I did read what you wrote. Engaged? Swayed? That's not that big a difference, is it? I did not say converted.

My question for you is - after reading the linked article, and becoming aware of the way Moore misquoted folks, played with chronologies, spun facts (the factory that presently makes boosters for commercial satellite launches is portrayed as one that makes boosters for ICBMs, etc.) do you still find yourself "engaged"?

haven't read the fact-checking article. I knew going into it he put his own spin on the thing. clearly documentary != accurate. michael moore, objective? pshaw.

that said, I was left with two very strong impressions:

1. charlton heston was embarrassing.
2. there is something to the "culture of fear" thought that I can't put my finger on.

Well, once you read the fact-checking article, you won't find Heston nearly so embarrassing.

It's one thing to spin, it's another to outright lie.

As for the "culture of fear" meme, I have a few thoughts about that, but I'm going to put them in an essay of their own.

ok, I'll have to read the article. because I'm sure it is an interesting read on how delusional moore truly is. (see his thing on why he gave the oscar speech? and they call my ilk whacked.)

that said, unless he did some really killer editing, heston sat there looking like a dotard. his responses appeared to be about as well thought out as a pro-france peacemonger strapping herself to a tank.

more violence in america than europe because we are more ethnically diverse? what is that supposed to mean?