Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michael Moore was very good....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 06:53 PM
Original message
Michael Moore was very good....
I just saw the CNN segment. But he could've been better.

He shouldn't have complained about not being invited on CNN for three years, when in fact, he WAS invited on, but declined.

He should know better - easily debunked claims like that should be avoided. He KNOWS they'll use it against him. Righteous indignation is only good when you can back it up.

But he was, overall, very very good. I'm just sorry he gave Wolf a chance to shoot him down on a simple issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. Do you know for a fact that he was invited but declined?
Presumably he gets invited when there's some sort of news hook. The release of a new movie is an obvious hook, as is the publication of a book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. He was invited but he did say that he does not do
taped programs because they edit what he says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. That's right. I'd forgotten he said that.
That sounds like a reasonable misgiving though. I mean his ideas are distorted with such regularity that I can see how he would be reluctant to be subjected to CNN's editing.

To say he was "invited" in that sense is a little like saying that Bush offered to let some DOJ staffers testify before Congress but not under oath and then suggest that Congress rejected the White House offer to let the staffers testify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. that was a different exchange
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. he didn't deny it
he deflected by saying he was unhappy with the way he'd been treated in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingshakabobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. I didn't see it as him 'complaining.'
Edited on Mon Jul-09-07 07:31 PM by Kingshakabobo
He says, while trying to goad him in to an apology, "Four years! I just.......I just haven't seen you in three years....so I was just wondering how you felt...after three years of not seeing me after you trashed Farenheiht...."

It seemed to me his point was that Wolf could apologize NOW for the Fahrenheit smear since he hasn't seen Moore in three years.

It didn't seem like a 'complaint' to me.

eta: When Wolf points out that they have extended invitations, "More says for what? to apologize?"

It seemed to be more of a problem for Wolf that he MIGHT be accused of not having Moore on the show......so Wolf took offense where none was needed.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Then we just disagree on our interpretation
I saw it as his complaining about not being invited on for three years. I could be be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
7. This is coming from a person with a ....
NANCY PELOSI avatar!!!!

Oh wait, I have one too!

Never mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-09-07 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. you're onto me!
Damn you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC