| Jump to bottom |
Veterans
CP I don't Think Bradley is questioning the Legality of the wars..he called them unjust not illegal.
And I don't think we can blame the current state of employment anymore on Obama than we can on Bush Jr.
It's easy to blame one person instead of the hundreds of morons who We the People elected to office.
We are looking for a quick and the honest truth is there is no quick fix for the economy or Health Care or tax spending. We have become accustomed to a certain lifestyle in the United States and the mass Majority get angry when that lifestyle is threathened
STIMULUS JOB FIGURES OVERSTATED...
Hey Chris
Can't argue about the overstated figures...
Looks like MSNBC says the same thing as well
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33522856/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/
Beat
No arguments from me about Moveon and from my quick glance at Media Matters they are both extremely biased sites, which is why I don't use them as the sole basis of getting my information.
And yes I saw the little disclaimer that Recovery.org put at the bottom of it's data, which proves my point. If you go to a site that has an agenda it will spin the data in order to make either themselves look good or the competition look bad.
Beat
Yes Chris I did read the site and understand that it's a Government Site. But it is still a Republican Centric Site.
According to your site it states that the Michigan has lost 132,000 Plus Jobs. However, according to Recovery.Gov it states that based on the Stimulus there have been 397 jobs created and/or Saved because of the stimulus.
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=recipientTopJobs&ViewAll=100
According to Recovery.gov it states that 30,383 jobs have been created nationwide.
So Chris which one should we believe the one that is just Recovery.gov or the one that has Republican in front of the name?
Answer: Neither
Which one is going to spin numbers to make themselves look good?
Answer: Both will
Bias is Bias no matter how one tries to "spin" it.
You Time has Pass
I normally don't respond to the Reverend's post because of the sheer Racism that is in his posts but I guess this is one of those odd times.
Robert Smith, your time has passed.
My Generation(those born in the 70's. 80's and even the 90's) it's our time now.
My Generation grew up in desegregated schools..so there is no black versus white.
My Generation has become more tolerant of people of different skin colors and ethnicity because we grew up in such a mixed environment
My Generation have dealt with the results of Mayor Coleman Young's racist tactics. When the whites left Detroit for the Suburb look at what has happened.
The Suburbs flourish and grow while Detroit becomes a shell of it's former self. L. Brooks Patterson did not create the 8 mile border, the ignorance of Coleman Young did.
My Generation grew up during the time that the Auto Industry was putting out sub-par products which is why my Generation does not have the same faith in American Made cars like your Generation.
Robert Smith your time has passed. Your message is no longer a relevant message. Spreading a message of Hate and Racism will only push Detroit further into the abyss. Open your eyes and see for once that's it's not the "white" man that has destroyed Detroit but the message that you and people like you perpetrate to blacks to keep them ignorant.
I am a black man who married a White Woman and have two beautiful daughters. When my time has passed they will live in a world that will even be more tolerant of people than your myopic mind could possibly hope to comprehend.
Remember Judge not a man by the color of his skin but by the content of his Character.
Do not assume that just because someone is black that they are automatically given a free pass in your book.
Do not assume that just because someone is white that they deserve your scorn.
YOUR TIME HAS PASSED!!!!
Beat
So Chris are we to believe this information because you pull statistics from a Republican website?
Again if it's okay for you dismiss any of Libby's links because they are from Democrat or Liberal biased sites, do not expect to get a free pass for posting data from a Republican or Conservative biased web site.
Couldn't agree More
All you have to do is look at the responses to the blogs to see what is important. If you look at the posts you made about Detroit's elections and the ineptitude of the Michigan Legislature, there are little if any response to those posts.
It seems to me that we care more about the sexy issues than about the issues that matter. I just hope that come next election people pay attention and actually vote for the correct Legislature this time.
My Bad
Chris D Wrote
"Ask yourself, do you think that there was a way that Moore could have gotten him the money without such a fuss over his identity? He could have just given it to him with no fanfare or secret "anonymous" donor that raises curiosity."
Where was the fanfare?
From Kenefick's post
"After I posted about finding the plan and what the cost was, someone emailed me and asked if an "anonymous" benefactor could offer to pay my first year's premiums. $12,000. "
Someone emailed him asking if it was okay for someone to pay his 12K medical Premium. You can't get any more subtle than that short of just mailing a check to the guy.
I'm sure that if anyone gave me alot of money and didn't want to be known it would make me curious and skeptical, but I wouldn't go out of my way to track down the person that did it.
Again if Kenefick had just waited for Moore to make his move we wouldn't argue over whether or not it was a publicity stunt. Again I am not denying that Moore had some PR related motive behind it, but it was still an anonymous donation which means the person did not want to be named.
"Why are you insistent on making this about Glenn Beck and conservsatives? If you scroll back through the posts, I did not bring him into this, you did...
I agree that there's some hypocracy on both sides, but you keep trying to justify Moore's with "they do it too" arguments..."
Because you are insistent on painting Moore as the only person who does things for his own gain. Moore is a Liberal you have made your intentions clear that you do not like Liberals or the way they do business.
I honestly don't care one way or another on what Moore or Beck do with their money but if you are going to attack a liberal for what they do with their money then be prepaid for someone to bring examples of a conservative guilty of the same thing.
Read my last paragraph of my previous post, unlike most of the people in this forum my loyalties do not lie with Liberals or Conservatives, left or right up or down. When I criticize someone I make sure to show that BOTH sides are guilty
You cannot say in one sentence Micheal Moore is a Liberal hypocrite because he only gave 0.001% of his riches to a worthy cause and then not expect someone to bring up that Glenn Beck only gave 0.001% of his riches to a worthy cause.
You cannot say that Micheal Moore is a Hypocrite because he uses movies to push his own Liberal Political Agendas when you have Beck using Books and TV as a way to push his own Conservative Agenda.
And BTW there is no Justification for what Moore or Beck do...they are charlatans with forked tongues, making millions off of the emotions and ignorance or hard working men and women...both would be willing to start a Civil war if they knew they could make a buck from it.
Do not mistake my attack on Beck as a way to defend Moore...I am neither Conservative nor Liberal. I not a Democrat or Republican. I'm just a guy who's sick and tired of Americans reacting like Pavlov's Dogs...Salivating every time these buffoons open their mouths
What I am trying to show is that Moore=Beck they are both bad for America and should both be held accountable.
My Bad
Sorry about the double post and formatting error. ^_^V
Do what I SAY, not what I DO...
Chris D Wrote
"Wrong link. This one appears to be about about Fred Thompson's cigars. But you can't tell me you're gullible enough to believe this was not a PR stunt. The first thing you do to get people's attention is shroud something in mystery and make it a "secret", a classic PR tactic. If Moore had really cared, there are many ways he could have gotten him the money. And he ended up getting some PR mileage with the stunt, didn't he?"
Actually look and the link again and scroll down to the topic
Beat me to the Punch
So what you're saying is that an Anonymous donation is really a secret PR stunt? If that's the case then why donate Anonymously in the first place?
He only got PR Mileage because the guy didn't just accept the donation and be thankful that there was someone out there that was concerned for the welfare of his dying wife.
Now if Moore had publicly stated he donated money to Jim Kenefick in his movie with out Kenefick knowing before the fact that it was Moore that donated the money then it would have been a PR stunt. Kenefick created the opportunity for Moore to use him as a pawn by tracking down who donated the 12K in the first place.
"To put things in perspective, Moore's donation / PR stunt constituted 0.001% of Moore's income from his last three movies. No other information for Moore's charity activity can be found, even by Libby.
In June 2009, estimators at Forbes magazine pegged Beck's earnings over the previous 12 months at $23 million, with 2009-2010 revenues on track to be even higher.[5] Although the majority of his revenue results from his radio show and books, his website's 5 million unique visitors per month also draws at least $3 million annually, while his salary at Fox News is estimated at $2 million per year.[5] Additionally, Beck's online magazine Fusion, sells an array of Beck-themed merchandise.
So let's do the math
With the money Beck made last year (rough estimate because of no numbers on his Merchandise revenue) it was about 28 Million minus taxes about 22 Million his 25K donation (which is still a lot of money) is only 0.001% of his income
No doubt Beck has donated more money to groups that mirror his own political beliefs. So does that make him better or worse than Moore?
Again if you are to criticize a blowhard like Moore for his political Grandstanding and his all talk no action politically biased moves, then you have to researve the same criticism for a blowhard like Beck who for all intent and purposes is just a mirror image of Moore.
Beck and Moore are two sides of the same coin. Both uses Media to peddle their biased politically motivated ideas. Both make a huge amount of money from the pawns that listen to their Drivel and both do not donate enough of their time or money to anything worthwhile.
I hope you understand Chris that I agree with you about Moore I think most of his actions are more for show and to stir up controversy but on the other hand I am trying to show that it doesn't matter what wing a person leans towards greed rules all.
Do what I SAY, not what I DO...
Chris D Wrote
"Wrong link. This one appears to be about about Fred Thompson's cigars. But you can't tell me you're gullible enough to believe this was not a PR stunt. The first thing you do to get people's attention is shroud something in mystery and make it a "secret", a classic PR tactic. If Moore had really cared, there are many ways he could have gotten him the money. And he ended up getting some PR mileage with the stunt, didn't he?"
Actually look and the link again and scroll down to the topic
Beat me to the Punch
So what you're saying is that an Anonymous donation is really a secret PR stunt? If that's the case then why donate Anonymously in the first place?
He only got PR Mileage because the guy didn't just accept the donation and be thankful that there was someone out there that was concerned for the welfare of his dying wife.
Now if Moore had publicly stated he donated money to Jim Kenefick in his movie with out Kenefick knowing before the fact that it was Moore that donated the money then it would have been a PR stunt. Kenefick created the opportunity for Moore to use him as a pawn by tracking down who donated the 12K in the first place.
"To put things in perspective, Moore's donation / PR stunt constituted 0.001% of Moore's income from his last three movies. No other information for Moore's charity activity can be found, even by Libby.
In June 2009, estimators at Forbes magazine pegged Beck's earnings over the previous 12 months at $23 million, with 2009-2010 revenues on track to be even higher.[5] Although the majority of his revenue results from his radio show and books, his website's 5 million unique visitors per month also draws at least $3 million annually, while his salary at Fox News is estimated at $2 million per year.[5] Additionally, Beck's online magazine Fusion, sells an array of Beck-themed merchandise.
So let's do the math
With the money Beck made last year (rough estimate because of no numbers on his Merchandise revenue) it was about 28 Million minus taxes about 22 Million his 25K donation (which is still a lot of money) is only 0.001% of his income
No doubt Beck has donated more money to groups that mirror his own political beliefs. So does that make him better or worse than Moore?
Again if you are to criticize a blowhard like Moore for his political Grandstanding and his all talk no action politically biased moves, then you have to researve the same criticism for a blowhard like Beck who for all intent and purposes is just a mirror image of Moore.
Beck and Moore are two sides of the same coin. Both uses Media to peddle their biased politically motivated ideas. Both make a huge amount of money from the pawns that listen to their Drivel and both do not donate enough of their time or money to anything worthwhile.
I hope you understand Chris that I agree with you about Moore I think most of his actions are more for show and to stir up controversy but on the other hand I am trying to show that it doesn't matter what wing a person leans towards greed rules all.
Do what I SAY, not what I DO...
Chris_D Wrote "Sounds like you want to have it both ways: if they don't contribute - disdain, if they contribute - disdain.
Actually no I don't want to have it both way but if you're going to hold a Leftist accountable for his contribution and question what he does with his money then you should hold the Right Leaning ones to the same standard and call them out for not contributing.
And the statements you quoted from me were questions I did not state what my opinion was but was pointing out the bias that is all to often shown by everyone in this forum both left and right.
"Not to defend Beck, but he spends his camera time railing on about over-powered government.. not about victim groups.
So tell me is Fahrenheit 9/11 about a victims group or Moore's biased criticism about the Bush Administration and the way they handled the events leading up to and during the Iraq War?
Is Sicko about the victims of the Current Health Care system or the Government's involvement in Health Care?
The general Theme of Moore's Movies at least on the surface seems to be critical of the Government than trying to create victims.
"But I did find some links with anecdotal evidence of charitable contributions:"
So the best that you could come up with is an anecdotal account of Beck's Donation from a Blogger who based on his blog appears to be a staunch Republican?
You call Libby out for only using blogs from liberals as a source of information yet you want to convince me using the same technique?
"Your first link does not cite any financial support from anoyne. His "Charities Supported" only listed one and "Causes supported" listed general causes. Though "supported" might mean a donation, it usually it means the celebrity shows up at an event or lends their name to the cause..."
So does that mean it should be dismissed that a celebrity donates his/her name to a cause they believe in?
So you accuse Moore of not walking the walk but yet when there is proof that there are causes he support you dismiss it as nothing. Once again a very narrow view on a individual that opinions you do not agree with.
"You should have read the entire content of your second link about the $6M donation, it didn't come from Moore:
Article quote: "One wild card is how much Mr. Moore himself will make via his own profit participation in the movie, which people close to the matter describe as generous. That amount will be deducted from the take before the Weinsteins and the charities divvy up the rest."
Thusly, you have only presented evidence that refutes your own argument. Moore has not given anything documented back except for Libby's instance, which was more of a cheap PR stunt than an honest attempt at charity..."
You're right I miss read the article and for that I will take the assumption that Fahrenheit 9/11 charitable contribution was due to Moore's involvement.
"If you go to Moore's website, he prompts visitors to contribute their money to five "worthy" charities:ACORN, NACA, Healthcare-NOW, Billionaires for Wealthcare, and Moratorium NOW! (http://www.michaelmoore.com/do-something)"
Which means that he donates his time and money to organizations that he feels is worthy of his time and money. I gave money to ACORN once because someone came up to my house and told me that they were trying to change some of the Laws that restricted people from getting a home. I agreed that it was a worthy cause and donated money. Now finding out what my money was being use for less than honorable things the next time someone from ACORN asks for money I will politely decline. But at the time I thought ACORN was a honest Charity and I agreed with what they were trying to change...does that make me a Prostitute loving Criminal?
So tell me Chris is it wrong for someone to contribute to groups that agree with their opinions?
Does the NRA refuse contribution from someone because they may or may not be a Gun Nut?
So let's call it like it is.
Moore does donate money to organizations that Moore feels is worth his money and time, but since you do not agree or like the groups he donates too because they are to liberal for your tastes then it amounts to Moore doesn't donate to charities.
"Wow! So he "donated" $12K to the guy who runs an anti-moore website. Though the end action was admirable, it appears more like a PR tactic than a genuine attempt at charity. Please tell me that you're not THIS gullible..."
So I guess I have to ask you the same question then...you want to have it both ways? If Moore doesn't publicize his actions then you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not donating his time and Money to charity or to help out the "victims" he makes his millions off of. If Moore does a nice thing and donates money to help out someone you dismiss it as a PR Stunt. Yet you want us to take for face value that Beck's 25K donation to a fundraiser which even you said was anecdotal account was not made with pure intentions.
Oh and as another note to the PR Stunt Moore did for the 12K donation he made the Donation Anonymously the Benefactor of the Donation Jim Kenefick tracked down who donated the money he even says so on his site
http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/2007/05/P20/
So tell me Chris do you think Moore would have still used Kenefick at the end of Sicko if Kenefick had just accepted the donation and not tried to track down who donated the money?
Do what I SAY, not what I DO...
Chris_D Wrote Moore's approach is akin to seeing a piece of litter on the floor and bringing it to everyone's attention, but never bending down to pick it up himself...
Isn't that a little myopic? Do you think that the Movies that Moore has made is equivalent to just a piece of litter on the floor?
Well we can go with that analogy but how about this?
The issues that Moore addresses in his film are issues that affects everyone. Now Moore is putting his own spin on the issues based on his own personal opinions. Whether we agree with them or not his purpose is to get his point across no matter how biased it may be.
Now back to the litter analogy. What if that piece of litter grew everyday someone walk past it or ignored it. What if people said "it's only a piece of paper it's not going to do any harm" Let's say this went on for a while and now the piece of litter has multiplied to the point that it seems to be everywhere..yet people still ignore it.
Oh some people might try to clean up the litter but it doesn't seem to be enough. Until one day someone says "hey this litter is a huge problem I should try and tell as many people about the litter so that maybe we can clean it up"
Moore is just one of many voices that is trying to get people to realize that this piece of litter is more than one person can handle.
Moore is no different than any of the other "voices" of this timeframe.
Moore is like Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman and all the other left and right wing pundits who sit on their butts and tell us that this is wrong with out really doing anything themselves.
What charities has Glenn Beck donated to?
Doing a quick Google Search I could find nothing.
So does that mean we shouldn't also hold the same disdain for him because he chooses to not donate his money to any causes?
Doing a quick search on Bill O'Reilly and there is a whole list of Charities that he donates his time and money to. Does that mean he should be given saint status?
Heck doing a quick search on Micheal Moore and you can see what Charities he has donated his time and money to...it's not as many as O'Reilly's but it's a lot better than Beck's
Chris_D Wrote The only thing I could find was a link to his own forum. The only charities listed are a few thousand dollars for Flint, one for a leftist educational endowment and a $6M donation (that was actually made by Disney and Miramax).
Here's some of the information I found on what Moore has contributed to
http://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/1402-michael-moore
And here is some information on that "$6M"Donation that Moore made
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0702-07.htm
The information is from a left leaning site but they pulled the information from the Associated Press so you can take it for what it's worth.
As here's the disclaimer part. I've never watched a single Micheal Moore Film, for the same reason I don't watch Olberman, Beck, O'Reilly, Cooper, Hannity even Jon Stewart gets on my nerves now(use to think he was at least funny)
They are all a bunch of Pretentious DB's who think that using a condescending know it all attitude and tone makes them somehow Superior to the rest of us. They think that just because they are on TV they are above everyone else.
I just don't believe the hype
This is funny!
The problem is C.S that Bush had a big ol' (R) next to his name...just like people associate Liberal with Democrats, Republicans are generally considered Conservative. It just matters on how left or right that person leans.
So unfortunately Bush will be associated with Conservative no matter how much the party tries to distant itself from him and his more left leaning policies.
But I have to admit I am getting tired of this blame shifting look I don't give a fig newton who caused the mess..I want to know what's being done to fix it. If it was because of some of Bush's policies then revoke the policies I'm just getting tired of the whole "it's not my fault" talk.
Nobody is pushing Status Quo as an option
So do you think that the current immigration law doesn't need any type of reform.
Why is it that it's so easy for people to illegally immigrate into the U.S?
| Jump to top |
