Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

topic posted Wed, February 6, 2008 - 8:12 AM by  offlineDruben
Sicko made me want to vomit. His propagandizing and self-righteousness (I give $12,000 to my enemy anonymously, except that I have put it into this film) and his over simplification of happy, happy Euopeans and Cubans and miserable Americans really irked me. But of course I couldn't say anything about his lack of rigor or manipulation with music and tender images and isolated incidences which are suppose to them eb generalizd (a very poor form of argument and investigation) with out being attacked by my liberal friends who thought I was anit universal health care. Listen, after going through Katrina, the government is the LAST organization I want setting up my health care.
posted by:
Druben
Maryland
  • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

    Wed, February 6, 2008 - 8:59 AM
    I do have to say that Moore's portryal of Canada was somewhat...skewed. Having grown up there, I can tell you that going to a Canadian hospital in London, Ont is NOTHING like trying to get medical help in a place like Toronto, or any of the other major cities in the country. In one of THOSE E.R.'s, you can sit there bleeding from a hole in your intestines and still have to wait 9 hours to be seen. Going into a London hospital was like going into Yellowstone Park and declaring the whole US a "pristine wilderness". He did pick a small town to show how efficient the whole country is.

    Still, most Moore haters just hate him because he makes them feel uncomfortable..he speaks truth to power, and that really causes cognitive dissonance amidst the sheep.

    He doesn't lie or obfuscate to the same degree as Insurance companies, the white house, or your republican members of congress who stand up for their lobbyists at YOUR expense.
    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

      Wed, February 6, 2008 - 10:48 AM
      It's good that he points out areas of weakness and motivates people but I hate how he cherry picks his info. And people buy his anti-american shtick hook line and sinker. He's just a filmmaker who makes millions of dollars, he invests in oil companies and Halliburton and then damns the other people who do. If he was a big time philanthropist or something then I'd take him seriously, but he really is just a quick buck artist who plays on peoples emotions.
    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

      Wed, February 6, 2008 - 1:40 PM
      "He doesn't lie or obfuscate to the same degree as Insurance companies, the white house, or your republican members of congress who stand up for their lobbyists at YOUR expense."

      That itself is a complete lie. Using Moore's techniques, one could make a documentary about how the Nazis weren't aggressors, but victims of circumstance, just doing what they did to survive...
      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

        Wed, February 6, 2008 - 2:41 PM
        Selective reporting can make anything plausible and couple that with sweet images and music and you have full blown propaganda and manipulation along emotional lines rather than really proving your point. I prefer 60 minutes style journalism much more. Moore is just a predictible commodity now. The left watch his films and feel soothed and comforted the right just ignore him and think he's wacky.
        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

          Wed, February 6, 2008 - 4:59 PM
          I've been chew out by one guy in my early days here on this service because, I was wary of his tactics (even when I supported his point of view) in presenting his point-of-view's. Still he is a very effective at what he does for the most part -- and that is why I'm wary of him...
  • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

    Wed, February 6, 2008 - 5:01 PM
    "Listen, after going through Katrina, the government is the LAST organization I want setting up my health care."

    Is it the government or this administration that has basically seen all executive agencies staffed with Bush's lickspittle and other sycophantic toadies, regardless of whether they're capable and/or competent?

    Though ideally I'd like to see health care completely nationalized and then administered on the state or county level, that's not going to happen in a country as annoying as the United States. Frankly, the solution is pretty simple - the government should offer everyone in the country some form of basic health coverage via a single payer system and those who want to continue to pay for private health insurance can do so.

    The biggest problem with health care in this country is not that health insurance is prohibitively expensive for those who have to pay for it straight out of pocket - which it is - but that so many people are being refused health insurance altogether. Both my housemates were denied health insurance for pre-existing health problems and went years without coverage. One worked for a company that was just too small to provide a group plan which would have qualified him for coverage regardless of his pre-existing condition and the other worked for a company that simply didn't offer insurance benefits until they were forced to by local ordinance. Meanwhile, their health problems could have gotten a lot worse and there's nothing they could have done about it, save keeling over, being dragged to the Emergency Room, being handed a bill for tens of thousands of American dollars they'd never be able to pay, etc. You're pretty much screwed from every direction. There's no reason for it.
    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

      Wed, February 6, 2008 - 5:44 PM
      "Is it the government or this administration......"

      It's the government. Nixon, Carter, Johnson, and I know you'd say Reagan....they all had bad administrations. It's the gov, not the admin. Which is another reason faith in Barry is silly.
      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

        Thu, February 7, 2008 - 8:58 AM
        You pretty much know my opinion on this, Jason. The federal government should stick to managing things like defense and interstate highways and social programs should be administered on the state or county level. However, when it comes to disaster management, I don't think people have much choice but to rely on the federal government and in the instance of Katrina, it was not the government, it was the administration. We have major disasters in this country all the time, but only under George Bush did we see the most amazing display of incompetence and stupidity. Why? Because he appointed unqualified morons to posts they should never have held in the first place. The man fears anyone smarter than he is, which, considering how profoundly stupid he is, is a very scary thing.
        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

          Thu, February 7, 2008 - 11:13 AM
          "it was not the government, it was the administration. We have major disasters in this country all the time, but only under George Bush did we see the most amazing display of incompetence and stupidity."

          Honestly (and I'm not trying to defend W here), I think it's a bit more complicated than that. I'll give you some details later on...

          But why (in the area of disaster relief) should some states be forced to rely on the federal government instead of their local governments. The people who live in those areas KNOW DAMN WELL when hurricane season is, and have forever. Shouldn't the states be responsible in some way. Like when blizzards and avalanches hit CO really fierce, how come I never hear about Coloradans bitching about how much the federal government should be helping out?
          • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

            Thu, February 7, 2008 - 9:42 PM
            >>But why (in the area of disaster relief) should some states be forced to rely on the federal government instead of their local governments.<<

            Because it is now illegal for local governments to offer aid. It's DHS or nothing at all (unless you count late blame as 'something').
            • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

              Fri, February 8, 2008 - 6:54 AM
              "Because it is now illegal for local governments to offer aid. It's DHS or nothing at all (unless you count late blame as 'something')."

              I didn't know that. But what I don't know could fill Louisiana. Good answer...
        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

          Fri, February 8, 2008 - 10:17 PM
          I disagree. The "Government" is US and it's OUR fucking money, they should let us spend it on basic health, or we should just fucking take it back.

          Would you let the bank tell you that it was keeping your money because to let you have it for your own interests would be "socialism"?
  • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

    Fri, February 8, 2008 - 6:52 PM
    If spin is fair, counterspin is also fair.

    The sh** Moore deals with has already been spun so hard in the other direction for so long that most people can't even see it when you rub their face in it.

    Can you really blame the guy?

    Really?
    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

      Sat, February 9, 2008 - 12:04 AM
      People mistake Moore's intention, which is two-fold - to inform and to entertain. The entertainment portion will naturally include some exaggeration, hyperbole, etc. People have completely unrealistic and frankly, unfair expectations of Michael Moore. As you aptly point out, Josh, Moore's just doing what the other side has already done, over and over again. Why do the Karl Rove's of the world get away with their bullshit while everyone else holds Michael Moore to some kind of higher standard? It's retarded. Seems to me that what people really don't like is the message, so they think should go right on ahead and kill the messenger.
      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

        Sat, February 9, 2008 - 2:59 AM
        "Why do the Karl Rove's of the world get away with their bullshit while everyone else holds Michael Moore to some kind of higher standard?"

        rove never called himself a documentary film maker. moore has, although he stopped after his bullshit 9/11 movie. moore still pretends to be objective, so i don't think the expectations are "unfair"..
        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

          Sat, February 9, 2008 - 10:33 AM
          "moore still pretends to be objective, so i don't think the expectations are "unfair".."

          He does not. Where? Show me! No one in their right mind would look at any of his films and say "objective." His movies are meant to be ENTERTAINMENT, not some PBS special.
          • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

            Sat, February 9, 2008 - 11:38 AM
            "Where? Show me! "

            Have any of his "films" been nominated for "best documentary"? I thought documentaries were supposed to be objective....
            • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

              Sat, February 9, 2008 - 11:53 AM
              Documentaries are supposed to present facts about the topic in question in as objective a manner as possible. However, his works are not what I would consider true documentaries. How does driving around the Capital building, reading the Patriot Act over a loudspeaker present facts? Sure, it's making a statement on how no one in Congress actually read the text of the law before clamoring to pass it, but that's not documentary, that's editorial.

              Have they been nominated for "Best Documentary" awards? I don't know as I don't pay attention to any of that Hollywood crap. If they have, is that his fault or the fault of "the Academy" or whoever, that can't find other genres under which to nominate them. The question is, has Michael Moore qualified his work as documentary? If he has, tsk, tsk.

              Either way, who cares? Anyone who watches a Moore film and expects objectivity is a sucker and a jive turkey. His movies are for entertainment purposes only. You know, kinda like how porn is for educational purposes only.
              • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                Sat, February 9, 2008 - 11:56 AM
                "has Michael Moore qualified his work as documentary?"

                Yes.

                "Anyone who watches a Moore film and expects objectivity is a sucker and a jive turkey."

                We are certainly in agreement there..
                • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                  Sat, February 9, 2008 - 1:04 PM
                  Moore is not a journalist. He does not have a degree in journalism. He studied drama and debate, and we should expect his documentaries to reflect that, which they do. He does not bother to make the usual gestures of neutrality that have practically been trademarked by Fox News at this point. But that's much to his credit.

                  Moore's approach to documentation was subtly distilled for me in one simple thing he did in Farenheit 911. When he explained 'a coalition of the willing', he left out Poland, but also didn't indicate he was giving the complete list of nations. I could only guess that e had 2 reasons: 1) Poland is too substantial in comparison to the other nations and 2) making fun of Poland is not PC at this point. That is: mentioning Poland would have weakened the point he was trying to make, not about the precise list of coalition nations, but about the more general character of the list.

                  Did he make his point? Yes.

                  Did he mislead us? Maybe.

                  The maybe depends on us, though, not on him. Watching Fox News is like watching David Blaine. Watching Micheal Moore is like watching Penn and Teller.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                    Sat, February 9, 2008 - 1:28 PM
                    "Watching Micheal Moore is like watching Penn and Teller."

                    I know it's just a comparison, but I really wish you hadn't mentioned P & T and Moore in the same sentence...
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                    Sat, February 9, 2008 - 1:30 PM
                    "Did he mislead us? Maybe. "

                    I think you meant "Definitely and on purpose".
                    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                      Sat, February 9, 2008 - 2:48 PM
                      What's to mislead? As I said before, Moore is there to entertain us. Humans should not be looking to the man for encyclopedic information. That would be like getting your news from the Daly Show or the Colbert Report. Is the Daly Show misleading us? Colbert?
                      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                        Sat, February 9, 2008 - 3:05 PM
                        "Moore is there to entertain us."

                        Okay, fine. It's good that you feel that way, seriously. I respect you all the more for it. But I have met more than a lot of liberals who believe that Moore's word is the gospel. And that's just RIDICULOUS. And I think you know damn well that Moore takes himself way more seriously than you do. He doesn't see himself as just an "entertainer". Speaking of the entertainer, when was the last time anyone here saw "The Sting"? Great movie.
                        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                          Sat, February 9, 2008 - 7:16 PM
                          I still think Moore is not any more factually misleading than Fox News.

                          That is: he choses his examples with an extreme bias and uses them to characterize things in an extremely partisan way,
                          but when he actually shows you something actually happening, it actually is what it actually is. He doesn't turn baby milk
                          factories into chemical weapons plants.
                          • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                            Sat, February 9, 2008 - 8:52 PM
                            "I still think Moore is not any more factually misleading than Fox News.

                            That is: he choses his examples with an extreme bias "

                            What I've found is that people who're more liberal tend to agree with the above, while people who are more conservative (like me, for example) feel the exact same way about CNN. In the end, I'd like to think that we believe that which makes the most sense to us.

                            "it actually is what it actually is."

                            Cuba is the health care paradise that he made it out to be?
                            • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                              Sun, February 10, 2008 - 5:41 PM
                              >Cuba is the health care paradise that he made it out to be?

                              Probably not, but that's a simple matter of spin.

                              Do Cubans live longer than Americans?

                              Did the people Moore showed getting treated actually get treated?

                              It's the difference between saying of a magician that he didn't really pull the cantaloupe out of his hat and saying that there simply is no cantaloupe.
                              • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                Sun, February 10, 2008 - 6:06 PM
                                "Probably not, but that's a simple matter of spin. "

                                Are you serious? Probably not? Probably not? Probably not? I expect better from you. What I've learned on tribe is that I usually don't have the intellectual capacity to debate people like you and BD, so I resort to ad hominem attacks. In this case, however, I'm really disappointed in your refusal to say that Moore is disingenuous at the very least, and your defense of him and his methods is..... I don't know. You're a jerk. :)
                                • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                  Tue, February 12, 2008 - 10:17 PM
                                  Probably not as in: I haven't seen it for myself; MAYBE Moore is right, despite my own lingering doubts.

                                  Disingenuous? YES. He used in a contextually inappropriate manner the footage of Bush addressing 'the rich... and the VERY rich',
                                  for example.

                                  He uses opportunistic cheap-shots, for sure. And he does it so transparently that it's almost a viable substitute for objectivity that we can see his bias at every step in the process.

                                  As for me being a jerk, I don't see what that has to do with Michael Moore's work.
                                  • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                    Tue, February 12, 2008 - 10:27 PM
                                    I disagree with you on the transparency thing, though. Where did you find out the footage was taken out of context? The ending credits? Or some other source?
                                    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                      Tue, February 12, 2008 - 11:08 PM
                                      It has been discussed by fellow 'liberals' a lot. The impression we tend to get is that the event where Bush speaks is one at which this kind of humor is the normal mode of speech. Less clear is whether Moore is trying to confuse us by not acknowledging the context. It's my guess that Moore considers any confusion on this point to be the viewer's problem rather than his own. If that's the case, I can't say that I like it, but it may be a subtle 'caveat emptor' to anyone consuming his films without such a critical eye and ear as are warranted. In a way, Moore almost invites you to watch his movies the way any political movie should really be watched.
                                      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                        Tue, February 12, 2008 - 11:23 PM
                                        "Less clear is whether Moore is trying to confuse us by not acknowledging the context."

                                        I don't think there's any question. If you've seen footage from the white tie event (with Al Gore telling the same kinds of jokes) and compare it to what is shown in Moore's movie, there should be NO doubt at all about what Moore is trying to do. So it's the viewer's problem and not his own? I think that's a bit off from "it actually is what it actually is"
                                        • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

                                          Wed, February 13, 2008 - 10:21 AM
                                          It actually is what it actually is, but Moore just doesn't say what it is, rather than saying that it is something that it isn't.

                                          This is a subtle distinction, but I think it's significant.

                                          It's like the difference between pointing at a bunch of white rectangles in an aerial photo of Iran and calling it 'proof of a nuclear weapons program' and pointing at the same thing merely to ask 'if these are not part of a nuclear weapons program, then what are they?'.
  • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

    Sat, February 9, 2008 - 5:04 AM
    I certainly hold people to higher standards than Karl Rove! C'mon people. we are devolving. By not holding people to engagin with the difficulties of a complex system and pandering to a simple form of propoganda, you do great harm to the mentality of the country and you don't help solve the problem which needs to get everyone on board. If you present a silly story of the happy Europeans, Cubans and Canadians who just walk into their clinics are immediately waited on and its all "FREEEEEEEEEE," it presents a LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Its not FREEEEEE, and it doesn't work like its shown. THAT was all SET UP. To institute a national health care is going to be very difficult especially since we have very little public spirit and acting for the common good among the poor as well as the rich. If I am going be paying for the care of the public then I am going to want to have a say in how they take care of their bodies. I would have every right to pressure people to avaoid behaviors which will land them in the hospital and clinics and they are a responsiblity to stay healthy, FOR THE CoMMON GOOD. Everyone talks about all this we need to give to the poor crap, but no one talks about their responsiblitiy to the public good by making sure they stay out of the hospitial. I never use health care or go to the hopsital. I don't use drugs, dringk to excess, hang out in dangerous neighborhoods, eat to exces because I dont't want to pay those costs. A socialized medicine will require a sacrifice of certain freedoms on everyone's part and we are no where near that.
    • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

      Sat, February 9, 2008 - 10:49 AM
      "If you present a silly story of the happy Europeans, Cubans and Canadians who just walk into their clinics are immediately waited on and its all "FREEEEEEEEEE," it presents a LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Its not FREEEEEE, and it doesn't work like its shown. THAT was all SET UP."

      Actually, I used to live in Scotland and when I needed to see a doctor, I went to the clinic around the corner from my flat. I never had to make an appointment, I was always immediately waited on, and I never had to pay a dime (i.e., it was FREE). Sure, NHS was paid for out of my taxes, but then the percentage of taxes I paid in the UK is more or less the same as what I pay in California, maybe a couple percentage points higher. It was certainly not 50% of my paycheck.

      When I lived in Spain, i didn't have to go to a clinic at all. The doctor made house calls!

      "To institute a national health care is going to be very difficult especially since we have very little public spirit and acting for the common good among the poor as well as the rich."

      Very true. It's odd how selfish Americans can be, particularly when considering that we as a people dump more money into charities and 'good causes" than anyone else on the planet. We seem to care more about the plight of starving Ethiopians than the fate of homeless mentally ill in the streets of our own cities. I've never understood this.

      "If I am going be paying for the care of the public then I am going to want to have a say in how they take care of their bodies."

      You have a say in how any government agency works. Contact your government representatives and demand they represent you in government. Easy as pie.

      "I would have every right to pressure people to avaoid behaviors which will land them in the hospital and clinics and they are a responsiblity to stay healthy, FOR THE CoMMON GOOD."

      Yes, it's called focus on prevention. American health care as it currently stands is not focused on prevention because more money is to be made from focusing on disease treatment. Making people ill and keeping them ill is profitable. A country full of healthy outdoorsmen is not good for the bottom line. Were we to switch to government provided health care, I imagine the focus would change as the profit incentive would diminish. Of course, there are still the drug companies with which to contend...

      "Everyone talks about all this we need to give to the poor crap, but no one talks about their responsiblitiy to the public good by making sure they stay out of the hospitial."

      Why do you hate poor people, Druben?

      "I never use health care or go to the hopsital. I don't use drugs, dringk to excess, hang out in dangerous neighborhoods, eat to exces because I dont't want to pay those costs."

      Good for you.

      "A socialized medicine will require a sacrifice of certain freedoms on everyone's part and we are no where near that."

      Sure we are. Like I said, it's simply a matter of shifting focus from treatment to prevention. We don't need any kind of consensus to achieve that.
      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

        Sat, February 9, 2008 - 1:15 PM
        >Sure we are. Like I said, it's simply a matter of shifting focus from treatment to prevention. We don't need any kind of consensus to achieve that.

        McDonalds used that 'Giving Meal' thing, which consisted of a salad, an exercise DVD, and a stepometer. It was reasonably priced, and some of the money went to charity.

        During the entire campaign (about 2 months?) I worked there 16 hours a week pulling several hundred dollars through the window every hour.

        I only ever sold ONE Giving Meal.

        We may be close to a concensus. But it will take government policy to implement that concensus, because it will be a concensus that everyone else should do something about their unhealthy lifestyle before we do.
      • Re: Does any one else hate Michael Moore?

        Sun, February 10, 2008 - 5:14 PM
        I don't hate poor people. I have worked for "charities' all my life. I do charity work now 24-7. What I have seen over a lifetime is there is a little game going on about the most of the takers making a career of being the resipients of "aid" and the givers needing the takers to not get their shit together. There is tons of charity in Baltimore and has been for years and years and the city doesnt get any better - still people chose drugs, crime, murder, and welfare as a way of life. All this charity, you'd think we'd see some results.