Author Topic: Howard Stern  (Read 10419 times)

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #60 on: May 11, 2004, 05:47:00 pm »
i like how the bowlingfortruth guy has an al franken site too. least he knows his audience
o/\o

  • Guest
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #61 on: May 11, 2004, 11:15:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
     
Quote
Originally posted by Dupek Chopra:
   Can you provide a specific example of this fact fakery?
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/  
 
 Here's another story on Moore:
    http://www.kynn.com/politics/moore/   [/b]
Posting links of dubious veracity are not "specific examples" in my book.  Can you please provide a relevant quote from one of your trusted sources?

ggw

  • Member
  • Posts: 14237
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #62 on: May 12, 2004, 10:05:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Dupek Chopra:
 Posting links of dubious veracity are not "specific examples" in my book.  Can you please provide a relevant quote from one of your trusted sources?
How about claiming he only learned last week that Disney wouldn't distribute his film.

ggw

  • Member
  • Posts: 14237
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #63 on: May 12, 2004, 10:17:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
  "The Left may be sincere, but they're sincerely wrong. And they must be challenged and defeated if we are to win this war on terror and preserve our way of life for this and future generations."
 
  http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20020826.html
Calling the liberal ideology dangerous and bad for America is "incendiary"?
 
 So, by that criteria, saying that the Republican foreign policy is dangerous and bad for America would also be incendiary?
 
 Neither of those statements are anything but routine partisan bickering and neither are on the same level as implying the sitting President and his family are in bed with the terrorists who attacked the U.S.
 
 
 So, to review and wrap up, Moore has made a consciously uber-controversial film.  Moore was informed last May, at the outset of the project, that Disney was exercising its right not to distribute it.  Rather than finding a new distributor, Moore decided to ring the "censorship" bell and incite his minions into the usual pavlovian slobber of adolescent rebellion masquerading as political progressiveness.

ratioci nation

  • Member
  • Posts: 4463
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #64 on: May 12, 2004, 10:33:00 am »
Miramax pulling a Pixar?
 
 
 
Quote
Current talks to extend the Weinsteins' deal for another four years after it expires in 2005 have no doubt been exacerbated by the current fracas surrounding Disney's refusal to distribute the Michael Moore (news) documentary "Fahrenheit 911."

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #65 on: May 12, 2004, 10:35:00 am »
how do you know its worse than a movie you haven't seen?
 
 i thought it was pretty well established that the bushes and bin laudens were linked through the carlyle group. this isn't a new allegation from mike moore
o/\o

  • Guest
Re: Howard Stern
« Reply #66 on: May 12, 2004, 03:05:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
  ...the legions of Moore sycophants lining up to chow down at his trough of half-truths and contrived controversies[...]incite his minions into the usual pavlovian slobber of adolescent rebellion masquerading as political progressiveness.
Separated at birth?  
 
   
Quote
Originally posted by Kim Jong Il
 ...when anything is wrong with us we must find the reason in ourselves, not elsewhere. That is the attitude[...]and the right way to rectify a nestle. Only when we thus correctly saccharin the cause of the frustration.
Frankly ggw, I'm amazed that you didn't manage to insert the word "Tentacles" into your vitriol.