# The Lies of Michael Moore. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 26, 2004, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278 "2004-06-26T04:26:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/141 "2004-06-27T15:28:00Z")
> [@HtB](#): > > It is, however, consistent with Bush’s history of wandering from failure to failure and being bailed out of trouble, often by Saudi money. > [@MsRobyn](#): > > I’m sure you can support that, **Hentor**. The movie does a good job of it. If you are near Pittsburgh, I would be happy to take you to the film myself. I saw it at the Star City Theater in Bridgeville yesterday. $5 matinee. I googled “Bush Saudi” and after about 15-20 minutes of cutting and pasting, can give you this. Clearly because of my methodology, it is not the most comprehensive or detailed analyses of the matter. Hopefully it provides some idea of the issue. > [@](#): > > "Federal authorities are investigating the activities of a Houston businessman – a past investor in companies controlled by a son of President Bush – who has been accused of illegally representing Saudi interests in the United States. > The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network – known as FinCEN – and the FBI are reviewing accusations that entrepreneur James R. Bath guided money to Houston from Saudi investors who wanted to influence U.S. policy under the Reagan and Bush administrations, sources close to the investigations say. […] > "The federal review stems in part from court documents obtained through litigation by Bill White, a former real estate business associate of Bath. White contends the documents indicate that the Saudis were using Bath and their huge financial resources to influence U.S. policy. > [@](#): > > "In sworn depositions, Bath said he represented four prominent Saudis as a trustee [one of whom was Saudi Sheik Salem M. Binladen] and that he would use his name on their investments. In return, he said, he would receive a 5 percent interest in their deals. Tax documents and personal financial records show that Bath personally had a 5 percent interest in Arbusto '79 Ltd., and Arbusto '80 Ltd., limited partnerships controlled by George W. Bush, President Bush’s eldest son. Arbusto means bush in Spanish. Bath invested $50,000 in the limited partnerships, according to the documents. There is no available evidence to show whether the money came from Saudi interests. > "George W. Bush’s company, Bush Exploration Co., general partner in the limited partnerships, went through several mergers, eventually evolving into Harken Energy Corp., a suburban Dallas-based company. Bush, known informally as George Jr., is a shareholder and director of Harken, which has been granted lucrative offshore drilling rights off the coast of Bahrain in the Persian Gulf. One of the top shareholders of Harken, a public company, is Saudi businessman Abdullah Taha Bakhsh. Bush said that to his knowledge, Bath 's investment was from personal funds, and no Saudi money was invested in Arbusto . Bath , 55, a former U.S. Air Force pilot, declined to comment for the record. Spokesmen for FinCEN and the FBI also declined to comment. > According to a 1976 trust agreement, drawn shortly after Bush was appointed director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Saudi Sheik Salem M. Binladen appointed Bath as his business representative in Houston. Binladen, along with his brothers, owns Binladen Brothers Construction, one of the largest construction companies in the Middle East. According to White, Bath told him that he had assisted the CIA in a liaison role with Saudi Arabia since 1976. [Source.](http://billstclair.com/911timeline/1990s/houstonchronicle060492.html) The Bush folks appear very jittery at the mention of Bath’s name. > [@](#): > > "In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ’80s in what has been called the “largest bank fraud in world financial history” by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ’80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair. [Source.](http://www.bushwatch.com/bushmoney.htm) They also appear for some reason to have specifically [redacted](http://sugarinthegourd.com/redacted.html) his name from the military records regarding Bush’s suspension. > [@](#): > > WAS BCCI’S INDICTED PRINCIPAL A BUSH BUSINESS BACKER?: Author Kevin Phillips, a top Republican strategist under President Nixon, reported in his new book, “Bush made his first connection in the late 1970s with James Bath, a Texas businessmen who served as the North American representative for two rich Saudis (and Osama bin Laden relatives) - billionaire Salem bin Laden and banker and BCCI insider Khalid bin Mahfouz. Bath put $50,000 into Bush’s 1979 Arbusto oil partnership, probably using bin Laden-bin Mahfouz funds.” Also of interest: Former CIA Director James Woolsey testified to the Senate on 9/3/98 that Mafouz’s sister was married to Osama bin Laden. And according to the conservative American Spectator, “Bush has given conflicting statements about Bath’s investment in Arbusto, finally admitting to the Wall Street Journal that he was aware that Bath represented Saudi investors.” [Source.](http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=47995) ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/142 "2004-06-27T15:31:21Z")
> [@TwistofFate](#): > > still not one single lie mentioned. Well…when you can’t fight the message, you attack the messenger. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/143 "2004-06-27T15:34:09Z")
**SA** , my use of the word “small” was based on the earlier post differentiating between “great”, “average”, and “small” people. Since your post did spend some time talking of those individuals who were not as gifted with intelligence or money, and how they should not be dismissed offhand, I wanted to reassure you that such was not my meaning. Nor did I mean to imply I felt there was any insincerity to your apology. I merely used the example of “insincere apologies” to highlight what I felt was “small” behavior. I understand your frustration over personal attacks aimed at you over your beliefs. I hope you can sympathize with my own (and others) situation, having been branded a “traitor” and “on the terrorists side” because I disagreed with the President over going to war in Iraq and said so publicly. So to me it is our President and his close advisors who has fomented hatred and disdain within and without our country by making such black and white distinctions. I find it ironic to be considered a liberal. I was quite comfortable in the Moderate Republican camp for many years, until the conservative wing of the party drove us out. I still consider myself a moderate, but the only place I find candidates whose views are anywhere near mine these days in in the Democratic party. I’ve not joined said party; I still have too many disagreements with their philosophies. But save McCain, there is no nationally prominent Republican I currently feel I could support. I find a good exercise for me, after writing a post, is to check it to see if I am attacking another poster personally. If so, I try to either edit the post so this is not the case, or I just hit the “back button” and go on to another thread. Unfortunately, I am not always successful in this exercise. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/144 "2004-06-27T15:41:26Z")
I hope you don’t mind my jumping in, **Starving Artist**. > [@](#): > > perhaps what you perceive as unfairness and judgementalism and mean-spiritedness are due to the overwhelming amount of abuse, criticism and insults someone of my political ideology comes in for here There is perhaps more of a feedback effect here than you are admitting. The “abuse. criticism, and insults” are driven not by your ideology so much as your presentation of your arguments, which presentation leads to abuse and which abuse endenders further “judgmentalism”. Case in point: > [@](#): > > it’s because I think he is deliberately and destructively presenting dishonest impressions of America and Americans in his attempt to acheive his own ends. Let’s think about this. Based on his popularity and the immediate success of his film, we can suppose that Michael Moore’s presentation of America and Americans resonates very strongly with a lot of people. In other words, they _agree_ with his impressions of America. Your argument that he is deliberately and destructively presenting falsehoods has some important and unpleasant consequences. A) There is some single truth, some monolithic “impression of America” that he is deliberately distorting and that _someone else_ can present in an unbiased way. B) Those who agree with his perception and presentation are either lying, misled, or too stupid to form their own opinions. C) _You_ somehow know who the guardian of the Correct Truth is, since you are clearly able to see through Moore’s smoke and mirrors. These consequences are understandably offensive to many people and rest on some heroic assumptions. I hope this gives you some insight into why you are encountering so much abuse here. We tolerate people of all political shapes and colors, but we do not take kindly to those who begin their arguments with the kinds of presumptions implicit in yours. ---
**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 27, 2004, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/145 "2004-06-27T16:23:26Z")
**Qadgop** , thank you for the clarification. I’m somewhat embarrassed to have to admit I’ve slept since then and forgot all about the “small, large, great” post. And I do understand and sympathize with your being attacked as a traitor or terrorist supporter. I don’t believe anyone who had even the slightest experience reading your posts would be able to arrive at such a conclusion honestly. It’s funny how polarized people in this country have become. I think this is a result somewhat of the electronic age. Conservatives, including me, perceived 20 and 30 years ago a huge bias in the press toward the more liberal mindset, and we felt pretty much powerless to do anything about it and felt the country was going to hell in a handbasket as a result of liberal influence in governent and society. Then Rush Limbaugh and his subsequent supporters came along and gave us a voice and an outlet for our disgust and incredulity over the course of events. However, the success and influence of Limbaugh, et al, was a strong motivator in getting liberals up in arms and they (and in my opinion, the press) became even more determined to fight for their side as a result. And both camps are very effective in convincing their followers of the stupidity, foolishness and devious motivations of those on the other side. Now, as a result of a couple of decades of this, both sides pretty much hate each other. I know from posts I see in other threads by people I’ve had run ins with here or in GD, that they are nice, helpful, good people. They are people I would probably like a lot and get along with just fine if I met them socially or had them as a neighbor. And it seems a shame to me that things have come to the point that friendly give-and-take has been replaced by close-minded and hateful accusations of stupidity, cowardice, treason, etc. by each side against the other. And just for the record, I no longer feel liberal influence has necessarily taken the country to hell in a handbasket. The changes in American society in regard to equal rights for women, racism, and a more open and frank view of sexuality I think have all been good, and I think most conservatives agree, but to me the efforts to acheive these ends often are taken to ridiculous extremes (such as in the days of what was called “womens’ lib” when everyone was supposed to pretend there was no difference at all, even physically, between men and women. Those of us who thought this was silly and unrealistic (usually conservatives) and said so were usually accused of sexism, and thus conservatives such as I were regarded as being against women’s rights when in reality we just didn’t want reason to go out the window in an effort to accomplish the right thing. Most of us conservatives I think, if pressed, would acknowledge that liberal thought, by and large, is good and humanistic (at least in most ways). What we object to is the impression that liberals seem eager to throw the baby out with the bath water in their attempts to effect what would otherwise be change for the better. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/146 "2004-06-27T16:26:59Z")
> [@Cicada2003](#): > > Is there any particular reason why the average American, or the average college student (Dean’s list or otherwise), should know the name of the prime minister of Canada? Ooh! Ooh! I think I know this one! It’s because an electorate that has even the most rudimentary grasp of the contemporary international political situation (starting with their closest neighbors, or even their largest trading partner) is much less likely to allow their elected representatives to implement disastrously foolish and wrong-headed foreign policy that an insular, poorly-informed electorate wouldn’t recognize as such until after it had already bitten them on the ass, right? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/147 "2004-06-27T16:42:16Z")
> [@Larry Mudd](#): > > Ooh! Ooh! I think I know this one! > > It’s because an electorate that has even the most rudimentary grasp of the contemporary international political situation is much less likely to allow their elected representatives to implement disastrously foolish and wrong-headed foreign policy… Good point! Maybe you can tell me whether they’ve replaced that awful U Thant guy at the UN yet? I wanna be informed!!! ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Svinlesha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@Mr.Svinlesha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Svinlesha)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/148 "2004-06-27T16:48:48Z")
**Starving Artist** : First off, regarding this: > [@](#): > > - When I refer to someone as a liberal, it isn’t alway an insult. **EddyTeddyFreddy, Zoe, Qadgop, elfbabe, Mr. Svinlesha,** and **SimonX** are all people I would refer to (and perhaps wrongly) as liberals, yet I have a high regard for them.\* For what it’s worth, **Simon** is a card-carrying and – if I’m not mistaken – extremely active member of the GOP. Just so you know. And by the way, thanks for the compliment. Next: > [@](#): > > _If your comments were aimed at me (and I realize they may not have been), perhaps what you perceive as unfairness and judgementalism and mean-spiritedness are due to the overwhelming amount of abuse, criticism and insults someone of my political ideology comes in for here._ I know you’re getting handed a lot of shit at the moment, both here in the **Pit** and up in **Great Debates**. Don’t let it get you down. Fact is, many of us on the left have become increasingly frustrated, bitter, and disillusioned here as time has gone on. You mention **Diogenes** , and I think he’s a good case in point: to my mind, at least, he was nowhere near as “insulting” two years ago as he is these days. A lot of us are simply fed up; we’ve had enough. In a way, you’re being given a first-hand taste of the results of Bush’s politics – in a word, division. You should also know that prior to the Iraq invasion, the people who shared your political ideology probably constituted a majority on this board. They were at the very least equal in number; but as time has gone on, most Bush supporters have either switched sides (like **Airman Doors** ) or simply crawled back into the woodwork. There are only a handful of hardcore tighty righties left: **Sam Stone** , **Shodan** , **Brutus** , and now you, really, are the names that leap to mind. Of them, only **Sam** (and possibly you) is really capable of marshalling a serious debate. **Brutus** has scarcely ever posted anything in a political thread that didn’t amount to a drive-by put-down. He considers me a “bongo-masher.” And no one can be more snide, or condescending, than **Shodan**. He thinks I’ve lost contact with reality. Etc. At least **Sam** takes the time to present a reasoned argument, backed up with cites. I mention this not as an excuse for the attacks you’ve suffered, but more in way of explanation. I see you, perhaps naively, as someone sincerely interested in open debate. Many of the arguments you present (nota bene: with regard to the Iraqi invasion) have been debated, and to my mind rebutted, dozens of times on these boards; but I can’t expect you to go back and reread a thousand old threads before hopping into the discussion. My point is that many others might read what you post and think, “God, how many times do we have to go back over this stuff?” and then respond in a rather unpleasant manner. They aren’t really responding to _you_; they’re responding to you + 100 other debates with considerably less polite posters, all of which have concerned the same topic. Those of us who opposed the war have been subjected to an unholy amount of hateful abuse on these boards. Consider **Millum’s** last post: > [@](#): > > - Dear **Starving Artist** , > > Whew! See! These left-wing-thinkers are descended from cattle. The herd instinct is their only message. > Blindly, literally, they bellow loweringly and then follow their teaming herdmates; maybe to the promised land of sweet smelling clover, or, kerplunk, kersplash, over the clift and into the sea. It doesn’t matter, they are herbivorates and herbivorates don’t think for themselves, they are kine, they think not much at all.\* You might find that post hilarious. Sorry to tell you that after two long years of reading, researching, analyzing, and debating on this board, over matters that are very grave and that I take very seriously, I find it insulting to be compared to cow – no less by someone whose ideological herd instinct far outweighs my own, and whom I doubt has had anything even vaguely similar to a critical thought in his entire measly existence. I can only imagine what was it like on the street in the US, in the run-up to the war, if you opposed the invasion. Anyway, as an unfortunate result, many of us have become considerably less willing to give our debating opponents the benefit of the doubt. In my experience, you are one of the very few polite Bush supporters I have had the pleasure of meeting here. The board needs more of your sort – debates get very boring very quickly when all the participants are in heartfelt agreement. Keep it up. Oh, and by the way: I’m still waiting for your response to my last couple of posts in your “liberal epiphany” thread. That old “everyone else believed it” dog don’t hunt; hell, that dog barely breathes. Better get crackin, old boy! 🙂 ---
**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 27, 2004, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/149 "2004-06-27T17:11:26Z")
Your points are well taken, **Maeglin** , and no, I don’t mind you jumping in at all. When I spoke of the insults and abuse I come in for here, I am speaking more of the derision that conservatives in general come in for here at the SDMB than I am in regard to my own posts. I can see your point in regard to the nature of my comments and how they are perceived, but I think they are to a large degree just a flip side to the liberal tactics that are so prevalent here. I am certainly not the only one using what could be thought of as having an iron-clad opinion of the righteousness of his own point of view and of the wrong-headedness of the other side. I will admit that I tend to state my positions and beliefs pretty strongly – and I tend to try to give as good as I get in terms of argumentativeness, insults and derision – but to do otherwise would be to get absolutely run over here. There were a few times when I first began to post when I tried to hold to the higher ground and explain my point of view while trying to hold to the higher ground and not get involved in name-calling, profanity, etc. and I was routinely piled on and piled on quite viciously. It wasn’t until I began to adopt a more aggressive manner and started to take the fight to them, showing that I was willing to give as good as I got, that I began to get somewhere. Now, at least, if I don’t win any converts, I at least hold my own against abuse and false accusations regarding my comments and meaning, and am able at least to get what I want to say out into the ether for people to make of whatever they will. And now I’m surprised to see people going into the Pit and complaining about how much I post (when these posts are in response to their posts to me), how I refuse to see their point of view (while they refuse to see mine at the same time), and about how I insult or belittle them (most often to their insults or belittling of me). There’s another thread where the question is “would you rather be mean or weak?” I think what they really mean is would you rather be bold and strong or weak. I started out weak and got run over. Now I’ve adopted a stronger approach and while I’m usually still outnumbered by about 8 to 15:1, I find I’m usually at least able to hold my own. I like to think that when someone wants to discuss some point calmly, rationally and in a friendly or at least non-confrontational way, I respond the same way. This is by far the best way, but unfortunately, it’s far from the norm here. Thank you though for trying to cast some light on the subject. I know your motive was to try to help me gain insight into the problem and I appreciate it very much. To the degree that I can (and I’ve promised \*\*EddyTeddyFreddy \*\*the same) I will try not to circle the wagons so quickly and I’ll at least attempt to hold to the higher ground to the degree that I can. But again, thank you.🙂 ---
**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 27, 2004, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/150 "2004-06-27T17:44:23Z")
**Mr. Svinlesha** , thank you a very great deal for your post. It provides a great deal of insight into many factors I wasn’t aware of. And thank you also for the compliment regarding my being a polite Bush proponent. I try to be whenever I can, and the friendships I’ve either developed or that I am developing on this board are going a long way toward helping me to try to fight the good fight in this regard. (Thanks to **EddyTeddyFreddy** , **Zoe** , **Qadgop** , [and now you] in this regard.) It is hard to behave like a raving hothead, even though the situation may call for it, when people such as you and they may happen upon it and think less of me as a result. I hope that you and they will recognize, when you see me acting like that, that for whatever reason I’ve come to feel that it was necessary even though I would prefer it to be otherwise. With regard to the other thread, I have to admit I’ve pretty much forgotten about it. As you are probably aware, I’ve been all over the place (threadwise, that is :D) lately and I find I’m tending to lose track of what’s going on where. I’ve also been spending way too much time here and I’ve been letting other things slide that I need to start attending to. So I’m hoping to try to start spending less time here even though I’m not sure it’s possible. I was warned when I signed up here that it was addictive and that I should just say goodbye to the rest of my life. Silly me, I thought that was just a joke. But really, I do need to start spending less of my time here. However, out of respect for the time you put into composing those posts I will try sometime soon to get back over there and answer them. Thank you again. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/151 "2004-06-27T17:46:20Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > (I would also point out this is the Pit, and the insults I’ve used here are far less agressive and vulgar than most of those found in the Pit.) It’s very nearly a waste to post in The Pit w/o using some insults. I mean why bother coming here if you’re not at least willing to dish some dirt? I wouldn’t take any insults from here to heart. They’re part of The Pit’s game. I say, “Flame away, **SA**.” Enjoy it even. Sincerely, Simon ---
**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 27, 2004, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/152 "2004-06-27T17:53:28Z")
Thank you, Simon. I appreciate that, too. Most of the criticism I’ve come in for in this regard has been in relation to my posting behavior in other threads, primarily in GD, and it is in those threads where I’m conflicted about how to proceed. Here, indeed, I will try to enjoy it, because…well, just _because_!😛 Thank you again. ---
**Author:** ![unclviny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e274bd/32.png) [@unclviny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/unclviny)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/153 "2004-06-27T18:03:40Z")
Allright, enough with the civility! somebody had better bite somebody quick or I’m telling on you both!. Unclviny ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/154 "2004-06-27T18:04:01Z")
> [@TwistofFate](#): > > still not one single lie mentioned. According to reports I’ve seen, Moore claimed that not one member of Congress had a son or daughter “fighting in America’s armed forces”. ---
**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 27, 2004, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/155 "2004-06-27T18:07:46Z")
> [@unclviny](#): > > Allright, enough with the civility! somebody had better bite somebody quick or I’m telling on you both!. > > Unclviny Oh, fuck off! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/156 "2004-06-27T18:17:12Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > Thank you, **spooje**. However, to be honest I do routinely use the term liberal as a sort of catch-all for everyone who happens not to be a conservative. I don’t really mean anything by this in and of itself. It’s just that it seems to me that the SDMB has pretty much boiled down into two groups: liberals and conservatives. When I refer to someone as a liberal, it isn’t alway an insult. **EddyTeddyFreddy** , **Zoe** , **Qadgop** , **elfbabe** , **Mr**. **Svinlesha** , and \*\*SimonX \*\*are all people I would refer to (and perhaps wrongly) as liberals, yet I have a high regard for them. Hey! Now that’s going _way_ too fucking far! This is horrendous and unreasonable slander, (or is it horrendous and unreasonable libel?). I support the priciples outlined in the [Sharon Statement](http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:XSOMQXcOW-cJ:www.fiu.edu/~yaf/sharon.html+%22against+all+enemies%22+%22the+just+interests+of+the+United+States%22&hl=en) which makes me a huge fuckload more conservative than most any of the oxymoronic “[Big-Government Conservatives](http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/017wgfhc.asp?pg=1)” in the Admin today. I highly reccomend that you forthwith disbuse yourself of the hobbled notion that opposition to the invasion of Iraq equals liberalism posthaste. It’s lazy, lazy thinking that’s fostered by politicians’ propaganda. Don’t fall for it. Newspeak is insidious. One cannot be too careful in such matters. Please note that ‘liberals’ such as Brent Scowcroft, Henry Kissinger and George Herbert Walker Bush opposed the who, how and when of the Iraqi invasion as well as myself. > [@](#): > > Originally posted by simonX: > > > [@](#): > > > > [size=1]\*\*[Revitalizing Conservatism\*\*](http://conservative.org/pressroom/revitalizingconservatism.asp) > > The Split on the Right. Conservatives are fighting each other… …David Frum [a NeoCon] made…a banner denunciation of any conservative with reservations about the invasion of Iraq. …conservative intellectuals and activists opposed or even those critical of it before the fighting or even those who mentioned that protecting **Israel’s interests** could complicate matters were all labeled paleo-conservatives and pushed off to the nutty fringe. …some of who differed on principle, but most simply saw the facts differently. > > …today, Reagan **_mainstream_ conservatism** lacks a public intellectual voice. > > …neo-conservatism soon replaced limited government as the ideal and filled the pages of the journals on the right…[National Review] even called for **a revival of colonialism under U.S. auspices and the building of an American empire**. Bill Buckley…[condemned] empire-building as **incompatible with American conservatism**. > > …NR and the [Weekly] Standard…[expressed] mild encomiums that it would be pleasant if [GWB] **moved right** domestically… By 2000, there was no opinion journal heralding the limited-government position… > > …conservatives had agreed that all foreign policy had to be justified on the criterion–was it in “the just interests of the United States”? …Bill Kristol, Max Boot and Paul Johnson…[said] that a new American colonialism was required to bring peace and democracy to the world. > > …If the U.S. government has the ability to bring peace and democracy to the world, big government can obviously also run America’s economy and plan its social life–and limited government becomes irrelevant. > > …there is a need to…move back to [conservatisms’] first principles…to start returning power to states, communities and the people rather than support the lesser-evil big government solution.[/size] > > _COPYRIGHT ©2003 AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION_ > > > [@](#): > > > > [**Big-Government Conservatism**](http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/017wgfhc.asp?pg=1) > > …[Bush] has tolerated a surge in federal spending, downplayed swollen deficits, failed to use his veto, created a vast Department of Homeland Security, and fashioned an alliance of sorts with Teddy Kennedy on education and Medicare. But the real gripe is that Bush isn’t their kind of conventional conservative. Rather, **he’s a big government conservative**. > > …[Reagan] declared in his inauguration address that government was the problem, not the solution. There, Bush begs to differ. > > Big government conservatives prefer to be in favor of things because that puts them on the political offensive. Promoting spending cuts/minimalist government doesn’t do that. > > Another trait is a far more benign view of government than traditional conservatives have. Big government conservatives are favorably disposed toward what neoconservative Irving Kristol has called a **“conservative welfare state.”** (Neocons tend to be big government conservatives.) > > Bush has never put a name on his political philosophy, though he once joked that it was **based on the premise that you could fool some of the people all of the time and _he intended to concentrate on those people_**. > > _© Copyright 2004, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved_ > > Make of this what you will. I’d hate to play the “True Scotsman” card, but… I’m about as liberal as [Milton Friedman](http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=%22Milton+Friedman%22+conservative). > [@Starving Artist](#): > > And I’m slowly coming to have very a high regard for **Diogenes the Cynic**. Him? His hairs’re on fire. And, yes, **Mr. Svin** ’s right yet again. I am a registered Republican and a GOP Team Leader. You think that _you_ feel lonely and outnumbered… Oh, yeah. Thanks for the respect. I’ll try to be worthy of it. Sheesh! Kids these days. What ever are they teaching them in these schools? Me, a liberal. Imagine! ---
**Author:** ![unclviny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e274bd/32.png) [@unclviny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/unclviny)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/157 "2004-06-27T18:17:18Z")
“Your mother was a Hamster and your father smelled of Elderberries” Unclviny ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/158 "2004-06-27T18:20:29Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > According to reports I’ve seen, Moore claimed that not one member of Congress had a son or daughter “fighting in America’s armed forces”. He says that only one does. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/159 "2004-06-27T18:40:25Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > Then Rush Limbaugh and his subsequent supporters came along and gave us a voice and an outlet for our disgust and incredulity over the course of events. However, the success and influence of Limbaugh, et al, was a strong motivator in getting liberals up in arms and they (and in my opinion, the press) became even more determined to fight for their side as a result. And both camps are very effective in convincing their followers of the stupidity, foolishness and devious motivations of those on the other side. Now, as a result of a couple of decades of this, both sides pretty much hate each other. 1st, I love Rush. But, fyi, Rush is an _entertainer_. He’s not a newscaster, nor a policy wonk. He even makes fun of his listeners who take him seriously. He regularly gives voice to pop-con sentiments while not commmenting factually about events in the world. He’s _The_ Strawman King. He certainly doesn’t directly give voice to conservatives who are armed with both a reasonable capacity for critical thought and the willingness to do fact-checking. He does indirectly give us voice in that he repeatedly makes fun of those who swallow his polemics as analysis. I love Rush. But I have a sense of humor _and_ a sense of perspective unlike _some_ certain people who post here who shall remain nameless as they know how they are and I’m too lazy. > [@Starving Artist](#): > > I know from posts I see in other threads by people I’ve had run ins with here or in GD, that they are nice, helpful, good people. They are people I would probably like a lot and get along with just fine if I met them socially or had them as a neighbor. And it seems a shame to me that things have come to the point that friendly give-and-take has been replaced by close-minded and hateful accusations of stupidity, cowardice, treason, etc. by each side against the other. I agree with general gist of this sentiment. That being said, there’re some allegations just about as grave as treason against _those in power_ that are not at all baseless. And there actually _are_ things which _are_ un-American. > [@Mr. Svin](#): > > I see you, perhaps naively, as someone sincerely interested in open debate. Prob’ly right. _Again_. > [@Mr. Svin](#): > > My point is that many others might read what you post and think, “God, how many times do we have to go back over this stuff?” and then respond in a rather unpleasant manner. They aren’t really responding to you; they’re responding to you + 100 other debates with considerably less polite posters, all of which have concerned the same topic. > …after two long years of reading, researching, analyzing, and debating on this board, over matters that are very grave and that I take very seriously, I find it insulting to be compared to cow – no less by someone whose ideological herd instinct far outweighs my own, and whom I doubt has had anything even vaguely similar to a critical thought in his entire measly existence. > In my experience, you are one of the very few polite Bush supporters I have had the pleasure of meeting here. The board needs more of your sort – debates get very boring very quickly when all the participants are in heartfelt agreement. Keep it up. > Oh, and by the way: I’m still waiting for your response to my last couple of posts in your “liberal epiphany” thread. While I don’t want to sound _too_ herdishly inclined, I’d like to second some of this as well. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278/160 "2004-06-27T18:52:04Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > … > And, yes, **Mr. Svin** ’s right yet again. I am a registered Republican and a GOP Team Leader… Not for long. A few more halting steps toward The Light, and you’re ours! I have a place all picked out for my toaster oven. What size of Birkenstocks will you be requiring? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lies-of-michael-moore/252278.md?page=9)