Apparently This Is Funny

[Taeme]

Since I sorta work in the Magic writing community I am constantly bombarded by horrible, terrifyingly moronic and ignorant statements which make me glad I worked up a threshold for pain from being in the D2 community. Trust me, it's a lot worse. It's just so much worse.

The following, however, soothes all my pain : Link One, Two and Three. The sort of writing Occhi, if he hasn't encountered it yet, will probably enjoy.

However the fact my editor gave me a "Well of course I've seen that!" so maybe it's way old news. But we do so learn to enjoy good writing, you understand, don't you?

[Taeme]

Holy heck this is even better.

Can't stop the LOL!

[Swarmalicious]

Um... talented writer, and yes, witty. But, about Michael Moore:

1 - The article finds some agreeable faults in Moore, but - like him or not, he's on the "good" team. What kind of country club herbert sees the interviewer in "Roger and Me" as the enemy? TV Nation rocked, and he means well.

2 - LOTS of people know who Michael Moore is. Can the same be said of this Lieks?
Similiarly, if Tarrantino makes a movie and Roger Ebert says it sucks, well, he may be right - but he's still a fat idiot without enough talent to generate his own films.

3 - I think the Olive Garden is garbage too. Cheers for that one.

[Taeme]

Moore?

He's a lot of things. Good team? I don't know about that one, my man, the concept of "Good team" isn't exactly a very easy one to nail down for people. I might not see good team in the same way you do. Politicial divide and all that. A lot of right-wingers absolutely loathe the man (Moore), but I haven't seen or read much of his work.

Not enough to say I like or dislike him.

Also, being famous proves nothing but the ability to be famous without the slightest inclination towards strengh of character or value of opinion. Many voices shouting at once don't add up to one clear, correct answer.

[Swarmalicious]

Well, what I mean by 'good team' is simply the opposition to obvious corruption or criminal acts that traditionally go unpunished. Wealth and power let some malicious people get away with a lot more than those without - not to say there aren't *just as many*, if not more, criminals on the bottom of the barrel... only that prisons the world over are suspiciously lacking one of the two.

Someone should step up and at least *indicate* to everyone where there are bad people operating unchecked. These people are wrong, and shouldn't do what they do, and Mike Moore is screaming his head off trying to stop them, or at least make them deservedly annoyed. If the Mr. Burns's of the world are secretly hiding barrels of nuclear waste in the park where *my* kids play, I praise the likes of Moore for shooting spitballs at them, and I'll not hesitate to take up a straw and wadded paper and join him myself. Admittedly, raging against the machine doesn't neccessarily make anyone virtuous, but I'll be damned if that changes the machine's verdict.

. . .

Moore's efforts range from poking at George Bush for using a borrowed Enron company jet the entire time he campaigned for prez, to being outspoken against police brutality (He once collected a truckload of wallets donated by New Yorkers, and then dumped them at the entrance of the precinct responsible for the Amadou Diallo shooting, claiming he was helping rid the streets of the so-called 'weapons') .

He's done hundreds of 'stunts' like this, and netted himself some fame meanwhile. You're absolutely right about fame proving nothing in terms of merit, but I think in the case of Moore - and brethren George Carlin, Bill Hicks, David Cross, and whoever that guy is who writes 'The Boondocks' - the voices are heard by so many for a reason. They should be.

[kandrathe]

I've always thought of Moore as a muckraker. Sometimes he exposes something important, but most of the time he's just annoying. I'd prefer good old fashioned 'Dan Rather' -esque investigative jounalism, pretending to be objective, while staging your own evidence. :)

[Occhidiangela]

He and Rush Limbaugh are two fat white guys with big mouths, different agendas, and different axes to grind. Their brand of opinion resonates with different sets of people, and both are capable of taking their own hyperbole far too seriously.

Sort of . . . two sides of the same Caucasian Coin. :P

[Swarmalicious]

heehee heheheh :D

I should also say this, which is what I meant to say, I guess, the whole time - I get the distinct feeling that my friends, family, and I would feel comfortable having the likes of Mike over for a meal, where as Rush & co. would scoff at the very invitation.