Hacking for Columbine

10 thoughts on “Hacking for Columbine”

1. Seen that in a number of places.

   Ahem. I really can’t approve of hacking sites. Honestly can’t approve. But I admit it’s very hard to disapprove when one is chortling madly…

2. It’s a sad day indeed when outright vandalism is applauded simply because it is perpetrated on someone we disagree with, however strongly.

3. Nobody’s applauding vandalism, ND, just noting it (and giggling like mad).

   But I do think Michael Moore should ask himself why the vandals hate him, because it must be something he did, like, um, lying, or maybe consuming (far) more than his fair share of the Earth’s Natural Resources, and causing Global Warming and stuff. He’s apparently quite racist, sexist, and ablist as well.

4. He’s a sexist and a racist ?
   What has he said that is racist or sexist ?

   Some facts about BFC are wrong, yes, but some of them also true. At least he has the guts to point out some things that others are afraid to.

5. Moore’s book title “Stupid White Men” disparages a group by race and by sex. That’s what “racist” and “sexist” means.

6. ok. I didn’t ask for the definitions of sexist and racist. If you’re going to call him that because of his book’s title, which is obviously meant to be facetious, then I think that says more about you than it does about him.

   If you have read or seen any of Moore’s work, then you’d know that in going after the ethics of businesses, he has no problem with questioning those businesses, regardless of race or sex.

   Sexist and racist are strong words, with very specific connotations. Hitler was a racist. My uncle is a sexist. It must be so nice for you to be able to throw labels about without having any more justification than a book title.

   p.s. My town’s elected officials are men, and in my opinion, they are stupid. Does that make me a racist ? Or does you calling me one make you a jerk ?

7. Why do you assume “Stupid White Men” is meant to be facetious? Everything I’ve ever read of Moore’s indicates that he does in fact believe that white males are the cause of all the world’s problems.

   And on your other point, if we call a politician we don’t like a “cunt” or a “dick”, that’s sexist; calling him or her a “moron” or a “jerk” is not.

   Get the distinction?

8. No, he doesn’t claim to know the cause of all the world’s problem’s. You’re now being just plain dramatic. Just because most of the businesses and spokespeople for those businesses have been male does not make him a sexist. If you think that he’s purposefully not going after women, you’re fooling yourself.

   Calling a politician a ‘dick’ is not sexist, it’s being rude. Saying that all women politicians are wrong or bad is sexist. It’s you who apparently don’t see this distinction.

   Here’s a hint:
   http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sexist

   still think he’s a racist ?

9. Yes, and I still think calling a female politician a “cunt” is sexist, and the same logic says that calling a male a “dick” is also sexist.

10. The fact remains that Moore does *not* just go after white males, in any of his movies or especially his books.

    Another fact that despite obviously glaring bias, leanings, and some sketchy statistics, Bowling for Columbine *does* ask some very important and difficult questions, and makes a best attempt to answer them. To dismiss the movie is one thing, but to dismiss the questions and issues being asked in it is quite another.

    Maybe you disagree, and you think that it’s no big deal why so many people are killed in gun-related events in the US ? Maybe you don’t find it at all strange that countries with more guns per person have less deaths due to guns ?

    It may come to a surprise to you that many people in this country, who also happen to believe in the right to bear arms, are very concerned about gun related deaths, and the increase of them in recent years.

    Same thing goes for the citizens of Flint, Michigan. What happened there was terrible, and Moore made a movie bringing that to light for many people.

    If you don’t like Moore’s filmaking style, fine. But don’t criticize him for making movies about tough and terrible circumstances, and asking questions.

Comments are closed.