to bring their culture into the 21st century and we cannot do that through military action. However, actually winning the war on terrorism effectively isn't much of a huge priority to the Saudi's or Bush and co. since they stand to make a huge profit in the markets and in political power the longer this war draws out.