[The Germanator]

Bowlingfortruth is a pretty good site...and I loved Bowling for Columbine after I walked out of theater, but some of the things they pointed out obviously make me a bit unsure now. I definetly won't take this move quite as seriously any more, even though it's still enjoyable to watch. Though I think sometimes the author of the site may misconstrue some of Moore's scenes and act like they are implying much worse lies or untruths then they really do. For instance, when the author is examining the native american scene in the "Brief History of America" cartoon he says, "We are told, regarding what the Pilgrims did to the Indians: 'They killed them all' and then 'You would think that wiping out an entire race of people would calm em down.' That's 2 lines telling us that Native Americans were made extinct by the Pilgrims. Someone is lying here. Either Michael Moore, or the 1990 U.S. Census, that says there are 1,878,285 Native American Indians in the United States. Someone should send a memo to these people and notify them that they don't exist."

Now...I feel that this point is a bit ridiculous. It's obvious that exaggeration is used, and if anyone actually believes that all Native Americans were made extinct by the Pilgrims. He acts like the public wouldn't be able to point that out for themselves. Does anyone honestly believe that Moore thinks that no Native Americans are alive anymore? C'mon...

Another part I had a problem with is during the examination of the "What a Wonderful World" montage. The author states, "So Moore paints a picture of the US plopping bombs on Iraq 'on a weekly basis' just cuz we feel like it - the reality is quite different. The point is about twisting the act of law enforcement into something that seems unjustified."

I may be wrong about this, but as far as I remember there wasn't necessarily this implication that they were "plopping bombs just cuz we feel like it"...Of course there is a reason for the bombings, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the bombings did in fact take place, which I believe may be the main point. Obviously every viewer will read this scene and statement in a different way, and I suppose I just took a different apporach in the examination some of these scenes...I mean, I disagree with a lot of the opinions the author gives on certain scenes, and believe that Bushnell ( I think that's his name) provides a similar sort of conservative spin on his agruments against Moore and the movie. Though he doesn't tell outright lies and he does expose Moore's which I applaud think is the most useful portion of the site. I could do without some of his analysis which seems a bit exaggerated at points.


Anyway, I haven't completley read through the site, but I think I get the gist of it...My overwhelming positive opinion of Moore has slipped a lot. I probably got caught up in my typical liberal, gun-control ways without wanting to see the truth. I suppose the main problem was that I thought I WAS seeing the truth, it is supposed to be a documentary right? That said, I don't need Michael Moore or anyone else to tell me that I don't agree with current gun control regulations. There's still something wrong when there are so many gun related homocides and deaths in the United States. I don't have the answer, and don't think Michael Moore does either (lies don't help), but the fact that my opinions on this movie and Moore have changed don't really affect my personal feeling about gun politics, which is most important to me.