"assassination by documentary"

[grasswire]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/bal-te.to.fahrenheit26jun26,0,7818565.story?coll=bal-features-headlines

"The left and the right might both agree that Fahrenheit 9/11 amounts to assassination by documentary, assailing President Bush for leading the country into war on the basis of lies and self-interest. While the White House has dismissed the film as "outrageously false," Moore, who won an Oscar last year for his anti-gun documentary Bowling for Columbine, has said that nothing would please him more than if Fahrenheit helps bring down the Bush presidency in the November election.

To do that, however, the film may have to reach beyond an audience that has already decided that Bush should go. It's a safe bet that the vast majority of Moore's fans are to the left of center; the question is whether his film will attract others."

Send a comment on this stupid characterization of F-911 here:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/bal-te.to.fahrenheit26jun26,0,4519020,storyfeedback.story?coll=bal-features-headlines

[wtmusic]

1. I dunno

"Assassination by documentary" may be a very apt description. What part of it is a stupid characterization?

[grasswire]

6. It's an attempt....

....to further the current politicized characterization of liberals as "wild-eyed" and bent on violence and disruption.

Michael Moore is not trying to "assassinate" Bush, and I object to the language that implies extra-Constitutional or criminal means.

Michael Moore simply wants voters to use their Constitutional right to vote. Lawful, peaceful.

Don't let them ramp up the right wing through this inflammatory language.

[Bluebear]

9. Ah, get the point well now.

The light dawns on Marblehead, as we say up here.

[Bluebear]

2. Grass, what is so stupid about that characterization?

I saw it last night, it was a stunning film but the article is correct that just "preaching to the choir" will do no good. Undecideds have to see it for it to have any electoral impact, don't you think?

[wuushew]

3. Passion of the Christ was preaching to the choir as well

but since it made so much money it had the unfortunate effect of dominating the news cycle for several weeks, obscuring further Bush crimes. If F-911 does well even if only among liberals it with have a negative effect on Bush in the polls.

[lpbk2713]

4. ....... dismissed the film as "outrageously false" ????

Without even seeing it? (Que voice from the past) "Well, there you go again.", relying on astrologers for guidance.

[Still_Loves_John]

5. Drives me crazy every time someone calls Bowling for Columbine

anti-gun. It just proved they never watched it.

But I think it's right in its conclusion. The thing I'm holding my breath on is whether the undecideds go to see it. That's the tac that conservatives are taking, too, if you notice. All of their punditry would seem silly to anyone who has seen the movie--they want to characterize it as ridiculous to keep anyone from seeing it.

I have to say, I've always said that the movie won't make a differnece because only liberals will see it, but it's so powerful that I hope word of mouth will bring more centrist people to the movie.

[jjmalonejr]

10. I hate the anti-gun label slapped on BFC too!

It analyzes fear and violence in America and assails the gun lobby and the NRA, but it isn't anti-gun. I'm sick of hearing people say that.

[Sporadicus]

11. I Didn't Perceive 'Bowling for Columbine' as Anti-Gun Either

Michael Moore demonstrated that other countries allow their citizens to own guns, but they don't dispatch one another with reckless abandon as US citizens do. He went on to give historical examples of how our culture of violence grew to fruition with the Columbine shootings.

[ibegurpard]

17. Absolutely!

Anyone who claims that watched a different movie than I did. That was what I expected going in. Instead I got an examination of the causes of violence in America with the lion's share of the blame seeming to land on a fear-mongering, sensationalistic media and press.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

7. Shut down the Baltimore Sun!!

:grr:

[Elidor]

8. Assassination has very negative connotations

There is nothing negative about revealing the truth to the brainwashed multitudes. This member of the left disagrees strongly with the characterization. Sounds like the kind of tripe Todd Gitlin writes.

[calimary]

13. Hardhead, you MUST send this post of yours directly to the Baltimore Sun

"Assassniation has very negative connotations. There is nothing negative about revealing the truth to the brainwashed multitudes."

Just that alone. BINGO. Short and sweet. Will make an absolutely superb letter to the editor! Never let the bad guys get the last word!!!!

[Elidor]

18. Wow. Thanks, Calimary

Umm...I guess I could do that. I've generally sworn off interacting with media whores, though I do have some aging eggs in the frige in case I see a CNN remote feed...

[Cheneys_former_heart]

12. Then WTF was "DC 9/11"? An assasination on factual history?

Remember that POS movie put out on Showtime? About how "in charge" the Shrubya was, his "heroic" command, all that other bullshit? Somehow I don't think this guy from the Baltimore Sun batted an eyelash about that one.

[whosinpower]

14. Well then

Where are the libel lawsuits then?????????? If the documentary is factually incorrect and is charactor assasination attempt - then why oh why has the White House not served Moore with a libel lawsuit????

[Eloriel]

15. Nah. "Assassination by documentary" is okay by me. n/t

[givemebackmycountry]

24. I could care less what they call it...

I say...

"By whatever means necessary"

[Devils Advocate NZ]

16. The undecideds...

The question has been put: "Will Fahrenheit 9/11 attract anyone who doesn't already agree with Moore?"

The answer as has been shown on at least two threads (one pointing to a critical report on the movie). They show that at least two right wingers went to see the movie "just to confirm that it is a pack of lies".

If even the hard core Bushies can't stay away, I am guaranteeing that "undecideds" will just HAVE to go see what all the fuss is about.

[Soup Bean]

19. Clinton was assassinated by the Right.

I wish we could live in a country where ideas are debated and rejected upon merit, and compromise meant that reasonable objections and alternate ideas were vetted and incorporated into policy where appropriate.

America cannot continue as the country we knew while we treat each other this way. The Left is responding to the Right (in a much less hateful way, mind you)...HOWEVER, most people in America are neither left OR right. They just count on those of us that are paying attention to take care of them. We need to do a better job.

Too much money in Washington....too much lobbying against the people....where's "Big Citizen" when you need them?

[gardenista]

20. "Assassination by Special Prosecutor"- Clinton by Starr nt

[Devils Advocate NZ]

23. Here is what the "middle" always forgets...

I wish we could live in a country where ideas are debated and rejected upon merit, and compromise meant that reasonable objections and alternate ideas were vetted and incorporated into policy where appropriate.

The bolded word is where the problem lies. "Merit" is a very subjective value. What you think is good, I might think is bad. So who decides?

Well, obviously in a democracy the majority decides, but this then means that a significant proportion of the populations will ALWAYS see what is happening as bad, while the other side sees it as good, and that is treating things very simplistically in a binary good/bad equation. What happens with shades of grey?

The point is, politics is about deciding the good vs the bad. Republicans have one view of what is good, and Dems have another. Sure there are some points where the two meet (those darn shades of grey) but in general they have opposing world views.

So what would happen if we got rid of the black and the white and only kept a middle grey area? Well, after first deciding how much black and how much white goes to make up the grey, we will then start fighting over the lighter and darker shades of grey.

It is inevitable simply because we don't all have the same opinions and viewpoints.

So it is rather utopian to expect the left/right war to end. Sure it might go cold for a while, but it wouldn't take much to set it all off again.

So let's get back to "merit". If we decide to accept or reject ideas based on merit, what happens when the majority wants something that does not meet the standard? Do we reject it even though it is the majority's will? Or do we accept it even though it has no merit?

The former would mean that democracy is no longer valid but the latter would mean that the "merit" idea is no longer valid. You can't have both when the majority decides it wants something that doesn't fit the "merit" criteria.

In other words, a society based on "merit" and "compromise" is by definition not democratic, because the people's will is NOT the deciding factor, while a democracy can not result in the best ideas ALWAYS being the prevailing ones.

That is where the left vs right fight comes in.

[Soup Bean]

25. Very thought provoking.

So step to (the least of the steps) would be parsing the winning arguement whether right or left, with the viewpoint to begnin to be accepted as paradigm in the future.

The struggle wouold never end, though.

[NervousRex]

21. If it was "outrageously false"...

The "Tort Reform" right-wing legal eagles would have filed defamation law suits...they haven't..'nuff said

[Bozita]

27. "I hired the toughest team of fact checkers I could find ..."

last 2 paragraphs:

http://entertainment.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=162309

"Fahrenheit 9/11" underwent thorough factual scrutiny, said Harvey Weinstein, whose Miramax banner was prohibited by parent company Disney from releasing the movie. Weinstein and his brother, Bob, bought back the film and arranged for distribution by Lions Gate and IFC Films.

"I hired the toughest team of fact checkers I could find, lawyers and head counsel from The New Yorker," Harvey Weinstein said in an e-mail response to questions from The Associated Press. "We invited them to be tough — and they were. All journalism should be this careful."

[depakid]

22. Farenheit 9-11 is a polemic-

and its purpose is the same as all polemics throughout history have been... nothing new here at all- or even very different, except for the media it's made in (video) and the fact that most Americans have never been exposed to classics, like Cicero.

[bigbillhaywood]

26. If this is true, there are many more people Moore should "document"

I myself would prefer to call it "targeted killing by documentary"