Interesting read about Moore's "deceits". I finally saw the movie this weekend so I can finally go through them and see what they are complaining about. I have to say they make some good points, I think it is clear that while Moore never quite lies, per se, he sure plays fast and loose with which truths he gives you and which he leaves out. And he certainly is not above giving you the wrong impression about something by playing with the context of it, which is kind of scummy. I think Deceit 1 is a good example of that. On a cursorary examination of "56 Deceits", and one which I did not attempt to do any research on the validity of any of the points, I have to say that it appears half of them make good points, a quarter of them are nitpicking and mostly irrelevant, and a quarter of them are just wrong or are just criticizing Moore instead of actually addressing the issue. Needless to say that is still too much; I hate being propagandized, by either side.

I have other issues with the movie too, in that it was disjointed and seemingly lacked purpose at times, frequently did not make its case well or convincingly, left out several things that would have made their case better, and got caught up too often in sentimentality, which while very moving is also irrelevant to the films larger themes. I am not a huge fan of Moore coming in (hated Bowling for Columbine) and this movie did not give me that much of a higher impression that I had before.