A Powerful Movie

[mrveggieman]

i have not seen this movie and honestly have no plans to. however, you can't really compare a movie by d-sousa and a movie by michael moore. The anti-bush movies were moore using creative editing to make it look like people said things they never said. So yes, that is the work of a leftist nut. that isn't about bush, that is about moore. having not seen this, i don't know if d'sousa uses the same techniques but if he does I will be the first to call foul.
In the anti-bush movies it was extremely easy to find cases to say "he never said that" "that is a lie by the film maker." Can we say that about this movie would be my question.

I never seen the movie and have no plans on seeing it but based on the commentary by some of the conservative readers on here it has plenty of "credible" evidence to convince any conservative about all the ills of our president.

[ensbergcollector]

I never seen the movie and have no plans on seeing it but based on the commentary by some of the conservative readers on here it has plenty of "credible" evidence to convince any conservative about all the ills of our president.

honest question, do you just assume they are all lies and there is nothing credible in there? Again, if the movie is done with "creative" editing then i will be the first to blast it. However, just because it is anti-obama doesn't mean it is all false (not does it mean it is all true). I just see people on the right believing it all while people on the left will say it is all lies.

[habsheaven]

It really has nothing to do with whether it is "true" or not. I am sure it is full of "true facts". The problem is the conclusions and inferences made by highlighting certain facts and ignoring other facts that do not fit with the narrative of what the writer wants to present. For viewers wanting to believe the narrative they will do so. For skeptics, they will dismiss it outright because they know the tactics that are being used.

[AUTaxMan]

It really has nothing to do with whether it is "true" or not. I am sure it is full of "true facts". The problem is the conclusions and inferences made by highlighting certain facts and ignoring other facts that do not fit with the narrative of what the writer wants to present. For viewers wanting to believe the narrative they will do so. For skeptics, they will dismiss it outright because they know the tactics that are being used.

Surely the liberal commentators will slice it to pieces if the film contains any of that kind of stuff, as well they should. I believe Boortz would have done so if he saw something that caused him to raise an eyebrow. He's never been one to toe the party line.

[habsheaven]

Surely the liberal commentators will slice it to pieces if the film contains any of that kind of stuff, as well they should. I believe Boortz would have done so if he saw something that caused him to raise an eyebrow. He's never been one to toe the party line.

What do you mean IF? It has to include inferences and conclusions based on what it is presenting. How could it be a movie if it simply listed a bunch of facts? I don't even know who Boortz is but I can tell from reading his review that he is not a Democrat and as such he will have the same preconcieved conceptions as other Republicans have. He wouldn't know how to "raise an eyebrow" to anything said.

[AUTaxMan]

What do you mean IF? It has to include inferences and conclusions based on what it is presenting. How could it be a movie if it simply listed a bunch of facts? I don't even know who Boortz is but I can tell from reading his review that he is not a Democrat and as such he will have the same preconcieved conceptions as other Republicans have. He wouldn't know how to "raise an eyebrow" to anything said.

Of course it draws conclusions. If it contains inferences and conclusions based on half-truths, lies and substantial omissions, it will be exposed for what it is. Boortz is a libertarian and has been very critical of the reps of late.

[Wickabee]

Of course it draws conclusions. If it contains inferences and conclusions based on half-truths, lies and substantial omissions, it will be exposed for what it is. Boortz is a libertarian and has been very critical of the reps of late.

This is pretty true.

[JustAlex]

In the past 4 years Republicans have painted Obama in the following way:

A Muslim-socialist-communist-Nazi-Kenyan-baby killing-gay-unAmerican-liar who can do no right and is destroying this country.

If the GOP lived on planet earth and not the fantasy world they have constructed they would see just insane they really have become.


Here is the truth.....Obama has NOT been the president we hoped for, he didn't do enough and the hope and change slogans he used were in fact false.

In his presidency I turned my back on Democrats and I'm now 100% Independent.


HOWEVER.......in the same period, the GOP has literally turned so insane, so out-of-touch, so greedy, so hateful, and so incompetent that their image is forever broken to many rational thinking people.

[pspstatus]

So maybe this movie is partly right. Maybe Obama is somewhat anti-colonialist. Is it such a terrible thing that Obama sees other countries as being equal to us? Is it such a terrible thing that he doesn't share the same condescending arrogance of superiority as many past presidents have? Even if he does have some anti-colonialist views I sincerely doubt that his goal is to turn the US into a third world country.

Here's a mind blower for you. Obama not being incredibly ethnocentric doesn't upset me that much.

[AUTaxMan]

HOWEVER.......in the same period, the GOP has literally turned so insane, so out-of-touch, so greedy, so hateful, and so incompetent that their image is forever broken to many rational thinking people.

Is their image broken to you as well?