Boycott Georgia!!! Yeah, Michael Moore!!!

http://perezhilton.com/2011-09-23-m...o-to-prevent-wrongful-executions#.Tn0MQFtN9pE

Now we've done it....only killing 50 percent of a murderous duo has made us reap the whirlwind. And Michael is only the tip of the iceberg (granted a huge, 15,000 years ago covering half the world iceberg) with more celebrities jumping on the bandwagon!

But I have a plan....this should get the libs to reconsider:

how about a sort of "Sherman's March" in which Michael and his Holy Army march thru our rancid, racist, corrupt state and free all people of color enslaved by our evil prisons! Let them all free, no questions asked. Discuss!

Does this mean the libs are going to leave the state? Daaaannng. Lookit me staying in droves!

That fat fuck is still alive? I would have thought diabetes or heart disease would have offed him by now.

Be careful what you wish for, the last major boycott got you this:

That's the beauty of socialized medicine. When he finally gets the "Cuba" insurance plan, he'll be the first to go...

Cuba? Sheeeeeeeeiiiiit...those starving fuckers will eat him before he ever makes it out of the airport.
​

I haven't taken Moore seriusly since 2002. He produced his last decent work in 2001, then after 9/11 then he became a shrill partisan douchebag.

What difference do you see before and after? It all looks the same to me, good mixed with bad.

Just when I'm about to get disgusted with him, I see how much he pisses of conservatives, and I remind myself, he's our Anne Coulter, we need him to balance the universe.

Yin/yang, Batman/Joker, Nancy/Freddy, O'Reilly/Colbert, World Net Daily/The Onion...

So, I don't really want to read what he has to say, but somehow I'm guessing he's trying to hurt the people of the state rather than the government by this boycott. Is that a fair assessment?

That is one shitty state flag.

Yes, basically he would hurt the people he's trying to "help." We will starve, but will be well fed spiritually and morally...a small price to pay in his mind.

He's obviously well fed in every way. ickle:

Before 2002, he criticized Democrats and Republicans alike. His last book that I enjoyed, Stupid White Men, he devotes and entire chapter to listing horrible, right-wing legislation that lefties should oppose.... that was signed into law by President Clinton. As a young naive lefty, that sort of thing blew my mind.

Post-2002, all he seems to do is bash Republicans, while excusing the Democrats as being the lesser of two evils.

I believe that's the point.

[yt="Marching through Georgia!"]jrYlR6RwRCw[/yt]

He can afford the best in medical insurance and therefore the best in medical care.

Damn.

This from our governor via his press secretary:

I just hope he stays out of Georgia period. I would like to remain earthquake free if that's okay with him.

Nobody but the moonbats take this fat fuck seriously anyway.

Isn't that how ALL political boycotts work? It's not like the government is a company providing a product or service. No real way to target it, so you target the people who the government (supposedly) answers to and get THEM to put pressure on it.

Now, I think the boycott is stupid, but the collateral damage aspect is a pretty weak argument, unless you are against all political boycotts.

Michael needs to lead a boycott against every state but Michigan - they need to spend all their money there.....aren't they going under like The Titanic/any ship he sets foot on?

I think hurting the people versus hurting the government is a great argument against it. Michael is supposedly all about "sticking it to the man" not the oppressed and powerless just trying to earn/leach a living.

Given his net worth it's highly unlikely he uses insurance. He can pay cash up front and get a discount.

What is he, like the weight of several men?
He gets a group discount most likely!

My problem with that flag is like my problem with the 'Confederate Flag' flying over the Alabama Capital (well it used to).

It'd be one thing if it was a historical thing, but it wasn't. Both were done in the late 50s in response to Civil Rights legislation being forced on the South. They intentionally chose a flag with racist connotations (instead of some other symbol of the Confederacy that hadn't been appropriated by racists), and stuck it on top of the capital in order to not so subtly say "You may have your rights now, but we're still on top bitches! "

The current GA State flag, while also harking back to the Confederacy (Stars and Bars, 1st National Flag) doesn't carry that extra baggage.



Plus it looks better.

Flags say what people want them to say - or what they want to hear. If, for instance, I choose to focus on the shameful way the U.S. treated Native Americans then I'd insist that we change our national flag.

Even you admit that racists "appropriated" the flag. What about the Klan having "appropriated" the U.S. national flag and using it for their purposes? Does that mean the U.S. is supposed to back away from using it? By no means. It means we focus on the good things that happened under those flags and try to correct any things that were bad.

Political correctness has neutered you, buddy.

(even though the new flag does look pretty good, too.)

Again, reread my post. It's not just the flag but the context. Do you think it coincidence that all these Southern States just happened to decide to put up the Confederate flag in the late 1950s?

I would also point out that the American Flag was not ONLY flown while Native Americans were being repressed whereas the Confederate flag (a version of it) was ONLY flown while blacks were being held in bondage, by a government formed in order to keep blacks in bondage. And then it got appropriated by the KKK. In fact the Redneck Rectangle got much use by the KKK than it did as the Confederate Naval Jack. So not exactly comparable.

As I said in my first post, I don't have problems with symbols of the Confederacy in their own right. I like the current GA flag and the even the MS flag (as it is historical, it was put up in 1894). I have a problem with THAT flag b/c of the way it has been abused, INCLUDING using it to give a 'fuck you, know your place' to blacks by Southern State governments in the late 1950s.

Again, reread my post. My big point was that flags say what people want them to say and people hear what they want to hear. Your reply is proof of my point.

There is more to the context of the state flag change (at least in Georgia) than what you've presented. Just as there's more to the Civil War than slavery. Yes, Civil Rights pushed the issues to the point that legislators wanted to make a statement but interpreting what they were saying is a matter of point of view - and winners write the history books and get to keep their flags, no matter how sullied they've become.

"There is more to the context of the state flag change"

No there isn't.

They were getting their ass kicked by the Feds and being forced to treat blacks as equals. So as a big "fuck you" to the Feds and black Americans they changed the flag to put the confederate flag on to it.

You can encourage people travelling to Georgia to buy their souvenirs online later so they pay no sales tax. You can encourage border towns to hire from Georgia to decrease the income tax pool. You can go to Georgia and use as many taxpayer-subsidized facilities as possible to cause the government to run out of money earlier in the year. Or just have an old-fashioned protest at the statehouse; those cost the state in extra security... it's not as easy as hurting the people, and you've got to think creatively, but it can be done.

Oh no he di'int!