Haven't seen the film, so I can't comment on it. Won't see it till I can do so for "free" as I refuse to put any money (however small or indirectly) in that man's pocket.
he has the freedom to make such films and present his view, I have the freedom to ignore him if I choose.
I disagree that he(through his film) will have a significant effect on the election. I also don't put much emphasis on the various "polls" showing everything from a slight Kerry lead to a dead heat. The only poll that means anything will be taken 11-02-04, we'll just have to wait and see.
One thing I will say, regardless of who is in the white house at any given time. That person has information that you nor I, nor any investigative reporter nor Hollywood film director may never know about. "We" may question (in the absence of that information) decisions made based on that information, But we must do so with the understanding that president must do what's best for the entire country (perhaps the world). It may become clear only in hindsight whether the decision was right or wrong. Look closely at the images of our presidents at the beginning of their terms and then again at the end. I have no doubts they have the most difficult job in the world. The current president faces challenges on a daily basis that would send lesser men to cower under a desk.
We got started on this because I C&P'd an article and added a decidedly anti-Kerry headline. Now I'll drop the other shoe so to speak.
That article spoke of a planned assassination attempt to influence/disrupt our election. No doubt many assume that the terrorist would attempt to assassinate GW. After all, if successful he would be eliminated as president. The terrorists would have what they want then. No more Bush.
However, chances of success are greatly reduced because our Secret Service and other law enforcement arms are on such a high alert regarding such a threat.
What I expect the terrorists to try is an "attempted" assassination. One that has little chance of success but will virtually assure the intended "victim" wins the election. That's right I expect Al-Queda to "attempt" to assassinate John Kerry.
Certainly, as a candidate for President his security is as tight as GW's, but a "failed" assassination attempt on Kerry would have the same effect as a successful attempt on GW.
I hope I'm wrong and I certainly could be.
One final note, obviously Al-Queda does not want another 4 years of GW. The question I ask is this... If GW is the wrong man in the white house, If he is doing things the wrong way, If he is hurting the US and the rest of the world so badly... why would Al-Queda wnat him out? Isn't his alleged ineffectiveness helping their cause? Isn't he setting them up to become what they really want (large and in charge)? Sure there are some short term hardships but what's a little hardship on the way to your ultimate goal?
Cold logic will tell you that the guy the bad guys want out is the guy you really want in there.
Just for fun... presume for a moment that Moore is correct, and that Bush *IS* really the guy Al-Queda wants in the white house... would anything be different?
And they wonder where conspiracy theorists get such wild ideas.
have a good one!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
