Ok, two guys’ word (minus the message board, since I can’t see it, and it is also filled as much by people who hate him as those who don’t), and they conflict on some points, albeit small ones.
Anyone else find the title of his book apropos?
Myrr21, I don’t know what you expect. The fan who posted his experiences clearly still has a favorable view of Moore, even encouraging readers to buy Moore’s book. He glowingly speaks of Activist San Diego, the organizers of the night’s events, and links to them. Why would he lie?
Anyway, I wanted to note that Moore has updated his online diary with no corrections or explanations for the San Diego events.
So there’s to be a trial! I rise for the defense, and shall sternly maintain the discipline of brevity. As best I can.
As to the charge of hypocrisy:
Defense numero uno: Human, all too human
Defense numero two-o: Misdemeanor and triviality, file a *Motion to Fugeddaboutit. *
Thirdly: Reliable testimony is lacking. We Dopers, of all people, are keenly aware of the distortion inherent in partisan bickering. (Comparing MM to Rush Limbaugh, right/left Tweedle-dum/Tweedle-dumber is like comparing Garrison Keillor with G. Gordon Liddy)
Fourth: Once again the running dogs have laid the dead hand of oppression on the proletariat…etc. (Let’s just skip that. Don’t want to be partisan. )
Last, diminished capacity, or some such. Of course this kind of thing doesn’t happen at a Tom Clancy , they are professionally managed slickola. MM’s own publishing house is treating him like a leper, they know how to keep the wheels turning smoothly, but they just cut the guy loose and let him improvise. What’s he supposed to do, control the crowd with the sheer force of his charisma? Sure. You betcha. Next up, Al Gore the Lion Tamer.
(Ask yourself this: that guy with the Liberal Media Bia, book, whathisface, you know, the book that Our Leader, Churchill the 2nd, was photographed carrying? You think his book things are professionally managed? Hmmmmm? MM sells more books, and fends for himself? Tell you anything?)
Hence: only possible verdict is Not Proven. The Penalty phase must therefore be suspended, Defendents name shall not be written in the SDMB Book of Lying Hypocritical Sacks of Shit.
Yet.
I have no confirmed opinion on Michael Moore.
Take this statement, though:
“quite simply, wherever I go, there is this unbelievable pandemonium. Every day, every night, hundreds – or thousands – jam themselves into halls, arenas, churches, auditoriums to listen to me talk about my book…”
I think the point about his bloated ego may be on target.
And I hope his supporters are raging mightily against the HarperCollins Machine for suppressing his book to please Bush fans. At least that’s what Michael would have us believe.
And how is “curfew violation” substantially different than “stayed past the time designated”? Doesn’t look like a lie to me. A slant, a POV, an attitude, yes. A lie, no.
Same goes for that other post that broke it all down, can’t find it now. But none of it was lies…it was POV issues.
As for “the little guy” and irony… only the janitor is the little guy? The hundreds of people who drove for miles and waited for hours were… Fortune 500 CEO’s perhaps?
Finally… do you all suppose it would be possible to denigrate, deride, despise and excoriate Michael Moore * without * referring to his weight problem? The fact that he is fat has absolutely no bearing on any of this.
Yes, yes, I know people did it to Rush when Rush was fat, but the people who did it to Rush were wrong, too.
stoid
Elucidator, emuslified and rjung, ouch! What a lineup! What a beatdown! Where’s my personal deity and touchstone, RTFirefly? We saving his batteries for the serious debates?
Churchill the 2nd, LOL, ooh my stomach! Permission to use?
Well, considering a curfew is generally a state-imposed restriction, that also has some obvious histroical overtones implying subjugation and even fascism, I would think that yes it is a substantial difference. The choice of words is not an accident.
Oh, please.
My parents used to give me a curfew. Those damn fascists.
This whole thing is really much ado about nothing. (Even on Moore’s part.)
Enough of this partisan bickering! Why can’t we all just get along???
Well sure, if you are 13 years old and it is your parents that’s one thing. But I suppose if you are a grown man and the police are called to enforce the 'curfew" then it is probably something completely different.
I notice that you skipped the part of my post preceding that…
Mr Moore knew exactly what the “problem” was with his actions (although he may have disagreed with the response to that problem). He deliberately chose to lie and act as if he had no clue as to why there was an issue…and instead offered up a “guess” of curfew.
Again, I don’t think you would be giving Mr. Limbaugh or Mr O’Reilly the same pass for their behavior that you are giving Mr Moore. You raised the issue of a partisan attack here in this thread. Interestingly enough, the attacks on Mr. Moore seem to be coming from posters with a variety of political viewpoints. Yet the staunch defenses of Mr. Moore all seem to be coming from liberal defenders. (I could be wrong here, but I don’t see any posters saying “I’m a conservative, but I think Moore didn’t do anything wrong here…” )Where is the partisanship in this thread?
I usually stay out of political discussions, but James Lileks had a beautiful column on this issue.
Priceless. Thanks for the link.
Lileks does indeed rule. Good link, Smeghead.
**
Saying exactly what the problem was doesn’t sound like acting like he doesn’t know to me, I don’t know how you arrive at that conclusion.
You are right about that, but not for the reasons you suppose.
I don’t like, enjoy, respect or trust Limbaugh. I think he is perfectly awful in almost every possible way, not just his politics. O’Reilly, not quite as bad, but you could never call me a fan. So if this whole thing was about one of them, I would feel absolutely no urge to rush to their defense. It would not amuse me, interest me, or entertain me to do so, so I wouldn’t.
However, that does not mean that I would have a completely different view of the incident itself and the roles everyone played, and it doesn’t mean I would be calling for their heads. I just wouldn’t say anything at all.
stoid
I still don’t see why anyone is defending the asswipe. He’s an embarassment to the left.
Personally, I defend him because I enjoy his film and television work pretty much unequivocally and generally think he’s a pretty funny and interesting guy. C’mon, tell me you didn’t think Roger and Me was funny…
There are so many conservative bombasts out there that when a liberal one appears, it’s sort of weirdly refreshing. He may say things that make even me cringe sometimes, but for entertainment value, he can’t be beat.
Then there’s the fact that this whole incident, objectively, is totally stupid and the OP was an overreaction to such an extent that it demands a response. “Shit encrusted lint trap of a brain” indeed… How many books have you sold this week?
I think those of you in this thread who are posting against him must love him just a little bit, don’t you? Just a wee little bit?
Can you at least say maybe you love to hate him? Doesn’t that count as love, too?
I am wearied and I am angry at the failure of this otherwise intelligent crowd to sort out sublime irony from misguided sincerity. matt_mcl is right on target, whether you understand it or not, when he quotes a person not involved in this discussion who says “You are an idiot” to someone else not involved in this discussion, and I’ll tell you why: because those words, “You are an idiot,” are at least one remove away from the discussion on hand, possibly more, making matt_mcl entirely immunte to accusations of ad hominem, and yet leaves these strong words – “You are an idiot” – hanging in the air, as it were, ready to attach itself to somebody not yet specified.
For those of you for whom Moore’s Vorpal Irony was lost, let me remind you that bdgr said:
It’s the same tone. The same fucking tone. You know it is. bdgr said so! For whom is that not good enough?
I wouldn’t go so far as matt_mcl to point out that somebody has at some point been called an idiot by somebody else. But I do think some people here are too hung up on so-called master satirists' like Twain or Swift and think that skillful irony must involve such devices as letting the mask, the perverse persona, occasionally slip to show the author's true feelings. Not only is this breaking character’ crude and heavy-handed, it also undermines the ironists’ message by introducing deflating contradictions. Moore creates a grotesque of sincerity that never cracks or slips. This much ought to be obvious. Who would say such things and mean them?
I hate to be pedantic, but some of you are entirely missing stoid’s point. I think I can clarify it for you, if you’ll bear with me. The underlying assumption behind these attacks on Moore’s character are based on misinterpretations of things he actually said. You couldn’t possibly conclude that he is being anything but fair where he is right and ironic where he is playing at being pompus and misleading, because that would presume what it is you set out to prove to begin with – that Michael Moore is flawed.
Given that, as I’ve just explained, there cannot be such a thing as admissible evidence against Moore, we’re forced to conclude that these claims against him are reducible to partisan bias.
I’m sorry, you guys just have agenda, and I think you should own up.
To put it in Board terms Michael Moore is basically a troll. He mixes his personal agenda pushing in with a few jokes, tries to get whatever bullshit he can past people, and when he can’t and is called on it he says it was just a joke and that people have no sence of humor Personally I try ignore most everything about him with as much effort as I try to ignore board trolls.
(DCU wipes tear from eye.)
Tnank you. Dear God, thank you. 