It's sad to see social problems like bullying enshrined in conventional wisdom as inevitable, or even desirable. One side effect of capitalism is that people tend to shrug off phenomena in which the money can't be counted; witness the countless studies on the "cost" in dollars of amorphous things like stress or sleep deprivation...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bowling for Columbine
- Thread starter crystalmethod
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
I went and saw this movie, because I thought it was going to be a comedy. The title, the fat bum on the cover--it had all the fixings for hilarity.
But on a serious note, now that I know who Michael Moore is I have a hard time believing a single word he says, because there is always some political agenda driving his "documentaries".
But on a serious note, now that I know who Michael Moore is I have a hard time believing a single word he says, because there is always some political agenda driving his "documentaries".
Originally posted by VertigoXX@Sep 7, 2004 @ 03:06 PM
The common citizen does not need to own an automatic assault rifle, Bambi the Deer doesn't require 100 bullets per minute to be taken down. The common citizen should have the right to own a simple rifle and/or a simple handgun. One trigger pull=one bullet.
The problem with "assault weapon" bans is that they're called assault weapon bans, and people *think* they ban weapons that spray a lot of bullets when you pull the trigger, but "assault weapon" is defined so broadly that it includes a lot of guns that aren't assault weapons. It really does make sense to hunt deer with an "assault weapon"--if you go by how those bills and laws define them. All of them ban guns which shoot one bullet with one trigger pull--real assault weapons have already been banned since the 1930's.
Well, I saw him give a talk live once, and he did prove that point admirably well, although his point was not so much about the stupidity of Americans, but rather their ignorance of the rest of the world. The talk was at a university, and he asked for volunteers - three American students who got straight A's and claimed to be knowledgeable about world affairs, and one average Canadian student who said he didn't really follow the news. He asked the American students who the Prime Minister of Canada was, and not one of them could answer the question. He then asked the Canadian student who the President of the United States was, and of course he was able to answer without hesitation. Some may consider that question to be somewhat skewed (and to some extent, I agree), but it got the point across.
Originally posted by it290@Sep 7, 2004 @ 07:21 PM
Well, I saw him give a talk live once, and he did prove that point admirably well, although his point was not so much about the stupidity of Americans, but rather their ignorance of the rest of the world. The talk was at a university, and he asked for volunteers - three American students who got straight A's and claimed to be knowledgeable about world affairs, and one average Canadian student who said he didn't really follow the news. He asked the American students who the Prime Minister of Canada was, and not one of them could answer the question. He then asked the Canadian student who the President of the United States was, and of course he was able to answer without hesitation. Some may consider that question to be somewhat skewed (and to some extent, I agree), but it got the point across.
True, many Americans are ignorant of world affairs, but that demonstration was extremely one-sided. George W. Bush is one of the most hated men in the world, everyone knows his name. This may seem very cold, and I know we have a lot of Canadians here; try not to be offended, I'm just being honest: Americans don't give a flying fuck about Canada. I doubt if any American citizen could name the Prime Minister of Canada. If the question was, "Name the prime minister of England?" or "Who is the president of Russia?" and none of the Americans could answer, then I'd be a little more suprised.
Originally posted by mountaindud@Sep 7, 2004 @ 10:00 PM
I'm just being honest: Americans don't give a flying fuck about Canada.
Um, okay. Actually, I do care very much about Canada. One might say we don't know much about their leaders and such because of two reasons. First, their media doesn't make rock stars out of them and try to sell them to the world. Second, we're bigger and butt into a lot more affairs around the world. Because Canada doesn't go starting wars on a whim, those in charge are not as well known. Bush isn't so much famous as he is infamous around the world right now. That's not a good thing.
I care about Canada, Europe, and the rest of the world because there are a great deal of things that they do better. People here tend to think America has all the answers, and our way is the best way. Big government is bad because it will take over your life. Social security and welfare make people lazy. Although these are perfectly legitimate concerns (see Spain) they work amazingly well in other places (see Canada). And while no system is perfect, we sure as hell can learn about what works (and what doesn't) from looking around us.
So, I guess you actually could say there are a large number of Americans that don't give a "flying fuck" about Canada, the truth, other people, other cultures, anyone but themselves. Sadly, I think their numbers are growing.
Oh, and if Bush gets reelected in November, Canada might just become my new home. 😉
no Google coaching here:
Jean Creiten? (sp?). TBH mountaindud is right on the money - Canada doesn't really go around pissing people off or screwing everything up; usually the only time Canada is in the news is because some people here want it to be legal to import price-controlled drugs.
Tony Blair. Vital for cross-examination of the case for invading Iraq...
Vladimir Putin?
I'd be more interested in knowing how many Americans know who Jean-Bertrand Aristide is. The story was in the US press but got second or third billing to whatever the current promoted stories were.
I suspect it's not so much that Americans are willfully ignorant, but that the major American media outlets condition many of us to think we're getting the important stuff when we're really getting:
1) Everything we're supposed to think is important
2) Stories to reassure us that we aren't the dumbest/fattest person in America
3) Everything that can be spun into a real-life drama (Michael Jackson, JonBenet Ramsey, Elizabeth Smart, Michael Jackson, Martha Stewart, Scott Peterson, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jackson, on and on and on...)
the Prime Minister of Canada
Jean Creiten? (sp?). TBH mountaindud is right on the money - Canada doesn't really go around pissing people off or screwing everything up; usually the only time Canada is in the news is because some people here want it to be legal to import price-controlled drugs.
Name the prime minister of England?
Tony Blair. Vital for cross-examination of the case for invading Iraq...
Who is the president of Russia?
Vladimir Putin?
I'd be more interested in knowing how many Americans know who Jean-Bertrand Aristide is. The story was in the US press but got second or third billing to whatever the current promoted stories were.
I suspect it's not so much that Americans are willfully ignorant, but that the major American media outlets condition many of us to think we're getting the important stuff when we're really getting:
1) Everything we're supposed to think is important
2) Stories to reassure us that we aren't the dumbest/fattest person in America
3) Everything that can be spun into a real-life drama (Michael Jackson, JonBenet Ramsey, Elizabeth Smart, Michael Jackson, Martha Stewart, Scott Peterson, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jackson, on and on and on...)
Originally posted by Quadriflax@Sep 7, 2004 @ 09:19 PM
...One might say we don't know much about their leaders and such because of two reasons. First, their media doesn't make rock stars out of them and try to sell them to the world. Second, we're bigger and butt into a lot more affairs around the world. Because Canada doesn't go starting wars on a whim, those in charge are not as well known. Bush isn't so much famous as he is infamous around the world right now. That's not a good thing.
That is almost the same thing I said, only with a thick, thick, THICK sugar coating.
Instead of 'Americans' I should have said 'the vast majority of Americans'.
Originally posted by mountaindud@Sep 8, 2004 @ 02:00 AM
George W. Bush is one of the most hated men in the world,
Just because we see protestors chanting ill remarks about the President, does not mean most of the world hates him. He may be unpopular in some countries, but who cares? He is not running their country. Besides, most that hate him are against wars. This can be said for just about any Head of State. You will always have people with this mindset.
Anyways... Lighten up. Think positively...
Originally posted by Lyzel@Sep 7, 2004 @ 09:36 PM
Just because we see protestors chanting ill remarks about the President, does not mean most of the world hates him. He may be unpopular in some countries, but who cares? He is not running their country. Besides, most that hate him are against wars. This can be said for just about any Head of State. You will always have people with this mindset.
Anyways... Lighten up. Think positively...
You'd be suprised; go to any Europeon country wearing a Gearge W. Bush T-Shirt and see how many high-fives you get. I have nothing against George W, I favor him over John F Kerry (not that that's saying much) but you can at least admit he is disliked internationally a hell of a lot more than any other recent president, no?
ExCyber, all you answers are correct. I never heard of Jean-Bertrand, I cheated/googled: apparently he is a democratically elected Haitian president, right? And that is a good point. Our news is garbage isn't it?
I never heard of Jean-Bertrand, I cheated/googled
Don't feel bad. I had to google for the first name. In any case there's no point in refusing to "cheat" for this one.
apparently he is a democratically elected Haitian president, right?
Was. There was an armed revolution in a country that's makeshift-boating distance from Florida, and the media barely batted an eye. How's that for being told what's important?
I know who Aristide is, but only because I have an interest in Haiti and I have followed the story obsessively. Who knows when/if we'll find out the real truth about that affair. And of course, I know who Putin and Blair are.
As for the PM of Canada, it's actually Paul Martin. When Moore asked the question, it was Chretien. I confess at the time I didn't know who it was, either. But I don't feel that bad, now: Pete Coors, head honcho of Coors Brewing, who's running for Senate here in Colorado, didn't know who Martin was when it came up during a debate (right after he had finished talking about how imporant foreign policy was).
And Lyzel, I think you'd have a hard time coming up with facts showing that the majority of the population in any country other than the US approve of the job Bush is doing.
As for the PM of Canada, it's actually Paul Martin. When Moore asked the question, it was Chretien. I confess at the time I didn't know who it was, either. But I don't feel that bad, now: Pete Coors, head honcho of Coors Brewing, who's running for Senate here in Colorado, didn't know who Martin was when it came up during a debate (right after he had finished talking about how imporant foreign policy was).
And Lyzel, I think you'd have a hard time coming up with facts showing that the majority of the population in any country other than the US approve of the job Bush is doing.
I think you'd have a hard time coming up with facts showing that the majority of the population in the US necessarily approves of the job Bush is doing. His approval rating has been eroding ever since 9/11/2001. It was 50-60% leading up to 9/11, then it shot to 85-90 right after the attack and has been slowly going down ever since. It's hovering around 50% right now, some polls putting him over, some under.
Originally posted by it290@Sep 8, 2004 @ 04:06 AM
And Lyzel, I think you'd have a hard time coming up with facts showing that the majority of the population in any country other than the US approve of the job Bush is doing.
Who cares if they approve again its not thier country .
As long as we don't offend them which Bush has done to many places .
Oh well .
Originally posted by ExCyber@Sep 8, 2004 @ 05:05 AM
It's hovering around 50% right now, some polls putting him over, some under.
yeah well its enough to get him re-elected , he's going to win .
Sorry to say , guess you'll be moving to Canada Quadriflax .
yeah well its enough to get him re-elected , he's going to win .
If you think you can tell that from a marginal national poll lead, you're out of your mind.
Originally posted by ExCyber@Sep 8, 2004 @ 06:27 AM
If you think you can tell that from a marginal national poll lead, you're out of your mind.
Lets bet ...$20
Kerry was only up a couple points before the Rnc . Not good .
Im not going on a poll lead its more of a gut feeling , you know what I really dont care either way , but I just know whats going to happen .
Youve got paypal right ?
Winner to be payed on Nov 4 .(or there abouts)
Originally posted by ExCyber@Sep 8, 2004 @ 05:27 AM
If you think you can tell that from a marginal national poll lead, you're out of your mind.
Nah, it's not just that. What has Kerry done of late? He has no traction. The latest silly thing he has started is President's Bush Middle initials. I wonder what Kerry's F initials are? Flip-flop? John "Flip-Flop" Kerry?
I don't mean much about that... I just though it was amusing.
Anyways, the way I see it... Bush is going to win.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 535
