The Classicist: "Searching for Michael Moore" by Trent England

Searching for Michael Moore
September 7, 2004 The thorn in the side of the Republican party goes by the name of Michael Moore (maybe you’ve heard of him?). I’ve seen less of him in the national spotlight (save the blurb from McCain the first night of the RNC), mainly because his movie isn’t number one anymore. Perhaps he’s confident of a Bush defeat in November and has been less outspoken. His columns in USA Today can’t match his directorial influence, and certainly cannot match his oratorical presence. So why have I heard more of him lately only in conversation? Informally sparring with my liberal friends, we cover the gamut of current political hot topics – from the Swift Boat Vets for Truth to the elimination of the IRS to the invasion of Iraq – but nothing irks a liberal comrade more than a conservative’s staunch support of a controversial right-wing figure. Their response to the presence (and often the recent headlines they make) of such notaries as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and more recently, John O’Neill. The oxycontin fiend who was involved in a drug ring and who also made racist comments on ESPN about an African-American still holds the number one spot in talk radio. This must be because only conservatives listen to talk radio, therefore it makes sense that he’s number one. After all, he is the czar of right-wing polemics. So when I use his logic or an example he used on his show when debating a liberal, I get the rolled eyes, and what is now a regular saying: “He’s the Michael Moore of the Republican party.” What makes him the Michael Moore of the Republican party? Or the right-wing movement? By saying that, the liberal is implying that Limbaugh is guilty of the same journalistic felonies as Moore is, or that, in a sense, Limbaugh also distorts the facts and presents data in a juxtaposed order to present the truth in a skewed fashion to meet his agenda. Paired with that, the liberal also implies that Limbaugh also has no credibility, since the liberal reaches for an example of someone whom conservatives deride as a liar and seeks to compare Limbaugh with him. The same is done with Ann Coulter. Controversial indeed, the left would love to have Coulter. Who wouldn’t? She’s beautiful, blonde, thin, brash, and commanding. But she’s the anti-feminist. The runway version of Phylis Schlafly. Her inflammatory remarks have often earned her the undeserved title “Michael Moore of the Right.” Nevermind that she’s not the star of Rolling Stone Magazine or Cannes or the Oscars. Coulter is only loved, let alone liked, by conservatives. The newest addition to the much-hated lineup of controversial conservatives is John O’Neil, author of the book Unfit For Command, which documents the actions of John Kerry in Vietnam and the testimonies of those with whom he served who claim he is unfit to be President. The media has all but tarred and feathered O’Neill, who, unlike Moore, has very much on the line in speaking out against a presidential challenger. Also unlike Moore, O’Neill has gotten no Rolling Stones cover stories, no star power treatment by Hollywood, and is making no profit from the book. Google Michael Moore’s income sometime. Who’s next? Free-market and libertarian journalist John Stossel? Comedian Dennis Miller? Filmmaker Mel Gibson? When you hear a liberal resort to a last-minute ad hominem attack by likening a conservative to the Moore fringe, do them a favor and ask: If the left reveres Michael Moore so much, why do they continue to compare him to conservatives they demonize?
Back

Searching for Michael Moore

September 7, 2004

The thorn in the side of the Republican party goes by the name of Michael Moore (maybe you’ve heard of him?).

I’ve seen less of him in the national spotlight (save the blurb from McCain the first night of the RNC), mainly because his movie isn’t number one anymore. Perhaps he’s confident of a Bush defeat in November and has been less outspoken. His columns in USA Today can’t match his directorial influence, and certainly cannot match his oratorical presence.

So why have I heard more of him lately only in conversation? Informally sparring with my liberal friends, we cover the gamut of current political hot topics – from the Swift Boat Vets for Truth to the elimination of the IRS to the invasion of Iraq – but nothing irks a liberal comrade more than a conservative’s staunch support of a controversial right-wing figure. Their response to the presence (and often the recent headlines they make) of such notaries as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and more recently, John O’Neill.

The oxycontin fiend who was involved in a drug ring and who also made racist comments on ESPN about an African-American still holds the number one spot in talk radio. This must be because only conservatives listen to talk radio, therefore it makes sense that he’s number one. After all, he is the czar of right-wing polemics. So when I use his logic or an example he used on his show when debating a liberal, I get the rolled eyes, and what is now a regular saying: “He’s the Michael Moore of the Republican party.”

What makes him the Michael Moore of the Republican party? Or the right-wing movement? By saying that, the liberal is implying that Limbaugh is guilty of the same journalistic felonies as Moore is, or that, in a sense, Limbaugh also distorts the facts and presents data in a juxtaposed order to present the truth in a skewed fashion to meet his agenda. Paired with that, the liberal also implies that Limbaugh also has no credibility, since the liberal reaches for an example of someone whom conservatives deride as a liar and seeks to compare Limbaugh with him.

The same is done with Ann Coulter. Controversial indeed, the left would love to have Coulter. Who wouldn’t? She’s beautiful, blonde, thin, brash, and commanding. But she’s the anti-feminist. The runway version of Phylis Schlafly. Her inflammatory remarks have often earned her the undeserved title “Michael Moore of the Right.” Nevermind that she’s not the star of Rolling Stone Magazine or Cannes or the Oscars. Coulter is only loved, let alone liked, by conservatives.

The newest addition to the much-hated lineup of controversial conservatives is John O’Neil, author of the book Unfit For Command, which documents the actions of John Kerry in Vietnam and the testimonies of those with whom he served who claim he is unfit to be President. The media has all but tarred and feathered O’Neill, who, unlike Moore, has very much on the line in speaking out against a presidential challenger. Also unlike Moore, O’Neill has gotten no Rolling Stones cover stories, no star power treatment by Hollywood, and is making no profit from the book. Google Michael Moore’s income sometime.
Who’s next? Free-market and libertarian journalist John Stossel? Comedian Dennis Miller? Filmmaker Mel Gibson? When you hear a liberal resort to a last-minute ad hominem attack by likening a conservative to the Moore fringe, do them a favor and ask: If the left reveres Michael Moore so much, why do they continue to compare him to conservatives they demonize?

Back