digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Michael Moore asks PA voters to vote Obama

michaelmoore.com — Since he lives in Michigan and his vote didn't count, Michael Moore is asking voters in Pennsylvania to cast his vote (and theirs) for Senator Barack Obama.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • MindyB, on 04/21/2008, -70/+170WOW! that was a great letter! Thank you Michael, for a while there I thought you were blinded by Billary McClinton given your silence in this election period. Barack Obama is a great person with great integrity and courage who has the leadership skills to get America on track and out of this quagmire Bush has created. Taking the high road like Barack has done, despite the unending low blows from the Hillary McClinton camp takes enormous fortitude, a quality that only great Presidents posses. I am Pennsylvanian and I will definitely vote for Barack Obama!
    • oOLiquidNightOo, on 04/21/2008, -11/+56"Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

      how is this not more publicly known? it was the first i'd heard of it. if it were true i really have a hard time understanding why obama wouldn't use the information in some form. for example, during the debate, clinton said that she would've distanced herself from wright and his church IF he had been her pastor. obama could've made a simple comment along the lines of "senator, are you saying that you've never sought reverend wright's advice on spiritual matters?"
      • bgrah449, on 04/21/2008, -19/+8I'm all for fair points, and I think Hillary Clinton is pretty lousy. But that was what, 15 years ago? I don't think any of the sermons under question had been delivered at that time. So Clinton would have a pretty snappy, "Yes, but then he said all that stuff that scares white women ages 50 and above, and our family hasn't associated with him since." Even though that's not why they don't associate with him anymore.
        • StepCousin, on 04/21/2008, -12/+5They both blew him for political power.....pretty disgusting, if you ask me.....couple of political prostitutes.
      • jglaser, on 04/21/2008, -11/+5I'm not defending her, but I don't think she ever heard the Rev. say anything controversial before inviting him over, but Obama did. She would probably point that out if it came up.
      • defska42, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6This is what I like about Obama, that he doesn't throw the dirt around. It would be cake for him, but he doesn't do it. He just brushes off his shoulders after being ridiculously attacked over issues that don't matter, and then goes back on the campaign trail and talks about issues that do. This is why Obama attracts the educated voters: we understand the game she is playing, the game that he refuses to participate in.
      • rpgmaker, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I'm looking out for a link to confirm it but for now we can only take the Moore's words for it. He use to be a fan of Hillary Clinton so there's pretty good chance of it being true.
    • StepCousin, on 04/21/2008, -32/+10Are you talking directly to Michael Moore (or to the digg community), or are you hoping against hope that he'll somehow read your comment? Either way, I'm digging you down for being pathetic.
      • wageslaven, on 04/21/2008, -9/+27And I'm voting you down for being petty and snide.
        • StepCousin, on 04/21/2008, -25/+5And I'm about to take a dump, and I'll picture your smiling face in the toilet.
          • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -3/+12And by Rule 34, there are probably whole forums out there for people like you...
          • StepCousin, on 04/21/2008, -4/+4Got a link?
          • hilikus34, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5*cough* 4 chan
    • RealHyperX, on 04/21/2008, -31/+12“LIBERALS ARE LIKE SLINKYS. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING, BUT THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN YOU PUSH THEM DOWN THE STAIRS”
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -12/+10Poor generalisation. Here's a better one: Republicans are like you.
      • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -7/+6South Park republicans are the dumbest manchildren ever.
      • Moetownslick, on 04/21/2008, -3/+14i love how you did that in all caps...i can really hear it better that way.
    • bclinton, on 04/21/2008, -20/+10Just what I want if I'm running for president. A far left wing wack fck slob backing me. LOL
    • bclinton, on 04/21/2008, -16/+8Hey Mindy - No ones gives a rats ass who you are going to vote for.
      Not trying to be harsh on you but you sound like someone that really doesnt have a clue. BTW I hope you're hot because you have few other things that will be appealing to another guy.
    • bdbr, on 04/21/2008, -4/+5Given your "Billary McClinton" nick, its a safe bet that you would have voted for him anyway. So basically you're saying, his letter made no difference one way or another in your vote.

      Has anyone heard a Pennsylvanian say they would have voted for Clinton but now will vote for Obama because of Moore's endorsement?
      • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -4/+2I'm going the other way. But part of that is because of the number of adds I've been forced to endure this weekend from Obama. Two commercials every break is over kill. I would have liked him better if he aired none and donated money to charity. McCain in the general, Im tired of all the crap going on in this party.
        • raisputin3, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2McCain is a RINO (Republicn in Name Only)
    • mrbeagle, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1He's a little late.
    • seomike, on 04/21/2008, -5/+4I wonder if he'll make a documentary blaming FOX NEWS for his disenfranchisement...
    • taiakpun, on 04/21/2008, -12/+4Wow, you americans are dumber than I thought. Obama for president? Ya ok, I guess being the international laughing stock of the world is not enough for you. The US is so deep in s*it no matter who you vote for nothing will change your downward spiral into a "has been". Already many non-democratic countries are surpassing you in economy, social structures/infrastructure, and land size. Did you not know that the Chinese own your country?! Haha, tis true. Sad, but true.

      Oh ya, by the way, Michael Moore is not somebody you would want on your side - narrow-minded dumb-ass
      • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -3/+2It's a sad day when someone bashing your own country seems more intelligent than everyone else around you.
        • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -2/+4Are you serious? You think he sounds intelligent? Look at his language he speaks like someone who once listened to someone intelligentand is trying to regurgitate but lacks the nuanced and sophisticated knowledge to express himself. "non democratic countries" are "surpassing" us in "economy" haha. What do you mean GDP? Quality of life? and what non democratic countries are "surpassing" us in "land size." These countries have always been bigger than us. I don't know of any countries growing in area. Plus hes a Canadian- their economy is incredibly intertwined with ours. If we go down so will they. Our country has a lot more going for it than they do. but i do agree with him that Moore is a fat manipulative dumbass
    • JettaMan, on 04/22/2008, -5/+10PA voters ask Michael Moore to stop eating them.
      • Lewie, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1I kinda like Michael Moore, but I loled
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -5/+8Wow, the radical that everyone hates says he is for Obama and he is suddenly greater than the Pope.
      • PBMainiac3, on 04/22/2008, -5/+6Sad really. Just proves my point that liberals are unnaturally attracted to others that share their fanatic ideas.
        • nick111, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Really? How's your 3 trillion dollar war-debt coming along?

          That's $10,000 per person - money that isn't going to be invested in your country, your kids.

          Liberals are usually right. Conservatives are usually wrong. Bet you can't think of a single exception... and you know what? It won't make any difference to you... because another thing about conservatives : they have trouble adapting. You won't change your mind about anything because you're simply not bright enough to see that you need to. Badly.
      • epmc, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3Radical? Man, you've got to get out of the States. He's a moderate-conservative where I'm from.
    • jonfleck88, on 04/22/2008, -4/+1A great letter? That letter was ridiculous for example, "On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption" come on, do all liberals really believe in reparation? Do people not get that democrat is right next to socialist?
      • Lewie, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3And Republican is right next to fascist. I know which side I want to be on.
      • epmc, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4What's wrong with social democracy. It seems to be working well for lots of other places in the world.
    • cygnus2112, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/23705. ...
      • epmc, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1HAHAHAHAHA. The Canadian Coalition? Really? One of my professors is a part of that group and he's close to being a genuine fascist!!!
        • cygnus2112, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1So if you can't attack the content of the actual video, you attack the producers?

  • motivatedmama, on 04/21/2008, -43/+75Hell yeah! I wondered where this guy was. Too bad this endorsement doesn't speak as much to Hillary's base. I'd say most of us Michael Moore fans were in Obama's corner anyway. Still very welcome and very cool!
    • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -40/+23most of you micheal moore fans are idiots, like the man.
    • fatrandy13, on 04/21/2008, -37/+14what if Michael Moore asked you to jump off the Ben Franklin bridge for him, because the one in michigan he tried wasn't high enough to kill him?
      • jonmlm, on 04/21/2008, -5/+14why would he ask a stranger to jump off of a brige if he actually wanted to kill himself? do you mean jump off the benny WITH him? that might make sense. i'm still confused though.
      • epmc, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2"what if Michael Moore asked you to jump off the Ben Franklin bridge for him, because the one in michigan he tried wasn't high enough to kill him?"

        Did you even read what you just wrote?

        First of all, the comment itself is out of place. I don't think a political endorsement is the same as someone blindly doing what the masses are doing as the "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?" rhetorical question is meant to expose.

        Secondly, why do you include a hypothetical first bridge that wasn't high enough. I think "what if Michael Moore asked you to jump off the Ben Franklin bridge for him, would you?" would have been sufficient.

        Thirdly, you imply that Moore wants to kill himself but was unable to, and you ask the question inferring this as if it is a way to entice the person being asked to jump. Moore would basically be asking "Would you jump off a bridge for me because the last one I jumped off of was too short to kill me." That's just plain confusing.

        Hey fatrandy13, don't quit your day job.... WHAT EVER THAT IS!
    • bingobongony, on 04/21/2008, -16/+10Did you just admit to being a Michael Moore fan?
    • KungFooJesus, on 04/21/2008, -9/+4isnt it illegal to ask someone to vote for you?
    • JettaMan, on 04/22/2008, -10/+5I wouldn't trust Michael Moore to give me the correct time let alone teach me about politics.
    • jabberwolf, on 04/22/2008, -9/+4Michael Moore is a retard. His only true feeling in life is to eat his way through!

      He can't make good arguments without throwing in a few lies here and there, to make his point. If anything, this should make anyone thinking about voting for Obama change their mind.
      • SpyDerMann, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3"He can't make good arguments without throwing in a few lies here and there"

        I suppose you believe Hillary about dodging bullets and all that. A few lies here and there, huh?
      • epmc, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2"His only true feeling in life is to eat his way through!"

        I don't think you should be the judge on how to make a good argument.

  • tvfilm, on 04/21/2008, -51/+11oh Michael.
    • motivatedmama, on 04/21/2008, -18/+9Suck it up choda. What the hell did you expect? For him to support Hillary or McCain?!? Get real!!
    • thcobbs, on 04/21/2008, -20/+16One "elitist" to another?
      • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -4/+8You republican idiots are talked down to every day by "elitists", they just fake a drawl or fist-pump for a patriotism they don't share to win your swooning hearts.
        • thcobbs, on 04/21/2008, -7/+5Why do you think I'm a republican? Just because I disagree with Moore? Talk about being an elitist.
      • Gabberwok, on 04/21/2008, -3/+9Um. Michael Moore is far from an elitist. He comes from an incredibly blue collar background, he's just been very successful with his films. And apparently has spent all of his money on cheese doodles. Or as the elites like to call them, "Les Doodles du Frommage"
        • cygnus2112, on 04/22/2008, -4/+1I'm surprised that people still believe that you are defined by the conditions of your childhood. Someone can be elitist and have grown up in the worst slums of the world. Most of the world's most notorious dictators started from very humble beginnings.

          Michael Moore is leftist Hollywood royalty. He's arrogant and he's an *****. I don't care if he ate no-name Cheerios for 40+ years.
          • Gabberwok, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Many of those dictators were able to gain power because they listened to the will of the people. Most dictators rise to power by taking populist ideology and spinning it to their own ends. And by your logic, every President is by definition elitist because he has the most powerful job in the world. Therefore elitism isn't much of a valid criticism of a presidential candidate. Let's be honest - no matter how rich he becomes, Michael Moore will always have a significant element of white trash to him.

            Maybe there's a subtle distinction between elites and aristocrats that I'm not getting, but people who could be considered part of the aristocracy of the US tend to look upon the nouveaux riche as scum, even if they have money. Read the Great Gatsby some time.
    • fuzed, on 04/21/2008, -3/+1...where art thou?
    • akamurph, on 04/21/2008, -10/+10Who really cares what Michael Moore says?!
      • CCoe, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5Um, dude... A LOT of people have seen his movies.
  • droog9277, on 04/21/2008, -28/+13Why is it clear to me, and not Hillary, that so many people are falling all over themselves to endorse Obama and not her?

    Damn you sniper fire for not straying from the hills were you being shot from!
    • diggSJaustin, on 04/21/2008, -9/+7Did you just wish death on another human being? That seems, uh... extreme.
      • sqwirl, on 04/21/2008, -3/+9Actually, I think he wished hypothetical death onto a human being who claimed to have been caught under what turned out to be hypothetical sniper fire.
        • MWeather, on 04/21/2008, -3/+6Then he'll get a hypothetical visit from the Secret Service.
        • rentmitchum, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Then he'll get thrown in a hypothetical prison, a cage of the imagination if you will.
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -3/+8I read it as "Damn you sniper fire - if it weren't for your location, Hillary would have been telling the truth!" I guess either reading works though.
      • PabloMac, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3It was a mismatch of words and actions.
  • BFNews, on 04/21/2008, -27/+30Great letter...
    • gsxrjason, on 04/21/2008, -5/+12I'm for Obama, but Moore's famous because of Sicko. That propaganda Health Care film was full of Clinton style spin. If you watch it closely every crazy story happened at least 15 years ago, and the stories about claims getting denied incorrectly all were corrected within a few days. He just points to a few non-issues and concludes socialist Health Care is the solution. That's kind of a long shot.
      • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -2/+5Sounds as if what you are saying is that Micheal Moore is a liar. If so, why don't you come out and say it?
        • jgtg32a, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4He never said the Moore lied, he uses deception and implies things, but I don't remember him really every outright lying.
          • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3You're right. He never says Moore is lying. Should have, but didn't.
          • gsxrjason, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I'll say this: his message is based on a lie. He never specifically lies.
      • bugsy187, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2@gsxrjason

        Every industrialized country has nationalized health care. It's hardly controversial. Our profit based system fails millions of people who aren't covered and fails millions more who are supposedly covered. It's time to adopt what the rest of the world already knows.
        • 140Suffolk, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2You know it IS controversial in Canada. It IS controversial in England. Why? Because thousands of people die every year waiting for tests and procedures that they'd get immediately in the US. And these are people that have PAID by working all their lives. Like going to a restruant and paying the bill. But they won't bring you any food.
          The figures for uninsured in the US are finagled. For example, if I am uninsured for one day out of the year, they will include me as an uninsured person for 2008. Also, the figures include illegal immigrants! How do we know that? Because whenever the question is asked, the politician claims not to know. Hah!
        • gsxrjason, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Just to clarify, I didn't say it was controversial, although I would guess that some people do consider it controversial. My point is that his arguments against the current situation don't point to socialism as a solution.
  • littlequeenie, on 04/21/2008, -50/+113Thanks Michael Moore. Very well said! PLEASE PA VOTERS, VOTE FOR OBAMA!!! Don't just listen to the soundbites. Go to Obama's site and listen to his entire speeches. I have been voting since 1972 and this is probably the biggest election with the most at stake in my lifetime. Please, vote Obama
    • thcobbs, on 04/21/2008, -25/+16You've been voting since 1972 and THIS is the biggest election? What have you been smoking cause I need some.
      • p0s3r, on 04/21/2008, -21/+13This is the first chance she's had to cure her White Guilt.
        • gsxrjason, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4What's with half your posts being about race? Damn get over it.
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -11/+72000: The election was stolen.
        2004: You had an opportunity to dethrone the Republicans and replace them with a crappy - but at least not maniacally destructive - candidate.
        2008: You have an opportunity to dethrone the Republicans and replace them with an inspirational leader who /just/ /might/ be able to fix some of the damage.

        I think given the ***** the country and Constitution have gone through in the last eight years, the other elections in the last thirty-odd years pale in comparison.
        • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -8/+10Good luck convincing these guys... they grew up being taught that the cold war and Reagan-era were the golden age of civilization.

          "Ahhh... the good ole days, when everyone you didn't like could be blindly chastised as being commie-bastards at will and lynched"
        • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -12/+5stolen? you libtards never give up
        • thcobbs, on 04/21/2008, -5/+6Damn...

          /me pats Fafnir43 on the head for being a good Kool-aid drinker.
        • coyote1284, on 04/21/2008, -4/+7*facepalm* If not for that first line... you do realize that the candidate that got each state's electoral votes won by popular vote in that state... right? Yes, even Florida.
    • OverkillTASF, on 04/21/2008, -12/+6Yes, vote on speeches, not on actions.
    • randumbusername, on 04/21/2008, -15/+6listen to his speeches? i think that tells you much about obama supporters. when the guy has to actually talk to people he sounds like he doesn't know crap. matter of fact he stutters and stumbles over wordage more than bush.
      • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -3/+2Never heard of sarcasm I take it?
        • randumbusername, on 04/21/2008, -5/+2doesn't sound sarcastic. sounds like an obama supporter from the Church of Great Rhetoric of Hope and Change, Obama Chapter.
          • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Ahh, sorry. I think I misunderstood your comment (since so many people tend to not use the proper 'reply' link). I thought you were referring to the comment directly above yours.

            Still, inability to speak well one-on-one doesn't mean he is wrong/stupid and his ineloquence is no where NEAR Bush's monumental proportions, haha
      • scottc, on 04/22/2008, -1/+8I take it you've never listened to Obama after a speech. He speaks slowly at times, but it's obvious that he knows exactly what he is talking about. It's a challenge to communicate complex ideas without either talking down to people or saying things that can be broken up and used as sound bites against you. It's also a challenge to answer a ridiculous question in a way that gently corrects the questioner without insulting him or her. He did a good job of that yesterday when a woman asked whether the US mint or the Federal Reserve would print our currency when he became president (she sounded like a confused Ron Paul fan.)

        He reminds me a lot of Bill Clinton - both are brilliant and both do their homework. They can argue the minute details of their positions on the spot without help from staffers. The difference between them is that Obama sticks to his principles, while Bill (and Hillary) will take up whatever position gains them the most power at the moment.
        • westerner22, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4Great comment Scott. Obama is often better when you listen to him twice. It is for me like watching a movie with Johny Depp. Bill Clinton, JFK and Obama are judged as ones with the highest IQ on the presidential arena. Senator Obama's Race speech in Philadelphia is also rated as addressing an intelligent audience, not a norm in this genre.
    • anssij, on 04/21/2008, -0/+10Whoever your candidate is, GET OUT AND VOTE!

      Supporting your candidate here on Digg might also help, but what really counts are the VOTES. Tell this to your friends and colleagues as well.
      • OrangeTide, on 04/21/2008, -9/+1so young and naive. as if our votes matter. same *****, different election year.
    • OrangeTide, on 04/21/2008, -12/+5no thanks. I try not to vote for black radicals or socialists.
      • KyleGoetz, on 04/21/2008, -2/+7Well, then, you're in luck! Barack Obama is neither a radical nor a socialist!
        Your post struck me, however, when I realized this (it's OT, though): Interestingly enough, though, Jesus WAS a radical and a socialist!
        • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -7/+2Jesus was not a socialist.
        • Lazydriver, on 04/21/2008, -1/+7Yes he was. He cured the blind for free. He saved your souls from the original sin. He helped the poor.

          That's socialism. You greedy ***** who want a new rug over helping out your neighbor should be deported to Mexico.
          • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -5/+1Silly. It's charities that help for free.A socialist would use force to take the cure from someone ELSE and give it to the blind for free.
            For example, Fidel Castro took the farms away from the farmers. Sent them to the firing squad if they objected. And gave the farms to "the people". So did the Bolsheviks. So did Robert Mugabe. Now THAT'S socialism.
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -0/+7Socialism requires neither force nor theft, only the belief everyone deserves certain necessities regardless of economic class
          • Lewie, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3If you don't want to be part of a community that helps each other, go live in China or Iran.

            Castro et al are not socialists. If you want [near] examples, look to the Scandinavian countries.
          • KyleGoetz, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2One could argue that Jesus's position actually /did/ force people to give. For example, examine the quote, "[I]t is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Using threats of damnation to encourage charitable giving; that's exactly like a socialist state requiring redistribution of wealth under the threat of imprisonment.
        • nreynolds, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3uh, Jesus wasn't a socialist... he was nice... but I don't remember him telling the people that the government should be in charge of helping everyone at the expense of others.

          on the other hand, Jesus WAS black. Radical - check. Black - check. Socialist - check.
          • 140Suffolk, on 04/22/2008, -4/+2smotpoker says: "Socialism requires neither force nor theft, only the belief everyone deserves certain necessities regardless of economic class"
            Fidel needed the firing squad to take the farms away from the farmers. So did the Soviets, except they called them kulaks. Did Mao use force when he uprooted millions of city dwellers, dragged them out into the boonies and let them starve to death during the Cultural Revolution? What about in Cambodia? In Viet Nam do people sign up for re-education camps voluntarily?
            Really, where has there been socialism without theft, force, intimidation and blood blood blood?
            Or was that sarcasm and I fell for it?
          • KyleGoetz, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1140Suffolk: Denmark, Canada, the UK, the UNITED STATES, Scandinavia, France, etc.
    • rentmitchum, on 04/22/2008, -0/+12Thank you oldest person on digg.
  • DeadFox1, on 04/21/2008, -41/+66Michael Moore-- I have more respect for you NOW, than ever before!
    • heliox, on 04/21/2008, -28/+14LOL...
    • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -32/+16woo a moron gained respect for an idiot!
    • slvrbullet87, on 04/21/2008, -20/+13Who is Michael going to bitch about if Obama becomes president?
      • MattB123, on 04/21/2008, -10/+20Probably whoever has it coming.
        • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -6/+8Exactly.
        • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3do you guys seriously respect Moore's film making? I mean if you align with him politically fine... but you can't seriously respect him as a producer of film!
          • MattB123, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3I respect what he does because he asks the hard questions others won't. I don't agree with everything he says or does but I think he plays a very important role with exposing what those in power would prefer not to have exposed or discussed.
      • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/21/2008, -8/+6The Jews?
      • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -7/+9Whoever is committing the most harmful injustices? (AKA The entire conservative party and negligent corporations who own their souls). You know... same ol' same ol'
        • PabloMac, on 04/21/2008, -4/+4He who makes sweeping generalizations loses credibility.
          • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3"Sweeping" implies there is a proportion of exceptions that is large/substantial enough mitigate relevance/accuracy.

            I would hardly characterize my generalization as "sweeping", especially considering both of the main parties are rather conservative and, from what I can tell anyway, the more socially conservative a person is, the greater their motivation to maintain partisanship and ignore factors that might require they mitigate their beliefs.
          • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2err... beliefs = policy stances I meant
          • Galume, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5Isn't that in itself a sweeping generalization?
          • PabloMac, on 04/21/2008, -2/+3"...the more socially conservative a person is, the greater their motivation to maintain partisanship and ignore factors that might require they mitigate their beliefs."
            The same could be said for socially liberal people.
          • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3like Moore?
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1@Galume: Is your comment directed at me?

            @Pablo: No, it couldn't really (At least not if you amend the quote to incorporate my correction so that it properly expresses the opinion). Liberals are constantly adjusting policy stances to compensate for environment and circumstances that conservatives choose to disregard entirely. They also frequently abandon their parties or switch affiliations when they see something they consider bad/wrong.

            "Necessary evil" and "eye for an eye" are more or less rejected by social liberals. They strive to thoroughly understand all issues and solve them at their core. When there is large/major disagreement, they are more likely openly dissent and criticize, each other as well as other parties. This is the exact opposite of social conservatives, from what I've seen, who tend to treat everyone as children, play he-said-she-said games, disregard the context of any statement/action because they don't wish to be bothered and approach every problem with the same solutions.

            For the record, these are my own opinions based on my own observations of personalities and beliefs from both ends of the spectrum. These descriptions are not literal/standard definitions. In summary, Liberals are optimists who have faith in humanity, conservatives are pessimists who believe most people require training and brute force to act properly - and those who don't are lost causes or need harsh punishment to reform.
          • PabloMac, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1@ smotpoker:
            Again, your sweeping generalizations degrade your credibility. You could have boiled all that down by saying that liberals believe and act as if truth is relative and evolving, and conservatives believe and act as if truth is constant and timeless. And you don't allow for any in-between, but just black and white. Thanks for stating your position.
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Again, my generalizations are not "sweeping", just general. Sorry for the elaboration/examples not meeting your standards of brevity. I typically try to do what I can to make sure my comments cannot be misconstrued or manipulated to imply something I did not intend (Which is obviously not bulletproof).

            From now on, I will make sure all of my replies to you as short as possible - hopefully they will stop escaping your comprehension.
        • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -5/+3Yes, I take a drug abuser's opinion seriously. Sure. Just keep telling yourself that.
          • MattB123, on 04/21/2008, -2/+4How do you know s/he abuses? Is anyone who admits to liking beer an alcoholic?
          • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -2/+8Like the ridicule of one who perceives a single factor in a person's life as an open ticket to dismiss everything the person says, does or believes should be taken any more seriously?

            Selective dismissal/persecution based on a belief you do not understand or agree with is a major problem with the world today. That was the sole justification of many wars, attacks and acts of violence throughout history and a substantial influence in the decline of American society, economy and morality.

            Keep thinking you are better than other people based on petty differences though. I'm sure it will come in handy when you go to join the yacht club or some gated community (assuming that isn't where you learned it)
          • PabloMac, on 04/21/2008, -4/+1"Like the ridicule of one who perceives a single factor in a person's life as an open ticket to dismiss everything the person says, does or believes should be taken any more seriously?"
            As in how some people dismiss everything another person says, does or believes because they have decided that person is a "conservative?"
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2@Pablo: I never said anything about disregarding everything conservatives say, only that they are the most harmful. Your disregard of context and contortion of meaning is a spectacular example of what I said above.
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2@Pablo: And for the record, drug use is not an indicator of anyone's social disposition or fundamental beliefs and is therefore a much more fallible metric. Social beliefs are actually indicative of character, drug use is not
          • PabloMac, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1@ smotpoker:
            Conservatives are the most harmful. Another broad generalization. We all appreciate that.
            And since drug abusers don't harm anyone but themselves (I thought that argument was over), drug use isn't an indicator of anyone's social disposition. Strange logic, but we understand your position.
            Better hurry along, now, or you'll miss your next 4:20 appointment.
          • smotpoker, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1@Pablo - The generalization is broad, but not incorrect, IMO. The more conservative belief/mindset the more negligent they tend to be. I don't really give a ***** if it offends you or others so you can stop repeating it. It is my opinion and based on my observations it is generally correct.

            Since drug users span both ends of the political/social spectrum, drug use is much less reliable as an indication of character. Since not all drugs are taken in large quantities, the same point in the users mental development or produce the same affects, it is also not a reliable metric of intellect.

            I would appreciate if you would please stop stalking me and making snide comments now, thanks!
    • jedmed, on 04/21/2008, -10/+3The Republican whip.
    • Pillage, on 04/21/2008, -15/+10Why did you ever have respect for this slob? He's a liar and Obama doesn't need this guys weight to drag him down.
      • defska42, on 04/22/2008, -1/+9A "Michael Moore is fat" joke.
        Oh snap.
        • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -4/+1well he is a manipulative nitwit who also happens to be amusingly obese
        • Pillage, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1the pun was unintended. But I'm just glad you weren't offended by me calling him a slob and a liar, probably because both are true.
    • travis6690, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2*whoosh*
  • More4, on 04/21/2008, -28/+16at least he's not supporting Nader this time, like he did in 2000
    • wageslaven, on 04/21/2008, -7/+16Nader is an excellent man, and a terrific candidate. If America's "democracy" wasnt so broken, people wouldnt have to be angry about choice.
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5Your second sentence is correct. So what you should be focusing on is /fixing the democracy/. At the expense of all else. That means you need to vote for the candidate who has a slight chance of doing something about it and a good chance of winning over the candidate who's promised to do something about it and has no chance of winning.
        • smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1A valid point but sometimes the best/only way of convincing enough candidates to do that and taking other positions you support is by illustrating just how strongly you and others believe that.

          The likelihood of even good candidates who perceive the problem putting such issues on the backburner is directly proportionate to the amount of voter and representative support/acknowledgment of such issues. Personally the only reason I didn't vote for Nader last election (and won't for this one) is because I feel the current administration is not just incorrect but completely immoral/negligent.

          However, there is still validity in the belief that if Nader loses too much support, the agendas associated with his campaign will lose much of their plausibility/validity not only in Washington but in public perception. Hard to fault people for doing what they think is necessary, IMO
        • raisputin3, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Problem with "fixing the Democracy" is that the USA is not and never has been a Democracy, it is a "Republic". The Pledge of Allegiance does not say "...and to the Democracy for which...", it says "...and to the REPUBLIC for which..."
        • mushabroom, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1What I have been trying to tell people since I was 10
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Yeah, he really upgraded this time.
    • hmcook87, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2come on.... nader was the man!
  • rpfinley, on 04/21/2008, -61/+25Buried, who wants to read political opinion from someone who uses this logic:
    ". . . as long as there's a picture of JFK and FDR riding a donkey at the top of the ballot, and the word "Democratic" next to the candidate's name."
    • tman84, on 04/21/2008, -18/+11Obviously the "well informed" members of digg.
    • kiubo, on 04/21/2008, -9/+33you missed the point.
      • madeingermany, on 04/21/2008, -3/+12I think that letter was a bit too long for some people to read ...
        • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4They only have memory foe a few words at a time, at best.
      • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -5/+4Michael Moore can sit & spin
    • MoofTheStoof, on 04/21/2008, -9/+8FDR only saved the country. I've often said in the past few months that Obama might just be in a position to be the next FDR and help pull us out of the Second Great Depression. Hopefully before it gets as bad as it did in the early '30s, though there's evidence that it's already starting in that direction... Then, too, there were food and resource shortages and inflation that helped push the world toward global conflict. He'll need a strongly Democratic House and Senate in order to break Republican procedural blockages and get the needed legislation passed and signed.
      • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -8/+7saved the country? that's a joke, it took decades to get out of that mess. And BTW thanks for that social security pyramid scheme
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -8/+4To be quite frank: at this point I would vote in a member of Hamas with a known paedophile as his running mate if it would get the Republicans out.
      • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2and that makes you no better than the conservatives who blindly voted for bush
      • raisputin3, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2yup, you have just proven yourself to be a complete *****
  • alexkehr, on 04/21/2008, -35/+49VOTE OBAMA PA!!
    • SpectralSounds, on 04/21/2008, -7/+5I was going to vote for Obama out here in the primary. Turns out since they somehow accidentally registered me as, "Independant" in PA, (Just moved out here and just got off the phone with Voter Registration) I am unable to vote in the primaries. I have to wait till November.

      Bah
      • westerner22, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I think you will be able to straightent his out. Go and vote tomorrow, no way they can turn you down.
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6Yes, I'll vote for him because you know how to scream on the Internet. Settle down, nobody cares what you have to say. Everyone should be voting for who they want, not who somebody on the internet said to vote for. Especially when they fail to give any reason.
  • 7Mystery, on 04/21/2008, -22/+13Well said. I hope the MSM picks up this, people of PA hear this and make a difference.
    • bingobongony, on 04/21/2008, -7/+5Why the ***** would the media pick up what Michael Moore has to say?
    • 13blueideas, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3Nice thought, but not likely.
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3I hate this guy and most people that watch the news do too. I hope they pick this up, that will really help to put things into perspective for them.
  • LOLIGATOR, on 04/21/2008, -49/+27thanks for your stupid opinion stupid face
  • Protestivist, on 04/21/2008, -32/+19Not only do we need to rid ourselves of bigotry, but we need to rid ourselves of greed. Corporate America has raped the world since WWII, they do not want to stop, ever. We need a candidate who is the least betrothed to the Capitalist Pigs and that, currently, is Obama (Cynthia McKinney not withstanding).
    • galeninjapan, on 04/21/2008, -16/+18I know right. The evil corporations sit in their corporate building, and they're all corporation-y... AND THEY MAKE MONEY! Those evil bastards.
      • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -9/+8how dare they! they should only make as much as someone on welfare! shame on them!
      • mewoot10, on 04/21/2008, -4/+2funny comments :D thanks.
      • funkywood, on 04/21/2008, -6/+5It's the raping the world that pisses people off, not the making money.
      • robbinzo, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Yes the military industrial complex make money by selling arms to the US government and lobbying for illegal wars of aggression.
        And selling pharaceuticals to schoolchildren (ritalin etc)
        And taking control of argriculture
        And having a monopoly of energy
        It's not a free market, we have monopoly capitalism and therin lies the problem - monopoly equals total control.
        • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2"monopoly capitalism" That doesn't make any sense considering those two words are almost exact opposites.
    • Latimer, on 04/21/2008, -8/+10Did you just seriously pimp Cynthia McKinney as a Presidential candidate? hahahahaha, im sorry, you just won the ridiculous post of the day award.
    • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -6/+9hey loser, the only reason a corporation exists is to make money. If they are not "greedy" they won't exist, and you won't have a job
      • K4ot1K, on 04/21/2008, -4/+7Thats the main point no one gets. With out corporations making money, there are no real jobs.
        • archiesteel, on 04/21/2008, -3/+6Gee, I guess cooperatives don't exist, then...

          The issue is not with private enterprise, but rather unfettered corporatism, which leads to abuse of basic human rights and increasing income gaps.
          • galeninjapan, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5And who supports these corporations? We al do when we buy their goods and services. If we didnt then they would cease to exist.
          • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4actually income gaps in capitalist countries are way better than in state controlled economies. Capitalism allowed for the middle class
          • Lewie, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1Where's our middle class?
          • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2look at income statistics in America compared to China or Russia dumb *****
    • Yatata, on 04/21/2008, -1/+8it's not corporate america that's the problem, corporations are an important societal component - it's corporate american ETHICS that are the problem. we need checks and balances to make sure that they are not above the law and that the bottom line isn't always the bottom line if it's at the expense of basic human rights.
  • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -29/+82Moore is seen by moderates and independents as the liberal Rush Limbaugh. How are we hoping this guy's endorsement will do anything but alienate votes? It's like McCain having to suck it up and take an endorsement from Bush. I appreciate Moore helping bring health care to the forefront but his total lack of journalistic integrity tends to do more harm than good to our credibility. Hopefully he takes a cue from Obama and sees that fighting the GOP with GOP tactics only makes things worse.
    • wriststrong16, on 04/21/2008, -34/+26Rush limbaugh is just a bigot who makes sexist and racist comments, michael moore uses facts to try to make life better for the working class, pretty crucial difference. Pretty faulty assumption to make just based on how his political viewpoints compare to what is arguably the most conservative country in the world.
      • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -14/+25I was talking about his distasteful methods, not his views. He bends and manufactures a lot of facts unnecessarily.
        • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -14/+9and the liberals love him for it.
          • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -10/+6Totally unlike Limbaugh, Beck, Oreilly, and all the other guys conservatives fellate.

            But at least Moore has some educational value amidst the emotive junk.
      • Balanced, on 04/21/2008, -8/+19Moore takes a LOT of liberties when editing his documentaries. At best, things are out of context. At worst, they are just plain wrong.
        • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -2/+6That's called lying. Yes, Micheal Moore is a liar.
      • coyote1284, on 04/21/2008, -7/+10Phtttttt... got as far as "michael moore uses facts..." and nearly sprayed my keyboard and monitor with Cherry Coke.
      • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -8/+11What fairy tale land do you live in? Michael Moore is a straight up liar. He is every bit as big of a bigot as you claim Limbaugh is. I mean seriously, how can you respect a fellow American who leaves the country and harps on how stupid his fellow citizens are. Pathetic. He's as worthless as his Stalinist movies.
    • cissystrut, on 04/21/2008, -7/+17I think you're only allowed to compare Rush Limbaugh to things such as: demons, zombies, and other diabolical creatures
      • coyote1284, on 04/21/2008, -1/+11Hey, don't put down zombies like that! It's not their fault they eat flesh, no one ask them if they wanted to be reanimated. (This message brought to you by PETU, People for the Ethical Tratment of the Undead.)
    • drpleau, on 04/21/2008, -5/+0So he was right in what he said.
      • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1yeah but his enthusiasm is turning other people off
    • Zera, on 04/21/2008, -1/+7Well said, I REALLY Hope this doesn't kill Obama's chances like Moore did for Kerry.

      The best way to lose an argument is to overstate your case. Michael Moore has never learned this, he merely alienates and motivates people to work against him cause.
    • defska42, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3I agree and disagree. Everyone I know knows to take Michael Moore with a grain of salt. He quite obviously hand-selects facts and manipulates them to make a point. But at least he does it in the interest of the little guy. The little guy doesn't have many people in positions of power lying in their favor, but we have plenty of people lying against us.
      I consider myself a fan of Moore because I appreciate what he does, and the attention he brings to important issues; but I would never blindly follow his claims, unlike most Limbaugh fanatics.
  • KevinRWright, on 04/21/2008, -28/+17His opinion holds no weight with me ever since he pulled an epic flip-flop on Nader. I'm glad that he supports Obama over the other 2 MSM nominees, but I don't think anyone should base their vote on what this idiot thinks.

    He hasn't even made a decent movie since Bowling For Columbine.
    • Digg90210, on 04/21/2008, -10/+13What about "Sicko"?
      • KevinRWright, on 04/21/2008, -6/+6I don't know, I thought it was a lot of fluff. I know it's not his style, I just wish it was more in depth.
        • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -2/+4Full of lies. Cubans get healthcare? Don't make me laugh. Except for high ranking members of the Communist party.
      • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -4/+6Sicko - Worthless piece of trash full of lies, inconsistancies, and liberal opinions. It ranks right up there with that piece of ***** Al Gore's liefest.
    • galeninjapan, on 04/21/2008, -12/+15Even Bowling for Columbine sucked. Watch it again and tell me what the hell it was about. It goes from guns to race to the media hype to Canada and all sorts of *****. His thesis comes across as something like this "We wouldn't have gun violence in america if the media would stop showing black people on TV and only if we were more like canada"
      • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -7/+9I was pretty embarrassed for him when he went after Heston like that. It's not really picking a fair fight to go after a guy who's getting that senile.
        • opticwind, on 04/21/2008, -7/+7Yes...I loved when he tried to show that gun violence is Heston's fault. The NRA, love em or hate em, does advocate gun safety.
      • skipdog172, on 04/21/2008, -2/+6Haha yeah. It is quite laughable to think that the NRA has anything to do with gun violence in this country. The war on drugs has more to do with gun violence in this country than anything else.
    • KevinRWright, on 04/21/2008, -3/+5So am I being buried for 1)not liking michael moore, 2)thinking that bowling for columbine was his last good movie or 3) for thinking it's a bad idea to base you vote off of what some celebrity thinks?

      k thanks.
      • KevinRWright, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2ugh. Buried with no response. such is digg.

        It was a genuine question, I'd like to know what people disagree with.
  • GeneralJoey, on 04/21/2008, -16/+129Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

    Oh Snap!
    • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -21/+2If you want him to say that, I don't what you like about him as a candidate.
      • felyduw, on 04/21/2008, -2/+12RTFA!!
      • Yatata, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5READ THE ***** ARTICLE!! (he probably needs help decoding diggspeak)
    • incredibilistic, on 04/22/2008, -0/+8I was also curious why Obama never threw this back at her. This news has been out for weeks but I've only heard about through talk radio and not in national media. There's even pictures of Bill and Wright at some sort of luncheon or something with Bill smiling and shaking the Rev's hand.

      But as Moore said, he's NOT trying to play politics as usual and said that several times in the debate and even said that in order for Hillary to win she has to resort to any tactics she can in order to win the election.

      The letter was brilliant but like others here I also fear that no matter how sincere Moore is in this letter that his negative reputation will force voters to the other side.

      The other sad thing is that people will hear that Moore endorses Obama and never bother to read the letter especially this very juicy tid-bit of information.
  • grungegbunny, on 04/21/2008, -45/+10Obama/Moore 08
    • dumpyhumpy, on 04/21/2008, -4/+15.... no thanks.
    • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -1/+10That would be moronic. Way to completely eliminate Obama's independent and crossover draw.
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Exactly. We have a large movement of sane people here - let's try to keep it together.
    • iainc, on 04/21/2008, -0/+6Again. No thanks.
    • StrangeFamous, on 04/21/2008, -4/+2Obama/Yomama



      You just got nailed.
    • grungegbunny, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1... was a joke.
  • dstrack, on 04/21/2008, -19/+22One of the only pieces of work I've ever seen from the guy that I could finish without feeling duped.
    • robbinzo, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1That comes later when you shake off you cognitive dissonance and realise that Moore is a corporate shill
  • Digg90210, on 04/21/2008, -17/+3Hmmm, why wasn't this mentioned in Wednesday night's debate in PA?

    If only the mainstream media did as much research as today's bloggers...

    • smackjack, on 04/21/2008, -3/+4probably because he decided after the debate
    • p0s3r, on 04/21/2008, -1/+6Probably because Michael Moore hasn't invented a time machine.
  • Digg90210, on 04/21/2008, -13/+5Politico ran this story last month -- didn't get much publicity:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Jeremi ...
    • had3l, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3Sorry, why is he being buried? Is there something he is not saying?
      • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1It angers the hillary camp for some reason.
  • pjpark, on 04/21/2008, -18/+11He blames the people of Pennsylvania for the apportionment compromise? What a stupid old fart.
  • galeninjapan, on 04/21/2008, -24/+14Michael Moore supports a candidate the continues to support the patriot act and continues to vote for funding for the war????
    • Pherdnut, on 04/21/2008, -2/+11Not being a total idiot, he probably checked to see what it was Obama was supporting in that patriot act vote and that being against the war doesn't mean you want our soldiers to be forced to fight insurgents with sticks, rocks and harsh language.
      • Sinnic, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4Supporting the Patriot Act is supporting the Patriot Act. Sorry, but you don't get to feel good about yourself because you only voted in your head for the 'support the troops' clause.
        • JayCrayZ, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1Except that for someone who doesn't have all that much power (1/100th of half the legislative branch of government to be exact), the whole "lets make sure the Americans we sent to fight our stupid war don't die on our account" is more important than the "lets wire tap whoever" part involved in the patriot act. If you read anything about Obama at all, its pretty clear his reasoning for voting how he did. Would you prefer the alternative? Really? It just makes you sound heartless.
          • Sinnic, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Yes, I would. Call me heartless. There's no reason why the military needs to beg off more funds from the Patriot Act, and similarly no reason why legislators should let themselves be deluded by such absurd reasoning.

  • fritson, on 04/21/2008, -29/+11BRAVO MICHAEL...... a great article.
    Thank you Mr. Michael Moore......you are so very brave.....and you are exactly right.
    You just keep on ....writing and talking....and making those greatest movies....don't ever give up.

    We The Nation.....are with you Michael .....all the way! You speak for the humane US and the humane world!
    Moore power to you!
    • heliox, on 04/21/2008, -11/+3You two need to get a room.
    • Doubledown, on 04/21/2008, -8/+5Um.... don't speak on behalf of myself
      • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3No kidding. Michael Moore has nothing to say that I want to hear.
    • p0s3r, on 04/21/2008, -11/+8LOL why are obamabots such melodramatic queens?
  • Jovensdesciple, on 04/21/2008, -35/+21I'll ask Michael Moore to shut the ***** up. That tubby bitch is clown shoes. Anyone that believes his lies is a moron, and desperate to follow any fat angry ***** who once in a while says something you actually agree with.
    • BinaryDelt, on 04/21/2008, -5/+9Replace "Michael Moore" with "Hillary Clinton" and "his" with "her" and "fat angry *****" with "hypocritical bitter liar".

      /Correction
    • jonmlm, on 04/21/2008, -5/+3well i think you is clown shoes.
  • hutectro, on 04/21/2008, -17/+6You're the MAN Michael Moore anything for you buddy love your movies.
  • SemiSarcastic, on 04/21/2008, -11/+14I would have preferred a more neutral/moderate person to make that statement (it makes it more credible and impossible to spin as liberal or conservative propaganda, too much of both are controlling the conversation anyway) but fine nevertheless.
  • thedogfatherx, on 04/21/2008, -19/+13Who gives a *****. I once told a few of my friends to vote for somebody. I think that is very very newsworthy.
    • Seemefearme, on 04/21/2008, -6/+5You don't make multimillion dollar earning documentaries.
      • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -2/+6propaganda crap you mean
      • mike17032, on 04/21/2008, -2/+3Neither does MM.

        No, those are not documentaries he makes.
        • Seemefearme, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Whether or not you agree with them doesn't mean they aren't documentaries.
  • DEIx15x8, on 04/21/2008, -13/+7So now I really know who the obama fans are.
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Rush Limbaugh's supporting Clinton, remember?
    • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1THEY ARE GOD FEARING FOLKS, WHO ONLY WANT THE HOPE FOR HARMONY FOR HUMANITY BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IF YOU HAVE A HEART VOTE IT.
  • soulscreme, on 04/21/2008, -21/+15This pisses me off so much. I ***** loathe Michael Moore. He is nothing more than an extreme-left propaganda machine. I have been planning on voting for Obama for months. Now, on Tuesday, it will look like his horse ***** had some effect. I'd love to be able to add a comment to my vote to disassociate myself from this jackass.
  • falafelkiosken, on 04/21/2008, -15/+56I hope this is good for Obama, Moore is known to repel a lot of people…
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3Hopefully the only people who hear about it will be the people who follow Moore's antics in the first place. In that company it might do some good, because otherwise they're quite likely to vote independent in the general. Let's just hope Clinton/McCain don't seize on it...
    • sallywally14, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2I don't think Hillary would want to touch that one...especially since it brings up a good point about her family and the Reverend Wright.
    • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -5/+0He repels people with some truths, makes you think enough about your self to do some investigation for your self, we are sinking as a nation, our world and planet is falling apart day by day and what do most of us do, we go against the grain because the OLD regimen for money has reared you to not think for yourself.
      WE ARE STILL SLEEPING.
      • bingobongony, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4You are EXTREMELY naive if you think that what you wrote is accurate.

        Micahel Moore has never told a "truth" in his life. At least not a twisted one.
    • HanSolo69, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3Michael Moore isn't going to sway anyone. But he will happily take credit when Obama wins.
    • zyklon, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1You know... I haven't been afraid of Moore or anything really since I won that fart contest with him.
  • Phlex330, on 04/21/2008, -20/+11Michael Moore is an Ass Clown, but I agree this time!
    • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1donno why you're being dugg down... you are right... it's probably the canadians
  • davea402, on 04/21/2008, -22/+4Hillary all the way......Clinton for FIRST MAN...
    • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4choose between the frequencies of love or of fear
  • galactus, on 04/21/2008, -14/+7I really dislike Moore but that was a great letter. Have I become a Moore-on?
    • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -4/+2Why is michael moore so disliked because he has the guts to exposed the GOVERNMENT that has been telling you how to act, feel, and what to do all of your lives. AND you fall for it hook, line and sinker, never searching your soul to see if you really have been duped.
      • icepick602, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2who the ***** are you talking smuhamm? if you think you've been "shown the light" by Michael Moore than you aren't enlightened enough about politics to tell anyone on this forum that they are the gullible ones. I don't think there is much more annoying than someone who thinks they are politically savvy because they've seen a Moore film
  • ssravp, on 04/21/2008, -14/+7Why do celebrities think they can tell people who to vote for, it isn't my fault his vote didn't count.
    • Cattywampus, on 04/21/2008, -3/+3Wasn't Obama against having the votes in Michigan (and Florida) count?
      • freshyill, on 04/21/2008, -1/+6He was FOR following the rules, not AGAINST anything.
        • Akairenn, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.
      • chaosium, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1Hillary said the same until her covert campaigning worked to be in her favor.
      • Defuser, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Considering that he wasn't even allowed on the ballot in MI, I can see why he might be against it.
    • MattCruikshank, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3First Ammendment?
    • StrangeFamous, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3Every legal citizen with the right to vote also has the right to tell you who they think you should vote for.

      The key is to listen to other opinions without letting them steer you one way or the other. Hopefully most people have learned by now that presidential elections are too important to be treated as mere popularity contests. We'll see in November.
  • martytram, on 04/21/2008, -21/+11michael moore is a fat ***** who knows nothing. i hope anyone who listens to him becomes obese like him.
    • freshyill, on 04/21/2008, -3/+10You make such a rational argument.
      • martytram, on 04/21/2008, -4/+1your gay
        • iainc, on 04/21/2008, -1/+4Evidently, you're an idiotic bigot who knows sod all about punctuation.
  • ElAssoWipo, on 04/21/2008, -13/+12ElAssoWipo asks that you use a pen and paper, write down what your values are and compare them with what the candidates have to say in order to make an educated decision.
    • p0s3r, on 04/21/2008, -10/+41.) I suffer from excruciating White Guilt.
      2.) Obama is the only black candidate running.

      Signed,
      Obamabots
      • sqwirl, on 04/21/2008, -4/+71) I suffer from applying rash generalizations.
        2) I don't like Obama, and feel compelled to ridicule anyone who does.

        Signed,
        p0s3r
      • madeingermany, on 04/21/2008, -2/+31) There are two candidates that match most of my values
        2) One of them happens to be a women and she doesn't mind lying to win
        3) One of them campaigns honorably and happens to be black

        I don't care about color or sex organs in my candidate, but I do care about integrity.

        • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -3/+4Then why would you even consider voting for Obama or Clinton. Both are dirtbags.
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -2/+31.) I suffer from racism so much that I can only argue based on a candidate's skin colour, not his actual policies.
        2.) Clinton is the only white candidate running.

        Signed,
        p0s3r
      • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -0/+0choose between the frequencies of hope or of fear
    • madeingermany, on 04/21/2008, -0/+6Wow, sound advice.

      However, policy-wise Clinton and Obama are not far apart - for my educated decision I would also figure in how honorable the candidates fought in the debate, because that's how honorable they would be in office.
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/21/2008, -3/+4ElAssoWipo asks that you compare the definition of debate to the televised spectacle of idiocy that occurs at every election.
        • madeingermany, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3Let me clarify: I meant their conduct throughout the campaign.
  • democrats, on 04/21/2008, -12/+43Finally, I want to say a word about the basic decency I have seen in Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

    I had no idea - woah!
    • Jebra, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5Same here, I did some googling and it looks true.
      http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/phot ...
    • ender7074, on 04/21/2008, -5/+2So they are both in bed with a racist bigot piece of trash. That's no suprise to me and shouldnt be to you.
      • Yatata, on 04/21/2008, -2/+3Wright is NOT a racist bigot. you are projecting your own prejudices.
        • 140Suffolk, on 04/21/2008, -5/+5He accused the USA of inventing AIDS to kill of black people. That is such a vile slanderous statement that he should be shunned everywhere for life just for that statement. And his rotten hateful church celebrates it. Collects that and slanders like it on DVD for sale !!
        • noangelcame, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5He grew up during the Tuskegee experiments,. where he learned that the U.S. government was involved in a conspiracy that allowed African Americans to be infected with Syphilis and allowed to die. The African Americans involved in this experiment were never told they had Syphilis, nor were they given any treatment for their conditions. They were absolute guinea pigs, and this act was approved by high ranking members of the U.S. government.

          So, it's not completely outrageous for an African American growing up living in a society that would allow this to happen to believe it could have happened again. If you know the darker side of U.S. history, there is not a lot of vile evil acts left that one couldn't reasonably put past the U.S. government committing.

          For the record, I am not convinced that the government invented AIDs to kill black people. But what I will say, is that I wouldn't put it past the U.S. government to engineer a virus that specifically targeted a particular ethnic group. There is written proof that exists to show they have the desire to create such a weapon. If you grew up during the Tuskegee experiments, I would not blame you for sharing the same suspicions as Jeremiah Wright.
          • 140Suffolk, on 04/22/2008, -6/+2Oh you're not CONVINCED that the government invented AIDS to kill black people? So your leaning that way?
          • GianDoe, on 04/22/2008, -3/+5let's just try to imagine, um, let's say 25 people working on a secret mission to invent a virus to exterminate "black people" (which by the way isn't a friggin race). not just normal people who can be pulled into this unnoticed...people on the cutting edge of viral science. these 25 people have been completely silent, basking in schadenfreude at the beautiful misery they birthed and have kept secret all these years... or you're a ***** nutcase.
          • newnie, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4AIDs came from a mistakes made when trying to come up with a polio vaccine in the 1950s
            You can read about it if you care to enlighten yourself with the book "The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV and AIDS "
            Here's a synopsis stolen from someone off Amazon
            "This book contends that by this process, HIV was accidentally transmitted from certain monkeys into humans. The author provides numerous pieces of evidence in proof of this theory. First, the very same villages in the Congo where HIV was first discovered also happened to be the very same villages in which the polio tests were performed. Second, HIV was diagnosed in these villages 10 - 20 years after the polio tests were performed. Third, none of the other currently existing theories can explain how a primate virus passed into the human population, and spread so quickly, over a period of 4 decades, given that the two populations of monkeys and humans had coexisted in the same habitat since the dawn of man without any such transmission. Fourth, during public hearings in the 1950s, the various teams presented their oral vaccines to the world scientific community. One team found an unknown immunodeficiency virus in one of the samples provided by another team."
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Learn to use the reply button next time instead of copying an entire post!
    • 4d669, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3I love it when someone tries to convince people that these sort of arguments and meaningless and then use the same kind of arguments as a 'smoking gun'.
      lol. this election is a popularity contest. the real 'historical' election happened 8 years ago and it's too late now.
    • insomniac8400, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Why isn't the media playing this like crazy. She opened this Rev. can of worms. She deserves to gets stuffed back in with them.
    • jelaime, on 04/22/2008, -2/+0That was my same reaction! Wow, Obama is definitely the bigger person.
  • slantyeyed, on 04/21/2008, -10/+10if hillary is as evil as people say, how come obama isn't blowing her out of the water in each primary (instead of going 60/40)? and why has this nomination race gone so long if obama is the chosen one?
    • h0lyavenger, on 04/21/2008, -3/+10Don't forget you're talking about the country that voted Bush into the office, twice. It's already a feat that Obama is able to take the lead.
    • Railz, on 04/21/2008, -3/+10Because middle aged women are generally bigger sheep then men. My mother can't comprehend why her fellow co-workers want Clinton other then her having a Vagina.
      • sallywally14, on 04/22/2008, -0/+0Hey now my mom did NOT vote for Clinton.
      • Tickitata, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I'm confused. Is the joke here the idea that sallywally's mom is a coworker of Railz's mother?
        ...Hilarious?
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -2/+3In primaries, 60/40 more or less /is/ blowing her out of the water. Normally things are much closer than that. Plus you have the name-recognition thing, her perceived "experience", and the feminists who think that feminism means reflexively voting for the female candidate. (Fortunately they're becoming a minority now - I'm pretty sure if Clinton's the first female president you'll be waiting another two hundred years for the next one...)
    • bingobongony, on 04/21/2008, -3/+6Uhhh...in most PRIMARY states, Obama is not coming CLOSE to beating Hilary 60/40.
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -6/+2More importantly how is he not the nominee if he is out spending her by so much. In the past hour I have seen 10 Obama adds and 1 for Clinton. There are two Obama adds in every commercial break. If this guy has so much money to blow why can't he give money to charity? I can't stand him and every add makes me hat him more. A year ago I said I wanted to leave the country if Clinton was ever president but now I find myself rooting for her because every time Obama has a commercial, speaks, or Digg speaks for him I find myself hating him more.
      • westerner22, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3People don't know the name Obama. They know the name Clinton. Many ayers ago I would vote for someone just because I heard their name, because it was more familiar. Most people do not follow the politics as you, or as I am now. Because we have to. He also has more money because millions of Americans like me donated a little to his campaign. While she is short of money, and in debt. He also must respond to all negativity and filth that she use es as her weapon. You know, Karl Rove did have some face to face exchanges in recent years with Bill Clinton. I hope you stick around for better tides.
    • colincornaby, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Because people are dumb. It's the same reason Bush got into office.
  • alexf, on 04/21/2008, -23/+21If Moore really wanted to help Obama he would've endorsed McCain.
  • techweenie1, on 04/21/2008, -21/+16Yeah I love telling people who to vote for, It makes me feel so authoritarian and fascistic.
  • Trav3133, on 04/21/2008, -29/+5GOBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@!!!!!!!!!!!! I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW HOW EXCITED I AM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • stfudumbass, on 04/21/2008, -11/+5I still have as much respect for you as I have had in the past (None). Moore was smart enough to keep his fat mouth shut because no one really wants his tainted endorsement. Hell if he had any pull what so ever, maybe he could have convinced Michigan Dems (and Florida for that matter) not to F with the national party. Those 2 states deserve to not count. You got a problem with that, then oust your states party officials. Don't go cry to mommy for punishing you for doing exactly what you were told you'd be punished if you did.
  • osirislink, on 04/21/2008, -17/+13Michael Moore is an idiot. "Down with the facists!! Down with the facists!! Heyeahhhhhharghharg!!
    • Railz, on 04/21/2008, -5/+5Except, by definition, any nation run by corporations is a Fascist state, even if the political parties are not labeled as such. So in literary sense, he is right.
      • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3fascists promote the nation and race above everything, not corporations. do some reading
      • insllvn, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3Fascism is a political ideology of one party, one leader. It advocates the value of a strong society created by a monolithic and nationalistic voice. It is characterized by mobilization of the people. Fascism can spring from virtually any ideology, so long as that ideology lends itself to the aforementioned nationalism. What you are thinking of is national socialism.
    • osirislink, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2fascists*
    • funkywood, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4So you think people should be discriminated against because of their face? Who's a facist now?
  • TGMD, on 04/21/2008, -31/+33Yeah... Who gives a ***** what Michael Moore thinks?
    • Witchbaby, on 04/21/2008, -3/+7I did like how he started out the letter saying that no one probably cares what he has to say. At least he can admit it. I give him that much. :)
    • mike17032, on 04/21/2008, -3/+3I do. Now I know who not to support.
  • MortalynFlux, on 04/21/2008, -14/+29"What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate."

    Ditto. I'm not an Obamahead, an Obama fan, or a follower of the cult of Obama. I am for change and a better life for everyone.
    • p0s3r, on 04/21/2008, -17/+12CHANGE!! YES! HOPE!! YES! CHANGEY HOPE! YES! YES! HOPEY CHANGE! YES! YES! YES!

      sheep.
      • dvdrtrgn, on 04/21/2008, -4/+6Why do you hate hope?
      • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5Ad hominem: it's so much easier than actual debate!
      • vade79, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2[say anything sarcastically here]

        [say "sheep", implying i'm better than the arbitrary thing above]

        It reminds me of punk rock kids who are different, and prove it, by dressing and acting like other punk rock kids.
      • BJLStorm, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Better than being a sheep for the war on terror. 9-11, America, Iraq, Freedom, Support the Troops, America, 9-11, 9-11, 9-11, TERRORISM. Except being in Iraq isn't doing a damn thing except wasting lives and money. I'll be a sheep for hope over a sheep for war anyday.
        • 10ofDiamonds, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0Why don't you just not be a sheep...............tool
    • randumbusername, on 04/21/2008, -5/+1who isn't for a better life? if you think socialist policies will get you a better life there are many failures around the world and throughout history to look at.
      • KyleGoetz, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Boy, those silly socialist policies sure do produce failed states. Like Japan, Denmark, Germany, France, Sweden, Canada, Norway, Iceland, the UK, etc. Contrast all these countries' currencies with the US currency and you can see how completely these countries have failed.
        Also, I really hate socialist programs in the US like roads, police, fire departments, etc.
    • 10ofDiamonds, on 04/21/2008, -4/+3That makes you doubly a moron. In essence what you have said is that you are for change, with no regard to whether it's good change or not. Statements like this are as ignorant as the "Anybody But _____" mantra. I am for change too, but not the kind Obama is proposing.
      • KyleGoetz, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1I only see two kinds of changes that are possible: Change to get better than we have it now, and change to make it worse. I don't see how Obama's proposed changes make things worse. I do, on the other hand, see how McCain's changes will make things worse (make the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran," 100 years in Iraq, etc.).
        • 10ofDiamonds, on 04/22/2008, -1/+0I don't like McCain either, and I wont be voting for him. Iam completely against the war in Iraq, and dont even get me started about Iran. You make the mistake that because I am not for Obama I must be for McCain. When Obama proposes things like raising capital gains taxes to 28% and more tax deductions to lower income earners he is marginalizing the middle class, and that's bad change.
          • KyleGoetz, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Ah, but when he proposes removing the social security cap (right now, if you make over 250 grand, you only pay social security on that first 250 grand) and undoing Bush's tax cuts, he provides great benefit to the middle class.

            Also, I think most people who will be paying capital gains are not the "middle class." I think perhaps you have a skewed view of what the middle class is. Most middle class people can't afford to invest in the stock market. Those who can probably actually fall into the "rich" category, just not the "superrich" category. I believe if you look at various sociological definitions of wealth (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth#The_middle_cla ... ), you'll find that the middle class makes very little investment.

            My parents have this idea. My dad makes enough money that they're easily in the top 5%, and when my mom works, they're in the top 1%. Their net worth is over a million dollars. However, my mom is adamant that they are not rich, because in the lower-upper class mentality, "rich" means "Hollywood elite and CEO elite," when it means nothing of the sort.
        • 10ofDiamonds, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0I am middle class and I pay capital gains tax, you're mom and dad are too. A candidate with a brain wouldn't just eliminate the social security cap, they would just eliminate social security. How exactly do you think repealing Bush's Tax cuts will help the middle class? I am no fan of Bush but his tax cuts are just whats needed right now.
    • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -3/+1What does that mean? You are for change but not Obama? Guess what I said the word change last year, why aren't you yelling for me to be president? A baby cries for change why can't they be president. Anybody can say change, it doesn't make them a good candidate. You vote for the candidate that will help the nation not the guy who says a word you like. Your statement has just confirmed every Obama haters feelings over the past few weeks. Your all just mindless idiots following the phrase change with no ida what's behind it.
      • MortalynFlux, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Look up the word ditto, reread my statement outloud, infer the tone in which it was written, and reevaluate your conclusions. You might also want to leave out character assassinations if you want to make a convincing argument. Otherwise you will alienate those who may be on the fence.

        I'm making a statement in response to those who say that people who are for Obama have somehow been hypnotized into some sort of cult. I am not blind, I do not think Obama is perfect, but I do think he is a leader who, along with the grass roots movement that is supporting him, can correct this grossly errant course the Bush administration has put us on.
    • IconoclastStill, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Obama the movement . . . yeah, I have one of those every morning about 0900 . . . then I flush.
  • sappeterson, on 04/21/2008, -28/+17I was planning on voting for Obama, but now that Michael Moore has endosed him...I am not so sure.
    • freshyill, on 04/21/2008, -14/+7Oh please.
      • Smuhamm, on 04/21/2008, -4/+0Right, so here we go again with the Guilt by association thing, you were not going to vote for Obama anyway, you like to live in fear, despair, the status quo you like the corruptness, deception, and lies, you really don't want change, you want things to stay the same, Hilliary is fighting so hard because she knows who she owes and it is the same people who rule you now.
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -7/+1Remember how many votes Clinton owes to Limbaugh and Moore won't seem so bad.
    • Swarms, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1I'm assuming that's a joke, since it's stupid if it's true...but think of it this way.
      Anyone that thinks it's wrong for you NOT to vote for Obama because Moore endorsed him should think it equally absurd for someone TO vote for Obama because Moore endorsed him. Basically, who gives a ***** what Michael Moore thinks?
  • psion01, on 04/21/2008, -36/+33Stuff it, fatso. I'll vote for whomever *I* choose and any similarities to your wishes and my actions are purely coincidental.
  • ashwinmudigonda, on 04/21/2008, -16/+6I must say that was succinct and INSPIRING. I hope Obama cut pastes this on the PA TV ads.
  • Kikinou, on 04/21/2008, -19/+7I don't give a rats ass which one of them wins, I just want whichever one can hammer through universal healthcare. I'm inclined to think Clinton is more likely to do it, but Obama is fine as well. I'm getting sick of the personality cult developing around Obama, though. Too many diggers seem to think that this is all about the personality rather than policy, all this Clinton hatred, it's absurd. Health care for all!! Keep your eyes on the prize!!!
    • Fafnir43, on 04/21/2008, -4/+1They have more or less identical policies. That leaves personality. Live with it.
      • DEIx15x8, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Then why did Digg have a riot over ABC's debate focusing on personality rather than important topics?
    • LeadOffMan, on 04/21/2008, -3/+5buy your own health care, the government isn't your sugar daddy