[geeks] RIP, Ronald Reagan

[Jim]

(I don't want to step into the middle of anything here, but I thought I
would throw out some sources. Feel free to do the same. I am normally
more interested in reading the information direct from the source
rather then someone's interpretation. In kind I would welcome the urls
that you speak of.)


>> Not that this is the case mind you, but said web pages could be full
>> of
>> fiction as well.
>
> The web pages I read document where they got the information.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/

>> I merely asked for the biggest example off the top of your head. (I'd
>> like to know...)  I want to visit a bibliographical reference... not
>> an
>> opinion page... a fact.
>
> One of the biggest was the editted Heston speeches previously
> mentioned.

-=-=-=-
The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this
one:
  "The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech near
Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away. The
speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound like
rudeness."

The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly
what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's
speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out
of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10
days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word  read the
transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to
challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the NRA
"don't come here." Far from deliberately editing the film to make
Heston look worse, I chose to leave most of this out and not make
Heston look as evil as he actually was.

  Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are
in my film? You'd think they would be proud of the things he said.
Except, when intercut with the words of a grieving father (whose son
died at Columbine and happened to be speaking in a protest that same
weekend Heston was at the convention center), suddenly Charlton Heston
doesn't look so good does he? Especially to the people of Denver (and,
the following year, to the people of Flint) who were still in shock
over the tragedies when Heston showed up.
-=-=-=-

Problem with these point the finger on either side things, is I can't
believe any one. Everyone on all sides are just throwing their agenda
in your face. If not distorting the facts, at least just giving you the
ones that support their point of view. Couple that with the fact that
people only want to read items that support the way they already feel
(How many Rush listeners will go out and read Franken's book with a
open mind? How many Moore fans will listen to Hannidy and really
consider what he says?), it gets too damn annoying. People have their
minds made up and only want information that supports that.

Considered dialog does not get ratings, instead two angry talking heads
are what people will tune in. People watch/listen/read to that crap
long enough and they begin to parrot it. Look at how many posts to this
list so far match up with talking points from either side. I could turn
on AM radio any day of the week and hear the exact same points brought
up.

Reagan is dead. I feel bad for his family and friends, going that way
can not be easy on anyone. I have had relatives that have gone down the
same road, and it is sad what time will do to you. As well I feel bad
for the hurt that Reagan's polices had cause many Americans. I don't
think anyone can claim that there was not same bad and some good that
came out of his time here, and in office. Same with anyone.

Personally, I think the "VS" that the media/society/whatever has got
everyone into is going to do more harm then anythings else. Everyone
has their side and wants so damn hard to "win" that it is extremely
rare for anyone to admit a mistake. At best they give excuses.

With the passing of Reagan, it wold be great if the news
coverage/people would take it as a chance to take a fair look at what
he did that helped some people, and do more of that. And what he did
that hurt some people, and do less of that. Instead all I have seen is
people using it as a jumping off point to their current agenda.

Then again, perhaps I am just cynical. After all, did I not just do the
same?

Jim