• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Michael Moore vs. Fred Thompson

Status
Not open for further replies.

C4Lukins

Junior Member
The Letter from Moore
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash6.htm
May 15, 2007

Senator Fred Thompson
American Enterprise Institute
110 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Dear Senator Thompson,

Given that it has been publicly reported in The Weekly Standard, a leading neo-conservative publication, that you support Fidel Castro and the Cuban regime by being a purveyor of fine Cuban exports despite the trade embargo, I was surprised to see your recent op ed in a more traditional conservative outlet, The National Review, regarding my trip to Cuba (I suspect you choose The National Review in an effort to pander to an outlet that had criticized you for your opposition to medical malpractice legislation).

In your May 2, 2007 National Review article, "Paradise Island," you specifically raised concerns about whether my trip to Cuba with 9/11 heroes, who have suffered serious health problems as a result of their exposure to toxic substances at Ground Zero that have gone untreated was somehow going to support Castro ad the Cuban government:

"It always leaves me shaking my head when I read about some big-time actor or director going to Cuba and gushing all over Castro." [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWNhNzA2YmY3NTNjZjZhNjE1NmZjMDFkOTdjN2Q4ZmE=]

Putting aside the fact that you, like the Bush Administration, seem far more concerned about the trip to Cuba than the health care of these 9/11 heroes, I was struck by the fact that your concerns (including comments about CastroÕs reported financial worth) apparently do not extend to your own conduct, as reported in The Weekly Standard's April 23, 2007 story, "From the Courthouse to the White House Fred Thompson auditions for the leading role" (emphasis added):

"Thompson's work space looks just like what the home office of a successful politician or CEO should look like -- though a little messier: a large desk, dark wood, leather furniture, lots of books and magazines and newspapers, a flat-screen TV, and box upon box of cigars -- Montecristos from Havana." [http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13528&R=1136E33842]

In light of your comments regarding Cuba and Castro, do you think the "box upon box of cigars -- Montecristos from Havana" that you have in your office have contributed to CastroÕs reported wealth?

While I will leave it up to the conservatives to debate your hypocrisy and the Treasury Department to determine whether the "box upon box of cigars" violates the trade embargo, I hereby challenge you to a health care debate.

Survey after survey has indicated that health care is one of the top issues to the American voters. Today, more than 46 million people lack health are coverage, including 9 million children. We pay significantly more than any other country in the world -- and get less back. Americans life expectancy is lower than other Ground Zero 9/11 workers live in a society where the Bush Administration has shown more concern about their travel than about their health.

Our debate would provide you an opportunity to appeal to the right wing of the Republican Party by continuing to attack me; it would give me a chance to discuss health care and tell you exactly what happened in Cuba, given your apparent inters; and it would provide the American people an opportunity to see just how serious Hollywood can be, with a purported conservative and an avowed progressive Hollywood personality on stage.

Over the course of the debate, we could specifically address the following issues:

(1) Your work as a lobbyist in light of the fact that the health care and insurance industries have maintained the current health care system through their effective control of the political establishment.

(2) The fact that you raised hundred of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the health care and insurance industries.

(3) Discuss the fact, highlighted in yet another conservative outlet The New York Sun, that you inexplicably wanted to cut funding for AIDS research. [http://www.nysunpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/thompsons-1994-issue-positions.html]

(4) Your relationship with the Frist family and by extension HCA, one of the nation's largest for-profit hospital chains. It has been reported that former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (who was renowned for his over-the-television-screen Schiavo diagnosis) is serving as one of your confidantes on your potential presidential campaign. The Frist family has historically controlled HCA, which paid a record $1.7 billion in civil and criminal fines, including a $631 million penalty for Medicaid fraud -- in other words, ripping off the taxpayers.

(5) Discussing whether Arthur Branch, as the District Attorney of Manhattan, supports a woman's right to choose, gun safety reforms, gay marriage, the trans fat ban and anti-smoking laws (which would impact Cuban cigars, including your Montecristos).

Like American Idol, we could even have the country vote to determine which one of us wins the debate. Though in the spirit of full disclosure, I feel obligated to forewarn you that I was the winner of the 1971-72 Detroit Free Press Debate Award for the state of Michigan.

The winner of our health care debate could even light a Victory cigar with one of your Montecristos (though we may want to consider shopping them to the safe house where I have put a master copy of SiCKO in the event that the Bush Administration tries to seize the film).

Sincerely,


Michael Moore

The Video Response from Thompson

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=611

The Thompson video is pretty pimp.
 
The Video Response from Thompson

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=611

The Thompson video is pretty pimp.

What a ****ing wimp, it was expected though. And why the hell do you hold the letter like you ****ing read you worthless piece of shit? Moore made a million ****ing points in it and all you had as a response was typical bullshit propaganda against Castro. Not a single responce to any of Moore's arguments.
 

Cheeto

Member
So one guy makes a majority of his money from the people who create the worlds problems. While the other makes his money exposing those problems, but only offering "jokes" on how to solve them...They are both douche bags.
 
laserbeam said:
if anything Thompson gave moore 30 seconds too many of his time.

whether you like Moore or not, i think it is quite irresponsible to champion the dismissive attitude of an elected official when challenged on his questionable background and political actions.
 

C4Lukins

Junior Member
meltpotato said:
whether you like Moore or not, i think it is quite irresponsible to champion the dismissive attitude of an elected official when challenged on his questionable background and political actions.

No not really. If every politician defended themselves against every quacks alligations, then that is all they would have time to do. Thompson responding to Moore was giving him way to much credit. I do like the funny chair turn and the cigar though.
 
C4Lukins said:
No not really. If every politician defended themselves against every quacks alligations, then that is all they would have time to do. Thompson responding to Moore was giving him way to much credit. I do like the funny chair turn and the cigar though.

completely disagree.
 

Kevtones

Member
C4Lukins said:
No not really. If every politician defended themselves against every quacks alligations, then that is all they would have time to do. Thompson responding to Moore was giving him way to much credit. I do like the funny chair turn and the cigar though.


Good thing Denis Dyack isn't a politician...
 

maynerd

Banned
C4Lukins said:
No not really. If every politician defended themselves against every quacks alligations, then that is all they would have time to do. Thompson responding to Moore was giving him way to much credit. I do like the funny chair turn and the cigar though.

When Thompson discussed Moore in the National Review he already acknowledged Moore. His response was WEAK.
 

Enron

Banned
fortified_concept said:
What a ****ing wimp, it was expected though. And why the hell do you hold the letter like you ****ing read you worthless piece of shit? Moore made a million ****ing points in it and all you had as a response was typical bullshit propaganda against Castro. Not a single responce to any of Moore's arguments.

bu bu bu bu bu bu bu

Moore's "points" were basically just your normal mudsling attack you would see in any lame political ad. A MILLION ****ING POINTS! "Hey, you have health care industry ties, so therefore you must be a piece of sh*t!" Woo!

I LOEV GAF POLITICAL THREADS!
 

maynerd

Banned
Enron said:
bu bu bu bu bu bu bu

Moore's "points" were basically just your normal mudsling attack you would see in any lame political ad. A MILLION ****ING POINTS! "Hey, you have health care industry ties, so therefore you must be a piece of sh*t!" Woo!

I LOEV GAF POLITICAL THREADS!

And what is Fred's apparent attack on Moore? Hey michael you took some sick people to cuba...so therefore you must be a piece of sh*t! Woo!
 

Doc Holliday

SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Ive never understood why people hate Michael Moore. Some of you guys sound like he raped your sister or something.
 
fortified_concept said:
What a ****ing wimp, it was expected though. And why the hell do you hold the letter like you ****ing read you worthless piece of shit? Moore made a million ****ing points in it and all you had as a response was typical bullshit propaganda against Castro. Not a single responce to any of Moore's arguments.


This is what Michael Moore brings on himself for always having to put himself into the middle of the questions he is trying to ask. Of course he isnt going to get a legitimate response....he is a nonplayer when noone responds to him.
 

Justin Bailey

------ ------
I hate that I'm sticking up for Michael Moore, but the guy did provoke him. Then when Moore responded with at least semi-serious points Thompson just gave a joke throw away answer which was neither clever nor funny.

+1 Moore.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
Justin Bailey said:
I hate that I'm sticking up for Michael Moore, but the guy did provoke him. Then when Moore responded with at least semi-serious points Thompson just gave a joke throw away answer which was neither clever nor funny.

+1 Moore.

Thank You(while I dont like Moore I will give it to him hes right on many issues just his tactics of making a point are very misleading, lazy and often irresponsible and wrong. hopefully Sicko breaks that trend.)

Moore was provoked and anwsered providing actual facts and offering a way to honestlly debate this issue and yet people are blasting him for it? WTF? how do you even argue against having an open public debate? seriouslly? regardless where you fall, I think one should be pissed that Thompson isn't willing to buck up to the challenge or at least offer ACTUAL rebuttals instead of ad hominem attacks thats only function is to pander to the cognitive dissodence his followers engage in(including many in this thread apparentlly).
 
Enron said:
bu bu bu bu bu bu bu

Moore's "points" were basically just your normal mudsling attack you would see in any lame political ad. A MILLION ****ING POINTS! "Hey, you have health care industry ties, so therefore you must be a piece of sh*t!" Woo!

I LOEV GAF POLITICAL THREADS!

He's accussing him that he's working as a lobbyist for the health "care" and insurance industries and that he received big money from both of them. In other words that he's one of the son of bitches that lets americans die like animals if they don't have health insurance, because the corporations are practically bribing him. You don't think that deserves a reply especially since Moore did such a good job
backing up his accussations?

And btw yes Thompson is a piece of shit.
 

laserbeam

Banned
Jonm1010 said:
Thank You(while I dont like Moore I will give it to him hes right on many issues just his tactics of making a point are very misleading, lazy and often irresponsible and wrong. hopefully Sicko breaks that trend.)

Moore was provoked and anwsered providing actual facts and offering a way to honestlly debate this issue and yet people are blasting him for it? WTF? how do you even argue against having an open public debate? seriouslly? regardless where you fall, I think one should be pissed that Thompson isn't willing to buck up to the challenge or at least offer ACTUAL rebuttals instead of ad hominem attacks thats only function is to pander to the cognitive dissodence his followers engage in(including many in this thread apparentlly).


Michael Moore and actual facts very often do not Walk hand in hand.
 
laserbeam said:
Michael Moore and actual facts very often do not Walk hand in hand.

Michael Moore is a respected documentarist in every part of the world but USA (what a surprise). The mud campaign against him doesn't seem to have affected Europe so please explain to a clueless european like me why "Michael Moore and actual facts very often do not Walk hand in hand".
 
C4Lukins said:
The Letter from Moore
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash6.htm
May 15, 2007

Senator Fred Thompson
American Enterprise Institute
110 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Dear Senator Thompson,

<blah blah>

In your May 2, 2007 National Review article, "Paradise Island," you specifically raised concerns about whether my trip to Cuba with 9/11 heroes, who have suffered serious health problems as a result of their exposure to toxic substances at Ground Zero that have gone untreated was somehow going to support Castro ad the Cuban government:

<blah blah blah blah>

Sincerely,


Michael Moore

The Video Response from Thompson

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=611

The Thompson video is pretty pimp.

I'm just wondering if that typo is in the real version. Anyone know? Proofreading ftl.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
140.85 said:
How is it a joke? He's echoing pertinent points he's made before about the topic.

A giant strawman of an article to encapsalate a character assasination, gotta love most of the conservative movement.

Michael Moore and actual facts very often do not Walk hand in hand.

I wont disagree but tell me where he lied in this rebuttal? seems like people want to give the victory to Thompson on the basis of Moore has lied before, therefore this is a lie even though I have no idea if thats true or not, im just gonna go with that - yea, hes lied or misled therefore this is a lie to.

Maybe he is lying but those who have obviouslly not taken one second to try and verify his claims against Thompson and are ACTUALLY KNOCKING him when his ONLY request is to debate this openlly, are what is rising my anger.

Now if hes such a BSing lier I would jump at the chance to give it to him nationally, especially when his films encapsalate such a wide audience. Its intresting Thompson plays the ignore game and so many just act like apologists to him. When in reality if these things arent true he would probably jump at the chance for the media attention and a public forum to knock down one of the "supposedlly" largest Liberal film makers. Yet he doesnt, Why?
 

140.85

Cognitive Dissonance, Distilled
Jonm1010 said:
A giant strawman of an article to encapsalate a character assasination, gotta love most of the conservative movement.



I wont disagree but tell me where he lied in this rebuttal? seems like people want to give the victory to Thompson on the basis of Moore has lied before, therefore this is a lie even though I have no idea if thats true or not, im just gonna go with that - yea, hes lied or misled therefore this is a lie to.

Maybe he is lying but those who have obviouslly not taken one second to try and verify his claims against Thompson and are ACTUALLY KNOCKING him when his ONLY request is to debate this openlly, are what is rising my anger.

Now if hes such a BSing lier I would jump at the chance to give it to him nationally, especially when his films encapsalate such a wide audience. Its intresting Thompson plays the ignore game and so many just act like apologists to him. When in reality if these things arent true he would probably jump at the chance for the media attention and a public forum to knock down one of the "supposedlly" largest Liberal film makers. Yet he doesnt, Why?

Wait. You're annoyed at Thompson's video response (which included a pertinent reference) but you flippantly summarize his article as "a giant strawman" and character assasination?

And c'mon. If someone repeatedly lies to you are you really gonna give the guy a second chance everytime he comes to you with something to say? My guess is no - after a while you wouldnt take anything he said seriously no matter how well presented. Hence many peoples reaction to Moore.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
140.85 said:

Let me ask you and everyone else a question. Has Moore came out and said his point of going to Cuba was to say that their health system is superior to ours? Because the crux of these blogs arguments rests on an assumption saying that Moore's trip was to try and prove that Cuba has a superior healthcare system in every way. Has Moore claimed that was the point? Because if he hasnt all your little blogs and shit(if they are true, though some do look legit in they're description of Cuba's system) mean nothing because they are inherentlly anwsering nothing more then a straw man.
 

Enron

Banned
fortified_concept said:
Michael Moore is a respected documentarist in every part of the world but USA (what a surprise). The mud campaign against him doesn't seem to have affected Europe so please explain to a clueless european like me why "Michael Moore and actual facts very often do not Walk hand in hand".


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAA.


Yeah, he's right up there with Ken Burns. Please. Michael Moore's "documentaries" are more accurately described as "entertainmentaries". Sure, there's some fact in there but there's also a whole crapton of his opinion and a whole lotta jumping to conclusions.

Even in America with GW Bush riding a 30% approval rating, most of us are smart enough to realize Michael Moore isn't some beacon of truth.

People despise him because he's an attention whore. He tries to stick himself in the middle of everything, as someone already said, and had nothing much to offer but his smartass opinions. Which is fine, until people start thinking that's a "Documentary". His "documentaries" are basically just longer versions of his show "The Awful Truth". Which is pretty funny, I might add, but worthless as a vehicle to present "facts".
 

Jonm1010

Banned
140.85 said:
Wait. You're annoyed at Thompson's video response (which included a pertinent reference) but you flippantly summarize his article as "a giant strawman" and character assasination?

And c'mon. If someone repeatedly lies to you are you really gonna give the guy a second chance everytime he comes to you with something to say? My guess is no - after a while you wouldnt take anything he said seriously no matter how well presented. Hence many peoples reaction to Moore.


A pertinant reference in the form of a straw man argument.

Please someone explain this to me if Moore is so full of shit why doesnt Thompson go onto the national stage and destroy the largest liberal and documentary filmmaker in America, defraud him and embarass him? Can anyone question that doing that would also serve in his campaign interest because the debate would create astronomical publicity on every single media forum? why doesnt he do this then, his excuse seems weak? And instead in his place he uses a knowing logical fallacy argument which psychologically only serves to pander to those willing to engage in cognitive dissodence. While ignoring almost every single point Moore made.

Something just isn't right to me with this picture.
 
Enron said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAA.


Yeah, he's right up there with Ken Burns. Please. Michael Moore's "documentaries" are more accurately described as "entertainmentaries". Sure, there's some fact in there but there's also a whole crapton of his opinion and a whole lotta jumping to conclusions.

Even in America with GW Bush riding a 30% approval rating, most of us are smart enough to realize Michael Moore isn't some beacon of truth.

People despise him because he's an attention whore. He tries to stick himself in the middle of everything, as someone already said, and had nothing much to offer but his smartass opinions. Which is fine, until people start thinking that's a "Documentary". His "documentaries" are basically just longer versions of his show "The Awful Truth". Which is pretty funny, I might add, but worthless as a vehicle to present "facts".

Good, so you have no proof just empty accusations. And btw "The Awful Truth" was partly very very informative (I learned a lot about how corporate america screws its employees and how the health care system screws americans) and partly purposely funny -nothing wrong with that.

This video for example was some of the funniest moments I've ever seen in my life on TV, maybe because I hate homophobic rednecks so much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABH_RFeeGAs -a bit NSFW
 

Tamanon

Banned
Jonm1010 said:
A pertinant reference in the form of a straw man argument.

Please someone explain this to me if Moore is so full of shit why doesnt Thompson go onto the national stage and destroy the largest liberal and documentary filmmaker in America, defraud him and embarass him? Can anyone question that doing that would also serve in his campaign interest because the debate would create astronomical publicity on every single media forum? why doesnt he do this then, his excuse seems weak? And instead in his place he uses a knowing logical fallacy argument which psychologically only serves to pander to those willing to engage in cognitive dissodence. While ignoring almost every single point Moore made.

Something just isn't right to me with this picture.

What does Oliver Stone have to do with anything?:p
 

Jonm1010

Banned
Tamanon said:
What does Oliver Stone have to do with anything?:p

:lol But I think you get my point. Maybe I should have said the Documentary filmmaker more Republicans hate on most often and want to see disapear more than any other filmmaker.

Edit: yea and wait *looks at Maynerd's post* did he make documentaries? and thinking about it more wasnt JFK like his biggest political film and that took a lot of shots at democrats if I remember? Oh well.
 

maynerd

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
From the link:



Hrmmmm.........the left would have you believe Canada is a healthcare utopia.

I don't know about that. Keep in mind all of the countries that scored higher than the US all have universal healthcare.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
From the link:



Hrmmmm.........the left would have you believe Canada is a healthcare utopia.

No we wouldnt. thats just that limbaugh speak on the right, creating false realities out of they're ass. I and most liberals like Canada's system because it actually COVERS EVERYONE but most have many, MANY issues with it. No where are you gonna find a "knowledgable" liberal saying lets do EXACTLY like Canada.
 
Michael Moore isn't an intellectual giant by any stretch, deserves alot of the disrespect he gets, but he is a good gadfly for some causes, even if his "arguements" are more for pissing off than have any kind of constructive points.

I still hold to the idea of wallowing all over Cuba with as much Americana as the populace can stomach since the 80s. If Castro had blocked us out, he's the badguy; if he let in American business, it weakens his authority.
 

Enron

Banned
fortified_concept said:
Good, so you have no proof just empty accusations. And btw "The Awful Truth" was partly very very informative (I learned a lot about how corporate america screws its employees and how the health care system screws americans) and partly purposely funny -nothing wrong with that.

This video for example was some of the funniest moments I've ever seen in my life on TV, maybe because I hate homophobic rednecks so much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABH_RFeeGAs -a bit NSFW

Empty accusations? Have you ever seen any of Michael Moore's "documentaries"? If you honestly think those are real, informative, UNBIASED documentaries, holy SHIT.

Like I said, of course there's some facts in there but its basically an opinion piece.
 

JayDubya

Banned
SatelliteOfLove said:
I still hold to the idea of wallowing all over Cuba with as much Americana as the populace can stomach since the 80s. If Castro had blocked us out, he's the badguy; if he let in American business, it weakens his authority.

Word. Embargos hurt the wrong people.

Also, Michael Moore is a ****tard. He's the left's equivalent to Ann Coulter.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
Enron said:
Empty accusations? Have you ever seen any of Michael Moore's "documentaries"? If you honestly think those are real, informative, UNBIASED documentaries, holy SHIT.

Like I said, of course there's some facts in there but its basically an opinion piece.

You never said previouslly that his bias was a problem so his rebuttal in no way is trying to say that he is unbiased, you just added that after the fact. Like I also said previouslly I think he deserves some of the criticisms he gets(like that car movie where he acted like he didnt interview the CEO but in reality he had) but a lot of what he says in his films when presenting facts is true(the pay checks of the iraq contractors compared to the soldiers, Bush playing buddy buddy to the Saudi oil people knowing they harbor terrorists, etc etc). Now his bias means shit if reality supports that bias. You ignoring those facts of reality because of bias is just a nice way of saying I am ignoring reality.
 

Triumph

Banned
Doc Holliday said:
Ive never understood why people hate Michael Moore. Some of you guys sound like he raped your sister or something.
He's a socialist. A SOCIALIST!

I dig him. His heart is in the right place although sometimes he can be annoying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom