Shots Across the Bow

A Reality Based Blog

 
Tuesday, August 31, 2004

Convention Issues

I listened to MSNBC today for 8 hours while driving to South Carolina to pick up my son's car, and I have a few comments:

  1. John McCain's diss of Michael Moore
    The talking heads thought this was a mistake because it gave Michael Moore some free publicity, and put F9/11 back on the map. What they didn't consider is that by doing so, McCain tied Moore to the neck of John Kerry, and I'm willing to bet that swing voters will find Moore's schlockumentary off-putting to say the least.

  2. Guiliani's attack on Kerry.
    Unbelievably, the talking heads claimed that this attack was surprising since the Kerry convention followed a policy of no Bush bashing. My jaw nearly bounced off the floor as I recalled the text of Carter, Gore, and Clinton's speeches, all of which were attacks on the President. It was also odd to here them fawning all over Guiliani, nearly coronating him as the heir to Bush. Although, that wouldn't be a bad thing. I like Rudy. When he made that tackle at the end of the Tech game, I was in tears. Wait, wrong Rudy. Oh well, I still like him.

  3. Conservative vs liberal protestors.
    Last time I checked, the protestors in Boston didn't attack any policemen. None were sent to the hospital, and none required 37 stitches after being hit with a beer bottle. It makes me wonder, was the excessive security at the Democratic National Convention caused by concerns on the part of the Democrats that conservative protestors would act like liberals?

  4. More liberal protestors
    Chris Matthews attempted to interview Ben Stein while a group of liberals tried to drown them out with some chanting. Nothing lile a little leftist demonstration of free speech to win over the undecided voters. By all means, do keep it up.

  5. Politicizing 9/11
    The talking heads made a big deal of the Republicans using 9/11 as a large part of the convention, and asked if it was fair to make it a one party issue. After all, after 9/11, we all came together, right? Why can't we still be together?

    The answer here is simple. 9/11 is a valid issue because it is the defining moment of the Bush Presidency. On 9/10, he was a mediocre president, floundering in office, attempting to deal with bitterly angry democrats while trying to define an agenda. On 9/12, his agenda was defined, and the course of his presidency was set. So not only can we discuss 9/11, we must do so. The only reason it has become a single party issue is that, for reasons of their own, the left has run away from it. Democrats want to put it behind us, as Andrea ???(MSNBC floor reporter) said today, why bring it back up when we were starting to forget it.

    For me, and millions of other people, that's precisely the reason to bring it back up. We cannot forget the feelings of that day, ever. If we do, we invite a repeat attack. Unlike the easy rhetoric, the world didn't change on 9/11, but we better have. UNless we want to fight terrorists here, on their terms, we have to be willing to fight them on their turf, but on our terms. President Bush has demonstrated that he understands that cold hard fact; John Kerry has not. He still lives in a 9/10 world, confident that reaction is better than action; that the best defense is a good defense. I don't give a damn about his adventures in Viet Nam or his medals or wounds. Hell, I don't even cxare about his Senate record, voting against nearly every modern weapon system in our arsenal. The fact that he has failed to grasp the necessity for a fundamental change in our defensive policy is reason enough to keep him from being Commander in Chief.

    And that's why 9/11 is a legitimate issue.


BY the way, this is liable to become the standard posting pattern around here. A long, researched and linked piece on Mondays, then hit or miss bits during the week as I find the time.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (1) TrackbacksPermalink


Sunday, August 29, 2004

SKB Hits the Big Time!

SKBubba is now blogging the Republican National Convention for the Knoxville News Sentinel.

Of course, he's not actually AT the convention, but what does that matter; you don't actually have to be there when you're just going to make up stuff anyway

And when he isn't emulating Jayson Blair, he channels Michael Moore, specializing in vague innuendo and deceptive half truth.

I'd like them to explain why, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the middle class's share of federal taxes has increased while wealthy pay less.


Note very carefully the construction of Bubba's sentence. It sounds like he said that the middle class is paying more and the wealthy less, but he isn't. That would be an easy target. He's a bit more subtle than that; he's compared the middle class share of the tax burden with the actaul amount the wealthy pay, and while it creates the impression noted above, these are actually two very different things. As usual, Bubba only tells you the part of the story that he wants you to see. Yes, the share of the tax burden the middle class pays did increase, but there's a lot more to the story, like the fact that not only are the wealthy paying less, but so is the middle class, and the lower classes as well. First, unlike Bubba, I'll provide a link to the Washington Post article where this information first came out so you can check the facts for yourself. If I'm spinning, you can call me on it.

First, check out this paragraph:
They point to a different set of numbers within the CBO study that show that the rich are actually paying more in individual federal income taxes. If Social Security, Medicare and other federal levies are excluded, the rich are paying a higher share of income taxes this year than they would have paid with no tax changes, the CBO found. If none of the tax cuts had passed, the top 20 percent would pay 78.4 percent of income taxes this year. Instead, they will pay 82.1 percent. In contrast, the middle-class share of income taxes dropped to 5.4 percent, from 6.4 percent if no tax cuts had passed.


What's this? The rich are actually paying a larger share of the income tax? But how can this be? Bubba said they're paying less! And he wouldn't lie, would he?

No, but he will send you on a snipe hunt if he can manage it. Remember when I said taxes paid and tax share were two different things? You've just seen it demonstrated. Everybody is paying less in taxes under the new tax laws. But the high income tax payers are accounting for a higher portion of total income tax receipts. It has to be one of two things. Either there are more people in the top 20%, or the top 20% is recording more income. In other words, we're creating wealth.

Also this:
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.


What the Post fails to note is that even if not a single Bush tax cut had passed, the tax share of the wealthiest 20% would have fallen to 64%. In other words, almost half the shift in the tax burden would have occurred without a single tax cut. Don't believe me? Look for yourself! The figures the Post used came from this report Check out the change in the tax burden that would have occurred under the tax laws of 2000.

So, now, let's look at the story Bubba ignores. First, we find that the top 20% of income earners pay 63.5% of all taxes, with the top 1% paying 20%. But according to some, they aren't paying their fair share. And they are right of course. They aren't paying their share; they're paying way more. It only gets worse if we look directly at income taxes, since according to the CBO, the top 20% are paying over 82% of all income taxes collected! The reason the tax burden has shifted is not because the wealthy are paying less, and the middle class is paying more, but because other Federal taxes (SS, Medicare, etc) are capped. You can only contribute so much, and so the highest income earners pay a lower effective rate since their contributions are capped.

One more quote from the Washington Post:
For the bottom 20 percent of households, the combined Bush tax cuts averaged $250 each. The middle 20 percent received $1,090, while the top 1 percent garnered $78,460, said Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee who analyzed the report.


Yep, like I said, nearly everybody got a tax cut, but I want to point out a subtle bait and switch in the Post article. All the numbers to this point come directly from the CBO publication. But these numbers don't. I searched the whole thing repeatedly, until I reread the Post article, and noticed that these numbers come from "Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee." I wonder where they got them, since they aren't sourced in the article? Also, isn't it odd that they are comparing the bottom 20% to the middle 20% to the upper 1%? Why the switch? Could it be to inflate the upper number so as to incite a bit of class envy? Obviously, by narrowing the range to the upper 1%, you're going to elevate the mean, but that's just a coincidence, right?

OK, enough. I think I've made my point. A seemingly carelessly tossed off line can conceal more deceptions than a magician's top hat, and Bubba is the master magician of East Tennessee.

Fortunately, the Crosswire blog has a representative for the right, who will be able to counter all of Bubba's propaganda, having the advantage of actually being in NYC. WestKnoxMomma (would it kill somebody to be a little creative?) is one of those great rarities, a blogger without an actual blog. As far as I can tell, this will be her first venture in the blogosphere. Here's wishing her lots of luck. She'll need it.

Her response to Bubba's deception as outlined above?
Those are all good things to hear, bubba. Hopefully, Bush will get to them since Kerry didn't.


Yeah, that'll show him.

She follows up with a nice little travelogue about going to NYC with a baby, and complaining about the lack of protests.

She's clearly fighting way above her weight class.

Too bad Michael didn't get Bill Hobbs to cover the other side; that would have been a debate worth following.

Posted by Rich
News • (6) Comments • (1) TrackbacksPermalink


Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Another quick comparison

I just noticed an interesting parallel today between the actions of al Qaeda, and the moonbats on the left.

  • Both seek to control the public through propaganda, lies, and inspiring fear.

    The fascists of al Qaeda claim they are following Islam, that they are fighting a Hoy War against the infidel Americans, who defile the Holy Land by their mere presence. That this is a lie is amply demonstrated by the fact that their bombs, knives, and guns kill far more of their own people than they do the infidel.

    The moonbats on the left do the same; albeit with less bloodshed. Michael Moore is the Baghdad Bob of the left, seeking to control the 'true believers' with a skillful blend of hate, lies, and innuendo. They invoke fear whenever possible; how often have you heard some left winger say something like, "If we don't get rid of Bush now, America is doomed!" And the people whisper 'doomed' like a greek chorus. The Presidential election has been cast by the left as a life and death struggle with the survival of the Republic hanging in the balance.
  • Both try to stifle any opposition, using all means at their disposal to stamp out any dissent.

    al Qaeda uses the bomb, the gun, and the knife (along with the occasional paper shredder) to silence the opposition.

    The left uses the lawsuit, or the power of a compliant media to kill any information that threatens them.

  • Both believe the common man is inferior; they believe that people are little more than sheep, who must be led to salvation by those who are smarter.

    This one needs no explanation as it is evident in every word that comes from their mouths, whether it be Osama bin Laden, or Michael Moore. In fact, a case could be made that Osama has more respect for his people than Michael Moore has for Americans.

  • Both rely on a foreign money man to fund their attacks.

    al Qaeda has Osama bin Laden. The lefties have Osama bin Soros, who has pledged over 20 million dollars of his own money to defeat George Bush in November.


Posted by Rich
Politics • (17) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Osama Bin Soros






George SorosOsama Bin Laden
Foreigner who hates President BushForeigner who hates George Bush
Spends millions of his own money to fund attacks on the President, designed to put him out of officeSpends millions of his own money to fund attacks on the President, designed to put him out of office
Wants the US out of IraqWants the US out of Iraq
Wants the US out of the Middle EastWants the US out of the Middle East


Spooky, isn't it?

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


A quick comparison

  • Liberal 527's outspend conservative 527's 10 to 1 or better, but Kerry tries to silence the Swift Boat vets because they are unfair?
  • Bush's response to the furor over his Guard service was to release every record. Kerry has refused to do so.
  • Kerry continues to question the President's Guard service, leaving on his campaign site a list of questions cribbed directly from Michael Moore and MoveOn.org. President Bush has said that he doesn't question Mr. Kerry's service, and stated flat out that Kerry should be "proud" of his service.
  • Kerry continues to ask these questions on his website even though every piece of evidence available indicates that President Bush served his time in the Guard, completing his required duty. Mr. Kerry's service, on the other hand, seems to stand up to scrutiny less well. As each claim from the Swift Boat Vets is examined, corroborating ecvidence, often from Kerry himself, turns up.
  • Kerry has remained silent as liberal 527s attacked every facet of the President's person, including calling him a drunk, a fool, a liar, incompetent, and comparing him to Hitler. President Bush has denounced all 527 actions, including the SwiftBoat Vets, and called on Mr. Kerry to do the same.
  • Not once did we hear of MoveOn.org or Michael Moore, or any of the other authors of attacks on President Bush being harrassed with threats and lawsuits. Mr. Kerry has been very quick to threaten legal action against the Swift Boat Vets, and has called for removing their books from the stores.


Here's a simple question for you: Which candidate is acting more like a President?

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Thursday, August 19, 2004

Victory!  And a personal note.

As some of you are aware, I was recently laid off from my job. I volunteered for the lay off since the company offered a very generous severance package, one that would allow me to start up my publishing company.

Then, the day before I was laid off, the company informed me that I was ineligible for the severence package, and sent me on my way.

My immediate boss, as well as most of my co-workers did everything they could to try and get the decision reversed with no success.

Basically, I was screwed.

So like any good American would do in similar circumstances, I lawyered up. He suggested we first try to resolve the situation out of court, giving the company one more chance to do the right thing. We also provided them with additional documentation pertaining to the dispute, which gave them a reason to reverse their position.

This morning, I received a check in the mail for the full amount of my severence package. No additional damages or anything like that; just what they owed me.

And I'm happy with that. Some folks tell me I should go to court and try and recover additional damages (legal fees, etc), and I probably could find a hungry lawyer to do just that. But I got what I was owed, and that's enough for me. I started the company anyway, with assistance from my family, and took on a little more debt than I anticipated, but now that I've gotten this check, I'm back to where I planned on being. Yeah, I had to pay for the lawyer, which reduced my net, but I consider that the cost of my mistake, which was not reading the company's policy in its most unfavorable light.

And that, my friends, is the lesson I take from all of this. Corporate policy is written to mean something very specific, but often can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Short of hiring your own attorney to go through every line of corporate policy, your best bet is to interpret any ambigious statement in the way most favorable to the company. Don't assume that it means what you think it means.

I'm particularly susceptible to this mistake, since I'm a technical writer by trade, and I'm used to writing precisely. When I write a procedure, it means one thing, and one thing only; otherwise, equipment can be damaged or people can be injured. The same degree of precision does not apply to corporate policy or procedures.

But now, my bill collectors will be happy, and the wolves can go howl around someone else's door for a few months.

By the way, sorry for the light blogging schedule lately, but I've been editing the next novel to be published by PHD Press. It's called Slither Service, written by Andrew Ian Dodge, and is scheduled for a mid September release.

Posted by Rich
Personal • (6) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Friday, August 13, 2004

Where are the Moderates?

The BBC has this list of Muslim media responses to the battle in Najaf. Take just this one from Egypt:
The foreign interventions are a subjugation of the people's will, a usurpation of their powers, as well as an outlawing of their very existence... The slogans shouted by Anglo-American forces before the attacks on Iraq have changed into the opposite. Freedom has turned into slavery and stability into an enraged volcano.


The rest are very similar, almost uniformly condemning the US and the Iraqi Provisional government.

But what do those actually in Iraq have to say?

Hammurabi

Muqtada Sadr injury is a fabrication by his thugs!

Najaf war is Iranian fight against US/Iraqi forces. Iran determines to win! It should not have given this opportunity. The mistake is the CPA one when they postponed arresting Sadr. It is also the mistake of the Judge (Al-Maliki) who announced the arrest for Sadr publicly. It should have been done without noises! All by all Iran used it and created what is going on now!

British journalist taken hostage in Basrah by unknown thugs may be related to Sadr/Iran Militia!

Imam Ali shrine polluted by the Sadr thugs and converted into a camp for their arms and dirty asses!


The Mesopotamian

Since Thursday night, armed militias and gangster terrorists (calling themselves the Mehdi Army) have been attacking Iraqi Police stations and other public property in the Holy City of Najaf. The fighting and criminal violence continued over Thursday night and for much of Friday. These enemies of a united and peaceful Iraq have been carrying out appalling acts against innocent Iraqis and their property.

It is clear that these people are not from the Holy City of Najaf. Interrogation, by Iraqi Police, of captured fighters is revealing that they are mostly criminals released from prison by the former regime immediately prior to the latest war.

In the face of this attempt to destabilise the country, the Interim Government of Iraq ordered a combined operation involving Iraqi military forces and units from the Multinational Force with the task of regaining control of the city. It is now clear that the operations have been a complete success. Over 1200 criminals have surrendered to Iraqi forces. The Holy City of Najaf is secured.


Iraq at a Glance

And I want you to read this:
My brother is a doctor; he and his colleagues were in the medical center waiting for the driver of the ambulance and another doctor, they waited for them because they had an emergency there…
They kept waiting and waiting….. And suddenly they reached the center but without the car… ‘Where is the ambulance?’ they asked.. the driver replied: ‘Thank God we are alive……AlMahdi militia came across the street carrying RPGs and rifles with that green piece fastened around their heads, we were forced to stop, then one of them shouted ‘get out of the car..we have a duty’, immediately we got out and escaped, we were so frightened………..’


And

He’s like the cancer, if we don’t uproot it, it’ll destroy all our body.


In short, the folks on the ground, those who call Iraq home, want to get rid of Al Sadr and his thugs, and welcome the help of the US in doing so; according to the Beeb, so-called moderate muslims in Egypt, Jordan, and the rest of the Middle East want to get rid of the US, and leave Iraq to the criminals.

How is this moderate?

Posted by Rich
84.5 miles • (6) Comments • (1) TrackbacksPermalink


Thursday, August 05, 2004

Why Are Republicans so Gullible?

They're doing it again.

You'd think they would have learned their lesson with Clinton, but nope, apparently they want to follow the same game plan, even though it failed miserably 8 years ago. Back then, it was Monica; now it's Viet Nam.

Look, John Kerry made his service in Viet Nam the centerpiece of the convention, which makes it a legitimate issue for examination. BUT it certainly doesn't deserve the level of attention the Reps are giving it, as they are making it the centerpiece of their counter campaign.

Whether John Kerry earned or scammed 3 Purple Hearts 30 years ago is much less important to me than what he's done in the last 20 years in the Senate. That's where his weakness is, which is why he's kept it quiet.

In a masterful bit of political jiu jitsu, Kerry has diverted the reps attention to events 30 years old while protecting his real record in the Senate.

And the reps went for it.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Tuesday, August 03, 2004

NO bounce for Kerry

And it's not a big surprise.

We've been told throughout the campaign that dem voters are more energized than ever, more into the campaign, and following politics like they never have before.

If that's truly, it only makes sense that there aren't many left leaning undecideds out there to give Kerry a boost. Those that find Kerry appealing or Bush repulsive have already shifted leftward.

What will be interesting to watch is whether Bush gets any bounce after his convention, or will we find that right leaning undecideds have alsop already shifted right.

So, I'll make a prediction: If the Bush bounce after the RNC is larger than the Kerry bounce, Bush wins. And the precentage of the popular vote will be proportionate to the relateve bounces.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


What is this crap?

Go to Orange on data that's 3 years old?

I don't think so. Ridge better have some current intel revealing that the info has been updated and placed into a more current scenario, or he , along with Bush, just lost a ton of credibility.

UPDATE: Instapundit thinks that criticizing DHS for upping the alert based on old info shows that the critics aren't serious.

He's wrong.

I'm all for keeping the people informed, but there's a difference between notifying people about intelligence you've uncovered, and upping the threat level when you, according to Ridge, have no specific information as to timing or planning. By all means, inform the people affected that they are targetted. Announce to the world that you have this information, which serves the dual purpose of keeping the people informed, and discouraging the terrorists from continuing with that particular plot. Use the intel to "connect the dots" and perhaps prevent an attack.

But raising the threat level to Orange should only happen when you have credible information that an attack has been planned and or initiated, otherwise it begins to lose credibility and seriousness. Now, Ridge is in the awkward position of either maintaining an Orange level in the affected areas for years, or quietly dropping the alert level when it becomes too expensive to maintain.

It's a no-win situation for DHS.

And, I have to wonder, why does DHS keep shooting themselves in the foot like this. Is there nobody there who knows anything about public relations? They had to know that the age of the intel would come out; why not make it part of the initial briefing, and deny use of it to your opponents?

UPDATE 2: OK, I guess I might have to take it all back. Via SayUncle, I found this:
More financial institutions than previously disclosed may be at risk of attack, and an al-Qaida operative has told British intelligence that the group's target date is early September, intelligence sources said yesterday.

The operative, described as "credible" by British intelligence, told his debriefers that the attack would take place "60 days before the presidential election" on Nov. 2, according to a former senior National Security Council official. On Sept. 2 President George W. Bush is expected to address the Republican National Convention at Madison Square Garden.


In other words, despite some of the intel being gathered three years ago, we apparently have good info that it is being used to plan a current attack, one that has been scheduled.

My apologies to Mr. Ridge.

I still wonder abotu the PR aspects, though.

Posted by Rich
News • (2) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Monday, August 02, 2004

This I didn’t know.

Sears not only sticks to the letter of the law and allows reservists and national guardsmento come back to work when they're duty is over, they also make up the difference in pay betwen the workers normal pay and his reserve pay.

I don't know about you, but I'm headed to Sears this weekend for some overdue shopping.

Posted by Rich
Commentary • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Michael Moore:  The Final Post

I followed Mike's request yesterday and downloaded Farenheit 911 over Kazaa, and I watched it.

All of it.

And after watching it, I have mixed feelings.

I'm proud to live in a country where a man can make a movie like this and not wind up in a gulag, or live in fear of a midnight knock on the door, followed by torture and murder. I'm proud that, all protests from liberal democrats aside, freedom of speech still rules in America, that Michael Moore, can stand up and spout his lies and distortions, and not only remian a free man, but make a very nice living doing so. It's almost oxymoronic; the very fact that Moore could make Farenheit 911 discredits one of Moore's central theses, that we no longer live in a free society.

On the other hand, I'm not so proud that thousands of intelligent people are so blinded by partisanship that they can't see the lies in this movie. That so many Americans can be taken in by this fraud pretending to be a patriot. It bothers me that so many who used to excoriate Rush and the Dittoheads now plunge lemming-like over the same cliffs of insanity following another ideologue. It worries me that the country is now facing a divide just as deep, just as bitter, and seemingly just as hardened as the one which resulted in the War Between the States.

Could Farenheit 911 be the Uncle Tom's Cabin of our time?

Like F911, Uncle Tom's Cabin was a distorted, biased version of the truth, yet its imagery was powerful, and stirred strong emotions in those who believed in its message, strong enough to spur them into a bloody war. Upon meeting Stowe, Lincoln is said to have remarked, "So, you're the little lady who started the war."

I wonder if anyone will be saying the same to Michael Moore.

Of course, another civil war is not in the cards; the divide in this case is cultural, not regional. But I wonder if a cultural war wouldn't be even more damaging, particularly now.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (8) Comments • (2) TrackbacksPermalink


Michael Moore Thinks Liberals are Ignorant and Stupid!

Don't believe me? You don't have to; here's the words from the horse's ass. I mean mouth.
First, this is Michael Moore, speaking to The Mirror, a London paper:
[Americans] are possibly the dumbest people on the planet . . . in thrall to conniving, thieving smug pricks," Moore intoned. "We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing."


Wow. That's pretty harsh, isn't it Michael?

Then, in an open letter to the German periodical Die Zeit, he said:
Should such an ignorant people lead the world? How did it come to this in the first place? 82 percent of us don't even have a passport! Just a handful can speak a language other than English (and we don't even speak that very well.)


Ok, so he doesn't really like the majority of Americans all that much. But why would I say that he thinks liberals are ignorant and stupid?

Well, because here's what he had to say in Boston, for American consumption:
The majority of our fellow Americans are liberal and progressive when it comes to the issues.


So, if most Americans are dumb and ignorant, and most Americans are liberal and progressive, then the conclusion is inescapable: liberals are dumb and ignorant and are being lead around by "conniving, thieving, smug pricks."

Which pretty much describes Michael Moore himself, come to think of it.

Remember folks, I didn't say any of this; Michael Moore did.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (3) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Mainstrean Democrat Michael Moore

As I said last week, by virtue of his prominence at the Democratic National Convention, it is clear that Michael Moore now represents the mainstream of the Democratic Party. After all, fringe whackos don't get seated with ex-Presidents, do they?

And so, I did a quick search to pull out a few quotes by Mr. Moore, to see just exactly what the Democratic party believes these days.

The results were very interesting, and while I'm sure you've seen some of these quotes before, I'll bet you haven't seen them all.
  • I mean, they are up at six in the morning trying to figure out which minority group they're going to screw today
    Link

  • I would like to apologize for referring to George W. Bush as a 'deserter.' What I meant to say is that George W. Bush is a deserter, an election thief, a drunk driver, a WMD liar, and a functional illiterate. And he poops his pants.

    Speech at Cannes accepting the Palme D'Or for Farenheit 9/11

  • There's a gullible side to the American people. They can be easily misled. Religion is the best device used to mislead them.

    Should such an ignorant people lead the world? How did it come to this in the first place? 82 percent of us don't even have a passport! Just a handful can speak a language other than English (and we don't even speak that very well.)

    On Americans in an Open Letter to the German publication Die Zeit (June 11, 2003).

  • If the passengers had included black men, he claimed, those killers, with their puny bodies and unimpressive small knives, would have been crushed by the dudes, who as we all know take no disrespect from anybody."
    Link

  • They [Americans] are possibly the dumbest people on the planet . . . in thrall to conniving, thieving smug pricks. We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing.

    The motivation for war is simple. The U.S. government started the war with Iraq in order to make it easy for U.S. corporations to do business in other countries. They intend to use cheap labor in those countries, which will make Americans rich."

    It’s all part of the same ball of wax, right? The oil companies, Israel, Halliburton. David Brooks in the New York Times, June 26. 2004

  • I agree with the National Rifle Association when they say, 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people,' " he told NBC's "Today" show. "Except I would alter that to say, 'Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.'

    Moore, in the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page on March 21, 2003.

  • In October of 2003, Moore was quoted in the University of Michigan’s student newspaper, The Michigan Daily, as saying “there is no terrorist threat in this country. This is a lie. This is the biggest lie we’ve been told.”

  • On his book tour to promote, “Dude Where’s My Country,” Moore stopped off in Cambridge, England, where he lamented before a large audience that, ‘You’re stuck with being connected to this country of mine, which is known for bringing sadness and misery to places around the globe.

    Newsmax.com, June 6, 2004

  • You know in my town the small businesses that everyone wanted to protect? They were the people that supported all the right-wing groups. They were the Republicans in the town, they were in the Kiwanas, the Chamber of Commerce - people that kept the town all white. The small hardware salesman, the small clothing store salespersons, Jesse the Barber who signed his name three different times on three different petitions to recall me from the school board. Fuck all these small businesses - fuck 'em all! Bring in the chains. The small businesspeople are the rednecks that run the town and suppress the people. Fuck 'em all. That's how I feel.

    These are one of the biggest landowners in this country - no one individual should be able to own that much property. This is not his [SPI owner A.A. "Red" Emerson's] property, this is planet Earth and its inhabited by the people who live here and other living things and one individual should not have so much say and power cutting down trees that are that many years old.

    Link


Hmmm. I'm not too sure how that's going to play with the undecided voters.

Posted by Rich
Politics • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Quote

Bible Verse of the Day

Monthly Archives