It is currently Fri Nov 28, 2014 6:47 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:07 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
DO.g's wrote:
Oh BTW, the message in sicko is an important issue that needs to be addressed. How do you stand on the CHIPS program?


Uh, I'd be willing to bet that Venus hasn't seen Sicko, or any of Moore's movies for that matter.

Let's find out. Venus, in your own words, please tell us about the message in Sicko.

Venus wrote:
Do you not allow opposing views?


From my experience, those who criticize Micheal Moore's movies without seeing them are precisely they type of people who do "not allow opposing views".

For instance:

Venus wrote:
I don't think the movie removed any blinders from anyone. It did nothing more than give the tin foil hat wearing moonbats another reason for us "Bushies" to think they are nuts.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:43 pm 
Offline
Involved
Involved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Posts: 20
Location: California
Michael Kwiatkowski wrote:
You cannot support Bush's war and our troops. It's one or the other, you can't have it both ways. No one is asking you to vote Democrat. No one is forcing you to hear or see the truth. But in the interests of sharing truth you don't care to read, I'll quote a former U.S. president:


Sure I can. Same way the troops can support him too. I'm very sorry to be the bearer of bad news but there plenty of men and women in this war that would disagree with you also. I know....I know....it's hard to believe that you guys might be wrong about a few things but it does happen. :wink:

Loved the quote and I love to read....don't be actin like you know me already/ :D


No shoeless, I did not see any of Michael Moores films nor will I ever. Well, maybe if I could see it for free. There's no way I would pay him a cent. I have however, seen clips and I read a lot so I am not completely clueless. I'm not a believer that 9/11 was an inside job nor do I think GWB had anything directly to do with it. *gasp*


D.O.g - I don't know anything about the CHIP program. Let me look into it and get back to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 5:19 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
Venus wrote:
Sure I can. Same way the troops can support him too. I'm very sorry to be the bearer of bad news but there plenty of men and women in this war that would disagree with you also. I know....I know....it's hard to believe that you guys might be wrong about a few things but it does happen.


Oops!

Military Times wrote:
Down on the war
Poll: More troops unhappy with Bush’s course in Iraq


The American military — once a staunch supporter of President Bush and the Iraq war — has grown in creasingly pessimistic about chances for victory.

For the first time, more troops disapprove of the president’s handling of the war than approve of it. Barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, ac cording to the 2006 Military Times Poll.

When the military was feeling most optimistic about the war — in 2004 — 83 percent of poll re spondents thought success in Iraq was likely. This year, that number has shrunk to 50 percent.

Only 35 percent of the military members polled this year said they approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, while 42 percent said they disapproved. The president’s approval rating among the military is only slight ly higher than for the population as a whole. In 2004, when his popularity peaked, 63 percent of the military approved of Bush’s handling of the war. While ap proval of the president’s war lead ership has slumped, his overall approval remains high among the military.

Just as telling, in this year’s poll only 41 percent of the military said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects the beliefs of the general population today — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll.

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php


Venus wrote:
No shoeless, I did not see any of Michael Moores films nor will I ever. Well, maybe if I could see it for free. There's no way I would pay him a cent. I have however, seen clips and I read a lot so I am not completely clueless. I'm not a believer that 9/11 was an inside job nor do I think GWB had anything directly to do with it. *gasp*


Believe me, I am not one bit surprised that you have never seen one of Moore's movies. What you know about his movies is what you have read from other right-wingers who also have not seen any of his movies.

I asked you to explain to us the message in Sicko, but you did not do so, because you don't know what it is. I see you also have no idea what Fahrenheit 911 was about.

It's too bad you aren't more curious.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:06 pm 
Offline
Involved
Involved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Posts: 20
Location: California
I love that you have such a fine grasp on how to post images. They are very creative and mature. I'll bet you have dozens just stored away for speacial occassions.

I went to your same source and found this:

Quote:
The mail survey, conducted Nov. 14 through Dec. 23, is the third annual effort by the Military Times to measure the opinions of the active-duty military on political and morale issues. The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole; the survey’s respondents are on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population.



I'm sure you overlooked that part....oops

Troops sound off
Military Times Poll finds high morale, but less support for Bush, war effort

Published: January 5, 2006


Approval of the president’s Iraq policy fell 9 percentage points from 2004; a bare majority, 54 percent, now say they view his performance on Iraq as favorable. Support for his overall performance fell 11 points, to 60 percent, among active-duty readers of the Military Times newspapers. Though support both for President Bush and for the war in Iraq remains significantly higher than in the public as a whole, the drop is likely to add further fuel to the heated debate over Iraq policy.

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2005_main.php

Less doesn't mean none...... Try again :wink:

I didn't know this debate about Michael Moore was based souly on his movie SICKO. Yes....you did ask me that specifically and I do believe I said I hadn't seen it. Being the mother of 2 and working 40 hours a week doesn't give me much time to waste on things I have no real interest in. Sorry to disappoint you. I will be the first to say I am no expert on this man and his life story. I would like to know why it is you think Fahrenheit 911 had no connection to what I said. Here's a couple links just incase YOU haven't seen it.


Quote:
It presents a critical look at George W. Bush, his presidency and the War on Terrorism. The documentary has another theme of criticizing the American corporate media for being "cheerleaders" for the war in Iraq, and not providing an accurate and objective analysis of what led to the Iraq invasion and the resulting casualties there.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_911

Quote:
Moore brought up his lingering questions on 9/11, which are a clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11, released some three years ago.


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/ju ... 7Moore.htm

Hmmm....sorry I have no silly cartoons to post to go along with this to better get my point across :cry:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:42 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Posts: 1456
Location: Ct.
Just out of curiosity, you seemed to focus on this which I listed and you put in bold letters.

Quote:
The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole;


Where as it appears you seem to put this next item into a category of neglect, not realizing the implications that it supports.

Quote:
the survey’s respondents are on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population.


In other words, they are wiser and have a better grasp of understanding the situation than those who are restricted in knowledge of the situation and have no idea how the system works.

Gung ho, blind patriotism does NOT mean that one understands what is going on.

As far as this petty battle over Moore goes.....Frankly, I don't give a damn.

Once again. We have bigger things to worry about.

Yet still.....the game goes on.

_________________
CrimsonEagle
The war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:18 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
Venus wrote:
I'm sure you overlooked that part....oops

Troops sound off
Military Times Poll finds high morale, but less support for Bush, war effort

Published: January 5, 2006


Approval of the president’s Iraq policy fell 9 percentage points from 2004; a bare majority, 54 percent, now say they view his performance on Iraq as favorable. Support for his overall performance fell 11 points, to 60 percent, among active-duty readers of the Military Times newspapers. Though support both for President Bush and for the war in Iraq remains significantly higher than in the public as a whole, the drop is likely to add further fuel to the heated debate over Iraq policy.

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2005_main.php

Less doesn't mean none...... Try again :wink:


I'm sure you overlooked the fact that the poll numbers you posted were from a poll taken a full year before the poll numbers I posted.

I'm sure you also overlooked this bit from the much more recent poll.

Military Times wrote:
Published Dec. 29, 2006

Just as telling, in this year’s poll only 41 percent of the military said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects the beliefs of the general population today — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll.


Note that the poll I posted was still rather dated (Dec. 29 2006), as it is an annual poll, but support for Bush's war in the military at the beginning of 2007 was LESS than that the general population. Less doesn't mean more. I'm sure that over the past 8 months, Bush's poll numbers amongst military personnel have continued to decline, but we will have to wait until the end of the year to discover just how far he has fallen in the eyes of our troops.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:10 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 11:46 pm
Posts: 14444
Location: NC
If Venus or anyone else wants to peruse the forums here, particularly the WAR IS HELL forum, she, he, or they will find lots of evidence to back up the statements that have been made in reference to what we know is an escalating call for an end to the war in Iraq from both soldiers and civilians. PLEASE, just do it...search through the posts and threads. Check out the sources and links. Just go back to the beginning of, say... October, 2006 and search forward.

Image

_________________
Image

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."
Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help.
That other party, they work for people who don't need help.
That's all there is to it."

~Harry S. Truman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:46 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:11 am
Posts: 5620
Location: western New York
Quote:
I didn't know this debate about Michael Moore was based souly on his movie SICKO. Yes....you did ask me that specifically and I do believe I said I hadn't seen it. Being the mother of 2 and working 40 hours a week doesn't give me much time to waste on things I have no real interest in. Sorry to disappoint you. I will be the first to say I am no expert on this man and his life story. I would like to know why it is you think Fahrenheit 911 had no connection to what I said. Here's a couple links just incase YOU haven't seen it.


So, mother of 2, when do you follow posting on websites? While you are working? Certainly you couldn't spend your at-home time on silly things like this, right?

_________________
Libertarianism

Libertarianism Makes You Stupid


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:10 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
dori wrote:
Venus wrote:
I didn't know this debate about Michael Moore was based souly on his movie SICKO. Yes....you did ask me that specifically and I do believe I said I hadn't seen it. Being the mother of 2 and working 40 hours a week doesn't give me much time to waste on things I have no real interest in. Sorry to disappoint you. I will be the first to say I am no expert on this man and his life story. I would like to know why it is you think Fahrenheit 911 had no connection to what I said. Here's a couple links just incase YOU haven't seen it.


So, mother of 2, when do you follow posting on websites? While you are working? Certainly you couldn't spend your at-home time on silly things like this, right?


I found it interesting that, as the mother of two children, she had no interest in the health care crisis in the US. Of course, that mind set is typical of most regressive right-wingers on almost any subject that will likely have a dramatic adverse impact upon the lives of their children and grandchildren, such as global warming, pollution, federal debt, globalization, ect. Because the solutions to these problems require difficult choices and/or sacrifice on their part, they choose to remain in denial, or they just don't care.

As far as what she said about Fahrenheit 911:

Venus wrote:
I'm not a believer that 9/11 was an inside job nor do I think GWB had anything directly to do with it. *gasp*


No where in the film did Moore ever suggest that 911 was an inside job or that Bush was directly involved in it. People really should refrain from critiquing movies they haven't seen.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:43 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:11 am
Posts: 5620
Location: western New York
Of all the well off people I know, and I know many, NONE are concerned about subjects that will enhance the lives of their children or grandchildren. What is it about money that blocks the danger receptors in one's brain? The only working receptors seem to be those that have to do with said money.

The SCHIP program discussion was particularly interesting in the House. It is unbelievable that Rs don't want children's health covered and have done everything they can think of to derail the program.

It will be interesting if? when? Bush vetoes it, eh?

As for people on the right watching Michael Moore's films, well, I wouldn't watch any by rightwingers either. But then, I wouldn't be a film critic about those films either.

We do have choices. If one chooses to critique a film one should really watch it first. The other choice is to say nothing.

But that is asking too much, eh?

_________________
Libertarianism

Libertarianism Makes You Stupid


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:57 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
dori wrote:
Of all the well off people I know, and I know many, NONE are concerned about subjects that will enhance the lives of their children or grandchildren. What is it about money that blocks the danger receptors in one's brain? The only working receptors seem to be those that have to do with said money.


It's not just the money (although money does undoubtedly change some people). There are examples of extremely wealthy people who are very altuistic and progressive, Ted Kennedy, Warren Buffet, Patricia Heinz, George Soros, for instance. On the other hand, there are millions of middle class and poor people who have the short-sighted, self-serving mentality of the right-wing regressive. More than the money, I think it is the inability to see past the end of one's nose which is the main factor in the behavior of right-wing regressives.

Image


dori wrote:
The SCHIP program discussion was particularly interesting in the House. It is unbelievable that Rs don't want children's health covered and have done everything they can think of to derail the program.

It will be interesting if? when? Bush vetoes it, eh?


When I told my wife that the House had passed the increase in SCHIP, she said, "It doesn't matter, Bush will just veto it." I replied, "I know, but let him veto health care for little children. We have to keep making him show just what sort of monster he is, so the Republicans will never gain the White House again."

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:54 pm 
Offline
Involved
Involved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Posts: 20
Location: California
CrimsonEagle wrote:
Just out of curiosity, you seemed to focus on this which I listed and you put in bold letters.

Quote:
The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole;


Where as it appears you seem to put this next item into a category of neglect, not realizing the implications that it supports.

Quote:
the survey’s respondents are on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population.


In other words, they are wiser and have a better grasp of understanding the situation than those who are restricted in knowledge of the situation and have no idea how the system works.


I understand your point and I also understand that what I quoted from was an older edition of the same magazine. My point being that this survey isn't reflective of what 100% of our troops are feeling. It isn't like they went out and asked each one. They surveyed (by MAIL) those that subscribe to this magazine. It could be 1000 people or it could be 10. The source itself explained that it doesn't reflect the military as a whole. Having said that, this source is also not reflective of what has happened since we sent in more troops. Please don't get me wrong....I highly respect the older and the wiser. It was the source I was questioning.

Not to be a butt kisser :D ok...maybe a little.... I appreciate you responding to me in the manner you do. I'm not the enemy....I just have some differing opinions then most here. That's what attracted me to the site and I hope to hang in there with you guys.

Dori wrote:
So, mother of 2, when do you follow posting on websites? While you are working? Certainly you couldn't spend your at-home time on silly things like this, right?



Yeah....when I am at work mostly. Shhhh don't tell my boss. I spend the majority of my at home time with my kids and husband. After the dust settles I have my own website to work on also.

I must admit that I bit off more then I could chew when I entered into this forum and especially this topic. I'll restrain myself to only those topics I am an expert in :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:32 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
The main thing you did is remained honest. There is nothing one can do to anyone who remains honest and truthful here, so keep up the good work.

As for dropping in where you're less comfortable or knowledgeable- that is how we learn. Someone said this quote today- "Tell people something they know already and they'll thank you for it. Tell them something new and they'll hate you for it". Around here we say a lot of things people don't want to hear, but that is because we are more likely to delve deeper than the surface. Treading water and thinking all is well belies the problems lurking below the surface. We're not surface thinkers here and some of us aren't afraid to tempt drowning to learn what lies at the deepest points.

Just the way we developed. That is why something like Michael Moore isn't a threat to us, because he is willing to take us with him and show us what we're missing. I really think you should get his films and sit back and watch. My little quote states that you have to look at both sides of an issue. If you really want to discuss something, you must know both sides of the issue to make your points. It's how we stay informed here. You won't hear the things we talk of on your CorpoMedia box. Surely you're not afraid of learning something new that may change your life forever are you? :shock: If you don't find it important enough then you can really tell people the reasons why.

Anyway, please feel free to venture where you feel more comfortable and lets see what you know! 8)

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:35 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 11:46 pm
Posts: 14444
Location: NC
Quote:
I must admit that I bit off more then I could chew when I entered into this forum and especially this topic.


Thank you, Venus. I can't remember a time during my tenure at TVNL that a person leaning toward the right of center has come here and done what you've just done....DISCUSSED a controversial topic with more liberal members without leaving in a huff, flinging back insults, and ultimately admitting that perhaps you weren't quite as knowledgable as you thought you were.

Good show...and I look forward to more discussions with you. Were we gentle enough?

_________________
Image

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."
Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help.
That other party, they work for people who don't need help.
That's all there is to it."

~Harry S. Truman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:15 am 
Offline
Involved
Involved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Posts: 20
Location: California
Thank you both...it means a lot. I didn't come here to push my views or to tell you how wrong I think you are. I just love a good debate and to me its nothing personal until it gets personal. We all have to be a part of this country no matter who is running it. Whether there really are puppet masters or one party decides all. I'm just in it to understand both sides. Again, I thank you for not throwing my ass out. :D


and yes Catherine....so far so good !!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group