STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Irene wrote:

---

God, I hate Michael Moore. Everything he does or says is so full of his own ego. DC...you, are a much better communicator that senior Moore. At least in my opinion.

---

I completed agree Irene. I think he is soooo conceited!

-- Edited by JoceyBaby23 at 10:52, 2005-09-02

I have mixed feelings. In general, I think he is great at bringing issues to peoples attention in a way that will keep their interest. However, this is one case where I was offended by his use of sarcasm and humor. I'm sorry- this really isn't a matter to be making jokes about. So while yes, maybe people will read it and pay attention, it makes him look like a fool who doesn't give the issue the seriousness and respect that it deserves..

-- Edited by ILoveChoo at 11:16, 2005-09-02

asf wrote:

---

 i may be wrong, but i think that is a part of his point - that this isn't getting the attention and respect that it deserves.  not that it's necessarily the best way to bring that to light, but i think that he treats it so casually because he feels that the situation hasn't been taken seriously enough.

---

I agree. I definitely think that he is using his sarcasm as irony.  He's mimmicking what he believes is Bush's attitude.  I'm not his biggest fan, but he made some valid points.

Well, love him or hate him (I fall somewhere in between), as always he raises some points. 

You can't tell me that if this were in a predominently white, middle class area that they'd be letting bodies rot in the streets and people live like animals, treated like so much human cattle. You just can't.   

Also, I was listening to the Diane Rehm show on NPR this a.m. and EJ Dionne of the WashPost made an excellent point about how there is simply no way of NOT politicizing this, given some of the measures that could have protected New Orleans that have had their budgets reduced or where funding was denied.  People forget that pro-environmental legislation is not always about protecting spotted owls or a pretty view, it's about protecting coastlines and in the case of New Orleans, natural barriers which have eroded over time.  Nothing could have prevented a hurricane, but things didn't need to get so bad.  The scienece will bear this out one way or another in the coming days, and we'll see just how much worse poor conservation made this disaster and the rise of the waters. The fact is, politics comes into play not for gratuitous finger pointing, but because it is precisely at times of crisis where we can measure the efficacy of our leadership, and in this case... well... too little too late.  Our leaders are defined by how they respond in times of crisis, and also how well they prepare.  And, frankly, given the response here, I am terrified what could happen if a disaster were to occur in DC (which, I'll remind you, is primarily minority in population and over 90% democratic - they'd certainly let us fry from the example I can see in this case).  What on earth would they do?  I mean, they already blew 17 million dollars of our homeland security funds for DC on the inaugural hoopla, and the cops here are so busy they don't bother to issue tickets if you run a light right in front of them.

What a fucked-up mess.  I'll refer to the quote where Bush spoke about how "nobody knew" the levees would break, and then point to the scientific models I saw OVER and OVER on CNN which predicted exactly that scenario.  But the Bushies do not care for science.  I am sure they think God had something to do with this.  What's more is this undertone you hear from various sources implying that these people and new Orleans somehow had it coming.  Michael Chertoff, our Dir. of Homeland Security going on about how these people "chose not to leave" and how that was a mistake.  I don't have to point out the poverty these people were already living under - we can't all trot off to our weekend homes at a moment's noticvve.  People simply had nowhere to go, and when faced with risking homelessness in their own town or certain homelessness if they were to leave with nowhere to go, they risked it.  And let's not forget the many, many old and infirm who could not leave (much of this as a result of pverty, as it's hard to get medical care or to live a healthful lifestyle in poverty).  Yeah, blame the victims, Chertoff.  Nice work.

In the case of Mssr. Moore, I do not think he is cracking jokes.  We call this satire, and sometimes it can be effective.Clearly not with this crowd, but I certainly agree with most of his points.    I certainly do not think that he is making light of anything - quite the opposite - but his style is not for everyone, and I'll agree his ego is out of control.  Sometimes I wish he'd pipe down, because as soon as he says anything, people who hate him begin to dismiss anything that comes out of his mouth, and excellent, truthful points get lost in the meanwhile. 

So let's not be so quick to dismiss this letter. There are some good points, albeit made in a somewhat snarky and childish way. 

dc wrote:

---

  We call this satire

---

That's the word I was searching for with my post! Thanks, dc. It temporarily escaped me.

Irene wrote:

---

Well, my problem is that I cannot usually see past his snarkiness and ego to see what it is he is saying. I am sure he makes some really valid points, but look at all the garbage you have to get through to see them. I don't have that kind of patience.

---

 

Oh, Irene... you crack me up!  LOL...

i agree with dc--i think michael moore almost always has excellent points to make, and points out some painful truths that other people are afraid to voice.  it is a shame that so much of his message is often lost in hyperbole, though--i get that, too. 

anyway, as most of you know, i am no fan of bush, but i don't think that the chaos that is happening now and the lack of planning all along falls squarely on his shoulders at all.  there was a lot of "turning a blind eye" all the way down the chain of command, and i find it especially shocking that the state and local leaders weren't more forceful in getting word out there that something like this was possible, nay, likely.  i know that it's easy to be a monday-morning quarterback, but i can't help but wonder why, when a "mandatory evacuation" was declared, some kind of shelter in baton rouge (or even the astrodome) wasn't lined up and buses rounded up to get people out of the city early.  i know you can't make people leave, but maybe if there were some kind of free option, it would have been taken by at least some. 

i never get involved in these conversations or threads, but i HATE micheal moore.

 

ps from bush on cnn (as reposted from wonkette.com):

"We got a lot of rebuilding to do.... the good news is and it's hard for some to see it now but out of this chaos is going to come a fantastic gulf coast... out of the rubbles of Trent Lott's house -- the guy lost his entire house -- there's going to be fantastic house. I look forward to sitting on the porch. Out of New Orleans is going to come that great city again."

or to quote someone from another message board i post on:

"Hey, why are you guys so sad and mad? Now the starving homeless colored folk have something to live for! When sitting 100 degree heat in a trashed sports stadium amongst piles of human feces and dead bodies, they have an image to focus on: the majesty of Trent Lott's brand new home. C'mon guys. It's beautiful. It's Hope."