Titles: Fun With Moore: A Point by Point Scoring of Fahrenheit 9/11
Sifting Through Michael Moore's Distorted Prism
Fahrenheit 9/11 Scorecard
Bush Slam 9/11 Scorecard
The Day Moore Shot Himself In His Political Left Foot
Obsessive-Compulsive Negativism and Cynicism- Fahrenheit 9/11 Style
BUSH MOORE POINTS AWARDED ANALYSIS MOORE'S ARGUMENT
PART 1: 2000 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, BUSH'S VACATIONING  
0 -1  -1 for hypocrisy.
There is no evidence of conspiracy. Competition, yes.
Conspiracy, no.
Liberals like to refer to Bush as an imbecile, and in the same breath imply he's a genius figurehead behind grand conspiracies. 2000 Presidential Election:
"Bush got away with 2000 election..."
"1st cousin called victory in Florida..."
"Chairman of Bush campaign vote count chairman..."
         
0 -2  -1 for Moore for attempting to paint a  deceitful picture. Moore says this as if there weren't incessant, repeated interminable, and progressively corrupt Democratic Party initiated recounts ad-nauseum already. 2000 Presidential Election Recount:
"if there was a recount Gore would have won Florida…"
         
    No points here. It appeared in the recount news coverage that the Democrats were trying to manipulate the count, where every chad was a vote for Gore, shile conservative military absentee ballots were invalid. 2000 Presidential Election:
"official misconduct in Florida vote..."
         
    No points here. Due to their claims being ignorant, bogus, and a cheap political maneuver. 2000 Presidential Election House of Representatives Protest:
"Not a single senator came to the aid of African Americans in Congress…"
         
         
0 -3  -1 for Moore for unwittingly revealing the ugly side of liberalism. Even if it were true (which it isn't- there was no protesting crowd, and only one egg was thrown, the source being arrested), what Moore portrayed were vicious, self-indulgent, rioting tyrannical people rampaging in the streets, who identified with liberalism. 2000 Presidential Election:
In Washington DC liberals in the streets were seen demonstrating to "reclaim what was taken from them"… showing eggs thrown at Bush's car…
         
0 -4  -1 for Moore for backfiring argument. We all know who controls both sides of the House now- the Republicans, partly due to a negative reaction to twisting ideologues like Moore. "Bush lost Republican control in the Senate"
         
0 -5  -1 for Moore for unwittingly revealing the liberal's over-reliance on popularity polls. This illustrates the Democratic Party's inability to make tough decisions without first going out and taking poll. "Bush's approval ratings began to sink"
         
    No points here. This came across as wishful thinking on Moore's part. It can also be said Bush was busy holding the nation's head above the morass the liberals want to drag the nation down into… "Bush already beginning to look like a lame duck president…"
         
0 -7  -1 for Moore on for trying to use an already lost issue.
 -1 for still failing to make a negative impression of Bush.
So? Even Gore conceded that during the campaign he should have had the rest Bush received rather than running himself ragged…
Up to this point I see nothing wrong with Bush up to this point in the movie.
"Bush went on vacation…"
         
    No points here for playing with numbers. Over-inflated number. It was more like 19%.
And again, he makes Bush look good by his not being an over-governing micro-manager.
"Pre 9/11 Bush was on vacation 42% of the time"
         
2 -7  2 points for Bush- one for detesting Washington, 1 for doing something about it. This clearly puts Bush in a shining light- simply for disliking the Washington scene. I can't blame him for moving his office to Texas, especially when taking advantage of modern communications technology. Bush, in response to reporter's challenge that he's taking too many vacations: "You don't have to be in Washington to work"…
         
3 -7  1 point for Bush for actually working when the liberal media was out to paint another picture. It has also been shown that Bush was working, meeting with foreign heads of state, and so on. Bush, in response to reporter's challenge that he's taking too many vacations: "You don't have to be in Washington to work"…
         
    No points here. So far, Moore's movie is backfiring, making Bush look good. I'm still applauding Bush, even with his fine French Florida linens. "Bush's summer to remember, with fine French linens…"
PART 2: VANITY BONFIRES    
4 -7  +1 for Wolfowitz here. Sorry, but I see Wolfowitz's geeky (and we all know who the smartest people are) old-fashion humor and spirit here, in "heck with the makeup, use old-fashion spit, like this…" Wolfowitz licking comb and running it through hair… a Moore attempt to make Wolfowitz look bad…
         
5 -7  +1 for Powell here. Powell was obviously disgusted with the need for it all, but appeared resigned to accepting it's necessity, considering the audience's regard for vanity… Powell getting makeup- a Moore attempt to make Powell look superficial...
         
    No points here. I see Bush having a much needed lighter moment with the crew. Bush getting "camera ready" for a speech, an attempt by Moore to catch Bush being stupid…
         
PART 3: BUSH AND 9/11    
5 -8  -1 for Moore for trying to profit from the tragedy of others. I am thinking "Moore is cashing in on yet another human tragedy, just like Columbine. Moore cuts into the World Trade Center event…
         
    No points here. I'm thinking "What's a dope like this doing trying to deal with human tragedy which he's distant from, and to which reasons for he is completely deadened to?" Moore still on WTC
         
5 -9  -1 for pretending anyone had any noting of what was happening at the time. 1st: Moore demeans Bush's appearance at an elementary school, and a minority school, at that;
2nd: What's an alleged 'war monger' doing at an elementary school in the first place;
3rd: When the first plane hit, most people considered it an accident, or possible the work of an isolated madman. There was no precedence for anyone to think it was part of a larger, state-sponsored terrorist attack, least of all Moore or his liberal armchair critic cohorts.
"After 1st plane hit, Bush went ahead with photo-op."
         
5 -11  -1 for Moore for failing to see this;
and another -1 for a lame-brained sophmoric attempt to twist the moment into a superficial anti-Bushism.
This was a candid moment, a good example of the disbelief and shock that engulfed the nation at that moment. After 1st plane hit, "Bush continued to read…"
         
      At this point I'm telling myself "Moore is a dope. Not only is he beating on that lost issue again, but Bush's mind is obviously on the job, most likely ruling out all the rash responses and poll sampling a weenie liberal like Gore would have mindlessly jumped to by now. "Was Bush wondering maybe should he have shown up to work more often…"
         
    No point here. Even if this were true, terrorism was not on the political plate, especially the liberal political plate, at the time. "Bush held not one meeting with his head of counter-terrorism…"
         
      Something tells me even if he did, it was to appease the loonie liberals desire for the funding of their many other 'social' endeavors. Bush "cut terrorism funding from the FBI…"
         
    No point here. Shoulda-Coulda-Woulda- more liberal Monday morning hypothetical quarterbacking. Even if he did read it (and I'm suspecting he didn't read it thoroughly), there was noting but vague information on terrorist intents, like "They are planning to attack America". Bush "Should have read security briefing…"
         
5 -12  -1 for misinformation. We all know how vague the security report was, that it did not state this (although Al Jazeera depicted cartoons of it beforehand). Only the uninformed Euro's at the 'Festival de Cannes' would fall for this one. The security briefing "said Osama was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes…"
         
    No points here. Still beating on a dead horse. Also no one would jump at such a vague report that only stated Osama was planning attacks in the US. Everyone knew they had plans since the first WTC attack in 1993. "A report like that might make some men jump…"
         
5 -13  -1 for sheer and shallow buffoonery. It was obvious to a more serious person like myself that Bush was having grave thoughts going through his head. Moore here shows he's an ass with his head in the gutter. I suppose Moore thinks he's part of the right crowd? Not in my book. "What was Bush thinking, 'I've been hanging around the wrong crowd…"
         
    No points here. More buffoonery. "Which one of them screwed me…"
         
5 -14  -1 for getting an 'F' in history. Even if this were true, it demonstrates Moore's complete lack of comprehension of the Cold War. Moore was on the wrong side then, too. "Was it my daddy who delivered a lot of weapons to Saddam…"
         
    Moore is trying hard to patch a picture together here, he gets an 'A' for effort, but an 'F' for failing to influence any but the completely uninformed and uncritical. No points here. Pretty pointless statement, even if Bush received them (he didn't). Clinton the President did receive them, however. "Was it the group of religious fundamentalists who visited my state when I was governor…"
         
5 -16  -2 for Moore for propagating general ignorance and playing to popular misinformation. Who is Moore trying to fool here, or is he just parroting a few of the general liberal self-delusions that are currently popular.
 2 ignorant statements here:
(1) Saudi Royalty may be contributing to the problem with their political tyranny, but it was their enemies who attacked the US;
(2) Bush never blamed Saddam, or even implicated him in any direct collusion, though there is no proof otherwise, as the liberals like to wag their fingers and constantly make claim to.
"Or was it the Saudis? Damn, it was them. I think I better blame it on Saddam."
         
5 -17  -2 for blatantly stupid, fanciful embellishments.
+1 for knowing they would work on our feeble subconscience.
In order to paint his picture Moore crossed over into the world of fantasy. Only a fool would have swallowed that picture. Also the Bin Laden's flew out after airspace was open. They perhaps thought the US was like the Muslim tyrant leaders- who would take out it's frustrations on the perpetrator's (Osama in this case) family members, though at the time Osama wasn't implicated yet, as Moore is implying. Moore shows Osama bin Laden himself flying out of the US during the flying ban imposed by the FAA.
         
5 -20  -3 for Moore here, -1 for hypocrisy, -1 for false information, -1 for bogus interviewee. First, isn't this just what Liberal rail against- shotgun government infringement of rights such as the Patriot Act (mild compared to measures taken as recently as WWII)?
Second, 22 of 26 Bin Ladens were interviewed and released by the FBI before the flight.
Third, where do they get these bogus interviewees?
"Should have subpoenaed Bin Ladens…" and "FBI did nothing, not even standard police interrogation procedure…"
         
5 -21  -1 for unwittingly revealing how Congress takes no responsibility for things that happen on their watch, and instead sit back and criticize. Response: Don't waste my tax dollars on your menial political maneuverings. Save my tax dollars for the military. And get a load of those Congressmen, sitting around criticizing like they aren't part of the picture… Senator Byron Dorgan: "I think we ought to look into why the Bin Laden flights happened, it should be the subject of a significant investigation…"
         
    No points here. At the time no one, least of all loonie liberals, knew who was behind the attacks. After the Oklahoma City bombing, it could have been anybody. Moore still playing up the Bin Laden flights.
         
5 -22  -1 for failing to make a believable analogy here. Sure, in the day or two before little Timmy was caught. "Letting the Bin Ladens go was like letting the McVeigh family leave the country after the Oklahoma City bombing…"
         
5 -23  -1 for pretending Clinton wasn't bolstered and repeatedly exonerated by a biased mainstream liberal media. This makes me pewk, pardon my unintellectualism. After Monica Lewinsky, all I saw was the major liberal media portraying Clinton sitting there like a demure angel. "What do you think would have happened to Clinton…"
         
5 -24  -1 for celebrity chasing, and not using a decent narrator. Moore making a feeble attempt at achieving celebrity. Moore using his own whiny voice.
         
5 -25  -1 for scene that backfires. This only demonstrates the madness of Osama. Scene of Saudi official saying Osama thanked him for bringing US aid to Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.
         
5 -26  -1 for Moore for unwittingly undermining his own premise. Moore unwittingly reveals that no one knew who was behind the attacks, while basing most of his Bush-bashing so far (such as not detaining the Bin Ladens) on the premise that everyone knew it was Osama already. In fact, there never has been conclusive evidence that it was Osama, only logical deductions. Larry King asking that Osama MAY be responsible for the attacks…
         
5 -27  -1 for more infantile and shallow commentary. More of Moore's infantile and shallow commentary. Scene jumps back to Bush in the 2nd grade classroom with Moore's infantile and shallow commentary…
         
5 -28  -1 for being a self-promoting ham. Moore being a ham. Moore showing himself giving a speech at the Democratic New Hampshire primary.
PART 4: BUSH AND SERVICE RECORD    
5 -29  -1 for revealing the world of fantasy he lives in. Bush's honorable discharge is proof there was no desertion. Further Moore's statement is a good example of the fantasy world all those with no military experience live in. Further, it was common to miss weekends then make the time up later, as Bush did when he returned from the campaign trail. "Bush a deserter" and "White House hopes of disproving the charge…"
         
5 -30  -1 for failing to weave another deception. Weak attempt at weaving another deception. Moore then tries to equate suspension with desertion.
         
5 -31  -1 for another attempt a duping the audience. Moore tries to portray this as a cover-up that he uncovers. All one needs to do is get another copy. Bush had many cross-outs in the copy of his service document he presented…
PART 5: BUSH/SAUDI/MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX TIES  
5 -32  -1 for trying to create something out of nothing. Everybody knows everybody uncertain circles. The fact that there is a tie here to Bush is much like the Kevin Bacon Internet game, where anyone is named, and there is a trail that leads back to Kevin Bacon. Mr. Bath was the Bin Laden's Texas money manager…
         
5 -33  -1 for another backfiring scene. Even if it was true, I still saw a man who didn't like what he was doing, and probably subconsciously failed intentionally, while searching for a more noble calling, of which by the way Osama unwittingly provided, and which Bush was the perfect man for the job, simple and noble, qualities loonie liberals are lacking in. "Bush ran all his companies into the ground, yet still received Bin Laden money to bail him out."
         
    no points given here. Moore never tells us where he's going with this conspiracy theory, he presents this bit of research without any point, hoping someone will make one. Even if the Bin Ladens did bail out George Jr., I only see rich foreign royals trying to stay on the good side of the US via the president's family in the face of political and religious unrest at home. Bush receiving Bin Laden money…
         
4 -33   Response: Yawn. More pointless connections ala Kevin Bacon. But -1 for Bush after the sentence what's her name got for similar actions. "Bush beat securities fraud rap with help, then appointed that help the Ambassador to Saudi Arabia…"
         
4 -34  -1 for Moore for attempting to lead the audience on a leash. Since Bush wasn't convicted, there was no debacle other than personal honor. This is Moore leading us on a leash. "After that debacle"
         
    No points here. The whole Carlyle Group connection has been debunked many times elsewhere. "Carlyle Group owned many weapons companies and other heavily government regulated industries, and the Bin Ladens stood to gain from the actions of Osama through defense investments."
         
4 -33  +1 for Moore's witlessly bringing up an important point. Yawn. And Bush Sr. actually cancelled the major United Defense contract in his years as President.
BUT… Moore unwittingly brings up the point that it is not good to elect a President who has ties to the military industrial complex.
9/11 guaranteed the United Defense was going to have a very good year.
         
      Yawn. So? Bush Sr. visited Saudi Arabia as ex. President.
         
    No points here. OK, Bush Sr.'s greatness diminished here, succumbing to greed, but not worth any points here. For military arms dealers…
         
4 -35  -1 for hypocrisy here; and -1 for missing the real point. Yawn. Clinton recently visited the Bin Ladens, most likely for Democratic campaign funds.
Further, we all know why the Saudis try to buy off US Presidents- they need US-backed security from the political and religious unrest in the Middle East that is a direct result of the misgovernance of the Middle East and their screwed-up religious sects.
"Who's your daddy (the US or the Saudis)? Implying Bush Sr. would give the Saudi's more consideration than the US based on their relative sources of income...
         
5 -35  +1 for Powell here. Powell does not look comfortable here at all, and poorly hides his disdain for rich royalty. He least of all looks like one who could be bought. Moore shows Powell with the Saudis…
         
    No points here. First, there are only a handful of 'civilized' countries in the world, a fact that loonie liberals fail to comprehend cushioned in the US;
Second, any ally in the screwed up and backwards Muslim World is not easy to come by.
"Bush has special relations with a regime that has human rights violations…
         
    No points here. A pointless use of an old cliché. "It will come back to haunt him…"
         
5 -36  -1 for unwittingly bring back memories of how stupid the liberal press is during a conflict, due to their not knowing who the enemy is. This brings back visions of the fantastically ignorant liberal press during Desert Storm when they persistently asked Military Commanders "So, what are you going to attack next?" Bush saying "It's important not to reveal how we collect information, that's what the enemy wants…"
         
    No points here. Response: Good for national security, something liberals don't understand. "Bush censors report…"
         
5 -37  -1 for slanted, leading questioning. A slanted question, which Moore conceals. What's the lady to say, "No, I don't care what happened, my husband is dead?" Widow of 9/11 victim saying "it's important to know what happened…"
         
    Dead heat here. No points. Sure, important if you’re a democrat, and pushing for Kerry for President. If not, the Oval Office with Monica Lewinsky in it is an important landmark. Moore "Here we are at three important landmarks, the Watergate Hotel, the Saudi Embassy,…"
         
5 -38  -1 for failing to make a logical point here. First, what's wrong with investing in the US?
Second, and liberals are complaining about $87 billion to address an underlying cause of Middle East misery?
"Saudis have $860 billion (6-7% of the US economy) invested in the US…"
         
6 -37  +1 for Moore leaving in how he handled situation so badly, like we all would have done, +1 for security doing it's job, querying a freakish leftwing looking person making videos of an endangered area. Security doing it's job. Moore handles it badly. Have to protect endangered emissaries… Security shows up and questions Moore about what he's doing there taking pictures… Moore says there are 6 secret servicemen assigned to Saudis…
         
6 -38  -1 for a poor attempt at duping the audience again. Yes, but Moore is trying to dupe us as to think it was ROYAL Saudi money, and not the works of anti-royalty elements. "Saudi money funded Al Qaeda…"
         
    No points here. This casts no bad light on Bush. The Saudi Royalty are obviously doing what they need to do to survive in that harsh environment, playing both sides. Requests may also not have been in line with the way they do things in a tyrannical Monarchy. Saudis reluctant to cooperate with investigators…
         
6 -39  -1 for another false statement. False. "Obvious Al Qaeda attacked us…"
PART 6: BUSH AND WAR ON TERRORISM    
6 -40  -1 for blind knee-jerk cynicism. Response: Yes, and he only scattered Al Qaeda and brought down the tyrannical (not to mention barbaric) regime that harbored them. "Bush didn't do much in Afghanistan, he only put 14,000 troops there…"
         
6 -41  -1 for hokey armchair generalship. Response: Clarke is obviously not a military genius, so I'll leave it at that. Clarke: "Special Forces should have went directly after Osama right away…"
         
6 -42  -1 for being off the mark in his conclusions. Response: Moore collects all these items and tries to weave a conspiracy. I see it more about free enterprise in a previously socialistic dictatorship. "Afghanistan about oil…", "Taliban in Texas…", Karsai former advisor to Unical…"
         
    No proof, no points. Funny how liberals have a crystal ball, and know Osama is on the loose rather than buried in a cave. I'm being sarcastic, of course. If Osama is holed up somewhere, without his money, he will soon be forgotten. "Most of the Taliban and Osama got away…"
PART 7: BUSH AND FEAR FACTOR    
6 -43  -1 for hypocrisy. Moore complains that Bush has instilled fear in the voters with nothing specific to report, yet Moore complains that pre-9/11 Bush did nothing, even when there was nothing specific to report. "War president had a new target- the American people; "Where, how, there's nothing specific to report…"
         
    No points here. "For good reason", says Bush, and I agree. If Bush wanted to win the election, he'd let another 9/11 occur to drive home his point. Bush is above this. I have my doubts when it comes to the Democrats, who wanted to wait for a WMD terrorist strike before doing anything about Saddam. "Fear works" says Democrat. "For political gain", says Moore.
         
6 -44  -1 for self-contradiction. This after trying to make bush out to be an imbecile. Calls Bush "skillful and ugly".
         
6 -45  -1 for social blindness. Iraqis did it under Saddam and the liberal's failed, long, drawn-out, and murderous economic sanctions. "No way anyone can live constantly on the edge like that…" (pertaining to Bush's alleged scare tactics)
         
    No points here. Entertaining, but pointless. Crackpot products go hand-in-hand with free enterprise (it only gets ugly when a hard-sell salesman tries to unload the bad product on unsuspecting consumers in order to recoup the costs). Small-town terror concerns being ridiculous? Who would have thought anyone would suicidally fly passenger jets into landmark buildings? Moore shows crackpot anti-terror products and small-town terror concerns…
PART 8: BUSH AND IRAQ WAR    
6 -46  -1 for weak, shallow, uninformed logic. Sure it has, through Saddam's rhetoric, state-controlled brainwashing and blame-shifting, and assassination attempts, among many other ways that stirred up 9/11. After 9/11 his time was up. And Moore is forgetting about Saddam's Exocet missile that hit the American destroyer during the Iraq-Iran war after the US denied Saddam more tanks. Iraq "a nation that has never attacked the US…"
         
6 -47  -1 for further weak logic. More weak logic, and again forgetting the Exocet missile. Further, he attacked US allies. IS Moore suggesting the US break all pacts with it's allies as soon as things get dangerous? You'd expect a liberal to do that. "A nation that has never murdered a single American citizen…"
         
6 -49  -2 for unbalanced reporting, and fashionably sympathizing with the wrong side. How many babies did the liberals indifferently kill while being too afraid to deal with Saddam directly, with their failed economic sanctions? Moore doesn't show that. Nooo. How many babies were intentionally killed by Saddam? Moore doesn't show that, either. Nooo. How many babies were killed by Saddam's antiquated anti-aircraft artillery falling back to earth? Moore here? Nope. How many scenes were staged by Saddam's Mis-information Ministry for loonie liberal media boobs like Moore? Many. Does Moore mention this? No again. How many babies were intentionally put in harm's way by the US? None. By the US's enemies? Countless. Moore whining? Not here. Moore shows dead baby.
         
6 -50  -1 for failing to mention the far greater horrors the enemy commits. Does Moore mention the Muslim's favorite fighting method- hiding among, dressing like, and fighting from behind civilians, thereby placing civilians in danger- contrary to the Geneva Convention? This is no aberration like US abuses in the prisons, but a mainstream, traditional, and barbaric tactic with no regard for innocents, whom they kill at will anyway. Moore mention that? Noooo! Moore shows civilian deaths, implying US killed them wantonly through gung-ho interviews with US soldiers.
         
6 -51  -1 for attempted deception. Moore tries to tie "killing the enemy" with the wanton slaughter of civilians. Moore still evades the enemy's cowardly tactics, and still fails to compare numbers with those civilians killed and the harm done to the country by liberal economic sanctions. Case in point- an Iraqi University staffer: "The war did not hurt the University. The looting and the economic sanctions did... (interview courtesy of NPR, no less)" Soldier's gung-ho interviews.
         
    No points here. Still one-sided, biased, unbalanced, evasive reporting. "They" killed civilians.
         
6 -52  -1 for backfiring. This actually raised Britney's intellectual bar with me. If she was mindless, she'd be spewing out liberal anti-US dogma. Moore uses Britney Spears as an example of only the vacant-minded as being supporters of Bush.
         
    No points here. Since it's not sure what Saddam could or couldn't do, due to Saddam's murderous, closed state, Bush was right to err on the safe side and get rid of Saddam. No blame to Bush here. Moore shows the Bush administration saying "Saddam not able to create new WMD's then shows them saying "He's got them…"
         
6 -53 No proof, no points; and -1 for poor logic. No proof, though liberals like to repeat this mantra. It's like saying the boy stirring up the hornets nests under your chair is doing you no harm. Poor logic. As a typical liberal, Moore misses the larger issue of Muslim political and religious tyranny being the underlying cause of the attacks on the US, of which Saddam was numero uno. "No real threat in Saddam…"
         
6 -55  -1 for weak continental worshipping, another -1 for arrogantly demeaning members of the coalition, many of whose members knew firsthand the meaning of living under tyranny, like the East Europeans. Another -1 for having to stoop to WWII footage of US enemies, no less. This has been tried before. Just because the main decadent European socialistic continentals were too weak, too corruptly tied into Saddam, and too far removed from 9/11 to deal with Saddam directly, liberals conclude the coalition of the willing was meaningless. Moore sets out to demean the coalition of the willing, showing tropical islands with no standing army, and WWII japs bicycling down village dirt roads.
         
6 -56  -1 for out-of-hand opposing any US efforts against terrorism and it's tyrannical harborers. Funny and clever at first, but stupid and cynical in the end. He uses the term "invade" in a negative way. Let's send Moore over there to live with his Taliban buddies, so he can see what their quality of life is, and watch him come back with his cynicism smeared all over his face like the dungheap it is. He'll appreciate running water and a sewage system, and a society who's manhood is not tied to his using his AK-47. Concerning members of the coalition of the willing: "Afghanistan? Afghanistan had an army- Our army! That's one way to build a coalition- just keep invading countries…"
         
6 -57  -1 for calculated questioning and selected interviews to fit an agenda that is destructive to the US. Moore of course leads the interviews down a liberal path with calculated questions. Nary will he show the good America has done in Iraq. Nooo, only those few who have been defeated by the few hundred maniacal political and religious tyrant insurgents polluting the Iraqi landscape and giving our liberal media their feeding frenzies. Yeees. There will always be those kind of characters on our side to draw a cynical liberal run and hide picture with. The rest of us know there are many more positive soldier stories that have made it back through the liberal weenie media screens of negative-only reporting, a true form of distortion. Then Moore begins showing dissident soldiers- making the kind of statements cynical turntail liberals like to hear.
         
    No points here. I see a proper attitude here. Draw the tyrants out of their holes and out from behind the civilians they hide behind. And liberal weenies cringed. Moore shows Bush's "bring 'em on!"
         
6 -58  -1 for being blind to the restraints unfairly put on the US, when the enemy does not abide by the same restraints. There is a rule not being followed here- the rules of war are determined by the aggressor. For better or for worse, the liberals have kept the US on a higher moral plateau. +1 for liberal effort. -1 for only holding one side to it. Sure, with the liberal weenie restraints placed on the US army- restraints like a regard for human life that the enemy is not encumbered by; and further restraints like nice treatment of prisoners. Are the US's Muslim enemies weighed down by these over-the-top human rights restraints? Three (to this date) headless bodies say 'no'. Soldier "not easy in Iraq".
         
      Seems to me it is doing just fine, when I see through the liberal media's addiction to negative reporting. This is a time in history, by the way, when the media is making itself look bad by not reporting the positive out of a fear of appearing like a government propaganda machine. This can be blamed on the liberal's own leftwing communist media-controlled states and the bad image they put on positive report about the government with their false positive propaganda. "War not going as planned."
6 -59  -1 for contradiction- attacking Bush for having no plan, then saying it's not going as planned. How can there be a plan for something that has never been done before? As the liberals like to say, there is no plan. We all know Bush is winging it. This is the first endeavor of it's kind- the first time in history a country actually liberated another country preemptively... Wait a minute, there is no proof that Saddam was not involved in 9/11. That's just liberal propaganda. I take that back. "War not going as planned."
         
6 -60  -1 for not being a grognard. That means only the hard-core will stay in. That's a good thing. Quality always has defeated quantity in the history of warfare. Soldier: The army will have retention problems and recruiting will be down."
         
6 -61  -1 for myth propagating.
 -1 for a foolish ideology.
 -1 for not seeing the damage done by the Democratic Party since the Johnson's Great Society began (which even in the 1960's was rewarded by urban riots across the nation, an early indication that it wasn't going to work).
That's a laugh. Try "places destroyed by Johnson's "Great Society" which created these government-dependent slums, and which the Democratic Party's communistic vote buying scheme of giving away free money (the money of others) perpetuated over the last 50 years. "Bush will get replacements from places destroyed by the economy…"
         
     -1 for failed deception. First, the whites did not come in and destroy your neighborhoods, it was done from within.
Second, the underclassed have always ended up in a nation's military.
Third, and especially in America, the underclassed are not doomed to stay there, as Moore and his liberal cohorts would like us to believe, so they can make themselves feel good when they pretend to be 'helping the poor'.
Moore interviewing black from his hometown, Flint, Michigan. "It looks like a war zone around here, just like Iraq!"
PART 9: MILITARY RECRUITING    
6 -62  -1 for inconsistency. This goes against the picture Moore and liberals like to paint- using the race card, where white is bad and everything else is oppressed. Recruiters shown interviewing young whites.
         
     +1 for unbiased reporting, however. -1 for having it go against the movie's theme. A good example of Moore shooting himself in the foot. Recruiter: "Shaggy was a former marine." Black rap-wannabe's jaws drop.
         
6 -63  -1 for blind idealism coupled with cowardice. Not when your enemy uses it as a first resort. And 9/11 was the last resort. The Iraqis ran out of time that day in their desire to overthrow Saddam themselves, the day their problems spilled blood on American soil. The liberals should have known better- there was no place left for them to run. "Should use the military only as a last resort."
         
    No points here. Good practical point here. The other option would be working hard. Hmmm. Tough choice, especially in Johnson's Great Society where you don't have to work. Black "It would be nice go be able to go to college without dying in the process…"
PART 10: BUSH AND SOLDIERS IN IRAQ    
6 -64  -1 for missed opportunity. Nice, but Moore missed the opportunity to show Iraqis sitting in the roadside desert in their lounge chairs sipping daiquiri's merrily detonating roadside bombs as contractor convoys passed by, then using it as an immature lifetime bragging right. Moore shows US military vehicles driving around Iraq to the tune of Bing Crosby's Christmas music.
         
6 -65  -1 for another ill attempt at casting the US in a bad light. Response: Sorry, Mikey, I see soldiers searching out vicious, murderous thugs and cowards. What's the alternative, Mikey? How about the Saddam method- if a combatant hides in a village, kill every male in the village. Did Moore mention that? No. Moore shows soldiers searching Iraqi house for combatant, ostensibly to portray them as some kind of arm of tyranny.
         
    No points here. You can't win what isn't there in the first place- what has been stamped out by decades of tyrannical rule. Soldier "We're not winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqis…"
         
6 -66  -1 for creating the opposite effect intended. I saw the protestors as a slap in the mother's face. Mother of soldier killed in Iraq visiting Washington, protestors there…
         
6 -67  -1 for having no room to talk on the issue of morality. First, Moore, as a liberal, has no room to spout this, liberals being champions of immoral behavior;
Second, he singles out the US, ignoring all other nations on earth, not even mentioning terrorists organizations who send children off as human bombs, due to the current liberal obsessive-compulsive anti-Bush fashion show.
"Immoral behavior breeds immoral behavior…"
         
      Blind idealism again, Moore forgetting even the event which this travesty of a film is titled after and which led Bush to take appropriate action. Then cuts to scene of Iraq war with comment "There goes Bush sending otherwise good kids to war…"
         
6 -68  -1 for clinging to false accusations. Back to that old illogical cliché. No one knew what Saddam was up to, least of all the weapons inspectors Saddam was playing the eggshell game with; and there was plenty of indications Saddam was up to something. For the liberals to say with certainty that Saddam was being a good boy is sheer self-deluded lunacy. "Sending kids to war based on a lie…"
         
6 -69  -1 for missing the point. Such Iraqis make good liberals. Additionally the soldier admits these are teenage boys, the same minds that Saddam or a Mullah brainwashed and gave an AK-47 to in order to repress the population, and who ran from the US army into the midst of civilians, and attack like the cowardly jackals they are from there. They aren't worth the consideration the soldier is giving them. The country is going to be run by adults, not wild-eyed teenagers. Soldier lamenting "Iraqis say 'go away, we don't want you here', then when they need help, 'Oh, why weren't you here?' which makes working in Iraq difficult…
         
6 -70  -1 for despicable display for a soldier. If he were ordered back just to throw him in the slammer, I wouldn't complain. He'd be another victim of liberal ungluing of people's sense of right and wrong. Response: I beg to differ- Saddam was the terrorist's primary funnel to weapons of mass destruction. Another liberally-brainwashed jelly head who can't see the significance of 9/11. Disillusioned Soldier: "I will not go back to Iraq to kill poor people, especially when they posed no threat to me or my country…"
         
    No points awarded yet, pending research. Lets see if this stands up to research… I'm certainly not going to take Michael Moore's word for it after all the other BS he's spewed out so far. Bush proposed cutting combat soldier's pay by 33%, assistance to their families by 60%, opposed $1 billion increase in health care benefits for vets, doubled prescription costs for vets, closed veteran's hospitals, opposed full benefits for part-time servicemen who were covered elsewhere, and dead serviceman docked 5 days pay on his last paycheck for being dead...
         
    No points for hiding his leading questions. I'd like to here the leading questions Moore used to elicit this response from this soldier. For that matter, from all his interviewees so far. Leading questions I would have used: "Did you know the Republicans did this and this? Now what do you think?" Wounded Soldier: "I was a Republican, not any more. Republicans conduct business in a dishonorable way…"
         
6 -71  +1 for presenting once again the down side to war. -1 for an unbalanced and erroneous-implication-based presentation. No balance here, either. What about the Muslim mothers of their human child-bombs the terrorists use? Or mothers of sons lost in the WTC attacks, or other terrorist attacks in order to get their tyrannical way, for that matter? And who began the killing first- Osama and his sympathetic States or the US? The US's only crimes have been committed by liberals in the form of economic sanctions. Moore cuts to Mother who's son was 'taken'…
         
6 -74  -1 for more one-sided fare. Another -1 for being on the wrong side again, and another -1 for being an obsessive-compulsive negative cynic. More one-sided fare. Soldier: "George got us out here for nothing" and "Don't re-elect that fool."
         
6 -75  -1 for not being able to answer the obvious. This has never been a question for me. These Muslims love to kill, they will fabricate any reason for it. Go after them, and the states that support them, now that their reach includes US soil. "Fighting for what?"
         
6 -76 Another -1 for missing the point. Again Moore misses the point due to his obsessive-compulsive cynicism, and attempts to provide an alternate reason for being in Iraq. The Iraqis has the same opportunities as any other willing coalition country to win those contracts, but they were mired in Saddam socialism, and expected to sit  back and have contracts to land in their laps. Bush's only mistake may have been being too tough on Iraqis, taking them from a dictatorial socialistic state to capitalism, without any socialist transitional cushion. "Fighting for what", then Moore shows Halliburton corruption, some guy saying "was is always good for certain companies"…
         
6 -77  -1 for clinging to this tired old cracked logic. A good example of liberal weenie cracked logic. OK, what about Bosnia when the US came to the aid of Muslims there, shielding them from the Serb genocide? Where's the oil in Bosnia? Kosovo? How about Grenada? Somalia? Haiti? Where's the oil in Haiti when the Haitians were begging the US military to go there? And let's go back to Vietnam? Any oil there? No. Korea? No. Europe in WWII or WWI? Japan oil? Any oil prospects for American companies in those now state-controlled socialized industries? No, no, and no. "If it wasn't for the oil, the US wouldn't be there…"
         
6 -78  -1 for more cynical liberal rubbish. More cynical liberal rubbish. Old lady "Iraqis will never be free."
         
    No points here. Anything a Muslim says can be discounted due to their political and religious brainwashing, under pain of death. Outside Whitehouse, dark-skinned kid "Bush is a terrorist…"
         
6 -79  -1 for more cracked logic. More cracked liberal logic. Hitler didn't make the decision to send US troops to Europe to save the world from Fascism, either. This, in liberal logic, makes Hitler the good guy. "Al Qaeda didn't make the decision to send my kid to Iraq…"
         
     -1 for not showing such responses. But -1 for the congressmen for not having the wit to have such a response. Since I don't know if the witless congressmen were Republicans or Democrats, points cancel out here. Fine. But Moore did not show the congressman who replied "Yes, I'm going to send my son. I'm going to tell him, "Son", poking finger at Michael Moore's shoulder, using him as an example, "get your fat, lazy, no good butt over there, and get a haircut and a clean shave! You're Daddy served, now it's YOUR turn!" Moore then shows himself getting congressmen to enlist their sons and daughters in the military to go over and fight in Iraq, since only one congressman has a son enlisted in the military.
         
6 -80  -1 for a blubbery guilt trip being the basis for this movie. Ohhhhhhhhhh! Here's the entire reason for this movie! Michael Moore's dealing with his guilt complex for having a complete lack of military experience! So he 'sympathizes' with the common soldier to make up for it! Nice intent, but GET OUT OF THEIR WAY SO THEY CAN DO THEIR JOBS and get the heck out of Iraq! "The poor serve so we don't have to…"
         
6 -81  -1 for clinging to outdated Marxist theories describing early industrial age Europe. Another guilt trip of Moore's, for not having been poor. He does not comprehend that in the US, social status is mobile according to economic and social achievement. "The poor serve so we don't have to…"
PART 11: MOORE PUSHES MARXISM    
6 -82  -1 for being the cause of the very problem you're trying to put on Bush, another -1 for being far worse. Moore fails to realize it is a product of liberal's nanny government state. Why work or get educated when there is a nanny state to take care of you, a state perpetuated by the Democratic Party who encourage government dependence in order to garner votes?
Further, and far worse, Moore fails to mention that the current enemies of the US are PROPONENTS of poverty and ignorance- namely the political and religious tyrants that exist in the Muslim world.
Moore then mentions poverty and ignorance in America.
         
6 -83  -1 for more outdated and misapplied Marxist drivel that only a political imbecile would swallow. More outdated Marxist drivel which does not apply in the socially and economically mobile US. "Ruling group rules over own subjects to keep structure of society intact…"
         
6 -84  +1 for humor, and another Bushism. But -1 for proving Bush is the right man for the job- the job being dealing with brutal dictators- not a job for a sensitive intellectual or a communist/socialist/destructive vote buyer like Kerry and the Democrats. Funny. Bush "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice…. (mind goes blank…)"
         
      In conclusion: I enjoyed the movie in my own way- that of cutting through the deceit and myths, in this case those of the political left, and uncovering the author's own guilt trips that gave rise to this work, the higher messages (anti-war, anti-greed, anti-deceit) are lost in a mire of unbalanced, twisted, anti-American biases.  
      Further conclusion: Bush didn't have to do anything to win this battle, Moore shooting himself sufficiently in his own politically left foot. If Moore is the flag-bearer for liberalism, liberalism is doomed.  
         
    Lastly, -1 for calling Saddam's Iraq a 'nation'.    
FINAL SCORE:
BUSH MOORE
6 -85