So who cares what Michael Moore thinks?

[peek 21]

So who cares what Michael Moore thinks? (Earnest question.)

Does anyone besides the media think that what he does or says means anything? (They seem to hang on to every word he says.)

He is a talented film maker from what I understand, but what else is he? (I kind of prefer Ken Burns' film making style myself.)

Isn't there enough going on in the world for the media to produce a lot of sensational news articles without Michael Moore?

Oh, and Merry Christmas (politically incorrect greeting.)

[quade 4]

Judging from your post, I'd say you do.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,110]

>So who cares what Michael Moore thinks?

Well, you (judging by this post.) A few other people. Far more than his detractors believe, and far fewer than he would prefer to believe.

[winsor 236]

billvon

>So who cares what Michael Moore thinks?

Well, you (judging by this post.) A few other people. Far more than his detractors believe, and far fewer than he would prefer to believe.

There are some sources I tend to ignore as a matter of course, familiarity with whom is limited to perusing tabloid covers in the checkout line at the supermarket.

My greatest exposure to Michael Moore is that part he played in 'Team America World Police.'

Like Gary, I have yet to come across anything about Michael Moore to suggest that his opinion is more valid or pertinent than that of, say, Paris Hilton or one of the Kardashians (who I know from the covers of the tabloids).

The one exception to the principle that 'if this person espouses it, it must be utter horseshit' was when Moore penned an editorial recommending a paradigm shift that I have long espoused.

When we were first offered hope (but got to keep the change), Detroit was in shambles and the economy was effectively a blank slate. It struck me then that there was a once in a lifetime opportunity to pick a new course, and to move away from the model implemented by Eisenhower.

Since Ike had brought the Third Reich to its knees by crippling transport in the form of rail, and the Allies had triumphed by being able to schlep materiel by means of deuce and a halfs, it seemed to provide unlimited freedom to move away from rail and to build a network of highways, with everyone having a car in the garage. Given the unlimited quantities of fuel available by simply drilling into the ground, what could go wrong?

By 2008 this model had revealed its flaws. The opportunity presented itself to revisit the approach taken in 1942, when Washington gave Detroit an offer it could not refuse. Given the catastrophe the U.S. faced at the hands of the Axis, auto makers were told that henceforth they would turn their manufacturing capabilities to other things, such as deuce and a halfs, tanks and the like.

"It will take us years to retool!" wailed the auto makers.

"Cool - you have six months" said the War Department.

And so it came to pass.

Had the incoming administration in 2008 gone to Detroit and told them that it was a real shame that they couldn't give away their products, but, luckily, they were going to be making light rail, high speed rail and freight rolling stock, there was not much they could say about it.

Also, on the books are rail right-of-way laws that would allow reestablishment of rail lines that had been paved and built over, which would allow the U.S. to reestablish the magnificent system of rail transport that once existed (the jokes in 'Roger Rabbit' about LA's rail weren't a joke).

Michael Moore's article basically said what I have said, which proves that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Beyond that example, I could only imagine what Michael Moore thinks - if I chose to do so - so I'm not sure if he has anything new to say.

Either way, I'm with Gary.


BSBD,

Winsor

[ryoder 1,590]

AFAIK, Moore is the only public figure who correctly predicted the election outcome.
Note the date of this article: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/michael-moores-5-reasons-why-trump-will-win

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[winsor 236]

ryoder

AFAIK, Moore is the only public figure who correctly predicted the election outcome.
Note the date of this article: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/michael-moores-5-reasons-why-trump-will-win

Ann Coulter did as well.

FWIW, I can't bring myself to read her stuff either.

[jclalor 12]

Here's a perfect example. In "Bowling for Columbine" Moore walks into a Michigan bank that offers a free gun for opening a new account. He gives the impression, after opening a new Account, that he walks out moments later with a new gun. Of course in reality he had to wait three days, But thanks to Moore's deceptive style, it looks like he walks out moments later.


https://youtu.be/cglnvXzitOQ