 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 909 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I don't remember a bunch of rah rah coming out of the news media before the war in '03. Plus, it's not necessarily the media's job to ask the hard questions (except who Anna Nicole's Baby Daddy is). The hard questions should have come from the Congress. The media may ask them too but don't blame Wolf if they aren't "hard" enough. Blame George, Hillary and any one of the politicians that voted for the war in a bi-partisan manner. They should ask the "hard questions" before embarking on the war, not the media. Will you blame the Philadelphia Inquirer the next time the Eagle's management makes a poor player decision because they did not question the organization enough?
Can't believe I'm defending swine and saying their poop doesn't smell, but so be it.
As to Moore and his purpose, it must be as a tool. But using a sledgehammer to make stained glass windows isn't a very useful tool. The man obviously learned the propoganda devices of the Nazis and the Big Lie and continues to use it. Just one small example, where's the Unocol gas pipeline across Afghanistan he said was in the works in Farehheit 911? The CNN interview was supposed to have been about Sicko and healthcare yet Moore turned it into a self-centered diatribe about the war (with Michael Moore self-promotion the clearest winner since Secretariat).
The fact that the Democrats have to pander to Moore and his ilk is why, even with the perceived disaster of Bush's presidency, I'm not very worried about the Democrats winning the WH in ‘08. I just wish somebody would run a candidate I could vote for versus vote against the rest by picking the lesser of evils.