This will be the first movie of his that I will go see:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhydyxRjujU"]YouTube - TRAILER: Michael Moore's 'Capitalism: A Love Story'[/ame]
This is definetley different for ole M&M
Stardust Wrote:This is definetley different for ole M&M
I'm not sure, in theme, this movie sounds that different from Roger and Me.
the problem with moore is he is suppose to be a non-fiction, but all of his movies have exaggerations, distoritions, and flat out lies....they are entertaining and he's good with the power of suggestion, but i mean bowling for columbine fun to watch, but when you actually do the research man...hardly anything is right...F 9/11 has its own issues...heck Roger and me was built on the premise that the CEO wouldn't talk to him only to find out they scheduled 2 appointements, but it was as dramatic unless moore make it look like he's being avoided and they are big bad villains...the only movies of his i havent seen is sicko...i just really think he shouldn't be a called documentarian....he's a political commentator putting his own spin on it like O'Reilly and hannity and Olbermann
Michael Moore is nothing but a propagandist. Anybody who is intent on learning about Marxism should save a few bucks and read The Communist Manifesto for themselves. Moore is a hypocritical capitalist pig who feasts on the ignorance of Americans who do not understand the principles that have made this such a great country.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Michael Moore is nothing but a propagandist. Anybody who is intent on learning about Marxism should save a few bucks and read The Communist Manifesto for themselves. Moore is a hypocritical capitalist pig who feasts on the ignorance of Americans who do not understand the principles that have made this such a great country.
:worthy:
^I don't always agree with Moore, or his documentary making tactics; however, if the argument is that greed run amok is what makes and made America great, I'll have to dissent. Bowing before the golden calf is not a strategy toward greatness. Enron. "Made-off." Tobacco industry (to name a few). Profits above all is not a sustainable economic philosophy.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Michael Moore is nothing but a propagandist. Anybody who is intent on learning about Marxism should save a few bucks and read The Communist Manifesto for themselves. Moore is a hypocritical capitalist pig who feasts on the ignorance of Americans who do not understand the principles that have made this such a great country.
Did you mean to leave out......."and also made him wealthy" ?
I would expect Moore to share the wealth with each and everyone of us.:eyeroll:
thecavemaster Wrote:^I don't always agree with Moore, or his documentary making tactics; however, if the argument is that greed run amok is what makes and made America great, I'll have to dissent. Bowing before the golden calf is not a strategy toward greatness. Enron. "Made-off." Tobacco industry (to name a few). Profits above all is not a sustainable economic philosophy.
This country grew into the most powerful and prosperous nation in the history of the world on the strength of individual and economic liberty (a/k/a capitalism). Michael Moore is a disgusting human being whose greed is as intense as any of the subjects who he targets in his "documentaries."
No system is perfect and some humans will always find ways to exploit the best of systems. Michael Moore prefers to exploit those abuses for profit while ignoring the flaws of communism and socialism, which have failed repeatedly to provide citizens the freedom and high standard of living that capitalism has delivered to most Americans.
Mr.Kimball Wrote:Did you mean to leave out......."and also made him wealthy" ?
That too...:Thumbs:
I would agree that individual initiative rewarded and free markets are vital. However, this does not mean abuses should be viewed as part of the business model, nor that federal regulation of corporate power is unnecessary.
Yes capitalism they way it used to be before they were allowed to run wild with our money however they chose then were able to seemingly loose it only to have the foresight that the American people would bail them out. Then they had the foresight to include legalities that enabled them to reward themselves for their criminal behavior. All at our expense ,What was learned from this do we want this to happen again? No regulations have been imposed on these crooks no changes in the way they do business. So ya I believe the way capitalism is being exercised today definitely needs changed. To maybe capitalism 2.0 This is just one of many points MM makes in the movie...
charliez Wrote:Yes capitalism they way it used to be before they were allowed to run wild with our money however they chose then were able to seemingly loose it only to have the foresight that the American people would bail them out. Then they had the foresight to include legalities that enabled them to reward themselves for their criminal behavior. All at our expense ,What was learned from this do we want this to happen again? No regulations have been imposed on these crooks no changes in the way they do business. So ya I believe the way capitalism is being exercised today definitely needs changed. To maybe capitalism 2.0 This is just one of many points MM makes in the movie...
The revolving door between Goldman Sachs and many of the other Wall Street firms that have benefited from the multi-billion dollar bailouts have nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with cronyism. Nor did the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have anything to do with capitalism. Our current economic situation was caused in large part by the federal government's meddling in the economy by requiring lending to bad credit risks. It is no coincidence that Treasury Secretaries Timothy Geithner, Henry Paulson, and Robert Rubin were all former Goldman Sachs executives and that GS continues to prosper in these difficult economic times.
Don't buy into the liberals' attempts to blame the failure to regulate capitalism enough as the cause for this recession. Reckless lending and the burst of the credit bubble was precipitated by extremely bad government policies and some of the main perpetrators of those policies are still in power and they are (not coincidentally) among the most vocal critics of capitalism.
Michael Moore should have gone after Clinton, Bush, Obama, Dodd, and Barney Frank for their parts in causing this deep recession. Had Moore done so, his movie would have drawn a bipartisan audience. Heck, I might have even reneged on my pledge never to spend a dime to see a Moore movie.
charliez Wrote:Yes capitalism they way it used to be before they were allowed to run wild with our money however they chose then were able to seemingly loose it only to have the foresight that the American people would bail them out. Then they had the foresight to include legalities that enabled them to reward themselves for their criminal behavior. All at our expense ,What was learned from this do we want this to happen again? No regulations have been imposed on these crooks no changes in the way they do business. So ya I believe the way capitalism is being exercised today definitely needs changed. To maybe capitalism 2.0 This is just one of many points MM makes in the movie...
Do we actually need more Regulations or just enforce the ones we have now.
He should be deported to cuba!!!
Michael Moore makes a lot of money because of our Capitalist system, but wants everyone else to fund his lofty ideas. He will not go to Cuba because their Communist government would take his money and spend it how they see fit and, by the way, that is what he wants here, in America. Right? He wants money taken from us so we can fund illegal immigrants health care. He is a firm believer that if you cannot make a living, don't worry, we will give it to you by making everyone equally poor - except Michael Moore, he can leave when he wants because he is rich. Our system may not be perfect but I will take it over anything else the world has to offer - our system has made us the greatest country and envy of the world. We can fix what we need to but we do not need massive 'fundamental' change that he and Obama want - European Socialism.
jetpilot Wrote:This will be the first movie of his that I will go see:
Why, because he isn't cutting Bush apart in this one?
TheRealVille Wrote:Why, because he isn't cutting Bush apart in this one?
No, but thank you very little for asking.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:The revolving door between Goldman Sachs and many of the other Wall Street firms that have benefited from the multi-billion dollar bailouts have nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with cronyism. Nor did the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have anything to do with capitalism. Our current economic situation was caused in large part by the federal government's meddling in the economy by requiring lending to bad credit risks. It is no coincidence that Treasury Secretaries Timothy Geithner, Henry Paulson, and Robert Rubin were all former Goldman Sachs executives and that GS continues to prosper in these difficult economic times.
Don't buy into the liberals' attempts to blame the failure to regulate capitalism enough as the cause for this recession. Reckless lending and the burst of the credit bubble was precipitated by extremely bad government policies and some of the main perpetrators of those policies are still in power and they are (not coincidentally) among the most vocal critics of capitalism.
Michael Moore should have gone after Clinton, Bush, Obama, Dodd, and Barney Frank for their parts in causing this deep recession. Had Moore done so, his movie would have drawn a bipartisan audience. Heck, I might have even reneged on my pledge never to spend a dime to see a Moore movie.
The lack of regulation and the arrangement or removal of regulations by the Bush administration on the lending practices of banks & financial institutes that paved the way for the financial collapse can't be blamed on us. They have their nerve blaming us.lol
charliez Wrote:The lack of regulation and the arrangement or removal of regulations by the Bush administration on the lending practices of banks & financial institutes that paved the way for the financial collapse can't be blamed on us. They have their nerve blaming us.lol
Please try to focus both of your eyes on the eighth word of the last paragraph of my post. (It is the word between "Clinton" and "Obama." Now read that word to the class, "B-U-S-H." Bush's vision of an "ownership society" did nothing to discourage banks from making loans to people who could not repay them, which is why I included him as part of the problem.
However, if you do not believe that Dodd, Frank, and other liberal Democrats who browbeat regulators who came before them for not making more bad loans to high-risk borrowers, then you are simply not familiar with recent history. You might also want to research the party affiliation of the incompetent political hacks that ran Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae into the ground. In the process, you may trip over the fact that at least one of them advised Barack Obama on economic matters during his presidential campaign. FWIW, I do not believe that Franklin Raines, as incompetent has he is, could do a worse job in the White House than its current occupant.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Please try to focus both of your eyes on the eighth word of the last paragraph of my post. (It is the word between "Clinton" and "Obama." Now read that word to the class, "B-U-S-H." Bush's vision of an "ownership society" did nothing to discourage banks from making loans to people who could not repay them, which is why I included him as part of the problem.
However, if you do not believe that Dodd, Frank, and other liberal Democrats who browbeat regulators who came before them for not making more bad loans to high-risk borrowers, then you are simply not familiar with recent history. You might also want to research the party affiliation of the incompetent political hacks that ran Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae into the ground. In the process, you may trip over the fact that at least one of them advised Barack Obama on economic matters during his presidential campaign. FWIW, I do not believe that Franklin Raines, as incompetent has he is, could do a worse job in the White House than its current occupant.
You're serious, right? Or, are you using obvious hyperbole to conclude an otherwise decent argument?
thecavemaster Wrote:You're serious, right? Or, are you using obvious hyperbole to conclude an otherwise decent argument?
Yes I am serious, although I would never vote for Raines either. The president's most important job, even in times of peace, is to serve as commander-in-chief of our military. It has now been more than two months since Obama's own hand-picked general in Afghanistan requested additional troops and Obama says that he is still formulating a strategy for the war. In other words, even if Obama was not working down his domestic enemies list and making a weak economy much worse, he is a total flop at Job One.
Lou Dobbs has been advocating the withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan recently and he makes some very good arguments. Essentially, Dobbs says that our troops deserve to be led by competent generals and by a competent CIC and he asks if we are not in the war to win it, then why are we in it at all? I think that it is a great question that deserves an answer.
Winning the war in Afghanistan and keeping radical Islamists on the defensive is vital to this nation's national security and IMO, it just is not going to happen under the current president.
As for Franklin Raines, I do not know much about him so yes, I would be ready to swap him for Obama today. Maybe Raines would exercise the same poor judgment as Obama and maybe he would also see Americans exercising their First Amendment rights as enemies warranting more attention than the Taliban but I would be willing to roll the dice.
In fact, the only good thing that I can say about Obama's performance so far is that he is not Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, or Robert Byrd. That is a pretty scary lineup. I doubt that this nation has ever had such a weak presidential line of succession in its long history.
Hopefully, the nation will survive four years of Obama and he will be voted out of office in 2012. Obama must have put Biden on the ticket as impeachment insurance. :biggrin:
Before we proceed very much farther are we in agreement that our elected officials in Washington have not as of today put the American peoples interests first & foremost?
I am a registered Dem always have been but its getting harder & harder to tell them apart & its sure a stretch in determining who's on our side up there. I totally agree we are not getting what we voted for. I look at these people more as how they vote & how well they exhibit their understanding that we put them there & we totally expect them to do the right thing for us & our country not themselves & their cronies. Not necessarily their political association. I don't see how anyone could justify handing out billions in a near depression time as we have been in while allowing for the unbridled theft that has occurred through unbelievable bonus's & bailouts in the billions & allowing their practices to continue without restraint or stiffer regulation to keep them in check so this type of thing doesn't happen again. As far as Afghanistan we should either send the troops necessary to keep our soldiers safe & make them victorious or get out. It is reported the people we are supposed to be after are not even in Afghanistan they are in Pakistan. That's were we should be not nation building & to the argument that they will just run back into Afghanistan not if there are none of them left.