3rd Hour Group 4

Just from what we have seen of Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore has made some very attacking claims on George Bush. I believe that much of what Moore is getting after is true. The problem is the way he's portraying his work; it's a little far fetched. The attacks Moore has made on Bush are very reasonable with evidence provided but the reasoning he uses is a little ridiculous. I understand why he's doing this, so he can more easily persuade unbiased viewers towards his view but for viewers such as my self I start to question what he's saying. Just from a basic standpoint I've mostly agreed with what Moore has been saying, especially with the outcome of the 2000 election and the lack of knowledge from President Bush. After providing all of the evidence, Moore continued to bash on Bush for no reason. He already made his point, why continue to override it. Overall I really like what Moore is trying to get at. People watching this really need to know there's a major bias in the production and they have to truly overlook it to really see what Moore is trying to portray without the useless bias.