... either. From Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

"Plagiarize: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
intransitive senses : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source"

So, as you can see from the definition, it can't be plagiarism because: (1) as I said, you can't "steal" a title; and (2) MM has acknowledged that his title is a take off on Bradbury's. In fact, not just a take off, but more of an homage (albeit perhaps an unwelcome one).

>> Ray Bradbury says he stold (sic) it and Ray says he wants it back....

Well, Ray can say whatever he likes, doesn't make it so. Bradbury has no protectible interest in even the exact name. You could write a book today and call it Fahrenheit 451 and he would have no right to stop you from using it.

>> Overpaid Hollywood liberals don't earn their overpaid $$$$ ...

Exactly how do they get it, then? No one forces you, me or anyone else to go to the movies. We GIVE THEM the money voluntarily.

>> B.S. and many are criminals just like Andy Fastau;

Perhaps. Is Moore a criminal? If you think so, on what basis?

>> Ken Lay is innocent till proven guilty....

Of course, in legal proceedings Lay is innocent until proven guilty. But, "innocent until proven guilty" is a legal fiction which applies only in a court of law. We can each draw our own conclusions and formulate of our opinions based on the available evidence. I will be flabbergasted if Lay doesn't either plead guilty or get convicted at trial.

I suppose you think OJ didn't kill Nicole and Ron Goldman, either?

>> ... but, a Hollywood liberal wouldn't agree with that...
>> except for their drug using selves and suppliers!

Boy is that turning "liberal" on its head.

>> PacBell...enough said.

More than enough. Nice to see that you have an open mind, don't jump to conclusions and argue your position with facts rather than name calling and demagoguery.

----- jim o\-S