1. Moore’s right that it’s crazy and dangerous that barely-trained “medical professionals” make decisions in a cubicle a thousand miles from your doctor.  Moore is wrong, however, because single-payer is a complete mistake.  Summary: Problem?  Yes.  Solution?  Not yet.  We’re working on it.

I’ve got a friend who works in a cubicle for a company that helps medicare decide what to cover (re: away from doctors who are treating people). He is not a doctor and most of the people at the company are not (although they do have some RNs). So, I don’t really see his point.

I found the comedy central interview and you need to use Microsoft internet explorer to view it.

I could not watch the whole thing, it was pretty much Moore and Stewart talking about how middle class people cannot get good health care.

2. “They’ve done a good job of scaring people into thinking that the federal government is bad...” Hey Mike; THAT WAS YOU.  You spent your entire career up to this point telling us that the government is bad.  Now you want us to trust them so you can move one step closer to the socialist utopia you so desperately want to create?  Or rather, the socialist utopia you pretend you want to create in order to make money by the bucketful in the capitalist system you use to full advantage while at the same time disparaging and denouncing it?

I actually think that Moore considers the Republican run government evil, but now that there is the possiblity of a Democrate run government it is no longer evil.  Since every one knows that the democrates never do anything wrong (they wish).

Stewart aside, the whole fact that the MSM takes his movie seriously is just another example of their bias. If Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh came out with a movie the MSM reaction would run the range between media black out to bashing. Moore’s movie reviews thus far seem to repeat the mooreon claims that he is raising an issue regardless of his being one sided… Yeah, like they’d ever say that about someone who’s politics they didn’t share’s work / movie… BS. I think the ‘media black out’ strategy should be fair to both sets of people.. the MSM should have no need to give airtime to partisans / hacks… on any side.

This is a bit off topic, but I just thought you guys would like to know that Roger Ebert briefly mentioned JimK and MooreWatch in his review of Sicko. Here’s the URL: Link

If I were Jim, I’d personally be flattered that the high and mighty Ebert took a few seconds of his precious time to take a cheap shot at me. :)

P.S. Jon Stewart sucks, and so does the Daily Show. I’m not at all surprised that he gave Michael Moore a free pass.

Not surprising in the least.  I still remember his interview with Howard Dean where he acted like Dean was a sane rational individual.  He would have given him a blowjob if Howard had asked him too.  That’s how much of a kiss ass he is to the liberals he has on.

Pretty weak. Even tho I got to watch it using Firefox

The only thing worth watching on Comedy Central anymore is South Park.

Even Roger Ebert can’t get the much talked about story right. 

But there’s room for irony when the owner of an anti-Moore Web site can’t afford to maintain it when his wife gets sick.

Eberts been sick a lot, and Joel Siegel just died. Coincidence?

Posted by witchndigger on 06/29/2007 at 06:47 PM (Link to this comment | )

Even Roger Ebert can’t get the much talked about story right. 

But there’s room for irony when the owner of an anti-Moore Web site can’t afford to maintain it when his wife gets sick.

Actually, that sounds rather close to right. Wrong would be to claim he couldn’t pay the medical bills.

The irony, from my POV, is the asumption you have a right to not cut back on personal things or hobbies when someone in the family is sick. Thats just too much to do, must have government fix it.

Roger Ebert briefly mentioned JimK and MooreWatch in his review of Sicko.

Interesting to see that Ebert has once again put aside his personal issues with Moore for the sake of fellating a left-wing cause. Ebert was pissed at him after the Oscars, when Moore DARED to tell the press back stage (including him) not to report on the boos. That was the only time Ebert was honest and actually, y’know, CRITICIZED Moore’s movie. Because Moore got above himself and thought he could order the media around just because they back his side, and Ebert got pissed and let some honesty in the face of his personal politics slip through.

But that was a long time ago, and Ebert’s no doubt forgotten his butthurt and gotten back to the important thing: sucking off Moore and his cause.

To sl0re - Please believe me when I say in NO way whatsoever is this semi-rant directed at you. You are a wonderful poster and a insightful contributor to this site, and I don’t want you to think this is aimed at you in ANY way. It isn’t - I just wanted to get this point off my chest.

Actually, that sounds rather close to right. Wrong would be to claim he couldn’t pay the medical bills.

Actually, it isn’t close to right. I didn’t “get sick”. I’ve been “sick” for a very, very long time. I’ve been dealing with a serious, chronic condition since before this site even existed. How “sick” I was at that time was not and will never be the point. The point was that a whole slew of bills came due at once, one of which was a large increase in our health insurance premiums. That increase, combined with server costs and other personal bills led us to a financial state where it seems Jim might have to close down the site to make sure we had enough money to take care of what mattered most. Please also remember at this time we had been bilked for thousands by JT Thompson, the site’s former administrator and a con man.

This is what gets to me. I didn’t “get sick”, nor am I “better” now, nor was the state of my health the imminent reason for the discussion of closing the site. It’s quite simply not true.

Posted by DonnaK on 06/30/2007 at 03:22 PM (Link to this comment | )

To sl0re - Please believe me when I say in NO way whatsoever is this semi-rant directed at you. You are a wonderful poster and a insightful contributor to this site, and I don’t want you to think this is aimed at you in ANY way. It isn’t - I just wanted to get this point off my chest.

Actually, that sounds rather close to right. Wrong would be to claim he couldn’t pay the medical bills.

Actually, it isn’t close to right. I didn’t “get sick”. I’ve been “sick” for a very, very long time. I’ve been dealing with a serious, chronic condition since before this site even existed. How “sick” I was at that time was not and will never be the point. The point was that a whole slew of bills came due at once, one of which was a large increase in our health insurance premiums. That increase, combined with server costs and other personal bills led us to a financial state where it seems Jim might have to close down the site to make sure we had enough money to take care of what mattered most. Please also remember at this time we had been bilked for thousands by JT Thompson, the site’s former administrator and a con man. This is what gets to me. I didn’t “get sick”, nor am I “better” now, nor was the state of my health the imminent reason for the discussion of closing the site. It’s quite simply not true.

Ebert’s take on the facts is still closer to the truth than most others. The site was in danger of going down and it had something to do with medical bills. Snarky and not perfect, but still closer than the average moore-on’s take (you were about to die, were destitute, and he ended up saving your life / home / whatever and your cured now*… :) yada yada… then JimK told Moore off… as shown in the Movie… LOL...).

* thanks to Moore’s donation of course

This isn’t trying to create chaos or a personal attack just my observation and I have to leave it on this post because you don’t accept comments on the old ones; You’re upset that the man that saved you by sending you 12,000$ is the man you hate. He didn’t tell you it was him, and he isn’t expecting anything in return. But wouldn’t it be the kind thing to do, to stop I mean. Karma has a bigger role than many believe.

You’re upset that the man that saved you by sending you 12,000$ is the man you hate.

He saved nothing and no one. He helped, for his own selfish reasons.

He didn’t tell you it was him, and he isn’t expecting anything in return.

That is demonstrably a lie, since what he got in return, WITHOUT ASKING FOR IT, is putting Jim and his wife in the movie as a “gotcha”.

But wouldn’t it be the kind thing to do, to stop I mean.

The kind thing to do would be to be bought off?

Moore fans sell their integrity and intellectual honesty cheaply, I see.

Karma has a bigger role than many believe.

Yes, and we can all only hope that one day Moore will get what’s coming to him due to it.

This isn’t trying to create chaos or a personal attack just my observation and I have to leave it on this post because you don’t accept comments on the old ones; You’re upset that the man that saved you by sending you 12,000$ is the man you hate. He didn’t tell you it was him

1. You registered just to attack me over this.  Don’t even pretend to lie about it.  You get one chance to tell me the truth.

2. This has been dealt with like 40 fucking times.  READ.

3. I don’t hate him.  Stop putting words in my mouth

4. He hid his involvement with the money until he told the WORLD in the film.  That’s not anonymous.  He DID tell me.  READ.

5. I should let Moore’s trick silence me and change my opinions about his lies and his shoddy journalism?  Sorry you’re for sale at such a cheap price but I’m not.

You’re upset

No, I’m not “upset”. Michael Moore sending us that money over a year ago did not “upset” me. The only thing that upsets me at all are the continuous and unending comments like these. Your point is invalid on its face.

the man that saved you by sending you 12,000$

Michael Moore did not save me, nor did his money. This issue, as Jim has pointed out, has been addressed many times. I just addressed it a few comments above. You point is invalid on its face.

is the man you hate.

I am at a loss. Where did you get the impression either Jim or I hate Michael Moore? We have both expressly said otherwise, repeatedly and with vigor. In my introductory post as a writer here I specifically said I do not hate Michael Moore. We may differ ideologically and I may call him on mistakes I may find in his work, but none of that equates to hate on any level. Please stop putting words in my mouth and instead read the words I have already written. Again, your point is invalid on its face.

He didn’t tell you it was him,

At the time the gift was given it was given anonymously and we accepted it as such. Of course Moore then revealed first to the world and then pesonally to us that the gift was from him. The cherry on this is the reveal of the gift, including Jim’s and my names, in the movie itself. So while you are correct that Moore did not reveal himself at the beginning, you are incorrect that he never told us the gift was from him. Hell, we even have a recording of the message he left us on our voice mail of Moore’s call telling us the gift was from him. Again… your point is invalid on its face.

and he isn’t expecting anything in return.

This is the one and only thing you have said that is accurate. And then you follow it up with this…

But wouldn’t it be the kind thing to do, to stop I mean. Karma has a bigger role than many believe.

Moore himself has said we have no obligation to stop. He knew what the purpose of this site was when he sent the money. He knows and has publically stated our right to speak and disagree with him should continue. But don’t take my word for it. This is what Michael Moore recently said on the subject himself:

In the film, you mention anonymously helping the man who runs the biggest anti-Michael Moore Web site to pay some medical bills. Now that your assistance is no longer anonymous, have you had any further contact with him?
Yes, I called him before the first time we screened it at the film festival in Cannes and told him it was me. I didn’t want him to be surprised by it.

And what did he say?
He was very grateful and thanked me and wished the film well.

And then said, “I’m still going to talk smack about you on my Web site tomorrow”?
Ha. Well, he might. That’s my point. His freedom of speech shouldn’t be taken away just because he can’t afford health insurance.

In summation, nothing you’ve said has any factual basis and is in fact a direct contridiction of what Michael Moore himself has stated. In the future, please get your facts straight before speaking on this subject. Thank you.

I hate Michael Moore.

But then I’ve never claimed to represent this site. I’ve never even considered asking to be a front-page poster, and if Jim suddenly woke up a little crazy one day and asked me, I’d say “Uh, Jim, go back to bed for awhile, I think the cat slept on your air mask’s tube and deprived you of oxygen.”

But then, my thing with Moore is more personal. His films, and the lies and deceptions in them, have resulted in me personally becoming at odds with people I cared about, who bought into his scare tactics and manipulations and suddenly wouldn’t hear a word against him.

I mean this statement utterly without humor: It really, honestly hurts to watch someone you care about turn into a Mooreon.

That’s a big part of it, but it’s compounded by the utterly indefensible things he’s said. I will never forgive him for his statements on 9/12/01. He may have tried to cover them up and pretend he never said them, but that’s one of those things about that time that should be included in Never Forget. Never forget what happened… and never forget what some peoples’ first reactions were.

I’m just one poster on the site, though. Did I come here because I hated Moore? No. I came here because he annoyed and disgusted me, and I wanted to find out if he had annoyed and disgusted anyone else as much. (Since I found an entire website for it, hey.) Have I grown to hate him since then? Yes. I really do honestly hate him.

I’ll openly say it because I think it would be disingenuous to be untruthful on the matter. If I said I didn’t hate him when I do, it would be a lie about my stance. I would oppose Moore on almost any matter (barring of course obvious extremes) because he is Moore, if he told me the night sky was dark I’d look out the window.

I really, honestly hate him, and I pretty much hope something bad happens to him someday. I hope it hurts a lot. I’m aware that doesn’t make me a terribly great person, and I’m not happy about it, but I’ve dealt with it.

I couldn’t help but think how unhealthy Moore was looking. apart from that, it was what I would expect of that show, in all fairness, it is on comedy central, so it’s not meant to be taken as news, sure, he makes his own opinion heard whenever he gets the chance, but .. it’s his show, and he does what he wants, thats what he gets paid the big bucks for.

Pretty funny that Moore got bumped for Paris Hilton.

so it’s not meant to be taken as news

You know, it’s funny you should mention that. Not that I’m aiming this at you, it just reminds me of something.

Moore himself likes to hide behind the shield of “comedy” and “satire"… which is what the Daily Show supposedly is. And yet at the same time, the Daily Show is often enough just a venting pad from which Stewart can attack the Right.

And let’s face it, a lot of leftists treat the Daily Show as if it IS a real news show. (Like they treat Moore’s movies like real documentaries.) They fling around that so-called statistic citing that Daily Show viewers are better-informed than those who watch “real” news, stuff like that.

And I’ll say again, completely aside from any politics, I want to hit Stewart in the mouth with a baseball bat every time he speaks. He has the most smug, self-satisfied, smarmy manner of speaking EVER and him reading the phone book would make me want to cause him bodily harm.

Moore himself likes to hide behind the shield of “comedy” and “satire"… which is what the Daily Show supposedly is. And yet at the same time, the Daily Show is often enough just a venting pad from which Stewart can attack the Right.

I can’t argue with that. It’s a soapbox for his own opinions without a doubt.

To say that the daily show is not biased against the government would be a lie, that’s for sure. I never knew about the show until Bush was in power, I’m hoping that he can sling some shit the other way if the opposition comes to power.

I’m hoping that he can sling some shit the other way if the opposition comes to power.

I doubt it will be shit. At most, mud.

A lot of comedians/critics/whatnot like to try to claim they’re not biased or whatever by saying “Well I made fun of the last guy too! I make fun of the other side!”

But there’s a different tone to it. There’s a different manner. With Clinton, it was like:

“Awww, you big goofball. In trouble again! Geez, why don’t you just screw ANOTHER intern! Heheh, anyway, c’mere, Billy, lemme buy you a beer.”

Y’know, kind of like you’d treat your dumbass cousin who’s always making a mess of things but you still like to hang out with and can’t seem to blame for anything.

With Bush it’s more like:

“RAAAAR MURDERER BABYKILLER YOUR MOTHER SUCKS COCKS IN HELL ARGLBLARGARGLBLAAAAGH!”

I’m hoping that he can sling some shit the other way if the opposition comes to power

Oh most shows, comedians certainly do make fun of either side, depending on if there is something there.  I actually prefer comedians to be a bit light on the political humor.  For instance I can’t stand more than two jokes by patton oswalt, and its not because of his voice.  However I can watch Frank Caliendo poking fun at both Bush and Clinton because his humor isn’t based on their politics but the people.

The issue with the daily show bleeds into the interviews with who is there.  John Stewart goes after Colin Powell trying to get him to say anything at all negative about the administration, like his an attorney going after a hostile witness.  Contrast that to where he’s practically giving a blow job to Howard Dean.

Posted by michael jackson on 07/03/2007 at 02:35 AM (Link to this comment | )

I’m hoping that he can sling some shit the other way if the opposition comes to power.

He has had a target right environment for years with the opposition. He only does gags on them about trips and falls or mispronouncing words. Not anything deeper.

Heck, even SLN has had some harsh attacks / skits attacking the dems… I remember one about Pelosi’s staff after the dems won congress where they were all leathermen and she was trying to explain the need for safewords. Heh…

With Bush it’s more like:

“RAAAAR MURDERER BABYKILLER YOUR MOTHER SUCKS COCKS IN HELL ARGLBLARGARGLBLAAAAGH!”

you have a way with words! ..
like Buzzion says, it’s sometimes funnier when the joke is aimed at the people, rather that wether or not the person is from a particular party.

He has had a target right environment for years with the opposition. He only does gags on them about trips and falls or mispronouncing words. Not anything deeper

.

see, that pisses me off. I like to see all the politicians get served equally. they deserve it.