resurrectionsong

June 29, 2004

Michael Moore: Heart of the Party (Updated)

Jay Nordlinger notes something that I'd missed:

Michael Moore, a nutjob, now sits in the mainstream of the Democratic party, and few seem to be pointing this out. Yet it is extraordinary. Byron York documented that the chairman of the Democratic National Committee buys the Moore theory that Bush went to war in Afghanistan in order to benefit his business pals — nothing to do with Sept. 11, and the Taliban's sponsorship of al Qaeda, etc.

What disturbs me isn't that Moore exists, and It isn't that Moore says what he says. What disturbs me most is that so many people take him seriously and that so many people will walk out of the theatre believing the spin and the half-truths.

Years ago, I had an argument with a woman that I knew well. A smart, funny, kind woman who happened to beleive that Oliver Stone's JFK was a bare stone's throw away from the truth. When I tried to argue that he manufactured facts and situations to create a better drama, her answer was that there was no way I could know since I hadn't been there when JFK was shot. She was willing to take Stone's word for it--since the movie was good, was well made, and since he was a respected name at the time--than she was to take mine, even though I showed no willingness to manufacture answers and conspiracies in the way of Moore, Stone, and Lyndon LaRouche.

I don't believe that Americans are stupid--but I do believe that they like answers presented to them in neat little packages. Moore does that with cinematic flair and passion that isn't matched by anyone on the conservative side (not even Rush matches Moore's over-the-top presentation). Moore presents enough facts to make his opinions credible, but mixed with enough speculation, misdirection, and outright fibs to make his conspiracy theory view of the world utterly false.

I hate Moore not because he's Moore--his opinions and his propaganda don't move me much on their own--but because he has somehow become the heart of the Democrats. His is their voice, their vision, and their belief.

It seems sad to me that a court jester like Moore is given such importance by the Democrats. They can do better for themselves and for the United States than support a man who regularly proclaims his disdain for the majority of people who live in his country.

Read the rest of Nordlinger's Impromptus.

Update: Check out Fahrenheit Fact, a new site devoted to the movie, and see what they have to say about Moore. Thanks Dean (who got it from Bryan).

Posted by zombyboy at June 29, 2004 01:48 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Michael Moore, a nutjob, now sits in the mainstream of the Democratic party, and few seem to be pointing this out.

Indeed, a lot of rank-and-file Democrats in the blogosphere are insisting that he doesn't represent the party.

An awful lot of Cleopatras over there on the "D" side.

Posted by: McGehee at June 29, 2004 02:23 PM

Thats because he doesnt. Watch Farenheit 9/11. Moore doesnt claim to be a democrat, infact he doesnt spare them critisism either. I wont post anything else other than this, as i know exactly what will happen.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 29, 2004 03:23 PM

Actually, GR is right to a certain extent. Though many Demos have embraced him, and he has embraced Kerry, the main reason behind all of this is because they all share a common enemy and a common goal. The enemy, republicans, and the goal, to get Bush out of office. If Dems were actually confronted and asked if they believed the same crap that MM believes, undoubtedly they would say "no."
But, Moore stated that Clinton was the "best Republican President that this country has ever had."
-Super

Posted by: Superhero at June 29, 2004 03:43 PM

Actually, I do think that it is becoming more common for Democrats to believe what Michael Moore is saying--that Bush is evil, he was looking for excuses to start wars, he did it to enrich his friends and avenge his dad, and that he is both the most stupid President that we've seen in our lifetimes, but also the most crafty and devious President that we've seen in our lifetimes.

Michael Moore may not claim the dems, but they certainly seem to be claiming him.

Posted by: zombyboy at June 29, 2004 04:45 PM

''...the main reason behind all of this is because they all share a common enemy and a common goal. ''

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion. The way i see it, the only thing that unites the Democrat party as a whole, and MM is their scorn for Bush. Can you really see the Democrats speaking out so passionaly against the NRA? I dont think the Democrats quite take the same steps in their Bush bashing either. Its pretty much a natural political process to critisize, or even smear your opposition. This doesnt mean Democrats relate to Moore on other matters, or vice versa.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 29, 2004 05:15 PM

PS-- You do know that he has registered to vote as a Democrat, right? His New York voter registration is as a Democrat. He has regularly pushed Democrat nominees in his speeches (during the speech I attended, he never mentioned a third party candidate and only mentioned Republicans to give them a verbal spanking--he did, however, endorse each and every Democratic candidate, giving special attention to Gen. Clark).

Just checking. Moore doesn't claim to be a Democrat, he just votes that way, registers that way, and encourages other people to do precisely the same (even in years when the Evil President Bush isn't in office).

Sounds like a Democrat to me.

As the article notes, Democrats in high position (although, admittedly, I've always thought Terry McAuliffe was a goofball) are espousing the same views that he holds. And if you've ever heard Pelosi speak, then you know that there is more than just a strong common dislike of Bush running between the two of them.

Posted by: zombyboy at June 29, 2004 05:34 PM

''You do know that he has registered to vote as a Democrat, right? His New York voter registration is as a Democrat. ''

Im quite sure that was in 1992, not now...

To be honest, i dont think a democrat being elected will stop Moore ruthlessly critisizing existing conditions. At the end of the day, he knows and we all know that its going to come down to Republicans and Democrats. Who else is he going to back? Democrats supporting ANYTHING Moore says is a totally political move in my opinion. Moore, despite what anyone says is still hugely popular. Getting Moore supporters behind the democrats would possibly lead to what MM and the Democrats both want.....Bush out of office.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 29, 2004 06:19 PM

Z, it just leaves me to wonder. Should we even have a rabid conservative spin doctor on our side to do what Moore does?

Posted by: OF Jay at June 29, 2004 08:45 PM

I answered the question on Jay's site--although he had already answered it better than I did.

Posted by: zombyboy at June 29, 2004 09:29 PM

I have such a habit of leaving comments and then answering them on my own blog, eh, Z?

Posted by: OF Jay at June 29, 2004 09:39 PM

''Z, it just leaves me to wonder. Should we even have a rabid conservative spin doctor on our side to do what Moore does?''

Bill O'Reilly would be your closest bet. All he needs to do is start making movies.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 30, 2004 06:02 AM

Well, O'Reilly would be a consistent choice, given that he claims to be an independent and slams the Republicans a lot.

But if he did make a movie I wouldn't go see it. My wife bought me one of his books without asking me and I wished she'd kept the receipt.

Also, you wouldn't see me going around to leftie blogs defending him or his movie. So either he's not the right choice for the anti-Mikey, or I'm not as devoted to wacko spin as ... some people I could name.

Posted by: McGehee at June 30, 2004 10:05 AM

''Also, you wouldn't see me going around to leftie blogs defending him or his movie.''

So? I think it would be good to see people try and defend him on lefty blogs.

''...or I'm not as devoted to wacko spin as ... some people I could name.''

I dont agree with a lot of things Moore says.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 30, 2004 10:49 AM

So? I think it would be good to see people try and defend him on lefty blogs.

Good for them. I don't think he's worth it.

I dont agree with a lot of things Moore says.

Yet you entertain us by coming here to defend him...

Posted by: McGehee at June 30, 2004 12:40 PM

Whatever. If you are just going to resort to pathetic insults, you really arnt worth my time.

Posted by: GuerrillaRadio at June 30, 2004 04:38 PM

Nah. O'Reilly has occasional moments of sanity (admittedly few and far between). You'd need a nutcase like Buchanan to balance out Moore.

Posted by: Kathy K at June 30, 2004 07:07 PM

I'm gratified that GR recognizes "you're defending Michael Moore" as an insult. There's hope for him yet.

Posted by: McGehee at July 1, 2004 02:20 PM

Im loosing all my friends because Im the only one that knows michael moore is truly one sided and a liar. Because I like bush because I hate people who hate him for michael moores movie.

Im 15 and cant believe what this world is coming to. Loosing friends over a nut who doesnt know what hes talking about.

in bowling for columbine he was trying to get guns off the street and having it banned but hes a member of the national rifle association? I just dont get it....its sad very sad I hope a republican side of the movie comes out and smashes michael moore in the face

Posted by: sarah at August 13, 2004 07:44 PM

"the goal, to get Bush out of office" is exactly true and I hope MM's movie reaches as many Americans as possible if it aids in that goal. I am happy to hear of it's distribution among the troops overseas.

Posted by: Christine at October 9, 2004 05:36 PM