How do you feel about Michael Moore, now?

Always liked him. Still do.

I like Michael Moore. I agree with much of his politics, but I don’t agree with some of his methods. I think he can be a bit heavy handed, and at times unfair, ie: using images of multiple rallies when speaking of only one. But I believe his passion is in the right place, and he is one of the few to openly and unapologetically call out those in power.

Same thing I’ve always thought about him – he brings attention to issues that deserve to be looked at more closely, but he probably lets his own bias take him too far. And, sadly, that bias alienates some individuals that may have otherwise been open to being educated about issues.

I’m still reading, but I was just wanted to say that Moore is a great man for what he said at the Oscars, and the religious-like reaction shows how people are easily deceived. The stuff he is saying in this article makes me sick; the reactions of people bent on revenge, no matter who it is, are just asinine.

I like Michael Moore. I think he cares about people, and I think that he has generally good intentions, and intent means a lot to me. I don’t think that he always does it right, and I don’t think that he is always right.. but I think he has the right idea.

I’ve always liked him. His first movie Roger and Me is a classic, and should be required viewing for all Americans.

I like Michael Moore a lot. I don’t always agree with his specific views (I agree with a whole lot of it though), but I like the fact that people hate him and that he just keeps doing what he’s doing. It’s funny watching people freak out and use death threats against him because he speaks the truth. What are people so afraid of?

I haven’t got the chance to read the whole article yet, I’m a bit busy at the moment, but Michael Moore is a solid filmmaker. I may not agree with a lot of his views, or his tactics, but he is an extremely talented filmmaker. Bowling for Columbine was a terrific documentary.

Wow, I wasn’t expecting such support for MM. Are the real terrorists the media? After all, aren’t they the one’s spreading messages of hate and discord?

I just finished reading it, but I thought there was a twist. This article only made me love him more.

@rOs It’s only been 25 minutes. I think all the conservatives are at work still ;)

I think Michael Moore is a pretty cool guy. Eh pisses off republicans and doesn’t afraid of anything.

Don’t like him.
Haven’t read the article, but still I don’t like him.
Can’t put my finger on it, but I don’t trust him.

Like his politics. Saw him speak years ago at a showing of “The Big One” for local labor unions and community organizers here in Boston.

I really liked the article. I like Michael Moore, but I do take issue with the fact that he does, to what extent I’m not fully certain, edit his films to prove his bias. Not that his films are crap then, as there is plenty of great info in them, but they aren’t 100% honest. He can still deliver his message without resorting to similar tactics he claims (as most of us do) to abhor.

But don’t get me wrong, overall I like what he does and didn’t know what he went through after his Oscar speech in 2003, nor after Fahrenheit 9/11. Those stories about the SEALs were crazy.

I admire the work he does and the stances he takes but I also find him arrogant and a grandstander. I’d rather have him speaking “truth to power” than not but he does interject himself into his documentaries in some very narcissistic ways.

I’ve never liked him, even back in my uber-liberal days.

The only film of his I have seen is Bowling for Columbine and he lied out his ass numerous times in it.

Never really cared for him then, don’t care for him now.

He has never let the truth get in the way of his ‘facts’. Never liked him, never will. His picture is right next to Jane Fonda’s on the wall of shame at the bar I go patronize.

Sign over the wall says “If you see your picture here, turn around, You are not welcome here.”

Mostly it is drunk locals that have been kicked out for fighting. But there are a few famous people on it.

He embellishes too much and to me he’s being desperate doing that. That tells me he doesn’t have enough faith in his prospective followers to believe him.

Listen, the “embellish” or “lies in Bowling” is almost cliche at this point. He’s not an intellectual you will go watch for an interesting take on anything. He’s an entertainer. I happen to share much of his politics, so I tend to appreciate (to some degree) some of his entertainment. However, if you don’t dig his politics, you won’t.

The tired “it’s biased” claim bores me to tears, however. Show me a documentary, “news” report or anything that is without bias. Seriously. It’s just not possible. Do I even want his entertainment to be “without bias”? I don’t even know what that would mean.

If he wants to do a documentary he would get the same accolades if he would just stick to the real truth without his spin on things. When he becomes known for it, he diminishes himself because the entire piece then will be taken as his opinion. We all are entitled to our opinions here in a free country thanks to the 1st amendment but please don’t hand it to us as if it’s fact. It pisses people off when they feel they’ve been had. The man probably has no metatarsals left because he’s shot himself in the foot so many times.

@tom_g, but people still take his word for gospel. Fox news does the same thing you know. Just substitute “intellectual” as you put it for “news.”

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard – I know nobody who takes his word on anything. Some social liberals and pro-union workers tend to find some of his stuff entertaining because they share some of his politics and opinions about the state of things.

Admittedly, I haven’t seen his last couple of films because I really don’t care for them that much. However, I tend to come to his defense anytime people claim the “bias” because there is no such thing as an “unbiased” documentary. His movies are entertainment pieces. He’s not making any wild propositions about anything really. He’s a rather mild moderate-liberal who I happen to share some opinions with.

Oh, and I am not sure I follow with the Fox news reference.

@woodcutter – The stuff he does is entertainment that is really done for (sometimes) cheap laughs and fun for the unwashed masses. This isn’t college lecture material.

Also, it seems as if you are under the impression that there is such thing as a “documentary” that is free from bias. What would this even look like?

IMO, at this point in time, we need Michael Moore. Quite frankly I wish there were one or two more of him.

@tom_g I was using the word bias loosely there, I suppose. If I may be myself for just a quick second, I was trying out my PC shoes and they hurt, so off they come. It’s up to the listener to make up their mind whether they’re being subjected to bias or untruths..or as I like to call them…lies. If it’s not a fact, it’s not a fact, period. His motives are plain to see. His intent is to get like minded people ginned up about his documentaries Because like everyone else with a megaphone, including FOX news, they want to influence their opinion. All subjects fall in line with their preacher- it’s the rules. A few of us have no stinkin preacher which makes it easier to notice BS as soon as it comes out of the hole.

He’s all right. He’s no Herzog or Morris, but he’s decent. IMO, his best film is “Canadian Bacon”.

I think his documentaries are very entertaining. Sicko was not the best, but Bowling for Columbine was good, and there was another one I liked, can’t remember the name right now.

I have always liked him, and I still do.

I have to admit when I first saw Roger and Me, I thought Micheal had brass balls for doing what he did to get that movie made and the footage he did get and he really has not let up since. The problem I have had since is his films devolved into mockumentaries for the sake of creating more controversy all in the name of getting attention and making more money unlike the pure passion for downtrodden workers of GM in the Roger movie. He sold out and subsequently pushed a far left pacifist agenda that is IMO far too idealistic in this tumultuous world we now live in. Plus I am beyond disgusted he chose to release his woe is me book on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and if that doesn’t prove his hypocritical blood-money making hidden-leftist-agenda I don’t know what will.

If you’re going to be hated, you might as well be hated for being right when everyone has jumped on the bandwagon heading straight to wrong. I like Michael Moore and Ron Paul, teo people whose politics and ideas are about as different as different can get, because they both have the integrity to say what they think even when they know it’s not the way to win a popularity contest with the American sheeple.

Thumbs up, still. I remember being shocked that he was booed at the Oscars after what I thought was a very brave speech. So few people were willing to say what he did out loud.

His heart is in the right place, his gutsy chest.

@mazingerz88 Well, I took the questin to be how do I feel about Michael Moore’s positions and his work. If you ask me if I think he’s a sexy man, the answer is a resounding NO! :-)

@ETpro Well I just read the whole article and now I know what happened when he seemed to disappear those few years. Just glad he’s still alive. And America is still America, full of real great people and then there’s the greatly deranged people.

He reminds me of Rush, just on the other side of the fence. He’ll probably be running for some office one of these days.

@tom_g I made the Fox News comparison where you suggested that since Michael Moore is an entertainer as opposed to an intellectual, which makes it okay for him to stretch the truth and use hyperbole. If I remember correctly, Fox News went out of their way to have themselves branded an “entertainment” outlet as opposed to a news outlet so they could do the exact same thing. Either way, I don’t approve.

Regarding his lies from Bowling, I am not calling them “bias.” I know he is biased. Everyone is. But as someone who is highly educated on the particular subject of the film, I was able to catch numerous instances where he stretched the truth quite a bit, and after doing some research, I realized that he did a bit more than that (selective editing, etc) which cemented my distaste for him. I don’t dislike him because he boldly shines heroic truth on my evil ways, but for much the same reason that @rooeytoo mentions.

As for people believing every word he says, I do know some, even if you don’t. And they are out there. That’s admittedly anecdotal, though, so it doesn’t carry much weight, but it still bothers me. In the end, you will like him, and I won’t, so we might as well just go listen to Sparklehorse together.

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard – Yep. You know the strange thing is I to be honest, my defense of him really has more to do with the concept of bias within a documentary or historical context – not so much a love for the guy. Like I said, I haven’t seen his latest movies because I couldn’t be bothered. I don’t think I’m his target audience. If I am to be completely honest about him, I really just like some of his politics (from when I saw him speak) and maybe Roger and Me. I don’t even recall much or anything from his other movies.

Anyway, last night after posting my last response in this thread, I had the most amazing meditation sitting, and realized that I should come back in here and admit that my fight is with claims about objectivity and bias. I should just start another question some time so I don’t hijack this one.
Puts on some Sparklehorse.

@tom_g cool, well I apologize for any presumption I may have had of you thinking he was an epic superhero or anything like that. Thanks for your reply. *shakes hand

Interesting points, thank you.

I was inspired to ask this question after reading about the bodyguards. It struck me that MM had to hire 9 ex- Navy Seals after making some remarks about an obviously sly president. If he was honestly wrong, then someone could have refuted his claims. A forthcoming government would have empirically proved him wrong, rather than letting their business colleagues use a loudmouth like GB to spin public perception. Ad hominem attacks are childish- they can distract from actual issue.

It seems even more suspicious that heavily influenced political media would openly condone the murder of an American Citizen, let alone anyone else. I’m not naive enough to believe, even for a second, that they honestly didn’t think MM (and his family) would be put in danger. Do we really allow these barbarians to speak for us?

Frankly, it all seems surreal. Regardless of our perception of him or his methods, he has every right to say as he pleases (Same as FOX, even if I don’t like it). The difference between them is MM never said anything that put anyone’s kids at risk. Based on that alone, any rational human being can at least see which person is more volatile (Q idea: Why is it commendable to be an violent person?).

I needn’t remind anyone that this is America; a Country forged in a revolution that sought freedom from oppression. If there is someone, with even a shred of credibility, who says they have proof that our government is misleading us- it is our duty as Americans to lend our ears. Anyone who tells you different is selling you something.

@rOs Great answer.

We all know our govt is misleading. It doesn’t matter who has the majority. Our great, great,grandfathers knew all that. We don’t need proof ,it’s more of a want. But if someone wants to shine a light on it anyway, they cannot be as equally misleading and say “the end justifies the means” and expect to get away with it especially when people are paying attention. They discredit themselves completely even if some of those fact are facts, exactly what the govt does. So then Mikey tries to convince us that his lies aren’t as bad as theirs. Mmmmkay. It’s a rotten thing to do.

Put some kind of disclaimer out in front if you want to use creative license so then we will know we are being entertained ,and will take the propaganda with a grain of salt.

@ETpro I completely agree about Ron Paul. I just watched this clip where he actually gets ‘booed’ for telling the truth. After hearing about BART police in CA paying scripted supporters to sway public opinion, I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if the ‘boos’ were bullshit. Hell, it’s even possible that there was a ‘mole’ in the audience that started it- causing blindly loyal GOP members to join in like ‘the wave’. High school debate is clearly more refined; the audience isn’t allowed to cheer and boo like the crowd at a fraternity talent show.

Wild conspiracy theories aside, is the greater portion of America really OK with being perceived as ignorant? Are our spirits truly so broken, that we can’t even do a simple internet search to confirm or refute the claims made by these decision-makers?

I’ve noticed how quick we are to dismiss those ‘hard-to-swallow’ truths. The more we find ourselves struggling against something, the more we should try to understand it. We simply have to stop allowing ourselves, and our opinions, to be herded like this. Pretty please with spin-free sugar on top? My head might explode…

@mazingerz88 Sorry to be so late answering. Been working all almost 24/7.. With the craziness there is around, the crazy thing is there are a few here still sane. Present company excepted, of course.

@rOs The size of the flat-earther crowd is certainly growing. We face some enormous and perplexing problems today with mounting debt, resource depletion and ecological melt down. And just switching reality off and living in Never Never Land is a great temptation. It’s rather ironic that a defense mechanism meant to preserve human sanity when the mind is under extreme stress is producing what’s arguably complete insanity in so many.

@ETpro Concise point. I feel that the GOP tends to completely leave resource depletion and ecological meltdown out of all of their thinking, and consequently so does their base. Therefore they think any arguments that consider these topics are foolish. If one leaves these things out of the debate, suddenly a lot of their rhetoric makes a lot more sense. However you can’t leave these things out because they are crucial. The wealthy are the only ones that will be OK as these problems materialize faster.

I wonder if there will be a time when the US becomes a plutocracy, and 98% of the nation suddenly believes liberal principles.

@cockswain While not all liberal principle are true, most are. Those that are based on empiricism will prevail. Truth always outs.

The latest from Michael Moore.

I regretfully retract my support for Ron Paul. Jon Stewart pressed him on some issues. Sure, Ronnie wants to increase “personal liberties”, but some regulations are actually a good thing when Greed reigns supreme.

Is there anyone that we can trust?

@rOs Sure, you can trust anyone that doesn’t desire politics as a life/career path

Fail to honor people, they will fail to honor you. But of a Great Leader, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, the people will say, ‘We did it ourselves.’ ~ Lao Tzu

Democracy NOW! 10/24/11
Michael Moore & Cornel West on OWS, Iraq & the Progressive Discontent Obama Faces in ’12 Vote

@SpatzieLover Humm. Let’s see. Ken Lay and Enron… Bernie Madoff… Goldman Sachs… Nope. I don’t think you can necessairly trust people just because they aren’t politicians./