3 articles make a slam dunk on a Micheal Moore's deception with the Afghanistan pipeline.

Newsweek, BBC and World Press Review

[april15Bendovr]

When you read all three articles the truth becomes more and more evident. The plans for the pipeline were in effect long before President Bush took office and involved many countries including the Clinton administration. I havnt seen Michael Moorons movie and refuse to pay that fat communist my money but this should help set things straight.

[BunnySlippers]

Bookmark

[woofie]

Using Michael Moore's logic I am the Queen of England

[Lando Lincoln]

Thanks and bookmarked. These articles won't change anything for the liberal loons who chortle, grunt and grin at the trough of Moore's palaver. The pseudo-intellectual elite will always somehow distort and warp facts to fit their situational biases. But it's the "useful idiot" masses that are influenced by such tripe. While gobbling their popcorn, you can be certain that countless brains are saying, "Wow, I never knew that! Gee, the U.S. is run by a bunch of....." Then, they depart with their knew found "knowledge". Scary.....and, classic, just classic propoganda.

Lando

[Lando Lincoln]

LOL! ... knew = new

Lando

[kylaka]

Moore lies. Go figure. At least he seems to enjoy himself while doing it (at least for now). Moore is like the proverbial frog in the pot. The heat will rise so slowly that he won't know it till he's cooked. Bad move calling the media in general a bunch of lazy morons, when they're on your side to begin with.

[mc5cents]

This does a pretty good job too

[douglas1]

Has anyone seen the new commercial with a woman pumping gas and all the while the price of gas keeps going up, and of course it is all layed at GWB feet, they are totally dishonest people they will say and do anything to win.

[7.62 x 51mm]

Liberal-demokkkRATs don't let facts get in the way of the *their truth*, as they know it to be.

Bookmarked for future usage.

[randog]

I read that yesterday--long read, but comprehensive and well sourced. I've had a lot of people asking me where they could find critiques of F911, and that's the best I've found to date, so I'm e-mailing the link to all my inquisitive (free-thinking) friends and acquaintances this morning.

[Paradox]

Thanks a bunch! I am going to compile some refutation of F911 and put it on a website, so that when my Democrat family members (SOME at least who are amenable to reason) ask me about the movie, I can tell them to go to my website and read about it. Its too tough to keep this all in memory. Besides, when I say it, it doesn't have the air of authority that a "real" article does. They think of me as something of a raving looney sometimes, LOL.

[88keys]

Great "rebuttal"...thanks for posting!

Now could we please see this on the front page? LOL!

I need to condense this info. into 4 or 5 "pithy sentences" for future discussions...anyone already got a list of quick answers to the "usual talking points"?!

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

bump for later

[FastCoyote]

I need to show this to a liberal.

[SunkenCiv]

Link to the original MSN/Newsweek article.

Some of the main points in ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ really aren’t very fair at all
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball

my comment -- There's an old saying (coined by one of the early 20th century newspaper publishing giants -- "don't start a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel." Michael Moore has been doing that. Oh, he can badmouth the other political party all he wants; he can appear on 60 Minutes and pooh-pooh the significance and former existence of 3000 people mass-murdered by Moslem mass-murderers while claiming that Americans are obsessed with guns and making violence; he can lead his Hamelin-ratlike followers one way, as the rest of the country goes the other; but when he attacks the press, he's starting a fight he is guaranteed to lose. Even the NYTimes gave what is essentially a negative review, mostly because that partisan flyer publisher worries that he's too over the top.

Michael Moore has tipped the race toward Bush. Kerry may get a little, commonplace jump from his finally naming a running mate, but the damage is done.

Gay marriage was made an issue by the gay lobby. In response, GWB advocated an amendment to essentially outlaw it. Kerry didn't want to lose the MOR voter, so he made his weak "states rights" position statement. Had he taken a strong stand in favor of gay marriage, he would have solidified support among the ever-tinier radical fringe -- the ones who will vote for Ralph Nader in the fall -- while losing the slight edge he had in quite a number of states. He has misjudged the MOR voter -- they are mostly sick of being led over cliffs by radical fringe groups. Gay marriage may have cost Kerry Michigan. Moore's crockumentary has ensured it I think. I'm surprised and pleased by this possibility.

Another factor in Kerry's setback in Michigan may have been his endorsement by Lee Iacocca. Iacocca's character has been attacked in at least one book published during his tenure at Chrysler; I've never met any old Teamsters or other pro-union voters who like him at all; I've never known a Ford exec who liked him at all (yes, I've known a few Ford execs, no one you've ever heard of though, nor will I name them); and his move to Democretin advocacy is hardly novel -- he's said before that, like many people, he votes Republican in good times and Democretin in tougher times. IOW, he's a dumb ass.

There's a link on this Newsweek page leading to a negative assessment of Kerry's poor use of photo-ops -- and significantly I think, it mentions his failure to use Iacocca in his Ohio appearances.

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

posted to: 7.62 x 51mm; 88keys; BunnySlippers; douglas1; kylaka; Lando Lincoln; mc5cents; Paradox; randog; ValerieUSA; woofie

[Paradox]

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

Remind me of this after the election. I'll bet ya $10 he is not reelected by that much. I hope you are right and will gladly relieve my wallet of said $10 bill, but I think its going down to the wire.

[SunkenCiv]

I've been using that as both a tagline and (more recently) a pseudo-tagline for months now. I don't wager, but I'll be happy to remind you, or to suffer the slings and arrows if I'm wrong (no money out of pocket though). Check out this a reprise:

'Scientific' view forecasts a big Bush win
Reuters
July 01, 2004

Polls may show the presidential race in a dead heat, but for a small band of academics who use scientific formulas to predict elections, President Bush is on his way to a sizable win... Most of these academics are predicting Bush, bolstered by robust economic growth, will win between 53 and 58 percent of the votes cast for him and his Democratic opponent John Kerry... But one glaring error is what the forecasters are perhaps best remembered for: They predicted in 2000 that Democrat Al Gore would win easily, pegging his total at between 53 and 60 percent of the two-party vote... The forecasters chalk up the 2000 error to Gore's campaign, which distanced itself from the Clinton record. All the models assume the candidates will run reasonably competent campaigns, said Thomas Holbrook, a professor at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee... Holbrook uses an economic indicator from the University of Michigan's survey of consumers. One question asks whether respondents are better or worse off financially than they were a year before. In May, 45 percent said they were better off. That is lower than the all-time election year high of 54 percent in 2000, Holbrook said, but higher than the 39 percent in 1996 when Clinton was re-elected.

Looks like the ten per cent margin is going to go down to the wire. ;')

If the US had gone to war in Iraq and in Afghanistan in order to bring about lower crude prices -- a charge that emanates from Michael Moore, from Stormfront, and from similar sources -- it hasn't worked. So, it would be a "heads I win, tails you lose" proposition against GWB. The crude prices have fluctuated, slowly heading south, we've probably seen the worst of the gasoline prices, and the accusations against Bush and his ancestors look increasingly like the artless propaganda they are. Now, anyone planning to vote against GWB based on the economy will see that shaken apart as well. Kerry still has to pander to the "I hate Bush" crowd because it is itself fragmented -- but he's done a lousy job. Choosing Edwards for a running mate is clearly an effort to retain the possible Nader voter -- Edwards having enriched himself in ambulance-chasing lawsuits against people who work for a living.

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

[gubamyster]

ping

[moehoward]

bumperoo to read later

[bitt]

to read