Today on Blogcritics
Home » Michael Moore, Miserable Failure

Michael Moore, Miserable Failure

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The Miserable Failure Michael Moore is a total moron. He won an Oscar last year for documentary (which alone should tell you that the Oscars are a worthless), and now thinks he is a legitimate commentator of the news. Saddam Hussein was more a legitimate leader of Iraq than Moore is a legitmate “docomentarian”.

First I want to congratulate him on his endorsement of Clark. The Miserable Failure said on his web-site:

I have decided to cast my vote in the primary for Wesley Clark. That’s right, a peacenik is voting for a general. What a country!

I believe that Wesley Clark will end this war. He will make the rich pay their fair share of taxes. He will stand up for the rights of women, African Americans, and the working people of this country.

And he will cream George W. Bush.

Cream GW? How can he cream him when he drops out of the race? HMMMM? How can he do that? Tell me the logistics of that? You’re so intelllectually superior to everyone else.

Besides; the fact is that Bush does look out for African Americans and minorities. His cabinet is filled with people of color and his nonimations to the courts also show that. It’s Moore’s party which keeps minorities down by telling them they need the government to help them. Comments like calling the nominees “Neanderthals” don’t help.

Anyways Clark is gone, and like Gore, Moore’s endorsement didn’t amount to a hill of beans.


Gen. Clark has decided to leave the race,” said Clark spokesman Matt Bennett. “I think probably the biggest reason is the tremendous momentum that Senator Kerry built coming out of the Iowa and New Hampshire races.”

“The mountain got too steep to climb.”

On his website on February 11, he is also discussing the papers released by the White House yesterday detailing President Bush’s military record.

I find it amusing that he, to my memory, ever criticized Clinton for bailing on service alltogether. Clinton went to England and penned nasty letters about despising the military and Vietnam.

Moore does try to answer the question here:

THAT is what makes this whole business of you being AWOL so despicable, and makes the grief-stricken relatives want to turn away from you in disgust. The reason your skipping-out on your enlistment didn’t matter in the 2000 election was because we were not at war. Being stuck in a deadly, daily quagmire now in 2004 makes your military history-fiction and your fly-boy costume VERY relevant.

So I guess if a President like Clinton didn’t serve, or a President like Bush is accused of not serving completely, it’s okay as long as we don’t go to war. So I guess we can be attacked, our citizens murdured and we can’t act because our President didn’t serve.

I guess if we DID have Gore as President it would be okay to go to Iraq because he carried a camera in Vietnam.

But he served.

For more discussions of the Miserable Failure


NRO discusses Bowling for Columbine

More reading like this can be read at Tom’s Nap Room.

Powered by

About Tom Bux

  • http://www.filteringcraig.com Craig Lyndall

    The fact that he liked Wes Clark as his candidate and he didn’t succeed really doesn’t say much about Moore being a failure. I can’t stand Michael Moore, but I think you are projecting some of this arrogance on him a bit here. No doubt he is arrogant. No doubt I disagree with him on many things.

    I don’t think he was trying to say he had the power to carry Wes Clark to victory or anything like that.

  • http://www.foliage.com/~marks Mark Saleski

    its StrawManWednesday!!! YAY!!!!

  • http://www.whitehouse.org Doc

    I adore Moore! He makes right wingers go apoplectic in the most delicous ways.

    Does he really distort any more than the wacko’s on the otherside (Ms. Coulters and Mr. Savage and Mr. Oxycontin? hmmm??).

    The point is, Clinton followed the rules, Gore followed the rules, Augustus C+ apparently did not and just enjoyed the special treatment of his his daddy’s connections. Not did Georgy do his “duty” by missing the mandatory physical (was it because they started doing piss tests for drugs? Brush the powerder off your nose you drunk! :-) and thereby was making himself ineligible to perform his duties (minimal as they were).

  • Shark

    Thanks Bux!

    Helluva job!

    I think the kids would like to read that again. I know I would.

    MOORE TO BUSH: “…THAT is what makes this whole business of you being AWOL so despicable, and makes the grief-stricken relatives want to turn away from you in disgust. The reason your skipping-out on your enlistment didn’t matter in the 2000 election was because we were not at war. Being stuck in a deadly, daily quagmire now in 2004 makes your military history-fiction and your fly-boy costume VERY relevant.”

    Beautiful! Couldn’t have said it better myself!

    Thanks again for the quote!

    PS: uh, um… whose side are you on again..?

    heh.

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    Tom Bux: Moore now thinks he is a legitimate commentator of the news.

    I don’t have much respect for Moore, but he’s certainaly as legitimate a commentator as you or I or “That C*** Coulter”.

  • Eric Olsen

    I think the time has come to pull apart the threads often conjoined in discussions of Michael Moore: he is an entertainer – that’s it.

    He is not an acute political thinker, he is not a documentarian in any real sense of the word. His films and books are polemics with no sense of proportion or fairness, but the mistake is to see these works as anything other than entertainment.

    Moore would not generate such intense reaction if he did not present himself as a speaker of truth, something he is clearly not. Is he entertaining? Many think so. Leave it at that.

  • Shark

    The line between commentary, news, and marketing has not only been blurred, it’s disappeared.

    —Which is, IMO, probably the most dangerous threat to our democracy.

    More of Shark’s Universal Laws:

    All ‘commentators’ are entertainers.

    All entertainers are commentators.

    All news is marketing—all marketing is news.

    And don’t forget Sturgeon’s Law:

    “90% of everything is crap.”

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    “Disclosure” on CBC last night had a feature on Pop Politics with Jon Stewart, Rick Mercer, Janeane Garofalo and how the definition between entertainment and politics has become increasingly indistinct.

    I like Michael Moore, and think he is quite qualified to comment on politics (or as Rick Mercer said on “Disclosure”, he’s allowed to call the Prime Minister a prick on national teevee, while Sheila Copps can’t).

    If you don’t like his opinions and the questions he asks, don’t listen to them. But this right-wing whining for your security blankie, just makes me like Mike Moore.

  • Eric Olsen

    I’ll go along to certain extent with the rest, but I don’t buy this at all: “All news is marketing—all marketing is news.”

    Most marketing is propaganda, which may have an element of news, but that is not it’s primary or even secondary purpose. Most news is news, filtering for bias.

  • Shark

    Eric,

    Okay, so I’m Mr. Hyperbole.

    Would you buy: “Most news is marketing — Most marketing is news?”

    I can cite a million examples, but gotta duck out for the day on business.

    Later!

    PS: No bloodshed till I return! Yall promise?

  • Anand

    I’m behind Shark 90%!

    I think you can safely say that News is Marketing in this day and age. How else do you explain the rise of news corporations, or the fact that they’re pretty much owned by entertainment corporations?

    As for Bux, he’s just jealous of the attention, since he seems as willing as Moore to spew invective (he just doesn’t do it as well). I applaud Moore for putting himself on the line for the left. There aren’t enough Moores out there making waves, and far too many oxy-heads on the other side, not to mention in office.

    And as for Bush, well what can you really say about a rich mama’s boy who, after a dissipated youth, became a religious zealot and right-wing ideologue? I think his military pageantry is disgusting enough to begin with, regardless of his checkered service record.

  • http://www.foliage.com/~marks Mark Saleski

    i still think the funniest thing moore ever did was to get drunk with those russian dudes who worked at the missile silo (tv nation, i think)

  • http://w6daily.winn.com/ Phillip Winn

    Amazingly, it didn’t seem to take long to move Michael Moore into the “Feeling Lucky” Google spot.

    Try it

    Note that my comment added no Googlejuice.

  • http://www.tekwh0re.net Ms. Tek

    Yeah, but its not funny anymore because its just an afterthought.

    Imitation is the best flattery, I suppose.

  • http://w6daily.winn.com/ Phillip Winn

    They lose originality points, but I further note that secondary and tertiary links for the phrase piont to Carter, Ms. Clinton, and other targets. So they make up for it in volume, apparently. :)

  • http://www.tekwh0re.net Ms. Tek

    I saw the Jimmy Carter one and had to laugh…

    I mean, who is holding a grudge THAT long?

    Who cares about Jimmy Carter? He doesn’t really do anything anymore, does he?

  • http://w6daily.winn.com/ Phillip Winn

    He builds houses with Habitats For Humanity. Much props to the peanut farmer from Georgia. He’s doing more good out of office than most people do in it.

    Come to think of it, that’s true of most people. :-)

  • The Theory

    exactly, phillip.

  • http://www.weberberg.de/miserable-failure.html Dierk

    Now George Shrub is Nr. 1 again. But look who’s No 2 for the query

    miserable failure Moore

    -?-

  • http://www.michaelmoore.com Michael “Miserable Failure” Moore
  • Sandra Smallson

    Eric, what gives you the authority to say Moore is not a legitimate commentator on politics? What gives any of us the right? Personally, I have little or no time for Moore and I could not even be bothered to watch his documentary. When it was released here I refused to spend £8.00 going to watch it. When someone gave me the dvd, it gathered dust under the shelves in my library. Still, he has absolutely every right like you or I to comment on politics or anything. What makes his comments entertainment? Because he won an Oscar? What award would have made it more legitimate in your eyes?

    The village idiot that is Bill O’reilly on the ENTERTAINMENT channel that is Fox news is no more qualified than Moore. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and if Moore has an audience for his opinions, so be it. That you do not agree with his opinions does not mean he has no legitimacy. I don’t agree with most of your articles on music. I can’t for the life of me see where your own legitimacy as a journalist commenting on the music industry comes from. Still, you have absolutely every right to write what you feel and think and so does Moore.

    If a lot of us can come on here and write about everything from the irrelevant Bryan Mcfadden leaving Westlife to the War on Terror, I don’t see why Mr Moore can’t say what he thinks.

    How is he any more arrogant than those of you who are saying that he is “entertainment” and not a legitimate commentator? Who are you people supposed to be? Politicians?! Legislators?!

  • Eric Olsen

    As I said, as an entertainer many people find Moore entertaining, but the way he plays with not only facts but context, tone, etc is just plain disingenuous.

    When I write about anything, I try to make it clear when I am presenting facts in a more or less neutral manner, and when I am giving my opinion. That is a line that should be clear and it isn’t with Moore.

  • Sandra Smallson

    The line isn’t drawn with Moore in YOUR opinion. Could be in many opinions. Still does not mean his opinions should lack this so called “legitimacy” as opposed to the “legitimate” opinions of some others in your view. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.

    I think the problem is with the people who take his opinions as fact or gospel rather than with Moore himself. He is just like anybody. Everybody would like for their opinions to be considered as fact. If there are people out there willing to take Moore’s opinion as fact, then that’s their problem. You think you know better. I think I know better. Everybody thinks one thing or the other. C’est la vie!

  • Bob

    I would like to speciffically address one part of your article:

    Besides; the fact is that Bush does look out for African Americans and minorities. His cabinet is filled with people of color and his nonimations to the courts also show that. It’s Moore’s party which keeps minorities down by telling them they need the government to help them.

    First of all of Bush’s black (yes, I’m perfectly aware this is not PC) cabinet members are simply token, like Condi (**blech, hack, hack** sorry, even thinking about her makes me gag) who feels nothing but contempt for others of her race. She grew up with no adversity, she is simply a token.
    Oh, and about PCness and using black, changing our name for it doesn’t make it any less offensive or whatever, calling them “colored” doesn’t make you any better. Have your ever noticed that no black people call themselves “african american” or “colored,” they call themselves black. Do I call myself European American? No, I’m white. We’ll only truly have diversity when the first way you classify someone isn’t by skin colour. Really the people who deserves extra opportunnity are the ones who have grown up with adversity, the ones who have socio-economic hardships, not the ones whose familys’ happen to have come from Africa a couple generations back, but are still filthy rich. They’ve grown up with no adversity and should be treated the same as a rich white person.