Join 3,556 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


The latest missive from Michael Moore

October 8, 2001 2:17 PM   Subscribe

The latest missive from Michael Moore
Another heartening (and kind of funny) piece for all of us out there who don't quite buy into Operation Endless Bloodshed, er, Enduring Something or Other...
posted by mapalm (57 comments total)

 
I'm so very thankful that sarcasm and assumption are alive and well in America. Is there actually a point to be made here that doesn't rely on vagueries, allusion, and the indomitable truth of "common knowledge"?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:37 PM on October 8, 2001


*eh*. Sometimes, *sometimes*, Mike Moore makes some good points. And he is a funny guy. But I never really liked him or much of what he has to say. Like in this case.
posted by tomorama at 2:50 PM on October 8, 2001


I fully believe that Afghanistan is so poor today there's almost nothing to bomb. However, it used to have international airports and other modern amenities. I'm disappointed that Moore would sneer that it is so backwards Afghans haven't invented the telegraph yet -- what a load of patronizing crap.
posted by rcade at 2:53 PM on October 8, 2001


The basic gist I got from his tripe was "America is the devil, everything about it is evil, the underlying point of this war is to strangle as many brown babies as we can find."
posted by tomorama at 3:18 PM on October 8, 2001


Bleh, moore is a moron.
posted by delmoi at 3:18 PM on October 8, 2001


Bomb Big rocks to little rocks...

no comment on Moore...
posted by da5id at 3:19 PM on October 8, 2001


As I’m sure you must agree, there are many upsides to this war. Sure, The Emmys got cancelled again, and, as a nominee this year, I already found out that I wasn’t getting one of those little gold people so who cares if I can’t walk down the red carpet in my Bob Mackie gown? I don’t even wear a gown -- I wear pants, ill-fitting pants at that! Yesiree, I say, BOMBS AWAY! Rockets red glare! We are all WHITE WITH FOAM!

This guy is kinda looney. Do people still listen to him?
posted by gleemax at 3:41 PM on October 8, 2001


I laughed at Moore's essay during the Presidential Campaign even though I was a Bush supporter. But this piece really bothers me; not because he turns it into a Bush-bashing piece, but because of his jovial, sarcastic attitude. He never once mentioned the five thousand people that died in this tragedy.
posted by Oxydude at 3:46 PM on October 8, 2001


I was just wondering when people are going to get tired of using er in sentences:
...who don't quite buy into Operation Endless Bloodshed, er, Enduring Something or Other...
This is getting so tired, and it lends an unnecessary smugness to the author's comments. Make it go away...

Also: Micheal Moore is a big dumb fool who I once respected. Talk about self-centered smugness. His agenda couldn't get any more transparent.
posted by geoffrey at 4:12 PM on October 8, 2001


Michael Moore's pinacale was/is/forever-will-be, Roger and Me. His rants nowadays are not only predictable, they are not interesting. Like this...

"Get your butts over there to Afghanistan and defend a way of life that allows companies like Boeing get rid of 30,000 people while using the tragedy in New York as their shameful excuse."

What about defending a way of life that allows people like Micahel Moore to live free and criticize the USA while he lives in it? Geez, what a prick!

And...
"But the last four weeks was worse than a bad classic rock extended drum solo. NOW we have resolution. NOW we know the ending -- the bombing to smithereens of a country so advanced it has, to date, laid a total of 18 miles of railroad tracks throughout the entire country! How very 19th century of them! I hope our missiles were able to take them out. I don't want this thing going on forever. Best that we obliterate them before they come up with some smart idea like the telegraph."

It's hillarious how his defense of not attacking the Al Quida is because they are technologically backwards. How patronizing can he be towards other people? Would it make more sense to only fight people we are technologically equal too? Does that mean a war with China and the Soviets is more valid?

Michael Moore is a fuck who's whole career is based on him being a "wacky" contrarian to whatever is mainstream at the moment.
posted by RoyalJack at 4:45 PM on October 8, 2001


I fully believe that Afghanistan is so poor today there's almost nothing to bomb. However, it used to have international airports and other modern amenities. I'm disappointed that Moore would sneer that it is so backwards Afghans haven't invented the telegraph yet -- what a load of patronizing crap.

Sorry to post two times in a row, but one of the things that annoys the living hell out of me with regards to Michael Moore and many people on the left is this patronizing attitude towards "poor" countries.

It's as if the left defends countries by the criteria of how quaint they are and how rich their "primitive" culture is. Quite patronizing indeed. Especially when Moore COMPLETELY ignores the fact that Afghanistan destroyed most of their "forward" culture themselves. Without the help of any Western interlopers. Ugggh.
posted by RoyalJack at 4:49 PM on October 8, 2001


The basic gist I got from his tripe was "LIGHTEN UP PEOPLE."
posted by jcterminal at 5:01 PM on October 8, 2001


Oh my, oh my.

Get your butts over there to Afghanistan and defend a way of life that allows companies like Boeing get rid of 30,000 people while using the tragedy in New York as their shameful excuse.

Let's see, commercial air passenger loads are down 30%. All major airlines are likely, as a result, going to push back existing orders for aircraft. Boeing has HUGE costs, and having aircraft sit around not being bought costs a LOT of money--they have to cut costs somewhere. But, I see his point. Yes, yes, it is shameful that Boeing is just trying to stay in business. Bad Boeing! No cookie for you!
posted by Swifty at 5:14 PM on October 8, 2001


I agree: inside Michael Moore there's a snide, patronizing little imperialist aching to get out. And now it's showing.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 5:29 PM on October 8, 2001


The basic gist I got from his tripe was "LIGHTEN UP PEOPLE."

jcterminal: I'd accept Michael Moore is telling people to just chill out if he didn't fill his missives with clearly self-serving rhetoric. The main problem I've had with Michael Moore is while he does have a sense of humor and a sense of moral responsibility, he's slowly degraded over the years into someone who see the root of ALL problems as simply corporate greed and nothing more. And honestly I doubt he'll ever understand that "big business" is not the only thing that creates "bad" situations.

Then again, if he realized this his whole market of being the pudgy cheerleader for pop-left would be shot to hell. He wouldn't have any idea what to do with himself, and lord knows we don't need another "Canadian Bacon" anytime soon.

The Boeing quote is a glaring example. If he had any brain in his head, he might realize that the industry was hurting before the WTC incident and now it's on a respirator and needs to figure out a way to survive.

And while layoff in unrelated industries seem like bullshit excuses, layoffs in the airline industry--in light of everything--is just to be expected.
posted by RoyalJack at 5:42 PM on October 8, 2001


Wow. Now I am really depressed. Maybe those polls are right. Maybe it's true that 90% of America (and Mefi) really does support Bush, and believes that this actually is about "terrorism" and "fighting evil."

Wow.
posted by mapalm at 6:10 PM on October 8, 2001


Wow. Now I am really depressed. Maybe those polls are right. Maybe it's true that 90% of America (and Mefi) really does support Bush, and believes that this actually is about "terrorism" and "fighting evil."

What exactly is depressing you about this? And how is this not about terrorism...
posted by RoyalJack at 6:20 PM on October 8, 2001


mapalm: Enlighten us.
posted by tomorama at 6:49 PM on October 8, 2001


Judging from mapalm's recent comments: while we talk about fighting a war on terrorism, we're really beating our chests to draw attention from our numerous shortcomings, giving the military-industrial complex a chance to show off how cool their gear is (therefore justifying the defense budget which could otherwise be spent planting flowers all over the world), and of course indiscriminately slaughtering innocent Afghani citizens, because there's nothing GWB likes more than a rousing game of "murderin' them Ayrabs."
posted by darukaru at 7:15 PM on October 8, 2001


while we talk about fighting a war on terrorism, we're really beating our chests to draw attention from our numerous shortcomings, giving the military-industrial complex a chance to show off how cool their gear is

Darukaru: Makes no sense. How is defending your country with the tools at your disposal "showing off".

If one defends themselves from a mugger by using martial arts showing off or are they using the skills they have? Or someone walking away from a car crash because they were wearing their seatbelts? Were they "showing" off how cool they were to buckle up?

This is off-topic. On topic, Michael Moore is a self-serving jerkoff. And I've been saying it for years before the WTC attack. I liked him when he first popped out, but as the world changes he seems to be stuck in blaming everything that is "wrong" in this world on big business...

Heck, Michael Moore might be right. If Osama Bin Laden hates the west for paying too little for oil from the mid-east, then maybe Bin Laden is a big evil capitalist too.
posted by RoyalJack at 7:24 PM on October 8, 2001


How is defending your country with the tools at your disposal "showing off".

It's not, RoyalJack, I was (clumsily) parodying the 'thank you sir may I have another' attitude.
posted by darukaru at 7:26 PM on October 8, 2001


Moore was funny back in the 90's but then again so were episodes of Family Ties.

btw....My friend who worked as his personal assistant in NYC says he sends his kids to private school and treats his staff like crap. What a hypocrite.
posted by AsiaInsider at 7:33 PM on October 8, 2001


It's not, RoyalJack, I was (clumsily) parodying the 'thank you sir may I have another' attitude.

DaruKaru: Painfully unclear that it was a parody post. But sorry for the mix-up.
posted by RoyalJack at 7:39 PM on October 8, 2001


rcade thks for your link .... best part of the whole thingy
posted by johnny7 at 7:58 PM on October 8, 2001


It was a brilliant piece. Moore is a satirist. That means you take him with a grain of salt, have a chuckle, and go on with your day. And he makes a couple of good points.

The airline bailout was bullshit. It had been coming down the pike for a long time. The terrorists gave them the excuse they needed to get it passed without the American people screaming bloody murder.

You are going to lose precious liberties due to this attack. (Even those of you without olive skin). And you are probably going to give them up complacently, in the name of safety and "Homeland Security".

This war has no clear objective, no enemy, and no boundaries. It goes on until Cheney and company say "stop". And they're not going to do that anytime soon.

So shout Moore down if you will, but in a couple of years, he may not look quite so foolish.
posted by Optamystic at 8:05 PM on October 8, 2001


Michael Moore should go to Afghanistan. Tonight. That way he can buy an airline ticket and help out the flagging airline industry about which he is so concerned and sort out his stupid native country's political shenanigans while he's there. Then he can fly back home in time for tea, at which time he can stuff 3lbs of McNuggets into his fat ugly self.

Or he can go get f****d. Either way, I don't mind.
posted by daragh at 8:19 PM on October 8, 2001



Moore was funny back in the 90's but then again so were episodes of Family Ties.

I know that Family Ties will live on forever in syndication, but the original broadcasts of the show ended before we hit 1990. Time flies.

Now back to the thread...

posted by gluechunk at 8:20 PM on October 8, 2001


Optamystic says this...
You are going to lose precious liberties due to this attack. (Even those of you without olive skin). And you are probably going to give them up complacently, in the name of safety and "Homeland Security".

The this...
So shout Moore down if you will, but in a couple of years, he may not look quite so foolish.

You sound like some benevolent being from the future who has come back in time to warn us foolish people of the present about all the wrongs we are doing.

We're losing freedoms? What and how? I know that there have been attempts at horse-shit legislation, but few if any have actually gone through. So where is the loss of freedom there? None at all. Sure there are loons who want a national identity card and other crap, but the great thing about the democratic system is that one loon can propose something and then others can shoot it down.. And it's legal to do so!

On-Topic: I live in NYC right now. And there are more cops and military personnel all over NYC. I've been stopped or denied anything by anyone. The cops have actually *gasp* been very friendly and pleasant to deal with. Heck, I'm a Jew living in a Musli/Islamic part of Brooklyn and the cops and national guard and the Muslims in the neighborhood get along very well and nobody is denied their ability to do anything...

Except for one guy. Some guy who was shouting threats at people leaving a mosque and was being arrested by the cops sent out to protect the mosque. Arrested by a black, hispanic and white cop. Some other cops were drinking coffee they bought from muslim owned stores nearby. Not like that has anything to do with anything, but it seems that everyone I encounter in NYC nowadays is trying to help and are not impeeding on anyone's freedom.

What freedoms are being attacked? And why is it that as each day passes by the modern lefts--Michael Moore included--sound more and more like paranoid conspiracy theorists...
posted by RoyalJack at 8:36 PM on October 8, 2001


BIG Whoops: A typo thatt reads wrong.... I meant to say...

"On-Topic: I live in NYC right now. And there are more cops and military personnel all over NYC than ever before. I've never been stopped or denied anything by anyone."
posted by RoyalJack at 8:38 PM on October 8, 2001


"And please, dear friends, let's look at the bright side for once: The last time a Bush took us to war and got a 90% approval rating, he was toast and a ghost the following year. You can't get better than that."

Perhaps I've lost my sense of humor but this is the kind of thinking that pisses me off more than anything. "I dislike Bush so I hope he fucks up the country so other people will stop liking him too".

How self-centered and unpatriotic can you get?
posted by glenwood at 8:40 PM on October 8, 2001


You sound like some benevolent being from the future who has come back in time to warn us foolish people of the present about all the wrongs we are doing.

Who's benevolent?
posted by Optamystic at 8:43 PM on October 8, 2001


And please, dear friends, let's look at the bright side for once: The last time a Bush took us to war and got a 90% approval rating, he was toast and a ghost the following year. You can't get better than that.

I don't know if being un-Patriotic has anything to do with it, but if Michael Moore is a satirst, then saying THIS is clearly not satire. It's smug arrogance that while he hates what is happening--ie: war--he'll like the political turmoil that will--supposedly--destroy George W. because of the war...

I Michael Moore blind to the fact that the chances of George W. being elected to office again--or for the first time :)--are zero to none?

If Michael Moore's goal is to make people think, he is doing a miserable job. He's not even preaching to the converted because each time he opens his mouth he looses more supporters for whatever he's talking about. A true asshole.
posted by RoyalJack at 8:48 PM on October 8, 2001


Who's benevolent?

Optamystic: Well, obvously not you, but if you are so sure that the outcome of all this will be a picture perfect rendition of what you and Michael Moore believe it will be, then please do something constructive to stop it from happening. Other than whining "I told you so..." over and over again.

Things don't just happen, Optamystic. They only happen if you let them happen. And while Michael Moore and others believe that "freedoms will be lost" because of all that is happening now, the fact is that right now that is not happening. And there is solid proof that nobody is sitting back and politely watching freedoms errode.

Ashcroft presented wire-tape legislation that he wanted passed in days. Congress didn;t let it happen and has not let it happen. Why? Because not everyone in suits is an idiot and not everyone in politics is out to make America a place where theer is less and less freedom.

The reality is that the biggest "Big Brother" nowadays are people who send in tapes to "America's Funniest Home Videos" of their cat in a funny hat.
posted by RoyalJack at 8:54 PM on October 8, 2001


As I’m sure you must agree, there are many upsides to this war. Sure, The Emmys got cancelled again, and, as a nominee this year, I already found out that I wasn’t getting one of those little gold people so who cares if I can’t walk down the red carpet in my Bob Mackie gown? I don’t even wear a gown -- I wear pants, ill-fitting pants at that! Yesiree, I say, BOMBS AWAY! Rockets red glare! We are all WHITE WITH FOAM!

I'll come out and say it - I like Michael Moore. Loved his work since TV Nation. But the paragraph above (like much of this piece) really rubbed me the wrong way. The fact that he couldn't make it to the end without pointing out his nomination and then oh-so-deftly disclaimining it smacks of something very, very icky. Clinically icky. Clicky.
posted by Sinner at 9:27 PM on October 8, 2001


RoyalJack: I wouldn't be so sure of yourself in saying the latter part of your message. At all. Wiretapping has been increased in recent years, habeas corpus has been more restricted, etc. It hasn't exactly been party time in the civil liberties dept. There has, however, been a backlash in Congress in regard to going further. Methinks that part of the reason for this lies in the conservative blowup at the FBI and ATF, and a more general renewal of skepticism regarding federal law enforcement, a skepticism fueled by the drug war as well as, quite possibly, a declining crime rate.

I'm no expert here, though. Maybe others can enlighten us? It's more a general impression I have received through the media in recent months. I've increasingly heard, for example, more of archconservative Rep. Bob Barr's (whose politics I generally find deplorable) opposing restrictions on civil liberties, particularly ones affecting privacy.
posted by raysmj at 9:36 PM on October 8, 2001


Methinks that part of the reason for this lies in the conservative blowup at the FBI and ATF, and a more general renewal of skepticism regarding federal law enforcement, a skepticism fueled by the drug war as well as, quite possibly, a declining crime rate.

Raysmj: So, how is this bad? Perhaps the opposition is only coming to light now that the conservative 800-poun gorillas out there are losing favor?

If the issue at hand is Michael Moore's paranoia towards freedoms being snatched away thanks to the WTC/Pentagon attacks, I still think he's full of shit and ultimately self-serving.

Freedoms might have been encroached on prior to September 11, 2001, but my impression is that since September 11, 2001 more people are aware--not just self-serving jerks like Michael Moore--nobody is letting anyone go any further...

It's just quite patronizing for Uncle Michael Moore--and others on the left--to be warning and warning us about civil liberties risks when it seems that most of the country knows the difference between increased security for our own safety and unfair restrictions for nobody's safety.
posted by RoyalJack at 10:10 PM on October 8, 2001


RoyalJack, I'm only pointing out that you can't say there was or is no legitimate cause to worry about civil liberties. There's no cause to be a Chicken Little, a la Moore, in fact there's never any cause, but there is a need to be especially vigilant regarding possible encroachments, given the general political climate of the past decade in re to civil liberties. And there's a better way to go about being vigilant that screaming that such-and-such *is* going happen, because the nation's leaders are all idiots or blah blah.
posted by raysmj at 10:29 PM on October 8, 2001


Makes no sense. How is defending your country with the tools at your disposal "showing off".

How is bombing afganistan defending our country?
posted by Jack Masters at 10:32 PM on October 8, 2001


How is bombing afganistan defending our country?

Hey Jack Masters: The core of Osama Bin Laden's terror network and the Taliban who has sanctioned his actions are in Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden--and his agents--are in Afghanistan. Thus, the attack is on Afghanistan.

It's defending our country, because they have clearly attacked us and have said explicitly this is only the beginning. So by attacking Afghanistan and smoking out Bin Laden and those who aid him we are defending ourselves from the future attacks they have blatantly said that have--and will be committing--against us.
posted by RoyalJack at 11:06 PM on October 8, 2001


RoyalJack, I'm only pointing out that you can't say there was or is no legitimate cause to worry about civil liberties. There's no cause to be a Chicken Little, a la Moore, in fact there's never any cause, but there is a need to be especially vigilant regarding possible encroachments, given the general political climate of the past decade in re to civil liberties. And there's a better way to go about being vigilant that screaming that such-and-such *is* going happen, because the nation's leaders are all idiots or blah blah.

raysmj: Then if that's the case, we totally agree. But what infuriates me about Michael Moore is that he has really driven more and more people away from the causes he claims to champion by opening his mouth. The issues he points out are important, but by continually yelling "The sky is falling..." all he's doing is driving people away from what he claims to protect.

It would be great if he provided tangible examples rather than coninually ranting the general "big business is bad" crap over and over. It seems the only tangible examples of anything he can provide are from his own life.

Boo, hoo. He didn't go to the Emmys.
posted by RoyalJack at 11:10 PM on October 8, 2001


RoyalJack, just so you know, responding to every single post (or a very large percentage of them) in a thread is generally considered bad form.

I read the first 20 comments here with a steady sinking of heart. It bothers me to no end when people use "un-American" as a criticism. Expressing an unpopular opinion is just about as American as you can get. What is un-American is the recently rampant idea that there are certain approved "American" opinions.

Perhaps all the leftist yelling about personal liberties is unnecessary, but you know what? I'm glad they're yelling anyway. It keeps the idea fresh in our minds, and in the minds of legislators who might make stupid decisions should they forget.
posted by Nothing at 11:36 PM on October 8, 2001


then please do something constructive to stop it from happening.

I am. I'm shouting at the top of my lungs to everyone who will listen that this war is an obscenely bad idea. I am mocking the idea that the murder of innocents is a patriotic act. I am reminding people that this war is the invention of a group of lying criminals who have already proven that they believe war to be a legitimate tool for enriching themselves and their corporate cronies. In fact, later today, I'm going to do the most patriotic thing I can imagine. I'm going to burn a flag.
posted by Optamystic at 12:04 AM on October 9, 2001


RoyalJack, just so you know, responding to every single post (or a very large percentage of them) in a thread is generally considered bad form.

You might think it's "bad form", but it's fairly commonplace on this thread and many others I'm not even directly involved in. It's a discussion, right? And I'm responding to posts directed to me, right?

Long story short, read the thread.

I read the first 20 comments here with a steady sinking of heart. It bothers me to no end when people use "un-American" as a criticism. Expressing an unpopular opinion is just about as American as you can get. What is un-American is the recently rampant idea that there are certain approved "American" opinions.

I never said Michael Moore was un-American; where did that come from? Never said it once.

I do think he's a self-serving jerk. Quote me on that. I even think he is very American; but he is also an immense hypocrite who toots his own horn for his own purppose and nothing more.

He used to be someone I liked, but as his passion has devolved into a song-and-dance schitck over the years my opinion of him has sunk to below zero.

Perhaps all the leftist yelling about personal liberties is unnecessary, but you know what? I'm glad they're yelling anyway. It keeps the idea fresh in our minds, and in the minds of legislators who might make stupid decisions should they forget.

It was--and is--very fresh in EVERYONE'S minds without Micahel Moore patronizingly jumping on the "I told you so..." and "The sky is falling!" bandwagon. His patronizing, school-marmish attitude towards the US populous and the Afghan people is just self-serving crap.

He's no John Lennon or Woody Guthrie inspiring people even after his death. He's a schmuck who's self-serving attitude is turning fans of his once "witty" banter straight against him.
posted by RoyalJack at 12:12 AM on October 9, 2001


I am. I'm shouting at the top of my lungs to everyone who will listen that this war is an obscenely bad idea.

Okay, so shouting at the top of your lungs does nothing constructive make make you yell like an Alpha Ape.

I am mocking the idea that the murder of innocents is a patriotic act.

And "mocking the idea that the murder of innocents is a patriotic act"? Dude, when was this the war to kill the innocents? As harsh and cold as the term "collateral damage" is, the attacks are NOT on the people of Afghanistan. Unless you consider the Taliban--who publically excutes people and kill women for simply laughing--are innocents.

So in your mind, it's bad for the US to attack the terrorists and the Taliban. But it's okay for the terrorists and the Taliban to exist in a vacuum... Where they are allowed to commit acts of terror without repurcussion? Allowed to murder people in public stadiums... And kill women for daring to laugh or be on any equal footing as men in their country?

You are not this dense, are you?

I am reminding people that this war is the invention of a group of lying criminals who have already proven that they believe war to be a legitimate tool for enriching themselves and their corporate cronies.

This war is war is the "invention" of being horrifically attacked by another entity who has said that we are simply non-humans and should die for the flimsiest of reasons. And "...and their corporate cronies..." You are an idiot, right? You realize that our country is going into a recession and NOBODY is profiting from anything? And that businesses are closing left and right? And interest rates are being cut every day to help bring the economy back up?

If there is someone making a profit in the middle of all this, please point me--and the rest of us--to them. Heck, Osama Bin Laden might have made a profit from this attack--trading on companies that were hit during the attack--so you mightbe right, but boy. You do sound like you're completely clueless

In fact, later today, I'm going to do the most patriotic thing I can imagine. I'm going to burn a flag.

Brilliant idea! Go ahead and do that...

But from my perspective, all the examples of what you are doing to help are extremely selfish and extremely focused on you and you only.

You're helping nobody but yourself and your ego in your arguments and your actions. And go ahead and burn the flag and yell in people's faces. I'm sure it will make millions of people take you much more seriously.
posted by RoyalJack at 12:26 AM on October 9, 2001


Sorry to post two times in a row

RoyalJack--sorry to act like a nanny/ninny, but I just have to say I find it kind of bizarre that you went from apologizing for two consecutive comments on this thread to doing the same thing three additional times. Guess you lost your inhibitions?
posted by Zurishaddai at 12:26 AM on October 9, 2001


Sorry about that Zurishaddai. I'll go burn some flags instead. l8r!
posted by RoyalJack at 12:48 AM on October 9, 2001


Welcome to RoyalJackfilter
posted by ducktape at 12:51 AM on October 9, 2001


One thing about Moore's piece gives me some hope -- it proves that irony and satire did not die on Sept. 11, thank God.

But beyond that, wow, what a bunch of claptrap. "Roger and Me" was hilarious and touching. "TV Nation" was a lot of fun (its piece on tourism in North Dakota, the least-visited state in the nation, was a classic). But now, Moore is just shrill, even when he's trying to be funny. How sad.
posted by diddlegnome at 1:45 AM on October 9, 2001


You might think it's "bad form", but it's fairly commonplace on this thread and many others I'm not even directly involved in.

Of the 48 comments above this one, a third of them are yours. This ratio is not commonplace on this thread or on other threads with 10+ postings. (Your above 16 comments also make of 20% of your total MeFi comments.) You may want to let people reply to your above words and then respond with one (or several) lengthy postings that group your responses together. Just a thought...
posted by gluechunk at 2:15 AM on October 9, 2001


Okay, so shouting at the top of your lungs does nothing constructive make make you yell like an Alpha Ape
We wouldn't want that, now would we?

You are not this dense, are you?
Even denser, once you get to know me.

You are an idiot, right?
See above.

You do sound like you're completely clueless
I know, I used to be only mostly clueless, but I found it unfulfilling.

You're helping nobody but yourself and your ego...
Myself and my ego appreciate the shout-out. My id and super-ego, however, are getting a little jealous. Next time, don't leave them out, 'kay?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm having a Columbus Day cookout, and I'm out of charcoal. Luckily, flags are on sale at Wal-Mart. Thanks, Betsy Ross!
posted by Optamystic at 2:39 AM on October 9, 2001


Well, for what it's worth, I'm with mapalm and Optamytic and Nothing et al. I read the Moore piece, thought to myself "Well, that's pretty much what I expected from MM : mild, not precisely on target, but at least attempting to cut through the crap," then read the first flurry of comments and RoyalJack's babbling with growing unease.

It's amazing how the dicks start to harden and rise at the first sign of violence. It was the same way for the week or so after Sept 11, and now that the bombs are falling, it's happening again.

Everyone's welcome to their opinion. Even leaving out RoyalTroll, I'm surprised so many here find Mr Moore anything but gently cajoling. He's urging folks to open their eyes a bit, is all...he's arguably past his best-before date, sure, but he's trying to do the right thing, I reckon.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:18 AM on October 9, 2001


This is some great stuff from the left. Makes me proud to be a liberal. When you get finished burning a flag and looking at hardening dicks, I'd love to hear what either of you proposes as a valid response to the Sept. 11 attacks. Should the U.S. write a strongly worded letter of complaint to the newspapers of terrorist-sponsoring nations?
posted by rcade at 7:00 AM on October 9, 2001


Hmmm...not one of Moore's finest hours but I suppose it depends on how you approach the article.

I think Moore wants people to stop being so blinded by patriotism for a second and stop and think about the implications of this war, the effects of which could long outlast the current mood.

George Orwell once said that to be on the left didn't mean you shouldn't be a patriot but that you should be an intelligent patriot and be able to look at the actions of your country in a sober and considered fashion. By disagreeing when you believe your country is wrong you are being a much better citizen then the one who blindly follows in a haze of patriotism.

While Moore's approach here is unfocused I think that's kind of the point. There are so many things that are wrong here and that could yet go wrong I think he's right to try and get people thinking. And maybe people won't start looking at this in a considered fashion until they they are more detached and, dare I say it, get their sense of humour back.
posted by dodgygeezer at 7:10 AM on October 9, 2001


I would like to hear what suggestions Mr. Moore has for dealing with Osama and his cronies. Mine would be for him to buy an airline ticket to Afganistan, try to coordinate a meeting with a high-ranking Taliban official and issue some kind of challenge. Perhaps he could propose a foot race (ala The Big One) with the winner getting what he desires, like organizing the clerics into a union? or even turning over Osama? Not only would his trip be economically productive, it would be really entertaining.

Sorry for the rant . . . there goes my credibility.

Optamystic, I don't agree with you, but that's cool. I hope the flag burning goes well.
posted by MetalHead at 10:34 AM on October 9, 2001


Hehehe...Thanks, Metalhead. For the record, I'm not burning any flags, today or any other day. Just engaging in some inflammatory rhetoric, if ya know what I mean.
posted by Optamystic at 4:01 PM on October 9, 2001


Liberal, left, right... what painfully simplistic and outmoded conceptual constructs, what lame, paltry tools for approaching complex questions.

Paint someone else with your broad brush, rcade, I'm not playing.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:17 PM on October 9, 2001


After saying this ...

It's amazing how the dicks start to harden and rise at the first sign of violence.

... you're not in much of a position to criticize other people for "painfully simplistic and outmoded conceptual constructs."
posted by rcade at 9:24 PM on October 9, 2001


« Older Syria Wins Seat on Security Council...  |  Moveable Type,... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments