The Airing of Grievances
Saturday, June 26, 2004
David Brooks writes the easiest column in the world, a partial list of some of the stupider things Michael Moore has ever said. This is the approach that's being taken by most of the vociferous right, who are no doubt shit-scared of what "Fahrenheit 9/11" could do to swing American sentiment even further against Bush, that strategy being to attack the author of a statement, rather than the statement itself. It's an effective tactic in deflecting the story away from the issue at hand, but ultimately, it just slows the momentum down and doesn't accomplish anything. After all, Picasso was a Communist, but nobody ever compared his work to that of Arno Breker, the way Moore is being compared to Leni Riefenstahl. I wonder why a newspaper would allow one of its editorial writers to write an entire column using someone else's words towards making, well, really no point whatsoever other than that the person who made the remarks has said some pretty dumb shit in the past. Oh, it's the New York Times? Well that explains it...
I just came from seeing "Fahrenheit 9/11", and I'm sure I'll have more to say on it later (it being 80 degrees and sunny in New York right now), but it's worth your hard-earned. Some of the connections Moore makes (or, rather, leaves the viewer to make) require a stretch of the imagination, but it's pretty tough to not come away moved by footage of soldiers in Iraq openly questioning the logic behind why they're there or of an honorably discharged Marine emphatically stating, if he were ever asked to re-up, that he would go to jail before serving in Iraq again. Maybe that's why Rumsfeld continues to extend tours of duty for our soldiers over there. Can't have dissenting opinions like those aired in an election year. If "Fahrenheit 9/11" does a third of the business that "Bondage Prisoners VI", er, "The Passion of the Christ", did, Bush is screwed.