
Journal elmegil's Journal: This says it all about F9/11 10
Why hold a self-proclaimed polemicist to a higher standard than you hold the president of the United States?
Why, indeed?
Why, indeed?
There's no such thing as a free lunch. -- Milton Friendman
Polemicist? (Score:2)
Polemicist? That's just someone who argues with another person's position. That's like saying "Why hold anyone who argues with the president's position higher than the president himself?"
Well, whether it's true of Moore or not, because that person could be right.
Re:Polemicist? (Score:1)
Re:Polemicist? (Score:2)
Sounds more like I shouldn't post when I've only been out of bed for half an hour..... eesh. I completely misread the entire thing.
At any rate, they ought to be held to the same standard of truth. Just because he's not the president doesn't mean he can't influence people, and you can't go around slinging nonsense just because you're not an elected official. The fact is that a lot of people have put a lot of (mis-placed, IMHO) trust in Moore, so if he's leading people astray with tricky editing and half tru
Re:Polemicist? (Score:2)
No real disagreement here :-). But many on the right are not holding them to the same standard of truth.
Nah, I don't like it (Score:1)
Re:Nah, I don't like it (Score:2)
I'm no fan of Moore (Score:2)
Muckracker might be a better term, or propagandist, or rabble-rouser, or demagogue. He certainly has a record of abusing the truth. But whatever the term for what Michael Moore is and does, we have every reason to expect less truthfulness from him than we do from the President when it comes to matters vital to the natiion's future.
Moore has no duty to the people beyond the duties of any citizen. No one elected him. He's just some guy who has arranged h
Re:I'm no fan of Moore (Score:2)
Indeed (Score:2)
It is indeed quite amusing to see who is ranting about Moore's lies, exaggerations, and insinuations, after watching the same people vigorously defend Dubya for the exact same sorts of acts.
When the President lies to the people, it is obviously a much bigger deal than when
What's the big deal? (Score:2, Interesting)
... or is it because the news media in the United States were so busy falling over themselves in their rush to self-censor, as Moore points out (which was also old news :-(
Don't get me wrong - I think it's worth watching. I just think its unfortunate that this is considered "newsworthy" in the US while it's old hat in the rest of the world.