ConstipatedCraprunner said:The movie was disgusting and a slap in the face to everyone who expected something serious and factional. The guy portrays American soldiers as a bunch of Alex de Larges, while playing at just how innocent these people are. Other highlights include when he describes Iraq as a peacful nation that meant absolutely no harm to the US in any way, shape, or form, and never harmed an American citizen.
On the other hand, that Unfairenheat article is a slap in the face of anyone expecting something serious, unbiased or factional. That article, much like Fairenheit itself, doesn't actually use facts to prove anything. To quote myself from Asshats:
I said:To fling all that away, I think Moore's film, and the article posted above, is very typical of any democratic institution that doesn't allow a large number of parties to be in power at the same time, like the American rotten electoral college.
Now I hate to break it to you, but the Democrats and the Republicans are really, REALLY fucking similar. They only break off on some key points to draw different groups of voters, but generally it all boils down to the same hogwash. At which point you have a problem, because you have two candidates with no significant differences. So you hammer on the few distances there are, blow them up, spout demagogic verbal diarrhea, and so on and so forth.
This lack of nuance doesn't exactly promote a healthy democratic atmosphere, as is expressed by the incredibly low turnout in American election. I firmly believe, and will express here again, that America would be much better of without the largely undemocratic electoral college.