Colbert makes Michael Moore look foolish on unions

[maqsur]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/379065/march-28-2011/michael-moore?xrs=share_copy

I gotta say, I know Colbert plays a character, but he really nailed Michael Moore in this interview, making him look like a communist basically. Check it out, it was pretty funny to watch.

[Kludge]

Haha.... Once Moore told Colbert he'd be nothing more than a tool of Viacom... "A PROUD tool of Viacom, and I hope it goes on for many, many years...! ... Michael Moore, Capitalism: A Love Story - $12.99 on Amazon! MM: "No, no, no, no, no!"

[matt0611]

Typical socialist , "if not for unions we wouldn't have weekends, vacations, 12 year olds working in factories blah blah blah"
Yeah right!

[eqcitizen]

Wow, i never knew how delusional Michael Moore is. I always saw him as just another idiot, but he has bought the whole marxist thing, hook, line and sinker

[angelatc]

Wow, i never knew how delusional Michael Moore is. I always saw him as just another idiot, but he has bought the whole marxist thing, hook, line and sinker

I don't know if he really buys it, but he sure knows how to sell it. I watched "Capitalism: A Love Story" over the weekend, and was almost frightened by how persuasive he must seem to uneducated people.

[Soca Taliban]

Funny how he always tries to include himself as one of the downtrodden and poor working class citizens.

[jmdrake]

Let's see. Since the "schools, libraries and roads belong to all of us. So everybody's money belongs to all of us". And Michael Moore said that with a straight face? :rolleyes:

I love the parting shot. "Capitalism a love story. $12.99 at Amazon". :D

[Krugerrand]

Funny how he always tries to include himself as one of the downtrodden and poor working class citizens.

Would that I could be a poor and downtrodden as Michael Moore.

[Fredom101]

I love how Moore puts himself in the working poor category. What a joke.
Pretty funny though, he came out looking ridiculous.

[buck000]

I'm glad that Mr. Moore wants rich folks to pitch in. He can do so, here (https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?nc=1270815460952&agencyFormId=23779454&userFormSearch=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pay.gov%2Fpaygov% 2FagencySearchForms.html%3FshowingDetails%3Dtrue%2 6showingAll%3Dfalse%26entryDN%3Dou%253DFA_Departme nt%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury%252Cou%253DFA_Executive%2 BBranch%252Cou%253DFederal%2BAgency%252Cou%253DTre asury%2BWeb%2BApplication%2BInfrastructure%252Cou% 253DFiscal%2BService%252Cou%253DDepartment%2Bof%2B the%2BTreasury%252Co%253DU.S.%2BGovernment%252Cc%2 53DUS%26agencyDN%3Dou%253DFA_Bureau%2Bof%2Bthe%2BP ublic%2BDebt%252Cou%253DFA_Department%2Bof%2Bthe%2 BTreasury%252Cou%253DFA_Executive%2BBranch%252Cou% 253DFederal%2BAgency%252Cou%253DTreasury%2BWeb%2BA pplication%2BInfrastructure%252Cou%253DFiscal%2BSe rvice%252Cou%253DDepartment%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury% 252Co%253DU.S.%2BGovernment%252Cc%253DUS%26alphabe t%3DT%26ascending%3Dtrue%26sortProperty%3DagencyFo rmName%26pageOffset%3D0%26totalResults%3D1%26nc%3D 1270815456914). He probably doesn't need 95% of what he earns, so I look forward to hearing how much he gave back. ;)

[madfoot]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind Michael Moore? @_@

[Kludge]

Moore's actually a decent philanthropist. He's donated $12k to the sick wife of a site admin of an anti-Moore website (who responded by calling him a "Moore-on"), $20k for Assange's bail, he hosted benefit screenings of Farenheit 9/11 to support victims' families, and on. He funnels a large chunk of his money into a charitable tax-free organization he and his wife run to benefit various causes, including film festivals, soup kitchens, and shelters for women. It also allegedly funnels money to people Moore seeks to influence for personal gain.

[jt8025]

Michael Moore, Capitalism: A Love Story - $12.99 on Amazon! MM: "No, no, no, no, no!"

It seems I'm missing the joke here. Why was Moore saying "No, no, no ..."? Because he said Amazon and rather have people directed to his site or because selling through Amazon (using capitalism) to sell a dvd against capitalism?

Sorry I'm just missing it. Someone please explain to me.

[Sentient Void]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind Michael Moore? @_@

Probably.

[Kludge]

It seems I'm missing the joke here. Why was Moore saying "No, no, no ..."? Because he said Amazon and rather have people directed to his site or because selling through Amazon (using capitalism) to sell a dvd against capitalism?

Sorry I'm just missing it. Someone please explain to me.
Moore called Colbert a tool. Colbert responded by promoting his book, implying Moore's visit was to promote his book, making Colbert a tool of Moore (and arguably, Moore a tool of Viacom, too). That's how I took it, anyway.

[Romulus]

Colbert is a tool of the system in which he voluntarily participates in and is more than happy to do so. Moore does not get that.

Everyone loves to hate the 'rich' as class warfare, Moore plays them like a fiddle.

Best line.. "you got some coin, the hat's not fooling anybody."

lmao

[heavenlyboy34]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind Michael Moore? @_@

His earlier stuff was pretty good (like "Roger and Me"). Nowadays he's not very independent-minded, and tends to schill for the type of people he used to rail against-as long as they do something or other he approves of.

[prmd142]

Moore's actually a decent philanthropist. He's donated $12k to the sick wife of a site admin of an anti-Moore website (who responded by calling him a "Moore-on"), $20k for Assange's bail, he hosted benefit screenings of Farenheit 9/11 to support victims' families, and on. He funnels a large chunk of his money into a charitable tax-free organization he and his wife run to benefit various causes, including film festivals, soup kitchens, and shelters for women. It also allegedly funnels money to people Moore seeks to influence for personal gain.

The problem is that moore thinks that his charitable actions give him a moral high ground. So the next logical step for him to think is that it is perfectly alright for him to force the rich into doing the same. The end justifies the means for him. Charity is the first step to socialist ideas. I don't want to generalise it but it usually is so. Read 'The Fountainhead' and study the character Toohey.

[madfoot]

Charity is the first step to socialist ideas.

(*)_(*)

[prmd142]

I'm not against charity as such, as long as it remains voluntary and just that. But in reality it hardly stops there. Just look at Gates and Buffet traveling all around the world and making billionaires to part with their money, making them to feel guilty for their success.

[acptulsa]

Charity is the first step to socialist ideas. I don't want to generalise it but it usually is so. Read 'The Fountainhead' and study the character Toohey.

So, someone feels a cause is worthy, but doesn't have enough money to make it happen. So, this person steals from someone else and uses that money. So, charity is the gateway drug. Right?

So, a person wants to eat, but doesn't have enough money. So, that person steals from someone else and uses that money. So, theft is actually the gateway drug.

Or maybe someone wants a video game, but doesn't have enough money. So, he steals, and video games are the gateway to socialism...

[AZKing]

I watched "Capitalism: A Love Story" over the weekend, and was almost frightened by how persuasive he must seem to uneducated people.

I found that movie was pretty interesting, actually. I was a little irritated when he seemed to promoting socialism, but it wasn't nearly as anti-capitalistic pro-socialist as I thought it would be. Hell, it was a lot better than Inside Job with Matt Damon.

Even if his movies have a slant, they're all pretty interesting to watch.

[acptulsa]

If he would lose just enough arrogance to realize he doesn't have a moral obligation to propagandize us, he could become the greatest documentary maker on earth.

[prmd142]

So, someone feels a cause is worthy, but doesn't have enough money to make it happen. So, this person steals from someone else and uses that money. So, charity is the gateway drug. Right?

So, a person wants to eat, but doesn't have enough money. So, that person steals from someone else and uses that money. So, theft is actually the gateway drug.

Or maybe someone wants a video game, but doesn't have enough money. So, he steals, and video games are the gateway to socialism...

Honestly, I don't know what you are trying to say here. But I'll assume you're opposing my views. So let me elaborate.

Charity is a personal choice. Like the fact that I like tennis and you like football. There is nothing moral or immoral about our personal choices. They are just that -personal choices. So is charity. By itself it is neither moral nor immoral. It is just a personal choice.

What happens when you treat charity as a moral act and not a personal choice? Take for example - Telling truth. Telling truth is a moral trait. It is not a personal choice. Since it is a moral trait, not telling the truth logically becomes immoral. Rightly so. But if you consider charity a moral trait, then not involving oneself in charity according to you must be immoral. This is the line of reasoning along which socialists start out. Hence my conclusion that charity doesn't give a person a moral high ground. It would be like saying 'I'm a good person coz I like tennis.' For me there is no difference between that and 'I'm a good person coz I'm involved in charity.' It cannot be used in defense of a person's character.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Honestly, I don't know what you are trying to say here. But I'll assume you're opposing my views. So let me elaborate.

Charity is a personal choice. Like the fact that I like tennis and you like football. There is nothing moral or immoral about our personal choices. They are just that -personal choices. So is charity. By itself it is neither moral nor immoral. It is just a personal choice.

What happens when you treat charity as a moral act and not a personal choice? Take for example - Telling truth. Telling truth is a moral trait. It is not a personal choice. Since it is a moral trait, not telling the truth logically becomes immoral. Rightly so. But if you consider charity a moral trait, then not involving oneself in charity according to you must be immoral. This is the line of reasoning along which socialists start out. Hence my conclusion that charity doesn't give a person a moral high ground. It would be like saying 'I'm a good person coz I like tennis.' For me there is no difference between that and 'I'm a good person coz I'm involved in charity.' It cannot be used in defense of a person's character.

Wrong. That has nothing to do with charity and is only your line of reasoning. What the hell kind of simplistic, black and white, false dichotomy world do you live in? Christine is that you???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9qQGvsulFU

[acptulsa]

Wrong. That has nothing to do with charity and is only your line reasoning. What the hell kind of simplistic, black and white, false dichotomy world do you live in? Christine is that you???

Truth be known, he sounds a lot like John Calvin.

[kahless]

I do not think he made him look foolish to that audience. Moore brought up some good points about economic disparity, imbalanced tax breaks and manufacturing competition with the third world. We heard the complaint and not any solution. He identified problems that have nothing to do with government employee unions that should not even exist.

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

lol, guys like Moore crack me up. But are very dangerous. People really believe the lies he tells.

[prmd142]

Wrong. That has nothing to do with charity and is only your line of reasoning. What the hell kind of simplistic, black and white, false dichotomy world do you live in? Christine is that you???



Do you present any reasoning refuting my arguments? NO

Do you resort to personal attacks? YES

If you are confident of your conclusions please present your case. I would be glad to change my mind if you can convince me with your reasons.

As for John Calvin, who is he? Was that also a potshot at me?

[specsaregood]

The problem is that moore thinks that his charitable actions give him a moral high ground. So the next logical step for him to think is that it is perfectly alright for him to force the rich into doing the same. The end justifies the means for him. Charity is the first step to socialist ideas. I don't want to generalise it but it usually is so. Read 'The Fountainhead' and study the character Toohey.

Well then Dr. Paul must be the leading advocate of socialism.


Ron Paul Receives Nation Charity Awards' Lifetime Achievement Award

http://libertypulse.com/article/ron-paul-receives-nation-charity-awards-lifetime-achievement-award/

[acptulsa]

Do you present any reasoning refuting my arguments? NO

Do you resort to personal attacks? YES

If you are confident of your conclusions please present your case. I would be glad to change my mind if you can convince me with your reasons.

As for John Calvin, who is he? Was that also a potshot at me?

John Calvin was a dude who lived a long, long time ago and seemed not to think humans had much control over their actions--and, by extension, the fate of their souls. He's a highly respected intellect, so no, I don't consider it a potshot.

And you could have this discussion all day and have the mods kick people out of the thread who tried to talk about other things, if you were to start a thread on the topic. But, it doesn't have much to do with Michael Moore. Does it?

[Depressed Liberator]

How the hell can someone argue that charity is a bad thing? Jesus Christ.

[ClayTrainor]

That was awesome. "The hat isn't fooling anybody, Michael" LMAO!!!

"Capitalism: a Love Story, only 12.99 at amazon.com" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[BenIsForRon]

How the hell can someone argue that charity is a bad thing? Jesus Christ.

They take Ayn Rand's writings as gospel.

[low preference guy]

They take Ayn Rand's writings as gospel.

Ayn Rand doesn't say charity is a bad thing.


PLAYBOY: Do you consider wealthy businessmen like the Fords and the Rockefellers immoral because they use their wealth to support charity?

RAND: No. That is their privilege, if they want to. My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue.

Link (http://ellensplace.net/ar_pboy.html)

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Do you present any reasoning refuting my arguments? NO

Do you resort to personal attacks? YES

If you are confident of your conclusions please present your case. I would be glad to change my mind if you can convince me with your reasons.

As for John Calvin, who is he? Was that also a potshot at me?

You had no argument, your whole premise was complete shit.

[prmd142]

John Calvin was a dude who lived a long, long time ago and seemed not to think humans had much control over their actions--and, by extension, the fate of their souls. He's a highly respected intellect, so no, I don't consider it a potshot.

And you could have this discussion all day and have the mods kick people out of the thread who tried to talk about other things, if you were to start a thread on the topic. But, it doesn't have much to do with Michael Moore. Does it?

Somebody above said moore has done a lot of charitable work. That sounded like a defense of what he is doing through these documentaries to me. So, no. I wasn't trying to go off topic.

Let me conclude this discussion for now with this. I consider charity a personal choice. A habit. And I personally consider it a good habit. But it is extremely important to identify the difference between choices/habits and morality.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

They take Ayn Rand's writings as gospel.

The same dog faced, withered bag that brought us this gem of wisdom:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uHSv1asFvU

[TheeJoeGlass]

[QUOTE=crazyfacedjenkins;3182735]The same dog faced, withered bag that brought us this gem of wisdom:


That was a bit harsh.

[dannno]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind Michael Moore? @_@

I'm really not a big fan of his socialist views, but Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 were great films..

[nayjevin]

Charity is too often misguided, and charitable organizations are too often inefficient or even corrupt. Filling a hungry person's bowl is one thing, paying the salaries of heirarchical executives is another.

[outspoken]

What would be ironic would be if they installed all of Moore's ideas here in the US (which may not be that far off...), is that he would no longer be able to maintain his oversized girth as his govt rationed health care would mandate he loose the weight not to mention food would be extremely limited in quantity as there would be no incentive for anyone to produce it. You can only stock so many twinkies away and at some point would have to obide by the laws set for by a tyrannically intrusive govt.

An emaciated Michael Moore might not be as paradoxically funny to listen to spew bogus information that plays of the ignorance and fears of his audience.

[outspoken]

Charity is too often misguided, and charitable organizations are too often inefficient or even corrupt. Filling a hungry person's bowl is one thing, paying the salaries of heirarchical executives is another.

'Charity sees the need, not the cause.' ~German proverb

[madfoot]

What would be ironic would be if they installed all of Moore's ideas here in the US (which may not be that far off...), is that he would no longer be able to maintain his oversized girth as his govt rationed health care would mandate he loose the weight not to mention food would be extremely limited in quantity as there would be no incentive for anyone to produce it. You can only stock so many twinkies away and at some point would have to obide by the laws set for by a tyrannically intrusive govt.

An emaciated Michael Moore might not be as paradoxically funny to listen to spew bogus information that plays of the ignorance and fears of his audience.

p. sure this is a strawman or something

[Sola_Fide]

The problem is that moore thinks that his charitable actions give him a moral high ground. So the next logical step for him to think is that it is perfectly alright for him to force the rich into doing the same. The end justifies the means for him. Charity is the first step to socialist ideas. I don't want to generalise it but it us ually is so. Read 'The Fountainhead' and study the character Toohey.

Force, not charity, is the first step to socialist ideas.

[madfoot]

Force, not charity, is the first step to socialist ideas.

this

[QueenB4Liberty]

I don't think anyone is saying charity is a bad idea, it's just bad when it's forced. Then it's not really charity though.