# Farenheit 9/11 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 16, 2004, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723 "2004-06-16T20:04:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/81 "2004-06-23T20:19:41Z")
Wow! Now we’ve almost filled up **two** pages on this thread! And the movie doesn’t even open until the day after tomorrow! I love this election year! It’s so exciting! 2000 was so boring! Wasn’t 2000 boring? (Until they had to count the votes, that is.) ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2004, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/82 "2004-06-23T22:54:43Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Michael Moore admitted that there was a factual error in a caption in the theaterical release of the film, so he corrected it for the DVD? How dare he! Hanging’s too good for him! > > I suppose you’d have been happier if he’d denied any error and allowed the incorrect caption to remain on the DVD. Take a moment to reread that. Moore lied. On this count, he admitted as much. What does this mean? He came clean about one lie, but he still lied about that. And there are other lies which he has not corrected detailed in the Spinsanity reports. Note, also, that this comes from an unbiased site, not one that even leans to the right ever so slightly. You’re showing your partisanship. > [@Antiochus](#): > > You set a very high bar for integrity and compassion. > > Do you apply these same standards to the likes of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Wolfowitz, Rice, Ashcroft, and the rest of the Administration? > > If you do, how do you maintain your sanity? > > If you do, you must feel compelled to vote for someone other than Bush in the upcoming presidential election. > > Unless, of course, you are pretty sure these paradigms of virtue always tell the truth. > > And who in the Bush menagerie - other than Richard A. Clarke - has ever apologized for anything? That’s a good question. How _do_ I maintain my sanity with people like you defending favored pundits even after they’ve been shown to lie? It’s not easy. Yes, I hold BushCo to the same standards. Yes, they’ve lied. But, see, I realize that both sides are bullshitting and I don’t like it. You, however, seem to feel that if one side is really terrible it’s okay to lie about them, because you need recruits for yours. Finding good sources and keeping yourself objectively informed is difficult. The vitriol is great and it’s comforting to take shelter with people who agree with you. I don’t know everything–far from it–but I’m doing my best not to become a shill for a political party because I think it’s kind of degrading. Don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![bughunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/aeb1de/32.png) [@bughunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bughunter)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/83 "2004-06-24T00:48:51Z")
> [@Avumede](#): > > There can be little doubt that the frenzy to call Moore a liar is motivated by politics, not concern for the truth. What mystifies me the most is that those who are so hasty to label Mr. Moore a liar are the same ones that idolize leaders and media personalities who exercise so little regard for fact in their fanatic pursuit of their agendas. Compared to what is spouted by Rush, Coulter, Bush, and Chaney on a daily basis, the liberties Mr. Moore takes with facts are minor. I personally think Moore does a disservice to the liberal cause by being so loose with his fact checking and research. Al Franken did a much, much better job with his book, but the right wing attack dogs in the media painted him as a clown… which stuck all too easily and diverted all attention away from the actual _content_ of his book, some of which predated Clark’s book by nearly a year. So if Moore can do what it takes to get these issues actually discussed, and not let the right wingers distract the media into focusing on personality, once again, then I can forgive whatever errors and exaggerations he makes. Those can get ironed out in the subsequent discussions. Perhaps the errors are there precisely for this reason – _to make people talk about the issues_? God knows the issues themselves haven’t been enough… despite their scandalous nature. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/84 "2004-06-24T02:24:57Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Take a moment to reread that. Moore lied. On this count, he admitted as much. What does this mean? He came clean about one lie, but he still lied about that. He admitted to making a factual mistake in the caption. Making a mistake isn’t lying. It does nothing to encourage people to correct their mistakes if they’re branded as liars anytime they do so. > [@](#): > > - > > And there are other lies which he has not corrected detailed in the Spinsanity reports. Note, also, that this comes from an unbiased site, not one that even leans to the right ever so slightly. You’re showing your partisanship. \*To which party? ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/85 "2004-06-24T03:18:01Z")
> [@bughunter](#): > > So if Moore can do what it takes to get these issues actually discussed, and not let the right wingers distract the media into focusing on personality, once again, then I can forgive whatever errors and exaggerations he makes. Those can get ironed out in the subsequent discussions. > > Perhaps the errors are there precisely for this reason – _to make people talk about the issues_? > > God knows the issues themselves haven’t been enough… despite their scandalous nature. One of my students, a Japanese housewife, brought up the subject of _Farenheit 9/11_ just yesterday. I swear this was with no prompting from me – I know nothing about this woman’s politics and the only thing I know about her movie preferences is that she really likes Johnny Depp, so I had no reason to think that she’d have any interest in _Farenheit 9/11_ at all. But she asked me if I was planning to see it, and said she was very curious about it. She also said (I’m paraphrasing a bit, as her English is good but not great) “I think it’s very good that in America people can show so many different opinions. In Japan, we complain to each other, but the government doesn’t hear about it. Our opinions don’t have any effect on what they do.” I said, “Maybe you need a Japanese director to make this kind of movie.” She laughed very hard at this, then said “Maybe someday it will happen!” Based on my admittedly limited understanding of the Japanese, I think she actually meant something closer to “Yeah, that’ll happen…the day after hell freezes over!” It sometimes makes me sad when my Japanese students say things to me that indicate that they hold an unrealistically sunny view of America – an America that I wish existed, but that I know does not. However, I think this particular student was right on. It _is_ very good that in America people can hold many different opinions and share them not just in private discussion but in a public forum. In America, you can even make a major movie that’s openly critical of the current government, its policies, and the President himself! It may be controversial, it may be difficult to get it distributed, but Michael Moore has shown that it can be done. In America, they can’t shut you up because you don’t hold the “right” opinions. That strikes me as something bigger and more important than whether or not there may be lies (I doubt it), mistakes (possible), or spin (I’d be stunned if there wasn’t) in the film. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/86 "2004-06-24T03:22:23Z")
Almost as if a Lib (or Con) would need to write anonymously for anyone to take them halfway seriously - and then they would just be written off as an anonymous coward. ---
**Author:** ![Hail\_Ants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dc4da7/32.png) [@Hail\_Ants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hail_Ants)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/87 "2004-06-24T03:54:39Z")
> [@](#): > > So if Moore can do what it takes to get these issues actually discussed, and not let the right wingers distract the media into focusing on personality, Fine, except Moore himself refuses to ever discuss anything unless he’s completely in control of the situation. And Moore’s personality is an issue, in that he’s a complete phoney. He is the Limousine Liberal poster child. He schlubs around in his trademark jeans, t-shirt & cap like he’s a working class slob, when in fact he’s a mansion owning, personal assistant & bodyguard employing, first-class flying millionaire. A year or so ago during his little outburst in London his disdain for so-called ‘working class’ people boiled over to the surface [when he ranted on about how little he was being paid.](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C74883%2C00.html) Not to mention his absolutely deplorable and opportunistic comments about the “wimpy, white” hijacked passengers (opportunistic in that he was plugging his “Stupid **White** Men” book via their deaths). ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/88 "2004-06-24T04:01:57Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > Fine, except Moore himself refuses to ever discuss anything unless he’s completely in control of the situation. > > And Moore’s personality is an issue, in that he’s a complete phoney. He is the Limousine Liberal poster child. He schlubs around in his trademark jeans, t-shirt & cap like he’s a working class slob, when in fact he’s a mansion owning, personal assistant & bodyguard employing, first-class flying millionaire. > > A year or so ago during his little outburst in London his disdain for so-called ‘working class’ people boiled over to the surface [when he ranted on about how little he was being paid.](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C74883%2C00.html) > > Not to mention his absolutely deplorable and opportunistic comments about the “wimpy, white” hijacked passengers (opportunistic in that he was plugging his “Stupid **White** Men” book via their deaths). What was that? Proving his point that all you do is snipe his personality? So what? No one made him a love object of liberals. We didn’t elect him President or anything. Do you want me to go start a thread on that marital-trouble having pill popping hypocritical arrogant slob whose leg the Right has been humping and proudly proclaiming themselves mental slave dittoheads to for decades? ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/89 "2004-06-24T04:30:22Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > He admitted to making a factual mistake in the caption. Making a mistake isn’t lying. It does nothing to encourage people to correct their mistakes if they’re branded as liars anytime they do so. Except it wasn’t a mistake. He replaced the caption “Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman.” with “Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again.” It doesn’t seem like a typo to me. Not only is it difficult to see how the two could be confused, it clearly helps him with his agenda: > [@](#): > > Moore does not, however, explain that he inserted this caption over the ad - which made no mention of Horton - in order to manufacture a direct link in the audience’s mind with the Bush campaign (Bush discussed Horton extensively on the campaign trail but the famous ad mentioning him was run by a third-party group linked to Bush media advisor Roger Ailes). More importantly, however, you have ignored all the other points in the columns. Please address them. > [@](#): > > To which party? Well, since Moore is ostensibly a liberal, it would be a liberal bias. Given the disingenuousness with which some posters appear to have approached this issue, I’m inclined to point to such a bias as the cause. The only other reason I can see for your not having addressed the other instances of Moore’s dishonesty would be some sort of personal devotion to him, something that’s too absurd to merit any contemplation. ---
**Author:** ![Hail\_Ants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dc4da7/32.png) [@Hail\_Ants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hail_Ants)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/90 "2004-06-24T04:39:39Z")
Because his personality gets at the issue of his credibility. As an example, Limbaugh has lost **a lot** of credibility, but not so much because of his becoming addicted to (originally) prescribed pain killers. But more so (to me anyway) for his less than forthcoming addmission & explaination. Moore’s first film, Roger & Me, was basically a testament to class hatred. That GM executives fired people so that they could water ski behind bigger yatchs. That capitalism is evil and socialism is good. This makes his personallity & behavior on the matter of lifestyle very relavent. And with F9/11 he is presenting himself as a selfless, objective, defender of freedom and the victims of Sept 11th. When in fact he is just using manipulative images to paint GWB in the worst possible light. In fact, **he’s** exploiting the victims of 9/11 both for political & financial gain (last I heard he wasn’t giving 100% of the film’s profits to charity). Which is the very thing he is accusing & condemning GWB for in the film! ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/91 "2004-06-24T04:42:15Z")
Well, then he’s a hypocrite. _shrugs_ I don’t like him anyway. But even a hypocrite can be right sometimes. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/92 "2004-06-24T05:54:15Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > In fact, he’s exploiting the victims of 9/11 both for political & financial gain. Which is the very thing he is accusing & condemning GWB for in the film! And which, as you point out, he was condemning GM executives for in his first film. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/93 "2004-06-24T06:07:52Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > And Moore’s personality is an issue, in that he’s a complete phoney. He is the Limousine Liberal poster child. He schlubs around in his trademark jeans, t-shirt & cap like he’s a working class slob, when in fact he’s a mansion owning, personal assistant & bodyguard employing, first-class flying millionaire. Really? Somebody better tell Moore, then: > [@](#): > > The day I talked to Michael Moore, I’d read an item in the _New York Daily News_ claiming that this so-called man of the people had a hot tub installed on the balcony of his Manhattan apartment. > > Asked about this earth-shattering news earlier this week, Moore laughed. “I don’t have a hot tub. I don’t even have a balcony.” > > … As for that phantom hot tub. "The opposition thinks it can undercut me with the mass audience. They say, ‘He’s actually a rich guy.’ They fail to understand that if a working-class person from Queens read that, they’d be going, ‘Hot damn. Dude has a hot tub.’ > [**Moore controversy,** _Rocky Mountain News_](http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/movies/article/0,1299,DRMN_23_2973446,00.html) In any event, so what if Moore is not scraping by on a working-class income? Saying that he has to be working-class himself to address working-class issues is as meaningless as saying a physician must be sick before he can treat sick people. :rolleyes: > [@Hail Ants](#): > > And with F9/11 he is presenting himself as a selfless, objective, defender of freedom and the victims of Sept 11th. Really? That’s the first time I’ve heard this interpretation of the movie; it’s certainly not a point raised in any of the reviews, or by Moore himself. > [@Hail Ants](#): > > In fact, he’s exploiting the victims of 9/11 both for political & financial gain (last I heard he wasn’t giving 100% of the film’s profits to charity). Which is the very thing he is accusing & condemning GWB for in the film! Political gain? Moore’s running for office? Or are you pulling accusations out of thin air again? ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/94 "2004-06-24T06:21:56Z")
> [@capacitor](#): > > If this film breaks $40 million in the first week, Eisner is good as gone as CEO of Disney. Is it mathematically possible for this film to break $40M in one week? While I’ve seen several different figures for how many screens it is opening on, none of them have been over 850. You could probably count on something like 3-4 showings a day but I don’t know what the calculated ticket price is or how many seats an average auditorium has. ---
**Author:** ![Hail\_Ants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dc4da7/32.png) [@Hail\_Ants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hail_Ants)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/95 "2004-06-24T06:48:44Z")
\*And with F9/11 he is presenting himself as a selfless, objective, defender of freedom and the victims of Sept 11th. \* > [@](#): > > Really? That’s the first time I’ve heard this interpretation of the movie; it’s certainly not a point raised in any of the reviews, or by Moore himself. Well gee, I’m looking at an ad for it on imdb right now: \*\* Your Country Your Future Your Movie \*\* Sounds like he is to me… ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/96 "2004-06-24T06:59:08Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Except it wasn’t a mistake. Do you have some proof that Moore knowingly and deliberately attributed the wrong crime to Horton? The man’s not omniscient, isn’t it possible that he was just _wrong_, or that someone in the computer room screwed things up somehow? Sure, that’s the sort of thing it would be best to catch before releasing the film, but he’s corrected it for the DVD/video release and admitted that the original caption was wrong. > [@](#): > > - > > He replaced the caption “Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman.” with “Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again.” It doesn’t seem like a typo to me. Not only is it difficult to see how the two could be confused, it clearly helps him with his agenda: \*You have the order of the captions reversed. He replaced the incorrect “Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again” with the correct “Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman.” If he’d done it the other way around as you described, he’d have been replacing the truth with an error or lie. I don’t see how you could confuse the two this way, but it was probably a mistake and not an intentional deception…even though it does help support your agenda. Anyway, while I agree that Moore’s description of the incorrect caption as a “typo” doesn’t seem accurate (although I suppose some sort of cut-and-paste accident could have taken place), that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a _mistake_. If he didn’t _intend_ to say something that wasn’t correct, it was a mistake. > [@the Spinsanity site](#): > > Moore does not, however, explain that he inserted this caption over the ad - which made no mention of Horton - in order to manufacture a direct link in the audience’s mind with the Bush campaign (Bush discussed Horton extensively on the campaign trail but the famous ad mentioning him was run by a third-party group linked to Bush media advisor Roger Ailes). Why would he “explain” that if it’s not true? Perhaps it _is_ true, I don’t know, but unless there’s some proof of Moore’s intent it seems strange to ask why he didn’t explain that he held particular motives when it’s possible that wasn’t the reason why he added the caption at all. Even if that was his reason, I don’t see why he should be expected to explain it. Does he need to explain why he made every decision that went into the film? Could anyone watching the film be unaware of Moore’s political biases? It’s not a lie to simply fail to say “That’s why I did it.” Now, if that was really his reason, it would be a lie for him to say “No, it wasn’t!” But I don’t see that this has happened. > [@](#): > > - > > More importantly, however, you have ignored all the other points in the columns. Please address them. \*I’ll address whatever I like, and what I’m interested in addressing is the specific phrase “Moore admits to altering _Bowling for Columbine_ DVD”. This phrase is not literally false. I could rewrite it using Webster’s definitions for two key words and have a truthful, if awkward, sentence: “Moore concedes as true that he made different the _Bowling for Columbine_ DVD”. But “admits to altering” has a different ring than the equally true “announces he corrected”, doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/97 "2004-06-24T15:53:19Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > You have the order of the captions reversed. He replaced the incorrect “Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again” with the correct “Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman.” If he’d done it the other way around as you described, he’d have been replacing the truth with an error or lie. I don’t see how you could confuse the two this way, but it was probably a mistake and not an intentional deception…even though it does help support your agenda. Er…what? I have them in the right order because I was referring to the original alteration, what you think is a mistake and what I think is deliberate. > [@](#): > > Why would he “explain” that if it’s not true? Perhaps it _is_ true, I don’t know, but unless there’s some proof of Moore’s intent it seems strange to ask why he didn’t explain that he held particular motives when it’s possible that wasn’t the reason why he added the caption at all. Probably because he was caught in a lie. Hey, I’m not saying that his changing to the correct sentence isn’t a good thing–at least he’s not denying it–but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a lie in the first place. > [@](#): > > Even if that was his reason, I don’t see why he should be expected to explain it. Does he need to explain why he made every decision that went into the film? Could anyone watching the film be unaware of Moore’s political biases? It’s not a lie to simply fail to say “That’s why I did it.” Now, if that was really his reason, it would be a lie for him to say “No, it wasn’t!” But I don’t see that this has happened. If you were reading a book by Bill O’Reilly and found some “mistakes” would you think it’s okay that he lied because people are aware of his bias? I don’t and I think it’s ridiculous to defend a pundit’s lying by simply positing artistic license. > [@](#): > > …what I’m interested in addressing is the specific phrase “Moore admits to altering _Bowling for Columbine_ DVD”. This phrase is not literally false. I could rewrite it using Webster’s definitions for two key words and have a truthful, if awkward, sentence: “Moore concedes as true that he made different the _Bowling for Columbine_ DVD”. But “admits to altering” has a different ring than the equally true “announces he corrected”, doesn’t it? Yes, it does and if you think that it was an honest mistake that’s a correction you’d want to make. But, as I explained, it’s difficult to see it as a mere typo and he certainly had a motive for doing it. I don’t know about you, but I think giving pundits this much credence is hardly sensible. > [@](#): > > I’ll address whatever I like So would you accept the validity of the criticisms, seeing as how the larger issue is Moore’s integrity? ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/98 "2004-06-24T16:12:30Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Er…what? I have them in the right order because I was referring to the original alteration, what you think is a mistake and what I think is deliberate. Isn’t part of the charge against Moore that the original ad _had_ no caption referring to Horton? The “original alteration” would have been adding the caption in the first place, not replacing one caption with another. > [@](#): > > - > > Probably because he was caught in a lie. Hey, I’m not saying that his changing to the correct sentence isn’t a good thing–at least he’s not denying it–but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a lie in the first place. \*But if it was a mistake of some sort, it _would_ mean that it wasn’t a lie in the first place. > [@](#): > > \*If you were reading a book by Bill O’Reilly and found some “mistakes” would you think it’s okay that he lied because people are aware of his bias? \*That would depend on what the “lies” were and whether they were actual lies, honest mistakes, or slanted/exaggerated representations of the facts. But I certainly wouldn’t expect O’Reilly to say “Now boys and girls, keep in mind, I have my biases and I’ll be doing my best to present my point of view and convince you that it’s correct!” I know that already. I’d be a fool if I didn’t. > [@](#): > > - > > So would you accept the validity of the criticisms, seeing as how the larger issue is Moore’s integrity? \*Look buddy, I’m posting in my free time here. And I do mean _free_ – unlike many other Dopers, I don’t have Internet access at work. I already spend a truly ridiculous portion of my non-work hours here. I used up my lunch break writing my last reply to you. If you think I’ve got time to read through every link you throw out, research the claims contained therein and see if they’re supported by outside evidence, and then determine the validity of the criticisms, you can think again. I chose the one point I wanted to respond to and that I felt I had time to do justice to. You’ll just have to live without hearing my opinions on the rest of them. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/99 "2004-06-24T18:58:56Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > I think it’s great that someone like Moore exists… > [@gatopescado](#): > > Yeah, you and “Dunkin’ Doughnuts”. It is reckless for conservatives to go inserting fat jokes into this kind of debate, **gato.** At least, until Rush Limbaugh retires. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2004, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723/100 "2004-06-24T19:40:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It is reckless for conservatives to go inserting fat jokes into this kind of debate, **gato.** At least, until Rush Limbaugh retires. Fat jokes are the best they can do. (someone has to make a post 99) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/250723.md?page=6)