View Full Version : have fun
ak1971
11-29-2005, 12:23 AM
I don't own a single share of stock!" filmmaker Michael Moore proudly proclaimed.
He's right. He doesn't own a single share. He owns tens of thousands of shares – including nearly 2,000 shares of Boeing, nearly 1,000 of Sonoco, more than 4,000 of Best Foods, more than 3,000 of Eli Lilly, more than 8,000 of Bank One and more than 2,000 of Halliburton, the company most vilified by Moore in "Fahrenheit 9/11."
If you want to see Moore's own signed Schedule D declaring his capital gains and losses where his stock ownership is listed, it's emblazoned on the cover of Peter Schweizer's new book, "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy."
And it's just one of the startling revelations by Schweizer, famous for his previous works, "Reagan's War" and "The Bushes."
Other examples:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who proclaims her support for unions, yet the luxury resort, the vineyard and the restaurants she partly owns are strictly non-union. While she advocates tough new laws enforcing environmental regulations on the private sector, the exclusive country club she partly owns failed to comply with existing environmental regulations for the past eight years – including a failure to protect endangered species.
Noam Chomsky has made a reputation for calling America a police state and branding the Pentagon "the most hideous institution on earth," yet his entire academic career, writes Schweizer, has been subsidized by the U.S. military.
Barbra Streisand is another proponent of environmentalism, yet she drives an SUV, lives in a mansion and has a $22,000 annual water bill. In the past, she has driven to appointments in Beverly Hills in a motor home because of her aversion to using public bathrooms.
Ralph Nader plays the role of the citizen avenger – the populist uninterested in wealth and materialism, pretending to live in a modest apartment. In fact, he lives in fancy homes registered in the names of his siblings.
This is not just a book of "gotcha" journalism, explains Schweizer. He says the dozens and dozens of examples of "liberal hypocrisy" he cites in his book "are of central importance in evaluating the validity and usefulness of liberal ideas."
"Using IRS records, court depositions, news reports, financial disclosures and their own statements, I sought to answer a particular question: Do these liberal leaders and activists practice what they preach?" he writes. "What I found was a stunning record of open and shameless hypocrisy. Those who champion the cause of organized labor had developed various methods to avoid paying union wages or shunned unions altogether.
"Those who believe that the rich need to pay more in taxes proved especially adept at avoiding taxes themselves. Critics of capitalism and corporate enterprise frequently invested in the very companies they denounced. Those who espouse strict environmental regulations worked vigorously to sidestep them when it came to their own businesses and properties. Those who advocate steep inheritance taxes to promote fairer income distribution hid their investments in trusts or exotic overseas locales to reduce their own tax liability. Those who are strong proponents of affirmative action rarely practiced it themselves, and some had abysmal records when it came to hiring minorities. Those who proclaim themselves champions of civil liberties when it comes to criminal or terrorist cases went to extraordinary lengths to curtail the civil liberties of others when they felt threatened or just inconvenienced. Advocates of gun control had no problem making sure that an arsenal of weapons was available to protect them from dangerous criminals."
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-30-2005, 08:12 PM
How did Schweizer get a look at someone else's tax return? It's illegal, so why aren't the Feds investigating how he managed to see it?
And if he didn't see the actual tax return, then the book is nothing but a compilation of fantasy imagination and/or hearsay that is more apt to be fiction than truth.
No way he has Moore's tax return unless Moore gave it to him or he stole it. The IRS has very strict disclosure rules that forbid disclosing an individual's tax information without their consent. The ONLY way he could get a copy of his tax return would be if he had a signed Form 2848 Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative. He is not entitiled to it under FOIA either. This is complete bullsh_t.
This is probably part of a pre-emptive strike against Moore's upcoming documentary that takes on the HMOs.
It's clear that the corporate fascists who call themselves republicans are scared that little Mike Moore might induce the average person to think that the matter of whether they live or die should not be based on whether a buck can be made saving them.
Doesn't it seem a tad silly to be worrying if Michael Moore owns stock in Haliburton when Uncle Dick sure as hell does? When Uncle Dick is still on the payroll of Haliburton, when Uncle Dick and his puppets are directing contracts to Haliburton, and when Uncle Dick is waging an illegal war from which Haliburton's profits (and his dividends) continue to skyrocket? If the Repugnicans want to toss rocks at Michael Moore they should check to make sure their house is made of plexiglass first.
Rigs11
11-30-2005, 08:25 PM
How did Schweizer get a look at someone else's tax return? It's illegal, so why aren't the Feds investigating how he managed to see it?
And if he didn't see the actual tax return, then the book is nothing but a compilation of fantasy imagination and/or hearsay that is more apt to be fiction than truth.
No way he has Moore's tax return unless Moore gave it to him or he stole it. The IRS has very strict disclosure rules that forbid disclosing an individual's tax information without their consent. The ONLY way he could get a copy of his tax return would be if he had a signed Form 2848 Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative. He is not entitiled to it under FOIA either. This is complete bullsh_t.
This is probably part of a pre-emptive strike against Moore's upcoming documentary that takes on the HMOs.
It's clear that the corporate fascists who call themselves republicans are scared that little Mike Moore might induce the average person to think that the matter of whether they live or die should not be based on whether a buck can be made saving them.
Doesn't it seem a tad silly to be worrying if Michael Moore owns stock in Haliburton when Uncle Dick sure as hell does? When Uncle Dick is still on the payroll of Haliburton, when Uncle Dick and his puppets are directing contracts to Haliburton, and when Uncle Dick is waging an illegal war from which Haliburton's profits (and his dividends) continue to skyrocket? If the Repugnicans want to toss rocks at Michael Moore they should check to make sure their house is made of plexiglass first.
Exactly Michael Moore is a filmaker, Dickie on the other hand is the vp of our country and used to run Helliburton.Dickie not Moore took us to war in Iraq where his 'former" company is still raking in money from the "liberation". Geez the blinders some people have on.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-30-2005, 08:59 PM
Geez the blinders some people have on.
Indeed.
They're blind to their own hypocrisy.
Since so many of them are snake handlers, you'd think Jesus' statement about plucking the beam out of their own (party's) eye before going after the mote in their neighbor's (party's) eye would have some impact.
If Moore wants to toss rocks at anyone he should check to make sure his house is made of plexiglass first.
BTW, I wonder what's happened to the millions in profits Moore has raked in from "Fahrenheit 9/11". Do you think he's given away any of it to charity?
enjolras
12-01-2005, 08:05 AM
Moore is a scumbag...
Doesn't change all of the other facts surrounding the Bush administration.. but anyone on the right is perfectly within their rights of pointing out the blatant idiocy that is Micheal Moore.
alkemical
12-01-2005, 12:01 PM
I view Moore in much the same light as the Limbaugh's, et al. However, like all of 'them' there is always a nugget of truth -
TheDave
12-01-2005, 12:15 PM
I view Moore in much the same light as the Limbaugh's, et al. However, like all of 'them' there is always a nugget of truth -
exactly, in my mind they are all 90% hot air... what i do think is really funny is that there are some here that still quote Rush as a legitamate source.
In fact lets get a running list of both right and left wing extremists that are not "allowed" to be quoted in the forum....
1. Rush
2. Michael Moore
3. Ann Coultur(sp?)
4. Kitty Kelley
5........
BroncoInferno
12-01-2005, 12:15 PM
exactly, in my mind they are all 90% hot air... what i do think is really funny is that there are some here that still quote Rush as a legitamate source.
In fact lets get a running list of both right and left wing extremists that are not "allowed" to be quoted in the forum....
1. Rush
2. Michael Moore
3. Ann Coultur(sp?)
4. Kitty Kelley
5........
Bill O'Lielly
TheDave
12-01-2005, 12:21 PM
Bill O'Lielly
Guess that means we have to add Al Franken to the list to...
1. Rush
2. Michael Moore
3. Ann Coultur(sp?)
4. Kitty Kelley
5. Bill O'Riley
6. Al Franken
7...........
BroncoInferno
12-01-2005, 12:25 PM
Guess that means we have to add Al Franken to the list to...
1. Rush
2. Michael Moore
3. Ann Coultur(sp?)
4. Kitty Kelley
5. Bill O'Riley
6. Al Franken
7...........
Sean Hannity
alkemical
12-01-2005, 12:33 PM
1. Rush
2. Michael Moore
3. Ann Coultur(sp?)
4. Kitty Kelley
5. Bill O'Riley
6. Al Franken
7. Sean Hannity
8. Mike Savage
Billy Clyde Puckett
12-01-2005, 01:08 PM
Labf
enjolras
12-01-2005, 03:49 PM
Labf
Anyone who would actually quote LABF
Broncos Rule
12-01-2005, 05:15 PM
Who's kitty kelley?
Broncos Rule
12-01-2005, 05:15 PM
Add to the list:
Randy Rhodes
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-01-2005, 05:18 PM
Labf
Big Gay
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-01-2005, 05:50 PM
The intense fear and lothing Moore elicits in the rightards is directly proportionate to the extent to which Moore has the goods on them.
That's how it always works. (See Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, Scott Ritter, James Hatfield, et al.)
That's what happens when someone stands up to the playground bully.
The wingnuts hate Moore because his movie (which exposes the Bush crime family) made over 100 million dollars. That scares the bejesus out of them.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-01-2005, 06:24 PM
1. Rush
Rehab Rush was spawned at the end of the Reagan years. He is nothing more a verbal fertilizer spreader of lies who has severely harmed the Constitution of the United States of America. Rush is really a propaganda instrument used by the neocons to bring about the end of America as we have known it.
Take this into consideration: in a crime family the money really means nothing - it's ALL about loyalty, because when the sh_t hits the fan, it is the loyalty that minimizes the damage to the crime family. Rush is a traitor. He sold himself out for the money. That is why he is a drug addict. That is the only way he can live with himself.
Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, and all the other neocons did not have the smarts to put a plan together to bring an end to communism. Enter James Burnham, who had the idea in the 1940s to bring down communism. It was Reagan who put that plan into motion. Regan gave Burnham a Presidential Freedom medal on February 23, 1983.
Check out this link and read what George Orwell wrote about James Burnham:
http://orwell.ru/library/reviews/burnham/english/e_burnh
Quite telling!
ak1971
12-01-2005, 10:32 PM
'The ONLY way he could get a copy of his tax return would be if he had a signed Form 2848 Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative. He is not entitiled to it under FOIA either. This is complete bullsh_t' 2848 is just a POA. There a plenty of legal easy ways to obtain tax returns.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-01-2005, 11:11 PM
This is complete bullsh_t' 2848 is just a POA. There a plenty of legal easy ways to obtain tax returns.
:bs:
The IRS has very strict disclosure rules that forbid disclosing an individual's tax information without their consent.
Schweizer doesn't have Moore's tax return - or, if he does, he's not showing it to anyone and he's not explaining how he got it.
In other words, his credibility is a joke.
In any event, it's amusing to watch you worry about whether Michael Moore owns stock in Halliburton or not when when the Vice President you support is still on the payroll at Halliburton, when Cheney and his puppets are directing contracts to Halliburton, and when Uncle Dick is waging an illegal war thanks to which Halliburton's profits (and Cheney's dividends) continue to skyrocket.
If you and your fellow Repugnicans want to toss rocks at Michael Moore, then you should check to make sure your house is made of plexiglass first.
gunns
12-02-2005, 05:27 AM
I work in a government agency where we have computer links to numerous other government agencies that we can look up confidential information on our clients. In fact the only agency we cannot link is the IRS but we are able to get some information from the IRS such as whether a client filed a tax return, what the source of the income was and how much that yearly income was. It matches names where people may be on someone elses tax return or used social security numbers other than their own so they would not appear on the social security system. This is delivered to us in a sealed envelope, while we view there must be a supervisor in the office with us and as soon as we are done viewing it it is shredded. It cannot be put in the case or even narrated on that we have seen it. If we question someone on this unreported income to us we cannot reveal where we got it and if they take it to a hearing we would lose if that's the only way we verified it as we cannot reveal it. I sincerely doubt that there are "easy" ways to get it or that if someone does get it there aren't serious reprecussions for revealing that information.
The wingnuts hate Moore because his movie (which exposes the Bush crime family) made over 100 million dollars.
How much of that did Moore keep?
Rigs11
12-02-2005, 08:57 AM
How much of that did Moore keep?
How much does limbaugh make off of his crap show? What's your point?
How much does limbaugh make off of his crap show? What's your point?
Moore constantly derides capitalism, the wealthy, and so on - despite being incredibly wealthy himself.
Why is it OK for Moore to be rich, but no-one else?
TheDave
12-02-2005, 10:47 AM
Moore constantly derides capitalism, the wealthy, and so on - despite being incredibly wealthy himself.
Why is it OK for Moore to be rich, but no-one else?
See i haven't seen alot of Moores stuff, but what i did watch, i didn't notice any of the above.
Fahrenheit 9/11 - Bush is bad
Bowling for Columbine - guns are bad
Roger & Me - GM is bad
I'll admit he takes pot shots at the wealthy but it's always specific to the premise of his movie. (notice how i never called them documentaries)
See i haven't seen alot of Moores stuff, but what i did watch, i didn't notice any of the above.
Fahrenheit 9/11 - Bush is bad
Bowling for Columbine - guns are bad
Roger & Me - GM is bad
In "The Corporation" (not his film, granted) he does his usual nonsense.
It's safe to say that since Michael Moore is the darling of the Nutty Left, well, what he says is pretty damned stupid.
Besides, I'd still like to know how Moore can be as rich as he is and not have to engage in continuous doublethink. Or else his comments and statements are just for show and he really doesn't believe any of it. Either way, he's one mangled puppy.
TheDave
12-02-2005, 11:46 AM
In "The Corporation" (not his film, granted) he does his usual nonsense.
It's safe to say that since Michael Moore is the darling of the Nutty Left, well, what he says is pretty damned stupid.
Besides, I'd still like to know how Moore can be as rich as he is and not have to engage in continuous doublethink. Or else his comments and statements are just for show and he really doesn't believe any of it. Either way, he's one mangled puppy.
I'm going to go out on a limb here... You just don't like him.
be honest, it was that Columbine movie, wasn't it?
BroncoInferno
12-02-2005, 11:53 AM
Moore constantly derides capitalism, the wealthy, and so on - despite being incredibly wealthy himself.
Why is it OK for Moore to be rich, but no-one else?
Well, I'm no fan of Moore, but I think the problem is not being rich, but being rich and expecting tax breaks and such. Personally, I have very little pity for rich people who whine because they have to settle for $3.9 million instead of $4.5 million.
I'm going to go out on a limb here... You just don't like him.
I find him to be a hypocrite and liar of the highest order.
be honest, it was that Columbine movie, wasn't it?
That, and F9/11, and his (mercifully) short-lived TV show. The man simply cannot tell a story straight, and to those of us outside the standard Left/Right political spectrum, the vitriol Limbaugh and his ilk (rightly) earn from the Left should be no less applied to Moore. The man's work is nothing but spin, half-truths, outright lies, and deceitful manipulations.
TheDave
12-02-2005, 12:46 PM
The man's work is nothing but spin, half-truths, outright lies, and deceitful manipulations.
You must have a rough time with TV... Every face I've ever seen on the box fits that description
Tell the truth - It was that whole "I'm the NRA" vs. "Bowling for columbine" thing that did it. They made fun of moses and hat just shot you over the edge...
BroncoInferno
12-02-2005, 01:57 PM
Tell the truth - It was that whole "I'm the NRA" vs. "Bowling for columbine" thing that did it. They made fun of moses and hat just shot you over the edge...
LOL
"Damn you! Damn you all!"
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-02-2005, 04:44 PM
You must have a rough time with TV... Every face I've ever seen on the box fits that description
Tell the truth - It was that whole "I'm the NRA" vs. "Bowling for columbine" thing that did it. They made fun of moses and hat just shot you over the edge...
:laugh: ^5
Hole in one, Tiger Woods.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-02-2005, 05:22 PM
How much does limbaugh make off of his crap show? What's your point?
http://www.bartcop.com/rush-oxycontin2.jpg
Tell the truth - It was that whole "I'm the NRA" vs. "Bowling for columbine" thing that did it. They made fun of moses and hat just shot you over the edge...
Not at all.
The NRA put too much emphasis on Charlton Heston. They could have picked someone else. In any case, Moore is fraud and a liar.
'Nuff said.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-02-2005, 10:48 PM
Never underestimate the power of makeup
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/9844/image0011cs.jpg
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/3576/image0023vm.jpg
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/5851/image0033nl.jpg
Never underestimate the power of makeup
I'm guessing you're the one on the left in the third image.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-02-2005, 11:24 PM
GOP chickenhead #1 to Dumbya's rescue!
If there's something stupid to be said, we can always count on LABF to say it. In that regard, you're very dependable.
Rigs11
12-03-2005, 08:43 PM
Moore constantly derides capitalism, the wealthy, and so on - despite being incredibly wealthy himself.
Why is it OK for Moore to be rich, but no-one else?
Limbaugh constantly used to bash drug users until he wa caught himself.
Why is it OK for Limbaugh to get high, but no-one else?
Rigs11
12-03-2005, 08:44 PM
If there's something stupid to be said, we can always count on LABF to say it. In that regard, you're very dependable.
And we can always count on you coming to the defense of the right.::)
Limbaugh constantly used to bash drug users until he wa caught himself.
Then Limbaugh is a hypocrite - along with his other "fine" qualities.
You want me to defend him? Get a freakin' clue, bub.
And we can always count on you coming to the defense of the right.
Is attacking the Left the same thing as defending the Right?
Can your brain get past only two possible political ideologies? Apparently not.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-04-2005, 02:55 AM
If there's something stupid to be said, we can always count on LABF to say it. In that regard, you're very dependable.
rofl
This from the last Bush defender standing?
Classic! :laugh:
This from the last Bush defender standing?
Is attacking the Left the same thing as defending the Right?
Can your brain get past only two possible political ideologies? Apparently not.
PS - I thought you had me on iggy.
Rigs11
12-04-2005, 09:30 AM
Is attacking the Left the same thing as defending the Right?
Can your brain get past only two possible political ideologies? Apparently not.
All you do is attack the left and come to the rescue of the right though. It's funny that you can't comprehend this. Maybe you should go back and look at your posts.
Rigs11
12-04-2005, 09:31 AM
Then Limbaugh is a hypocrite - along with his other "fine" qualities.
You want me to defend him? Get a freakin' clue, bub.
It's obvious you have such a hate for Moore and the left which is fine, but where does the Libertarian name come from?
All you do is attack the left and come to the rescue of the right though. It's funny that you can't comprehend this. Maybe you should go back and look at your posts.
How does attacking the Left mean I'm defending the Right?
Give me a specific example of when I've "rescued" the Right. A URL to an OM post would be perfect.
It's obvious you have such a hate for Moore and the left which is fine, but where does the Libertarian name come from?
Because I have strong libertarian leanings.
For example, a blog entry I liked:
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/2005/12/whatever_happen.html
Rigs11
12-04-2005, 10:14 AM
How does attacking the Left mean I'm defending the Right?
Give me a specific example of when I've "rescued" the Right. A URL to an OM post would be perfect.
Please. Everytime anyone atacks Bush or his cronies you come to their aid.Hell ou went so far as calling Dubya the most influential person.:loopy:
Please. Everytime anyone atacks Bush or his cronies you come to their aid.
I guess specifics aren't your strong point - I made a simple request, and if what you claim is true "everytime" [sic], then it should be trivial to fulfill.
If the facts don't support the Bush-basher's allegations, then does relating those facts mean I'm "aiding" Bush? Nope.
Hell ou went so far as calling Dubya the most influential person.
No - I was asked to provide a list of individuals I believed to be more influential than Bill Clinton. I didn't say Bush was the most influential, nor does noting his influence mean I agree with him in any way. One of other people I mentioned was Pope Benedict - does that mean I agree with all the mythology that attends that job? Nope.
Rigs, you need to take some classes in debate, because blasting you to smithereens is too easy.
BroncoInferno
12-05-2005, 06:45 AM
Well, W*GS, I enjoy most of your posts, but you do seem to save most of your vitriol for the left. You do go after the right occasionally, but with seemingly less frequency and usually less hatred. It makes some sense, as Republican ideology (or, I should say, alleged ideology, as they certainly don't practice what they preach) more closely resembles the Libertarians (economically speaking, anyway).
Rascal
12-05-2005, 06:48 AM
Well, W*GS, I enjoy most of your posts, but you do seem to save most of your vitriol for the left. You do go after the right occasionally, but with seemingly less frequency and usually less hatred. It makes some sense, as Republican ideology (or, I should say, alleged ideology, as they certainly don't practice what they preach) more closely resembles the Libertarians (economically speaking, anyway).
At least he does there are some people who do nothing but slam the right regardless of what the left does. Maybe you should be worrying about them.
BroncoInferno
12-05-2005, 06:51 AM
At least he does there are some people who do nothing but slam the right regardless of what the left does. Maybe you should be worrying about them.
That's fair enough, but this was about W*GS.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-05-2005, 04:21 PM
Well, W*GS, I enjoy most of your posts, but you do seem to save most of your vitriol for the left. You do go after the right occasionally, but with seemingly less frequency and usually less hatred. It makes some sense, as Republican ideology (or, I should say, alleged ideology, as they certainly don't practice what they preach) more closely resembles the Libertarians (economically speaking, anyway).
Bingo.
You would be, oh, about the 1,000th person to point this out - yet W*GS remains in denial.
It seems like his life would be less complicated if he just came all the way out for Dubya and the Corrupt Old Party and joined hands with his buddies Tom DeLay and Ted Nugent.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
12-05-2005, 04:33 PM
At least he does there are some people who do nothing but slam the right regardless of what the left does.
Um, do you suppose it's because the long conga line of corruption, cronyism, and criminality of the past five years has been coming from the right, i.e., the party in power?
Well, W*GS, I enjoy most of your posts, but you do seem to save most of your vitriol for the left.
Because the OM, in this thread area, is dominated by liberals and a few loony lefties.
You do go after the right occasionally, but with seemingly less frequency and usually less hatred.
When the few conservatives here start being as vocal and strident as the leftists, I'll take them on too.
It makes some sense, as Republican ideology (or, I should say, alleged ideology, as they certainly don't practice what they preach) more closely resembles the Libertarians (economically speaking, anyway).
Only on the most shallow level. Libertarian ideology can also be claimed to resemble that of the Democrats (with the caveat that they don't practice what they preach either), but also only on the shallowest level.