No I’m not. I’ll try and find the response to his/her thread. I’m always interested to see how people spin the truth.
LOL!!!
Peace, save you the trouble. The support for Michael Moore’s movie is Michael Moore’s website. No one was at all impressed (but Catholic Vegan who hasn’t been seen since the election) Do you think that is an unbiased source? Do you think it’s a credible source?
Just a guess…but you haven’t read the link I provided. The sources he uses are varied, outside, and unbiased.
There are plenty of other sites (not put up by Micael Moore) that refute him… Factual ones… not propoganda.
Why would ayone refer anyone else to Michael Moore about anything? What would you expect to hear about this propaganda movie which he made, financially benefits from and has finally cured his chronic condition of being a fringe wannabe in production circles?
Especially when the person is a narcissist… He is so proud of himself…
Please explain to me how Michael Moore would be a good person to determine whether or not his alleged “facts” are biased?
** LOL!**
Moore’s not only a propagandist, but he’s also a college dropout.
Brought to mind the US playing rock music at full blast outside the Panamanian nuncio’s office trying to get the little dictator to come out. Remember him, the guy with beaucoup gold braid all over.
Why not let people question wether you’re credible rather than posting this ands removing all doubts that you’re not.
JMJ_Pinoy said:
Moore’s not only a propagandist, but he’s also a college dropout.
Not having seen the movie I will not comment on its greatness or lackthereof. However, the link is kinda funny on how it gets other to verify obvious facts: “Gore won more votes in 2000 election” (what’s next: “Sun rose in the morning according to Washington Post”) while leaving out details of other sources (when it talks about Bush spending time in Crawford and fails to point out that Bush had many working meetings while there).