Six years after the launch of Operation: Iraqi Freedom, one of the war’s most extreme critics, film-maker Michael Moore, claims that most Americans now stand with him. Is he right? Two weeks ago, Moore wrote a column titled ‘Why I’m Not Now and Have Never Been the Democrats’ Rush Limbaugh.’ “What I have believed in,” Moore proclaims, “and what I have stood for in these past eight years … these are all things which the majority of Americans believe in too. That’s why in November the majority voted for the guy I voted for.”
On the other hand, there is one way in which Moore does imagine himself to parallel Limbaugh: Like Rush, he sees himself the star of the show. “The days of using my name as a pejorative are now over,” writes Moore, as he dubs himself the “spokesperson for the liberal, majority agenda.”
Moore is certainly a “spokesperson” for an agenda, but it is neither of the liberal mainstream or the American majority. It is far-leftist and on the fringes of political and social opinion where those too liberal for even Mother Jones magazine find themselves. Perhaps no issue better reveals the radicalism of Michael Moore than his stance on the post-9/11 war on terror. Moore’s homepage still features a commemorative caption that reads:
After six years of killing Iraqis, Americans are more concerned about economic crisis.
Not freeing them. Not keeping the Iraqi people safe from tyranny. NoÑwe’ve been over there killing them, that’s all.
It’s been almost five years since Moore wrote this gem:
The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow — and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush?
Nor was Moore any more supportive of the campaign in Afghanistan. “[D]o not declare war and massacre more innocents,” Moore demanded on 9/14/01. And while Americans were unfurling their flags and clenching their fists in the wake of the attacks on 9/11, he could only think of his own idea of injustice:
Many families have been devastated tonight. This just is not right. They did not deserve to die. If someone did this to get back at Bush, then they did so by killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! Boston, New York, DC, and the planes’ destination of California – these were places that voted AGAINST Bush! Why kill them?
This comment has since been removed from his website’s archives.
Even his attempt to portray himself (unlike Rush for the GOP, he says) as his party’s bridge to the general electorate is flimsy. To prove that the Democratic Party has embraced him to win over the people, Moore cites sitting in the VIP box with Jimmy Carter at the 2004 DNC just two years before they won Congress. And even though Moore was notably nowhere to be seen or heard in the run-up to the 2008 general election, he still uses Obama’s victory to gloat that it somehow proves, “the American people agree with me,” unlike Rush Limbaugh.
Besides, one wonders: Why would Michael Moore even want Americans to agree with him? As he himself told a British newspaper in spring 2004,
They [Americans] are quite possibly the dumbest people on the planet…
The New York Times also reported the following from that spring:
”That’s why we’re smiling all the time,” he told a rapturous throng in Munich. ”You can see us coming down the street. You know, ‘Hey! Hi! How’s it going?’ We’ve got that big [expletive] grin on our face all the time because our brains aren’t loaded down.”
Moore is many things. But no number of consecutive Democratic victories could ever make him the spokesman of the American majority. His country, including much of his party, will always know him as, more or less, what the film Team America popularly dubbed him in 2004: “a giant socialist weasel.”
9 responses so far
1 forgetn // Mar 24, 2009 at 3:42 am
Michael Moore, really, that’s all you’ve got! Mr Moore is nuts, he’s always been nuts, and will remain in that realm forever. On the bright side we almost never hear from him, he doesn’t have a radio show, and if the best you can do is find quotes from Mr Moore dating back from 2004, well, I know you can do better… much better.
The “Liberals” have their demons, you can do better that that guy.
2 Bulldoglover100 // Mar 24, 2009 at 7:33 am
I agree forgetn…..there is no comparison between Moore and that round mound of stinking sound Limbaugh. While the public would all agree that Moore is nuts, just as many, if not more, would say Rush has hurt our party when it was at it’s lowest….now I ead that El’Tubbo has lied and inflated his numer of listeners LOL Imagine my surprise! Rush/Palin lie. What leaders we appear to have picked to lead us out of the wilderness…….when they cannot even lead theirselves out of a simple question without going astray.
3 ireign // Mar 24, 2009 at 8:18 am
If Michael Moore wants to be the spokesman for the Democratic Party, Republicans should embrace this rather than deny it. The fact is Democrats do take him seriously. Fahrenheit 9/11 had a private premier for Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Moore, does have clout with Democrats and sitting in the former President’s box is considered a honor. Right-leaning journalists should ask President Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi what they think about Moore’s comments, the same way Republican lawmakers are pestered about Limbaugh.
Moore’s ideas are not in the majority and this is a battle Republicans can win. Bulldoglover is correct. There is no comparison between Moore and Limbaugh. Limbaugh’s show is more similar to the dailykos. Moore, is someone who doesn’t really study politics but just embraces every left-wing and some far-left wing causes and spouts off about it. The only difference between him and nuts on college campuses is he is more articulate and he is good at weaving a story.
4 mlindroo // Mar 24, 2009 at 9:26 am
Granted, the Dems would not want Michael Moore to become the public mainstream face of liberalism. But Qualtere’s analysis still seems a bit unfair on several levels. For example, Moore is right to focus also on the negative side effects of the U.S. invasion … many innocent Iraqis *have* been killed and the cost to the U.S. in both financial, geopolitical as well as human terms has also been quite high . Surely Qualtere does not believe that the *only* noteworthy thing about the whole operation has been “freeing them” and “keeping the Iraqi people safe from tyranny”!!
MARCU$
5 pampl // Mar 24, 2009 at 10:58 am
I agree with ireign. Moore is an embarrassment to everyone in the same species as him, publicly tying him to Dems would be a PR coup.
mlindroo: that innocent Iraqis have died has been noted ceaselessly by the news, so it’s about as “noteworthy” as the sky being blue. Moore’s summary gets it backwards, anyway; US troops are over there at a cost to us, so if Americans were really so unconcerned about the fate of Iraq they’d be pushing for a faster withdraw so there’d be more cash to spend on bail outs.
6 ExGOPer // Mar 24, 2009 at 11:39 am
I agree with mlindroo. Most mainstream Democrats have had enough sense to distance themselves from Moore and his brand of politics, even while sharing a few of his ideals. And Republicans really have to have the same epiphany about Rush if they ever want to be trusted to lead again.
This goes right to the heart of Obama’s “we can disagree without being disagreeable” mantra, which I wholeheartedly endorse.
7 sirpaulj7 // Mar 24, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Michael Moore is crazy. Most democrats KNOW he is crazy, and (as ExGOPer said) they have enough sense to distance themselves from him. The fact that many of his beliefs are shared by most Americans is pure coincidence in my book.
Rush Limbaugh is ALSO crazy – and most republicans KNOW he is crazy, but they do not dare say it out loud lest they be called a RINO.
As far as I’m concerned, both Moore and Limbaugh are extreme examples of how NOT to be a good American.
8 insightdeluxe2 // Mar 26, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Here i am defending Moore…But the above article mentions nothing about Moore’s film Sicko and the issues it raises about our criminal health “care” system. he exposed the for-profit health insurance industry for what it is, an industry that makes $$$ off of sick people. Moore is extreme b/c he has to be. The issues he confronts (gun violence in America, the fleecing of Flint, MI by GM execs, an “unelected” and dangerously incompetent President Bush, a war to find WMD/liberate Iraqis/overthrow Saddam/spread democracy in the Middle East/defend America/defeat al-Qaeda) are equally extreme. Satire is illustrating the absurdity in reality. Conservatives hate satire b/c it challenges the staus quo and their reality. Don’t take Moore so seriously. he’s just a fat dude from Michigan. However, take the issues he presents seriously.
9 The Moore You Know About Obama… | thelobbyist // Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 pm
[...] the latest issue of Rolling Stone, Michael Moore insists that Barack Obama’s ambitions are much farther left than he lets on. Thus, the President [...]
You must log in to post a comment.