# Michael Moore is a liar after all **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 30, 2004, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665 "2004-07-30T23:35:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gamaliel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b487fb/32.png) [@Gamaliel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gamaliel)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/41 "2004-07-31T02:21:34Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > F911 isn’t too bad, it’s “Bowling for Columbine” that is really full of shit. I won’t see F911 mainly because of that, and also MM really had no _moral_ right to rip off his title. The author of “Something Wicked This Way Comes” (taken from Shakespeare); “I Sing the Body Electric!” (taken from Whitman) and “Golden Apples of the Sun” (taken from Yeats) has no _moral right_ to complain about others riffing off of his titles. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/42 "2004-07-31T02:32:50Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > I also have yet to see a proper ‘donkey show’, but I feel safe in judging them as ‘bad’. YMMV. You don’t know what your missing, brother! ---
**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:** [July 31, 2004, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/43 "2004-07-31T02:50:07Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Re: **S\_A** ’s typically partisan blather… > > Quote: > > Exactly! This is the problem with dishonesty. If you can’t believe everything someone says, you can’t necessarily believe anything they say. Would you care to specify just what, if anything, about my post quoted here in its entirety comprises partisan blather? Are you saying that to disdain dishonesty is a conservative trait? Are you saying honesty isn’t important to those on the left? I thought not. (But I am surprised you’d engage in such thoughtless stereotyping here where the idea is supposed to be fighting ignorance.) Tsk, tsk, tsk! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/44 "2004-07-31T03:11:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Would you care to specify just what, if anything, about my post quoted here in its entirety comprises partisan blather? It’s all in the context, of course. I’m quite sure that if you spent 1/100 the time you seem to have availble to argue against whatever you define as ‘liberals’, you might find questionable actions by the administration sometime over the past four years. Yet you remain silent. Why is that, exactly? > [@](#): > > Ya know, throwing insults at people and then saying you’re leaving is pretty lame. Point taken. Hey, but don’t worry; like I said, I’ll be back in week. If you’d rather get some insults in right now, rather than wait, go for it. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/45 "2004-07-31T03:15:25Z")
> [@milroyj](#): > > and changed the font/typeface . Martha Stewart got 5 months for that! ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/46 "2004-07-31T03:29:51Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Well, first of all, I half expect to find out that this charge is a lie or a mischaracterization of some kind, because, well, just about everything that the right says these days turns out to be a lie (okay, well, just about all of the charges that they level at others turn out to be lies). Certainly a loss of credibility is what one suffers when they routinely lie. Wait, wait…the Bloomington Pantagraph is “the right” now? Come on, they asked for compensatory damages of a DOLLAR. They’re a newspaper in a college town. And they’re “the right.” Riiiiight… ---
**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:** [July 31, 2004, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/47 "2004-07-31T03:52:53Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > It’s all in the context, of course. I’m quite sure that if you spent 1/100 the time you seem to have availble to argue against whatever you define as ‘liberals’, you might find questionable actions by the administration sometime over the past four years. Yet you remain silent. Why is that, exactly? It’s because unlike those such as you, I _know_ what I don’t know. For example, the pure and unadulterated truth of the matter is that no one here _knows_ for an absolute certainty that Bush lied about anything! Yet one hears it over and over around here. I don’t know whether he did or not, but unless I learn incontrovertible proof that he did, I’m going to believe that he didn’t. I detested Clinton with the fire of a thousand suns, and I knew him to be a liar, based on his own words, before he ever took office. But I never would have accused him of deliberately lying and using those lies as a justification for sending American men and women off to die in a war concocted for private reasons. I wonder sometimes if people around here realize just what they’re saying. Here you have in President Bush a man who has lived his whole life prior to the presidency without assaulting anyone or having any sort of violently oriented run-ins with the law. He was a typical citizen. He had a wife and daughters, a job, attended church, and had a clean police record (other than maybe something related to partying in his younger days). But then he becomes president and turns into this cold-hearted, vengeful, mass murderer who not only cares nothing for the lives of thousands of Iraqis, but of hundreds if not eventually thousands of young American men and women. And not only that, but he’s so driven to engage in this viscious murderous rampage that he deliberately undertakes to lie to and deceive the American public in order to make his villainous and murderous dreams come true. But wait, there’s more…he works to enlist the support of other countries in his murderous sceme and manages to trick their leaders into believing him to the point that they are willing to send their own countryment to kill and be killed. And of course, for all this to be possible, he also has to decieve his own advisors and cabinet officials. Does this sound plausible to you? It most certainly doesn’t to me, thus my defense of Bush on these boards. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/48 "2004-07-31T04:07:26Z")
I haven’t seen F9/11 yet, so excuse the kinda dumb questions, but exactly what point was Moore trying to prove with this headline? Was he trying to prove that Gore really did win the election, or is he merely trying to illustrate how controversial the election was? If it’s the first, then yeah, Moore’s definetly in the wrong. But if it was the later, as the link in the OP seems to suggest… well, what’s the big deal? The “headline” in its original context makes exactly the same point, it’s just harder to see on a movie screen. The only real problem there is that it makes the folks at the Pantagraph sound more radically liberal than I assume they actually are. If I worked for that newspaper, I might be pissed, but as an unaffiliated hypothetical viewer, I don’t see how that changes the message of the movie or seriously impugns its credibility. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/49 "2004-07-31T04:22:35Z")
Moore was trying to illustrate how\* fishy \* the whole thing was. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/50 "2004-07-31T04:44:17Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > It’s because unlike those such as you, I _know_ what I don’t know. For example, the pure and unadulterated truth of the matter is that no one here _knows_ for an absolute certainty that Bush lied about anything! Yet one hears it over and over around here. I don’t know whether he did or not, but unless I learn incontrovertible proof that he did, I’m going to believe that he didn’t. One doesn’t have to go too far down memory lane for evidence: > **[Bush's search for clean Cuban hookers goes awry](https://www.theregister.com/2004/07/28/bush_sees_clean_cuban_hookers/)** > > Castro wronged by Internet gaffe > [@](#): > > Earlier this month, Bush launched an attack against Fidel Castro and his alleged promotion of sex tourism in Cuba. Our fearless leader dug way back to a 1992 speech given by Castro to prove his case. > > “The dictator welcomes sex tourism,” Bush told a room of law enforcement officials in Florida, according to the Los Angeles Times. “Here’s how he bragged about the industry,” Bush said. “This is his quote: ‘Cuba has the cleanest and most educated prostitutes in the world.’” > > As it turns out, Bush had lifted that quotation not from an actual Castro speech but rather from a 2001 essay written by then Dartmouth University undergraduate Charles Trumbull. In the essay, Trumbull did appear to quote a Castro speech about prostitution. Sadly, the student made the quotation up. > > [snip] > > And this isn’t the first time the Internet has baffled Bush. Back in 2003, the President cited another student’s thesis when making a case to go to war. The student’s work ended up in a government document describing Iraq’s weapons capability. Not exactly the kind of hard intelligence needed to justify an attack on another country. > > But just as the Bush administration did with the Iraq evidence, it is not backing down about being wrong on the Castro issue. > > “The president’s point in citing Castro’s quote was to highlight Castro’s morally corrupt attitude to human trafficking,” White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan told the LA Times. > > How funny then that the quotation ended up pointing out how inept the Bush administration is at research. Surely, the White House is committed to improving its information gathering practices in the future? Well, no. Bush’s speech “was vetted the same way all the president’s speeches are vetted,” Buchan told the paper. If not a liar, then he is an incompetent, make your choice. ---
**Author:** ![RingOfFire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e47774/32.png) [@RingOfFire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RingOfFire)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/51 "2004-07-31T05:03:42Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > All I know is that the paper didn’t call him a liar. Now did they. Yes, Yes they did. Misleading: (transitive senses) to lead in a wrong direction or into a mistaken action or belief often by deliberate deceit Deceit: to cause to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid Lie: to create a false or misleading impression So if Misleading == Deceit; and Deceit == false impressions && Lie == false impressions Therefore Misleading == Deceit (Boolean TRUE) At least you got the typing thing down, maybe a few more years you’ll get the comprehension and logical thought down. ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/52 "2004-07-31T05:23:43Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > That’s the best you can do? Hardly makes him liar of the century, does it? And aren’t we about seventy years late for the Moore-bashing threads, anyway? As if a lie should be uignored if it’s discovered too late? AS if a lie discovered means no other lies were made? Not that Michael Moore hasn’t already been totally discredited except among those who comprise his cult… Michael Moore IS the liar of the century. He lied for nothing more than personal aggrandizement and personal financial gain, no matter what his PR people (he can afford them) tell you. Shit, he even beats Dubya Bush in lies! ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/53 "2004-07-31T05:29:52Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > That’s the best you can do? Hardly makes him liar of the century, does it? And aren’t we about seventy years late for the Moore-bashing threads, anyway? As if a lie should be uignored if it’s discovered too late? AS if a lie discovered means no other lies were made? Not that Michael Moore hasn’t already been totally discredited except among those who comprise his cult… Michael Moore IS the liar of the century. He lied for nothing more than personal aggrandizement and personal financial gain, no matter what his PR people (he can afford them) tell you. Shit, he even beats Dubya Bush in lies! ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/54 "2004-07-31T05:37:22Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Now, if you would like to argue that Moore has altered the dialogue of one or more persons speaking in the film, go right ahead; I would find that a considerably more serious and compelling case for fabrication. But, the thing is, it still would not negate the entire film. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD NEGATE THE ENTIRE FILM WOULD BE PROOF THAT NOT A SINGLE FACT PRESENTED IN IT WAS TRUE. Oh sweet Jesus. **El\_Kabong** , the Manson family needs you and your type of thinking. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/55 "2004-07-31T07:14:29Z")
Lemme get this straight, Marty… After **Fahrenheit 9/11’s** been out for over a month, after every partisan dink and their roommate have gone over it with a fine-tooth comb, after all the alleged “lies” and “deceits” in the movie have been proven accurate after all, the anti-Moore folks have _finally_ shown that a _headline_ shown in the film wasn’t the **exact same headline** used in the newspaper? I mean, I want to get this straight: the _facts_ claimed by the segment are still unambiguously correct – that a full recount showed Gore with more votes than Bush – but because a _visual element_ was “off,” that somehow invalidates the _entire_ movie? Uh, yeah. :dubious: Uh, Marty, have you ever considered getting a hobby? Maybe meeting some girls, perhaps? Aside from the mind-numblingly stupid hair-splitting aspect of this entire OP ( **El\_Kabong** nailed the point in his first post, IMO), I just wonder where was this ultra-exacting demand for accuracy and veracity from the resident SDMB conservatives when Mr. Bush was selling his war with Iraq. I mean, Colin Powell’s little slideshow at the UN last year makes Michael Moore look like the Patron Saint Of Unerring Truth-Telling by comparison. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/56 "2004-07-31T07:15:52Z")
If what the article says is true, I’m going to have to discard partisanship and say I think it’s a valid criticism of Moore’s film. I really don’t think it’s hair splitting; if he fabricated a headline and passed an opinion piece off as a front-page story, that’s wrong. I too will be interested to hear if Moore addresses the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/57 "2004-07-31T07:18:27Z")
> [@Snakespirit](#): > > Shit, he even beats Dubya Bush in lies! Well, I wouldn’t go _that_ far… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/58 "2004-07-31T07:47:12Z")
Where is your liberal compassion? These guys haven’t won one in so long, they’re starting to develop some real self-esteem issues. And besides, Moore’s kind of a dink anyway, we can easily afford to chuck him over, _F-9/11_ has already _happened_, the bomb done gone off, let 'em bitch about the crater if it makes 'em feel better. Yeah, OK, MM bites it, too bad he made your guy look like a drooling goon, but hey, we weren’t holding the camera. And lets face a fact, if The Leader was as hot of shit as you would like us to believe, a chubby audio-visual geek wouldn’t have been _able_ to make him look like a shallow dweeb. Content yourselves with the certainty that, as a liberal, he is often shot through with bitter pangs of regret and remorse, in those contemplative moments that arise when one is rolling in a pile of hundred dollar bills with supermodels. There. Feel better now? ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/59 "2004-07-31T07:59:32Z")
Now watch this drive… 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2004, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665/60 "2004-07-31T17:11:17Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > There. Feel better now? Actually, by bringing in a bunch of completely non-topical issues (what the fuck does Bush’s credibility have to do with Michael Moore? They’re not the same person.) intended solely to attack the persons making the arguments, you’re the one who’s trying to make yourself “feel better.” It’s quite amusing–there’s a chorus of liberals who _constantly_ whine about how Bush is dishonest, misleading, a liar, etc., and when one of their own gets caught in a lie, they largely refuse to recognize that fact and instead launch salvos of ad hominem attacks against the conservative posters who brought this up. This is exactly the sort of behaviour that people say the right-wing talking heads do! Would it really have been _that_ fucking hard to say (like several–Hi, **Blowero!** –did), “OK, if this is true, then Moore lied, and has lost credibility has a journalist.” And then (here’s the important part), _don’t say anything else_. Don’t say, “Oh yeah!!! SO WHAT!! Bush lied too, and you like Bush, so you really don’t care about the truth you partisan STOMA-FUCKER!”, because shit like that stinks just as bad as “Oh yeah!!! CLINTON LIED!!!”. Don’t say “Oh yeah!! SO WHAT!! The PAPER didn’t say that he lied–they just said that he was misleading!!!”, because that sounds an awful lot like “We didn’t say Sadaam and Al-Qaeda had connections–we just said they had contact.” It’s doubletalk, and it’s every bit as lame as what y’all accuse the right of doing. Get a fucking spine: Rhetorical integrity shouldn’t get discarded when speaking to someone who holds different political beliefs. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-moore-is-a-liar-after-all/257665.md?page=4)