Michael Moore: tick… tick… tick… tick…

Michael Moore's rock is being kicked over. First Chris Hitchins dressed him down, then the 9-11 Commission blew his Saudi-Airplane theory away, then he freaked out at CNN American Morning host Bill Hemmer, then he skipped the showing of his film in Crawford, Texas with no explanation.

Now a paper in central Illinois, the Bloomington Pantagraph, has demanded an apology from Moore for using a Photoshopped front page in his film.
A scene early in the movie shows newspaper headlines related to the legally contested presidential election of 2000. It includes a shot of The Pantagraph's front page with the prominent headline: "Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election."

But the Pantagraph says that headline was never on the front page. It only appeared -- in much smaller type -- above a letter to the editor.
One would think, when making a documentary he had hoped to be of major import, he wouldn't be so sloppy.

And while we're speaking of Michael Moore and fraud, we may soon be speaking of Michael Moore and election fraud. The filmmaker has promised a Florida audience that he will have cameras in Florida this November to "guarantee to every Floridian that their vote will be counted this year." We're not sure what role his cameras will play enforcing election law, or even in making sure everyone fills out their ballots properly.

And in the United States, our votes our secret. We do not allow millionaire film producers to document our votes or to interfere with the conduct of the election.

He is not stable, and I am serious about that.



Michael Moore doesn't have to wait to be charged with Election Fraud, he is very likely facing charges in the Great White North for violating Canadian election laws when he started running his fat mouth about how Canadian voters needed to vote AGAINST Canadian conservative leader Stephen Harper in their recent election. That just happens to be illegal, for a non-Canadian (like Moore) to go into Canada and attempt to influence an election. Does Moore-on care? Hell no.
One day, he'll piss off the wrong person, and they'll just snap his fat neck and be done with it. Moore wants to be a martyr so bad he can taste it.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 30, 2004 at 11:05 PM  

... and it was fine to sit there and finish a book about a goat, or whatever it was that those students were reciting... while the airplanes rammed into the towers.

There's something not stable about that. Which makes me wonder just what sort of crisis might get The Great Leader off his lard. Althought frankly he is perhaps far less dangerous when prone, and with a pretzel.

I'm quite serious.

If there's one gift of truth that Moore delivered, it was this one. The remainings are nitsy. Let them go, and do bore us by explaining the above fact away.

Be creative.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 30, 2004 at 11:21 PM  

Anonymous no. 2, are you certain that you're serious?

We are told that the President stayed where he was, reading that story to the children, because he did not want to panic them. I don't know. It does not matter. That you are I or a fraudulent maker of picture shows assume that we would have acted differently is of no matter. The President did what he did.

What Moore whines about, what you complain about, is an appearance. You wanted a President who, like on The West Wing, rolls up his sleeves and calls Leo when the opportunity arises.

The President did what the President did. That much is obious. And it did not matter, in the context of the situation, what he did in the first eight minutes. The deed had been done and the other deeds of the day were in progress. As the 9-11 Commission reported, we were not equipped that morning to stop any of it.

The President kept his cool under pressure. The President was a leader at that important period of time, and this is something Moore cannot bear. He fabricates, exaggerates, misplaces, a rips the guts out of context to make a point with the relation whatsoever with reality.

It's falling to bits. Are you watching? And that was the point of my post. You see, Michael Moore wanted so badly to be a Bush-slayer, but he was not up to the task.

By Blogger Mark Kilmer, at July 30, 2004 at 11:37 PM  

Maybe this link can clear up some of the mystery about Moore's cancelled Crawford visit...or at least about what a typical Texan response to Moore might be. (Warning to dial-up users: BIG video!)


By Blogger Tully, at July 31, 2004 at 8:17 PM  

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?