Fahrenheit 9/11

“I think it's very valid, and if you read my post I defended MM to a certain extent. The point I was trying to make is that BECASUE it has an opinion, it is not a true documentary... it's an opinion piece!

My argument is that even MM, and most of his supporters, admit that it's opinion. That doesn't make it invalid at all, but it does suggest it's not a "documentary" by definition.”

“Well, exactly how would you label this movie then for the movie-going public?”

“It's a movie. Just as you would any other, read the reviews, and if it sounds like something you'd enjoy, go for it.

Just don't tell me it's a documentary when it's not. A documentary doesn't promote any given opinion, but objectively presents facts.”

“rosey - I think wand is just trying to point out that in his opinion, it's an opinion piece.

I don't know if we can classify it like that. Is there such a classifaction? What would the guidlines be and who would be able to make it, objectivly?

In trying to classify "art", some would call it censoring it. Why can't we leave it and let the people decide for themselves? Wand has decided that it's an opinion piece, rosey thinks it a doc. Maybe yer both right? It is, after all, purely a subjective thing, right?”

“"The funny thing is, all these people who #&%!$ about Moore's movie....Have you seen it?"

I'm not bltchin' about the movie. I'm bltchin' about the fat piece of shlt that made it. LOL!”

“How unladylike!”

“Gosh, Nigel, stop being so #$#%$ shy & reserved... how are we supposed to know how you REALLY feel when we have to read between the lines? Can't you be a little more clear, please?”

“Hi.

No person is without an opinion. No documentary can be filmed without a bias.

Therefore no documentary has ever been made?

What ends up on the cutting room floor?

What could one do to be unbiased? I supposse if you went around and filmed everything you saw without comment, then didn't cut anything out of what you filmed, one would have an unbiased documentary.

They couldn't keep me away from that feature!”

“Jihad Moore!!

LOL!

Fun though, what I hear myself saying is very much like many of the things the lefties here have said about Rush...but I'M the butthole. I can live with that. :)”

“As a "Lefty" I can promise that I didn't go around screaming:

"Don't watch Rush! It's all Propoganda/Spin/Biase, etc."

Why should I bother? Whoever wants to believ everything will believe everything. Nothing I can do about it.

Why does the "right" feel the need?

Am I in the minority?”

“BM, you have a semi-valid point. Everyone knows Rush is a right-winger, I'm certainly not defending Rush or his tactics, I don't like him & don't listen to him. There is no question about where he stands, and he tells you that in no uncertain terms! Thus, I don't think his supporters try to present him as anything other than what he is.

What is at issue in this discussion is honesty... MM defenders should be honest & state that MM has a bias he brings to his work, and not present it as authoritative, objective fact. He presents an opinion... he is entitled to do so, but I believe there is a responsibility to call it what it is... opinion, not "documentary", which is supposedly non-biased fact.

Rush presents opinion. MM presents opinion. Both are free to do so, but let's be honest about what they do... they promote a certain perspective that is not "middle of the road", unbiased reporting.”

“"Thus, I don't think his supporters try to present him as anything other than what he is...."


You wanna break that news to strat?


LOL!”

“There are just as many whacko, alien life forms on the right as on the left. What I try to do is get people to put away their broad brush & learn to assess issues & think for themselves, not blindly follow some idealogy "just because". My gripe is with anyone who can't tell you WHY s/he thinks as they do... they just KNOW they're right! That applies to right-wing nut-jobs as much as it does left-wing weiners.

And Strat, this wasn't necessarily directed at you...BUT, as in all cases, if the show fits...”

“For someone who didn't see the movie wanderer, you sure have your mind made up about it. Can we hear that lecture about open minded examination of the facts again? It's been at least a month.

F 9-11 is roughly 99% news footage and interviews and is most certainly a documentary... and yes, of course (like every person on the planet) Moore does have a point of view.”

“And as for thinking for yourself, is this just a coincidence, or do you just post to a lot of boards?”

“In his movie Fahrenheit 9-11, Moore shows a newspaper with a headline that says Gore would have won the Florida recount:



But the story was not a story, but rather a letter to the editor. Dan Alban explains:

yes, that was a letter to the editor that the movie infers is a news headline instead.

headlines atop letters to the editor in the Pantagraph only reflect the opinions of the writers. that was the letter writer’s opinion.

the reason I didn’t initially find it was because I was scrolling our news archives for news stories with that headline.

it appears obvious the page was doctored a bit since the letter ran on Dec. 5, 2001 and the dateline on the alleged Pantagraph page shown in Fahrenheit somehow is Dec. 19, 2001.


So Moore seems to have gone to a lot of trouble to doctor up a newspaper page and misrepresent a letter to the editor as a straight news piece in order to support his argument. And this guy is held up as some sort of crusader for truth?



From The-Crease.”

“I'll kept that in mind when I get the DVD. I'm sure that doctoring something like that would be grounds for libel, no?”

“I know it's hard to believe, but Moore got caught playing games with at least one quote in his flick:


Fahrenheit 9/11’s distortions don’t end there. A maestro of the deceitful edit, Moore whittles down a quote from Condoleezza Rice to suggest that the Bush administration is lying when it denies ever having alleged Iraqi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Says Rice in the film: “Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.” Gotcha? Not quite. Here is the uncorrupted version of Rice’s quote: “Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself, and his regime, involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”

Go figure...he took something out of context.

From The-Crease”

“Have you seen the movie, Mutt?”

“A full accounting will likely be impossible, so I'll just touch on a few. And yes, this is a long post, but thankfully we won't be going into the origins of money, the gold standard, or any other economic-type ramblings. Rather, I want to focus a little more on the post movie lies, the dissembling being put forth as Moore's movie is challenged.

I'll begin with Michael Isikoff's piece in Newsweek. Isikoff writes:



The movie claims that in the days after 9/11, when airspace was shut down, the White House approved special charter flights so that prominent Saudis-including members of the bin Laden family-could leave the country. Author Craig Unger appears, claiming that bin Laden family members were never interviewed by the FBI. Not true, according to a recent report from the 9/11 panel. The report confirms that six chartered airplanes flew 142 mostly Saudi nationals out of the country, including one carrying members of the bin Laden family. But the flights didn't begin until Sept. 14-after airspace reopened. Moreover, the report states the Saudi flights were screened by the FBI, and 22 of the 26 people on the bin Laden flight were interviewed. None had any links to terrorism.


Now, since this was on MSNBC no one likely saw this, but Michael Isikoff appeared and got into it with kool-aid drinker Chris Lehane:


LEHANE: Yes. And I have great respect for Michael. He is a wonderful reporter.

But I think, if you carefully look at the words that were employed and the facts that are employed in this movie on that particular portion that he is talking about, you will find that it's very, very hard to question it. First of all, we do not say that flights took off when federal airspace was closed.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: Viewers don't look at a transcript, though, Chris. You know that. They are left with an impression by looking at images.

LEHANE: Yes, but we are very, very careful. We make very clear that the flights didn't take off until after September 13, which is when federal airspace was opened.

And the Saudis that Michael is talking about, there were 140 Saudis on those flights, 142. Only 30 of them were interviewed in a way that was completely inconsistent with usual FBI and Justice Department protocol. In fact, even in the 9/11 Commission report that Michael is referring to, it raises some issues about the length of those interviews and the fact that the vast majority of folks who left the country after this terrible tragedy were not interviewed.

There's an FBI agent in the movie who personally talks about the fact that this was not consistent with the practices that should have been employed.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: OK, Chris. Michael, respond.

ISIKOFF: Well, Joe, I think the point you were saying, that the clear impression of the movie is a little different than some of the particular words that sort of slip by very quickly.

For instance, an example, Chris says that they never say that it was when federal airspace was shut down. They say it happened after September 13. But it doesn't say in the movie, at least not in any transcript I have seen or what I heard when I saw the movie, that that's when federal airspace was reopened.

LEHANE: But that's not what you wrote in your piece, Michael.

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: In the piece that you wrote in "Newsweek," you specifically said that Michael Moore's movie stated that flights left while federal airspace was closed. The movie does not state that. Your piece was wrong on that.

(CROSSTALK)

ISIKOFF: Does the movie say that it-explicitly say that when federal airspace was reopened? Does it say that?

LEHANE: Did your story specifically state that the movie did state that? Is that what your story said?

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: This is important, because you wrote this specifically in your piece. And, as I said, you're an awesome reporter, but you had that one wrong.

SCARBOROUGH: Michael, did you have that one wrong?

ISIKOFF: No. One thing, I actually have asked Chris for over a week now for a full transcript of the movie, and I haven't seen one.

LEHANE: And, Michael, did I provide you a transcript of this portion of the movie?

ISIKOFF: A full transcript of the movie would be helpful on this issue.

LEHANE: But did I provide you a transcript of the portion of the movie that you are writing about?

ISIKOFF: You provided me some-a partial transcript of the movie.

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: And did you write in your story that Michael Moore stated in his movie that flights left while federal airspace was closed, yes or no?

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: Simple question.

(CROSSTALK)

ISIKOFF: As I told you, when we see the full transcript, we will respond as to whether or not

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: Hold on, Chris. Let me ask the questions. Will you provide Michael Isikoff and will you provide us a full transcript of this movie?

LEHANE: You can come to us whenever you want about any single fact that you want.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: No, no. Answer the question.

ISIKOFF: He's not answering the question.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: Will you provide a transcript?

ISIKOFF: Full transcript, full transcript.

LEHANE: You come to me with any issue that you have and I'll go over it with you.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: Chris Lehane, will you provide us a full transcript, yes or no?

LEHANE: As I provided Michael Isikoff when he asked, I provided the transcript of the issue that he was looking at.

SCARBOROUGH: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: And Michael still hasn't answered my question.

SCARBOROUGH: All right, thank you so much. I am going to have to take that as a no.


And now, a week later, there still isn't a full transcript. But thanks to the yeoman's work by some people with a higher butthead tolerance than I have, we have a partial transcript:


In the days following September 11th, all commercial and private airline traffic was grounded.

VOICEOVER: The FAA has taken action to close all of the airports in the United States.

VOICEOVER: Even grounding the President's father, former President Bush, on a flight forced to land in Milwaukee. Dozens of travelers stranded, among them, Ricky Martin, due to perform at tonight's Latin Grammy awards.

NARRATOR: Not even Ricky Martin would fly. But really, who wanted to fly? No one. Except the bin Ladens.

(video of plane taking off... song, "We've got to get out of this place")

SEN. BYRON DORGAN: We had some airplanes authorized at the highest levels of our government to fly to pick up Osama bin Laden's family members and others from Saudi Arabia; transport them out of this country.

NARRATOR: It turns out that the White House approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens and numerous other Saudis. At least six private jets and nearly two dozen commercial plans carried the Saudis and the bin Ladens out of the U.S. after September 13th. In all, 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to leave the country.


Now, let's read back to what Chris Lehane said:


LEHANE: Yes, but we are very, very careful. We make very clear that the flights didn't take off until after September 13, which is when federal airspace was opened.


And what does the movie say?


In the days following September 11th, all commercial and private airline traffic was grounded....At least six private jets and nearly two dozen commercial plans carried the Saudis and the bin Ladens out of the U.S. after September 13th.


I don't know about anyone else, but the impression that gives me dovetails with what Isikoff is saying...that there's a clear impression that the bin Ladens got clearance while all other flights were still grounded. In particular, the use of the term "days following" is used in quite the misleading fashion and not the "clear" way Lehane asserts. And speaking of Lehane, let's look at what Isikoff wrote, that outrageously dishonest quote over which Lehane made so much hay:


But the flights didn't begin until Sept. 14-after airspace reopened.

With all of that said, Moore may well have said more plainly that this all happened after airspace was reopened, but so far there's no transcript proving this. And since there are so many awful people attacking him, and his cause is so noble, I don't see what's wrong with providing a transcript of the movie to prove his critics wrong.

Now, the next bit we'll talk about is something brought up by my brother in law, which is the footage of President Bush saying something about terrorists and then teeing up at the golf course. Alas, it turns out Moore is less than honest with this too. First, the context of the quote used shows just how disingenuous Moore is:


KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine, Aug. 4 -- It's a ritual when President Bush golfs: As he gets ready to tee off, reporters toss out a few questions about the news of the day from their perches on a nearby sand trap. This morning, Bush wasn't waiting. He sprang from his golf cart at 6:15 a.m. and said he was "distressed to hear about the latest suicide bombers in Israel."

Just over four hours before, as Bush slept at his parents' seaside retreat, a Palestinian suicide bomber blew up a bus in Israel, killing nine passengers.

Bush, wearing khakis and a knit shirt, was holding a driver in his gloved left hand. The rest of his foursome, including his father, former president George H.W. Bush, was waiting. However incongruous the setting, the president plunged ahead. "There are a few killers who want to stop the peace process that we have started, and we must not let them," he said. "I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killers."

His business out of the way, Bush barely paused for breath before saying, "Thank you. Now watch this drive."

...

During his comments this morning, Bush said, "For those who yearn for peace in the Middle East, for those in the Arab lands, for those in Europe, for those all around the world who yearn for peace, we must do everything we possibly can to stop the terror."


See what's happened here? For a better illustration, let's look at the movie's use of the quote:


REP. JIM MCDERMOTT: It's like training a dog; ya tell him to sit down or ya tell him to roll over at the same time, the dog doesn't know what to do. Well the American people are being treated like that. It was really very very skillfully and, and ugly in what they did.

PRESIDENT BUSH: We must stop the terror. I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killers. Thank you. Now watch this drive. (President driving a golf ball)


So Moore wants us to believe this quote was an attempt by Bush to scare the public about another attack by al Qaeda, but in reality he was talking about a suicide bomber in the Middle East. Further, Bush went out of his way to make his comments. In other words, he wasn't badgered into answering a reporter's question in the middle of his golf game, but volunteered his remark!

We could go on with stuff like this, so we will.

In the film, we get the following snarkism:


NARRATOR: George Bush spent the rest of August at the ranch where life was less complicated.

Well, what was Bush actually doing?


While in Texas, he will have a working vacation there. I was going to do this at the end of the briefing. Let me give you some information now. But the President will travel for approximately two days a week each week during his visit to Texas. The upcoming week, he will travel one day to build a house in nearby Waco, Texas, to participate in a Habitat for Humanity event.

The following week, the President will travel to Colorado and New Mexico. The week following that, the President will travel roughly three days to Wisconsin and other locations TBD. He'll also travel to Pennsylvania that week.

The following week, the President will have an event in nearby San Antonio, and you can also anticipate travel over Labor Day weekend to some unnamed cities as of this point.

But to get back to the probe, the President enjoys getting out of the Beltway. The President enjoys being in the country. He is looking forward to what he calls his "home to the heartland" visit, where he will be based in Crawford, Texas but will, from there, travel to the rest of America to meet with a wide variety of Americans, to listen to their concerns, including union workers, including people concerned about our nation's defense, including people who are fighting for social justice through Habitat for Humanity. And that will be the essence of what the President does.

...

Q Will there be a national security conference call --

MR. FLEISCHER: He'll have intelligence briefings every day. Every day but Sundays.

Q Live, or by phone?

MR. FLEISCHER: They're always live.


Doesn't sound "less complicated" to me.

Next, Moore repeats the tired old canard about how Gore really won:


NARRATOR: And hope that the other side will just sit by and wait for the phone to ring. And even if numerous independent investigations prove that Gore got the most votes...

JEFFREY TOBIN: If there was a statewide recount, under every scenario, Gore won the election.


Dumb, dumb, dumb, right down to the use of Jeffrey Tobin. Needless to say, they are wrong:


A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.

Then Moore shows he has an awfully high opinion of himself:


NARRATOR: Even though we were nowhere near the White House, for some reason the Secret Service had shown up to ask us what we were doing standing across the street from the Saudi embassy.

MICHAEL MOORE: We're not here to cause any trouble or anything. Uh, ya know, is that...

OFFICER: That's fine. Just wanted to get some information on what was going on.

MICHAEL MOORE: Yeah yeah yeah, I didn't realize the Secret Service guards foreign embassies.

OFFICER: Uh, not usually, no sir.


Ah, but despite his wet dreams, the Secret Service wasn't out to bug Michael Moore. Instead, they were there because the Saudis requested their presence...something every embassy is able to request. That's what the officer meant by "not usually." They aren't there by default, but rather by request of the embassy. And their website has this to say:


The Secret Service Uniformed Division is a uniformed force whose members protect the White House Complex, the Vice President's residence and foreign embassies and missions in the Washington, D.C.,area.

Finally, because I'm getting tired of reading all of this crap, the film says this about Iraq:


A nation that had never murdered a single American citizen.

Hm. Well, Jake Tapper asked Moore about that line:


TAPPER: You declare in the film that Hussein's regime had never killed an American …

MOORE: That isn't what I said. Quote the movie directly.

TAPPER: What is the quote exactly?

MOORE: "Murdered." The government of Iraq did not commit a premeditated murder on an American citizen. I'd like you to point out one.

TAPPER: If the government of Iraq permitted a terrorist named Abu Nidal who is certainly responsible for killing Americans to have Iraq as a safe haven; if Saddam Hussein funded suicide bombers in Israel who did kill Americans; if the Iraqi police — now this is not a murder but it's a plan to murder — to assassinate President Bush which at the time merited airstrikes from President Clinton once that plot was discovered; does that not belie your claim that the Iraqi government never murdered an American or never had a hand in murdering an American?

MOORE: No, because nothing you just said is proof that the Iraqi government ever murdered an American citizen. And I am still waiting for you to present that proof.


Way to dissemble there, Mike.


From The-Crease”

“You’d have an easier time nailing jello to a tree than trying to spin Moore as truthful.”

“Exactly, Nigal. The intellectual legwork has been done, and Moore's movie apparently has some serious errors in it.

Still, I plan to see it when it comes out on DVD.”

“I think it's funny that when Moore supporters are confronted with documented errors/distortions and are provided a link to a website detailing 50+ errors/distortions, they shut up and ignore it. They refuse to acknowledge that their beloved "documentary" apparently is full of holes. Pathetic.

Okay blissninny brigade, simon says stick your fingers in your ears and say "nyah nyah nyah - can't hear you".”

“"Still, I plan to see it when it comes out on DVD."

Maybe we can put on our brown shirts and watch it together? It'd be like frickin' Beavis and Butthead with all the heckling. Huh, huh...huhhuh.”

“Sorry it took a few moments to prove you wrong mutt.


St. Petersburg Times, June 9, 2004 : TIA now verifies flight of Saudis

TAMPA - Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, with most of the nation's air traffic still grounded, a small jet landed at Tampa International Airport, picked up three young Saudi men and left.

The men, one of them thought to be a member of the Saudi royal family, were accompanied by a former FBI agent and a former Tampa police officer on the flight to Lexington, Ky.

The Saudis then took another flight out of the country. The two ex-officers returned to TIA a few hours later on the same plane.

For nearly three years, White House, aviation and law enforcement officials have insisted the flight never took place and have denied published reports and widespread Internet speculation about its purpose.

But now, at the request of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, TIA officials have confirmed that the flight did take place and have supplied details.
<snip>



The Media Consortium Florida Ballot Project

Table 1
Candidate Outcomes Based on Potential Recounts in Florida Presidential Election 2000

Review of All Ballots Statewide (Never Undertaken)

Review Method              Winner           Margin of Victory
Standard as set by each county Canvassing
Board during their survey         Gore        171 votes
Fully punched chads and limited marks on
optical ballots         Gore         115 votes
Any dimples or optical mark         Gore         107 votes
One corner of chad detached or optical mark         Gore         60 votes”

“Sorry about the formatting there - I gave it my best try. The original (pdf document) is more readable. There's also this from Matt Drudge (of all places):

BIG MEDIA FLORIDA RECOUNT: GORE TOPPED BUSH IF ALL UNDER/OVER VOTES COUNTED; LEGAL STRATEGY DESTROYED CHANCES

**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit DRUDGE REPORT**

A vote-by-vote review of untallied ballots in the 2000 Florida presidential election commissioned by the nation's main media outlets shows Al Gore edged ahead of George W. Bush "under all the scenarios for counting all undervotes and overvotes statewide," the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
<snip>”

“Okay, only 58 to go! LOL

Seriously, thanks for the links. The film was made before the TIA revelation. The Florida debacle will never be resolved to anyone's satisfaction.”

“Quit whining and re-install the usurper!


(I ALMOST wrote 're-elect', LOL)”

“Still can't get over it can ya tilt? I don't know who's more disgruntled, you or Gore. LOL!

As bad as liberals make our current leader out to be we are still a lot better off having avoided a Gore term [shiver].”

“Here's the one I was looking for (Thank God for Google cache):

Gore wins under six of nine scenarios

Monday, November 12, 2001

The media consortium applied its ballot review to nine scenarios for recounting ballots. The first two attempt to model historical events as closely as possible. The others, while taking court and political party actions into consideration, are more hypothetical. All are based on two out of three reviewers agreeing about whether a mark occurs by a candidate's name.

If the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't stopped the counting

Dec. 9 count/Counties' own standards -- Bush by 493

What might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't stopped a hand count ordered by the state Supreme Court of all the state's under-votes. Scenario uses the results of the counties that actually finished their hand counts and, for those that didn't finish, applies the standards those counties planned to use. Also counts some over-votes in nine counties.

If the four counties Gore wanted to count had finished

Gore's four-county strategy -- Bush by 225

What might have happened if the four Democratic counties in which Al Gore sought hand counts had finished in time to be included in the state's certified vote total. Scenario adds the actual results of Palm Beach County and the 139 counted Miami-Dade precincts to the state certified total (which already includes Broward and Volusia). Consortium numbers are used only for the remaining Miami-Dade precincts. Ballots with one corner of a chad detached or better are considered votes.

If all counties agreed to use the standard acceptable to most

Statewide count/Prevailing standards -- Gore by 60

Applies to all counties the standard a majority of elections officials said they would accept as an indicator of voter intent, based on a survey by consortium members: a single-corner detached chad in punch-card counties and all "affirmative" marks in optical-scan counties. An affirmative mark is any mark that indicates voter intent, including a filled oval, another mark such as an X through the oval, circles or mark around or near the oval, and circles or marks around or near the candidate's name or party. Applied to all under- and over-votes statewide, except Volusia.

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used one standard Dec. 9

Dec. 9 count/Uniform standard-- Bush by 430

Dec. 9 again, but this time using the actual hand counts only from Palm Beach, Broward, Volusia and Miami Dade (139 precincts) and applying a uniform standard to only the under-votes in the other 63 counties and Miami-Dade's remaining precincts: one-corner detached on punch cards and all affirmative marks on optical-scan.

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used their own standards

Statewide count/Custom standard -- Gore by 171

Best guess at what an unrestricted statewide hand recount might have been. Uses actual hand counts from Broward and Volusia and consortium applies each county's own standard in other 65 counties.

If all counties had used the Gore standard

Statewide count/ Most inclusive standard -- Gore by 107

Any "dimpled chad or better" counts as vote in punch-card counties, and all affirmative marks in optical-scan counties.

If all counties had used the toughest standard

Statewide count/ Most restrictive standard -- Gore by 115

Counts only so-called "perfect" ballots that machines somehow missed, including fully punched chads and properly marked optical ballots that scanners could not read because of problems such as ink color, humidity and misalignment.

If all counties had used the Bush standard

Statewide count/Bush standard -- Gore by 105

Applies the standard generally accepted by George W. Bush's lawyers during the hand counts in the three punch-card counties where Gore sought counts: ballots with at least two corners of a chad detached. All affirmative marks accepted in optical-scan counties.v If all counties had used the Palm Beach County standard

Statewide count/ Palm Beach dimple rule -- Gore by 42

In punch-card counties, counts dimples as votes in the presidential race when dimples are also present in the U.S. Senate race or elsewhere on the ballot; otherwise accepts only two-corner detached standard. All affirmative marks in optical-scan. Based on Palm Beach County canvassing board's stated aim of accepting dimpled chads as presidential votes if the voter left dimple marks in other races on the ballot.

* The only scenario of the nine in which hand counts completed Dec. 9, as well as other ballot adjustments, are not included, because this scenario assumes no counts would have taken place outside the four counties.

** All statewide counts apply standards to all under-votes and over-votes. And because there was more than a 1 percent difference between Volusia County's certified number of under- and over-votes and the number it showed to the consortium, the consortium has chosen to use Volusia's certified count in all scenarios rather than the number the consortium reviewed.”

“Nigal, when are YOU people going to get it through your heads that the Republicans are just a bunch of crooks? LOL

Gotta love the patriotic/religious act they put on while they're doing it though... Daytime Emmies all around!”

“Roger & Me: What happened in Flint sucked. Maybe Companies shouldn't just pull out if it destroys a community? Maybe a community shouldn't put all it's eggs in one basket?

I hope the film made people think, especially power brokers and people with only one specialized talent

Columbine: Our murder rate is atrocious. The myths explaining why seem like crap & cop outs.

I hope the film made people think about new ways to combat murder.

And the cartoon made me snarf my coke!

F 9/11: Still waiting for the lines to die down a bit :)

I'm sure it will make me think.

I like Moore.”

“

Aww, Michael Moore has a seat of honor in the Presidential box at the DNC.

Yep, he's an objective, non-partisan truth teller. Yep, yep, yep.”

“We have a high murder rate because we're more ethnically diverse.... according to "Moses".”

“We are not crooks!!



OK, bad example...”

“LOL Tilt! Maybe "Moses" should take his people to the Promised Land?”

“Hey Mutt - who ever claimed Moore wasn't partisan?

Objectiveness is subjective”

“Objectiveness is subjective? News to me! Someone needs to revise the Scientific Method!”

“True objectiveness is like true altruism - doesn't exist

Is light a particle or a wave?”

“Perhaps. But, for all practical purposes objectivity can be practiced - and is.”

“Do we have to get practicle? :)

Can you name an objective documentary?

Can you name anything media based that is "objective"?”

“sociopolitical documentary not wildlife!

Although Jane Goodalls Crapumentories are a fine example of pseudoscience drivel!!!!!

Damn, not quite sure where that came from.”

“I watched some of the DNC convention stuff last night, but I mostly scanned slides. Al Gore cracked me up, what a has-been political loser! I must say, though, Bill Clinton did a great job. Like him or not, that guy can speak and work a crowd like a wet cigar. Whatever that means. Clinton has charisma and charm and says the right thing at the right time. If I were a Dem, I'd let him stain me too.”

“No, I'm not a big fan of documentaries, bearmagnet. Your point is taken, but it seems pretty simple to me: find as many objective facts as you can, ask one side for their story, ask the other side for their story, ask both sides for their rebuttals, and refrain from making editorial comments.

Seems simple enough.”

“I see what your saying Mutt. I'm not sure I ever considered Moore's films documentaries and always took the bias into consideration.

Did he start this or the media?”

“You're knit picking, Mutt. Anyone can almost always find a way to discredit something if you want to.

In my opinion, here's what Moore's film does for your average viewer:

1. Really drives home what a dumbass George is and how unqualified he is to be leader. Seven minutes sitting around in a kid's classroom after he's learned our nation is under attack? Now there's a responsible and credible leader. I wanted to see someone stand up immediately and say, "Kids, I have to leave now. I'm sorry. A very important thing has happened. Your teacher will tell you about it later. And good reading, by the way. Keep it up!" Instead of that dead, stupid stare into space on probably one of the most ciritcal moments in our nation's history. Not to mention all the vacation time he took his first year in the presidency -- more than any other president EVER! Cool!

2. Points out the inconsistancy in American foreign policy by showing America's two-faced approach to the terrorism in the Middle East i.e. Hey, the U.S. is wheeling and dealing with the Saudis, our primary source of fuel and to whom we give billions and billions of dollars every year, a chunk of which is most definintely trickled down to fundalmentalists/terrorists and the Pres.is all for ridding the Middle East of "terrorists" by invading Iraq. Hmmm. I think that's a conflict of interest. Regardless, it points out the flawed policy.

3. People get RICH off the war machine while the poor SOBs go off and die. Maybe the Vietnam-era folks remember that one but for plenty of people in my generation and younger, that may be a new concept (wasn't for me but I still like to see it up on the big screen). Also shows how our troops are getting disgruntled with war. Why shouldn't they? Most are way over their rotations, their parents had to buy their flak jackets and when they get old and have problems from that bulletwound to the leg or psychological problems from blowing people away, the VA won't pay for medical care.

3. Points out a ton of interesting other FACTS such as that most of Congress didn't bother to read the friggin Patriot Act -- probably the most Nazi-esque document passed in the U.S. since McCarthyism; how heavily recruiters do target minorities and I think he was good in showing, hey, our political leaders, including those in Congress, are pretty friggin' weak.


I really loved the "smoke 'em out" montage. Jeeze did I get sick of that line...”

“29 July 2004

Marines Probe 'Fahrenheit' Soldier

http://uk.imdb.com/news/sb/#1

The Marine reservist who told Michael Moore in Fahrenheit 9/11 that he would not fight again in Iraq and accompanied Moore as the filmmaker attempted to persuade members of Congress to have their kids join up to fight, is being investigated by the Marine Corps, USA Today reported today (Thursday). According to the newspaper, the Corps is conducting a preliminary inquiry into Lance Cpl. Abdul Henderson's appearance in the film. A spokesman for the Marines, Patrick Kerr, commented: "He made it very clear that he would not follow orders. ... We're trying to determine what, if anything, he said or did was wrong." Asked what would befall Henderson if he failed to report for a second tour of duty in Iraq, Kerr replied, "Technically, he'd be a deserter." Henderson told the newspaper that so far, he has heard nothing from his superiors. "I expect trouble, but who knows?" he said. "They never told us not to give our opinions of how we felt." Meanwhile, Fahrenheit continued to perform strongly during mid-week. It has now earned more than $106 million at the domestic box office.”

“Ya gotta be careful what ya say, no doubt.”