Posted by Jan (22.214.171.124) on September 02, 2003 at 01:57:56:
In Reply to: Micheal Moore posted by P (126.96.36.199) on September 01, 2003 at 23:10:55:
January 07, 2003
Michael Moore: A psychological analysis
I've long loathed Michael Moore's politics, but I've always cut him some slack (believe it or not). I've defended him in the press, in that Wired article for which I was interviewed. I've refrained from gratuitous name-calling (with one exception which I later retracted) and I've made it a point to read the entirety of his writings and to give him credit when he's right.
Those days are over, not because I no longer believe in those methods but because I no longer feel Moore deserves their application. I now realize that he is a very interesting psychological case study.
First we had this yesterday:
American satirist Michael Moore has stormed out of Britain after a bust up with the London theatre hosting his one-man show. The Bowling For Columbine moviemaker performed Michael Moore - Live! to packed audiences for two months before Christmas at The Roundhouse in Camden, North London. But on the penultimate night he reportedly flew into a rage, verbally attacking everyone associated with the theatre because he thought he wasn't being paid enough. During the performance he complained he was making just $750 a night. A member of the stage crew says, "He completely lost the plot. He stormed around all day screaming at everyone, even the £5-an-hour bar staff, telling them how we were all conmen and useless. Then he went on stage and did it in public." Staff retaliated by refusing to work the following night, which led to the show being held up for an hour. Eventually he made a groveling apology to staff and the angry audience finally took to their seats. A source reports that Moore then packed his bags and flew to New York the next day without saying thank you or goodbye to anyone.
This, from a man who claims to be "regular folk" and who identifies with "working stiffs."
Primary diagnosis: Cognitive dissonance
Being an intelligent man, Moore knows deep down that he is full of shit. On some level, he's aware of the hypocrisy and manipulation that he engages in on a daily basis. Claiming to represent "working stiffs" while being a famous multimillionaire is becoming problematic, and as his psyche tries to reconcile these two states of being, he lashes out at the people who actually embody what his public persona is supposed to represent.
His subconscious wants to 'destroy' the real working stiffs, so as to mitigate the constant influx of information about what it means to be a real working stiff.
It may also be possible that in attacking genuine "regular folk," Moore is merely demonstrating that he truly believes he is one of them, in the same way that only another member of an "oppressed" group is allowed by society to insult other members of that group.
In any case, the dissonance between what Moore knows to be true and what he so desperately tries to convince other people is true has become a psychological burden for him, and he is beginning to crumble under the pressure.
Secondary diagnosis: Pompousassity
He just can't help it.
And then this, today (emphasis mine):
I took my son to see Michael Moore live at the Roundhouse, in north London, before Christmas...Sure there were some flunked bits Ė you expect that, the troughs are part of the adventure, an evening with a well-worn rebel.
What we did not expect was to feel so enraged at one point that we almost walked out. It was when Moore went into a rant about how the passengers on the planes on 11 September were scaredy-cats because they were mostly white. If the passengers had included black men, he claimed, those killers, with their puny bodies and unimpressive small knives, would have been crushed by the dudes, who as we all know take no disrespect from anybody. God save us from such stupid white men, especially now, when in the US and the UK, black people's lives are being ripped to shreds by drugs, lawlessness, fear and frightful violence plus the endless circle of racism, exclusion and incarceration.
Ah-hem. Ah-HEM. Yes, this may simply have been a joke in extremely bad taste...but maybe not. Does it matter?
Primary diagnosis: Projection
Moore is a self-proclaimed overweight nerd. Therefore, he knows that if he were confronted with a challenge such as being on a hijacked plane, he would be a "scaredy-cat" and would be unable to fight back in any meaningful way. But, rather than admit this to himself or anyone else, he attributes these feelings and qualities to others.
This projection not only comforts Moore by convincing him that he's not unusual or less manly than anyone else, it also gives him an opportunity to talk about Stupid White Men, which is important because he has books to sell.
Secondary diagnosis #1: Black envy
To Moore (as to many others), black people are cool. Black men, in particular, are natural warriors and bad-asses in Moore's mind. Their Afro-fabulousness is apparent on the football field and in popular culture. They will whup that ass, basically.
On the other hand, Moore sees a problem with white men. The only white men you see whupping much ass have guns. This poses a severe psychological conundrum for an individual like Moore because, remember, guns are baaaad. So a Dirty Harry figure can't be the hero.
The hero must be the unarmed yet naturally tough black man, in Moore's mind. I'll refrain from discussing the homoerotic undertones of this.
Also, the black-man-as-noble-hero image is safe and desirable. It appeals to white guilt and fits right in with contemporary pop culture. We love watching a Denzel Washington shoot poison arrows with his eyes and put the smack-down on the antagonist with an eloquent speech. We love our black sports hero-millionaires, and we enjoy knowing that they overcame hardship and oppression to achieve their lofty status. Our culture adores this sort of thing because it means we've changed.
Moore is tapping into that cultural state of mind and attempting to exploit it. He supposes that a rant about how bad-assed black men are, in contrast to white super-wusses, will appeal to our current instinct to vilify Whitey and elevate "minorities."
Furthermore, it's really the only option Moore has. His paradigm does not allow for white heroics, unless those heroics are performed by extremely poor or extremely liberal white people, preferably female. He has a best-seller called Stupid White Men. That's his schtick and he's stickin' to it, except now he has added Wimpy to the adjective list.
Secondary diagnosis #2: Blame the Victim Syndrome
In a mind as saturated with modern "liberal" dogma as Moore's, it is imperative to always find a way to place at least part of the blame for any tragedy upon the victim. To him, no event is allowed to be colored in anything but pallid shades of gray.
Just as he blames Columbine on suburbs, conformity, and gun shows, Moore must use the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, to somehow criticize the "establishment," which is White Men (stupid and wimpy white men, to be concise). At the same time, he strives to be original and provocative, and is aware that all the obvious targets have already been addressed - the federal government, President Bush, the airlines, et cetera.
Therefore, in the midst of a feverish bout of Blame the Victim Syndrome coupled with a desire to be "different," Moore has found his holy grail: Blame the deaths of 3,000 innocent people on the whiteness of the airplane passengers.
In the paradigm Moore has crafted for himself, this is the perfect solution - it lets the perpetrators off the hook (liberal handbook item #8, check), holds the Black Man up as Heroic Bad Ass (political correctness handbook item #4, check), and lays the blame for the atrocity at the feet of Stupid White Men (Michael Moore best-seller thesis, check).
Furthermore, it's bullet-proof, so to speak. Moore knows that if and when Whitey stands up to defend himself against such a ridiculous statement, the politically correct crowd (leftists) will scream, "Racist!" Remember, white people are not allowed to defend themselves against statements that simultaneously shred Whitey and praise black people, and Moore knows this.
Moore also likes this, because it helps him sell millions of copies of his book, Stupid White Men.
As you can see, what we have here is a deeply troubled man whose personal reality may not gel with actual reality, but nonetheless has a perfectly reasonable explanation. Pompousassity coexisting with the projection of a feeling of helplessness onto others. A deeply held yet erroneous belief conflicting with hard sensory input from the manifestion of that belief. Black envy wrapped up with the hate of one's own race. Et cetera, et cetera.
Treatment Plan: Prolonged intravenous infusions of Clueô.
Posted by Rachel on January 07, 2003 12:19 PM
Category: Michael Moore is a liar
Fan. TAS. Tic.
I love it.
Brilliantly done, Rachel. The prognosis is spot-on, and I agree wholeheartedly (and excitedly!) with the proposed treatment plan.
He really is in dire need of a smack upside the face with the ol' Cluebat.
Posted by: geoff on January 7, 2003 12:30 PM
So should we look for Moore's next movie? titled: Why I Love Black Men. eminem can do the soundtrack.
Posted by: jimmy on January 7, 2003 12:36 PM
Thought I don't disagree with you, Rachel, I have an expectation that the so-called rant was actually a really badly delivered and thought-out joke.
Posted by: JoshMedia on January 7, 2003 12:40 PM
Brilliant analysys. Where does the line form to take a turn with the Cluebat?
Posted by: HenryJ on January 7, 2003 12:43 PM
Thank you all.
Josh, I suspect the same thing. Which is why I didn't get pissed off about it, and rather chose to mock him in a satirical fashion myself.
Posted by: Rachel on January 7, 2003 12:45 PM
I'm reminded of a few white students in my dorm my sophomore year at college. They made a point of being friends with and dating black people only. Maybe they had race issues similar to Moore's. I don't know. Anyway, one of these students became a resident advisor for a floor in my dorm the following year, and that meant he had to be decent to everyone: black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander, etc. I admit to deriving a perverse enjoyment out of that.
Posted by: Anne on January 7, 2003 01:18 PM
Posted by: Don T. Wilson on January 7, 2003 01:19 PM
Thank you, once again, for making my sometimes boring day so damn much fun. You really should consider starting your own radio program! You are brilliant.
Posted by: on January 7, 2003 01:25 PM
I'm hoping it was a bad joke too. And to avoid the usual thought pattern of the Moorites ("I don't care if it isn't true, I still believe it"), I'll stick with the proven Pompousassity he constantly shows.
Still, I'm waiting for Moore's movie of what really happened on Flight 93. Let me gues...the roles of Jeremy Glick, Tom Burnett, Todd Beamer and Mark Bingham are played by Denzell Washington, Taye Diggs, Michael Clarke Duncan, and Ja Rule.
Saeed Alghamdi, Ahmed Alhaznawi, Ahmed Alnami and Ziad Jarrahi are played by Seth Green, David Faustino, Dana Carvey, and Michael J. Fox. Yeah, that's it.
Posted by: Chrees on January 7, 2003 01:37 PM
Dachle isn't running.
Posted by: JoshMedia on January 7, 2003 01:50 PM
This is what Moore really suffers from:
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration.
5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.
6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends.
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him.
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.
I think this describes him to a "T" from the DSMV itself, and corresponds very well with Rachel's analysis. There is a name for it.
Unfortunately, I was married to a guy just like him.
Posted by: on January 7, 2003 01:51 PM
Nice analysis, Rachel.
Theory may be dead in academic psychology but it lives on in the blogosphere.
I went to see a movie last week on the Upper West Side of Manhattan (living here does have many advantages, honestly)and before the flick started I had to endure the people next to me and in front of me speaking reverently about Fat Michael, how nice he was in person when they met him in London and what a wonderful movie "Columbine" is.
By coincidence, it was the same day Tim Blair had an article up debunking the many lies in the film, which just opened in Australia, so I asked these folks if it didn't bother them that the film was full of outright falsehoods, beginning with the title itself, and referred them to Blair for a complete rundown of St. Michael's little fibs.
You would have thought by their reaction that I had walked into the lobby of the Riyadh Hilton and announced that the Prophet was a diseased camelhumper. MM is a secular saint in my neck of the woods.
Posted by: Ed Rubin on January 7, 2003 02:04 PM
You can't take the DSM-V categories and diagnoses too seriously. Doesn't it strike you that anybody who has even one or two of those grandiosity-related traits will have six or seven, because many are just different ways of saying the same thing?
The latest iterations of the DSM, which now recognize smoking, for example (but not homosexuality) as pathologies, have abandoned any pretense of therapeutic or theoretical value. These "diagnoses" have two purposes; getting insurance reimbursement, which generally requires a diagnosis of some syndrome or disease, and permitting psychiatrists to engage in the lucrative sideline of giving expert testimony in custody cases, etc. and convincing gullible judges that apparently normal people suffer from "disorders."
I hear "sex addiction" is now a DSM disorder. I always knew people who liked sex were really sick.
However, although in general I am no fan of the DSM mode of "analysis", in the case of His Ugliness I am willing to make an exception. Everything you and Rachel said about him is true.
Posted by: Ed Rubin on January 7, 2003 02:19 PM
While I certainly admire everyone's insight and typing ability, I prefer the short, succinct approach.
Mike Moore is a dick.
Posted by: jpd on January 7, 2003 02:25 PM
It is as I thought. He's not just an idiot, he's a mean idiot.
I don't know about MM's rant being a "thought-out joke". You'd just have to have been there to hear the tone and the delivery. (I'm skeptical.) But the rest of his tirade was delivered off stage.
Besides all the symptoms mentioned, he seems also to exhibit Bipolar Personality Disorder: he's "nice in person" on one occasion, and a real jackass on another. I have my own opinion as to which face is the real one.
Posted by: Mike on January 7, 2003 02:25 PM
I'm really disappointed that the Blokes didn't give him citizenship. That way he could have stayed over there forever. (We certainly don't want him breeding here at home!)
Posted by: Michael the Intern on January 7, 2003 02:32 PM
Hey Michael the Intern.
We don't want that fat fool over here!
I was just thinking how much better it smells over here the last coupla days.
Posted by: Kieron on January 7, 2003 02:53 PM
Michael Moore is a Big Fat Idiot.
(my next book)
Posted by: mike on January 7, 2003 02:56 PM
Does anyone know if there were black people on the 4 airplanes on 9/11?
If so, does anyone know if black people were among those who fought the Islamist maniacs?
I'm sure the gov't knows this. Getting this information would be unlikely. Too bad. The information would make an interesting data point.
Personally, I have a suspicion that the answer would make Moore an even bigger idiot.
Posted by: Paul A'Barge on January 7, 2003 02:56 PM
Brilliant analysis. I refuse to see his lying film "Bowling For Columbine", except possibly on the same basis ("know your enemy") as I once watched Leni Riefenstal's famous Nazi propaganda film "Triumph of the Will" (great title, too bad what it glorified was so ugly).
I'd love to see this Moore character have to debate Rachel (a white woman, female equivalent of Todd Beamer) and/or a black man like Ward Connerly, Thomas Sowell, or Clarence Thomas. Oh, I forgot, those men aren't _"really"_ black because they don't share Moore's ideology. He'd prefer frothing anti-Semites like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Louis Farrakhan.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 7, 2003 03:18 PM
Dear Ed Rubin.
That was my NPD post. I forgot to put my name on it. Anyway, I think your take on the DSM is generally correct, except when it comes to Narcissists. The symptoms are very accurate.
Also, NPD's don't seek treatment because they don't think anything is wrong with them. (No money in that for the therapists!)
There is no known treatment for NPDs. They are basically incurable.
No hope for Mikey.
Posted by: Loretta on January 7, 2003 03:27 PM
Moore's rant actually makes him more of a racist then most. His natural assumption is that the black man would immediately beat up on the terrorists. He can't imagine them having the intellectual capacity to come up with a thought out plan to prevent the hijackings. Sounds like he comes from the Jimmy the Greek school of ethnic bias.
Moore is probably just pissed that he gets charged double fares when he flies.
Posted by: JohnO on January 7, 2003 03:42 PM
Perhaps you could use this site to take out your agressions on Michael, and also get in some target practice.
Posted by: Ben on January 7, 2003 04:07 PM
Rachel, you now have the same problem that Bill Whittle has: How do you top your own brilliance?
I'm sure you'll manage it, but raising the bar so high on a single post can be dangerous!
Posted by: Mrs. du Toit on January 7, 2003 04:24 PM
"I now realize that he is a very interesting psychological case study."
Whenever you need someone to man the switches and dials of the electro-shock therapy machine, fire me off an e-mail. :)
Posted by: Charles Hueter on January 7, 2003 04:46 PM
Very nice Rachel, however, being the psychological layman that I am, I am content to diagnose the man as just a big ol' crapweasel.
Posted by: Russell on January 7, 2003 05:06 PM
London theater review pans the production as amaturish, unfunny and offensive:
Posted by: Paul Stinchfield on January 7, 2003 05:10 PM
Michael Moore - Egomaniac with a sever inferiority complex.
The man is a legend in his own mind.
Posted by: Brent on January 7, 2003 05:13 PM
I will add another name to my List tonight. Oh, the List? You'll Search Engine will find it under:
Posted by: Howard E. Morseburg on January 7, 2003 05:40 PM
I was going to say that Moore's remark -- about black men being more inclined than "scaredy-cat" white men to beat up wimpy little Arabs with dinky little knives -- reminds me of Jimmy the Greek's remark that black men were natural athletes thanks to their years in slavery, but of course somebody beat me to it.
I wonder, just how many whacks with the Cluebat(TM) would it take to knock some sense into this fat fool's head? Would we have to hit him and hit him until his skull begins to change shape, or could we stop before then? (Errr, metaphorically speaking, of course. :) )
Posted by: Aitch748 on January 7, 2003 05:49 PM
Brilliant analysis, Rachel! I really think this guy is pathetic. And like you, had held the jury out until now. You can tell a lot about a person by how he treats peers and waitstaff.
$750 a night .. he should have taken the money and ran .. oh yeah, that is what he did. What a maroon!!
Posted by: Happyman on January 7, 2003 06:11 PM
All you Moore-lovers better be careful. If you diagnose the man as mentally ill, he cannot be held responsible for his actions, can he?
Posted by: Brian Sak on January 7, 2003 06:12 PM
Moore would no doubt be a "scaredy-cat" (kindergarten for coward) in any confrontation with Rachel or Camille Paglia or any of the black men I named (Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Ward Connerly).
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 7, 2003 06:18 PM
Added to Moore's diagnosis: pathological liar (like a certain recent President).
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 7, 2003 06:19 PM
And in true Michael Moore fashion, the message board on his website has been disabled. How convenient.
Posted by: Mike on January 7, 2003 06:21 PM
Hell, Moore would be a "scaredy-cat" in a debate with a cat! ha! ha! Mrrreeeowwwrrrr!
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 7, 2003 06:23 PM
Is it Art imitates life or MM wishes he had a life?
Michael obviously wishes he had Mo(o)re... so buy him a big black vibrating substitute!
Posted by: DANEgerus on January 7, 2003 06:51 PM
Mikey obviously has a mouth and a rear-end. Too bad he's missing a brain. And a heart...
Posted by: Patrick on January 7, 2003 07:23 PM
I'm going over to Misha's and borrowing the Imperial Clue-By-Four(tm).
What a snotweasel.
Posted by: MonkeyPAnts on January 7, 2003 07:27 PM
can anyone explain how m.m. ever became as popular as he has? why do so many believe his lies? how can otherwise intelligent people not see through his racism and hate? (yes, i do see some sensible people sucked into the maelstrom.)
and - as some of you have commented - in addition to being dissembling, racist and wrong - he IS mean.....
Posted by: peggybundy on January 7, 2003 07:36 PM
What really makes Moore's shtick sick is that yes, there were black people on those planes. As well as people of other racial/ethnic/whatever backgrounds (not counting the Arab killers). I don't have the roster of names at hand at the moment, but I remember this. But that's not what mattered to the terrorists. Nor, apparently, to Michael Moore. All that mattered to them was that these were people on American planes, so they had to die.
Posted by: Andrea Harris on January 7, 2003 07:44 PM
Personally, I think he and Rush Limbaugh were separated at birth. I often wonder, what would happen if they met. Would they explode, like matter does with anti-matter? Or would they merge, forming some sort of even larger, marshmellowy figure, like from Ghostbusters.
Anyway, he misses the point. Up until 9/11, it was the best thing for passengers to simply obey the hijackers - while fatalies weren't unheard of in hijackings, generally, the whole point of previous hijackings was the passengers themselves - to use them as bargaining chips. I think just about everyone, of all races knows that, except perhaps him.
After 9/11, I really doubt anyone will be able to hijack a plane. Passengers know realize they have nothing to lose. Several times since, the passengers have jumped on people who were just acting suspicious - like Richard Reid, but also several other cases when it was just a nut.
Posted by: Jeremy on January 7, 2003 07:57 PM
one of my biggest shames in my life is that I was a dye-n-the-wool liberal at one time in my life, I was raised in a union family and it was Democrats = good Republicans = evil back then.
Thank God that Jimmy Carter came around and made me see the light of day
best thing is now my entire family are now part of the GOP's finest supporters
I'm guessing that Mr Moore will at least acomplish driving more folks to the GOP
and that is a good thing! I hope/pray/beg he opens his trap over and over again
Posted by: Paul ya'all on January 7, 2003 08:04 PM
People get sucked into anyone who has beliefs and states them strongly. Only milquetosts are anathema to followers.
Posted by: JoshMedia on January 7, 2003 08:31 PM
You could have done that whole profile in one word..it's "asshole". Pardon my French. :)
Posted by: gupps on January 7, 2003 08:34 PM
Can we please put a warning at the beginning of these postings? I started laughing so hard that I blew hot tea all over my keyboard! Ouch!
Rachel, brillant analysis, though I have to say that after reading this, intellectually I feel woefully inadequate. Why in the hell did I get a graduate degree when my thought processes aren't nearly as clear and concise as what I just read? I tend to fall in line with Russell, and think of MM as just "a big ol' crap weasel". That was a funny line!
Posted by: Stiehl on January 7, 2003 08:53 PM
I am a white man. So is Michael Moore. Michael Moore is a wimp. I am not. Neither were the men on the ill fated aircraft on 911. Never before were hijacked aircraft used as human guided cruise missiles. All that went before were used as political statements even though some of the passengers/crew were murdered (other than the originator - who just was a thief and a white man - D.B. Cooper). As soon as the white men on Flight 93 (and possibly red blooded American non-white men) learned of the escalation of hijacking to the human cruise missile (invented by a white man named Tom Clancy), the white men attacked and defeated the Islamist al Qaeda perpetrators. If Michael Moore were on Flight 93, he would have been cowering in a pool of his own elimination. My psycoanlysis - Michael Moore is just a coward.
Posted by: Doug Landrum on January 7, 2003 09:12 PM
I just couldn't believe that the second Moore bashing came from The Independent. I mean, considering the Idiotarians there, how far over the line did Moore have to go to get a negative review there?
Posted by: Josh Heit on January 7, 2003 09:23 PM
Michael Moore indirectly constructs weapons. Every time I hear him speak or see his films, I have projectile vomiting.
Shame he isn't downrange.
Posted by: Sapper Mike on January 7, 2003 09:24 PM
Damn, but you're good, Rachel!
I hate, but I mean I *hate* Michael Moore. I grew up working-class poor, and I can't stand the way that flabby sack of shit tries to exploit MY tribe. He doesn't know jack about Just Folks, and he never will. Liberals never do. And BTW, he's not an asshole; he's not a dick; he's a *fuckwad*.
And as for his next movie (I believe it was Jimmy who brought this up), how about "I Wanna Be Black"? Title track by Lou Reed.
Posted by: Pearl on January 7, 2003 10:37 PM
All I can say is hella-cool analysis Rachel.
I can't say that Moore is topping himself this time because he is so far out already. But this stuff today really pissed me off. Bowling for Columbine was one thing...but insinuating that white people are cowards and denegrating the 9/11 dead are new lows.
I got a little carried away on my blog and invited him to come to Dallas and find out whether he's right. On second thought, I did the right thing.
Thanks for the great blog.
Posted by: Rick Stinson on January 7, 2003 11:22 PM
It wasn't just that there were black people in general on the Sept. 11 flights -- the co-pilot of Flight 93, Leroy Homer, was black.
See here for information about him.
By the way, while this next comment has nothing to do with race, it is something that Michael Moore has been claiming that bothers me. On the front page of Moore's site, his editor claims:
"Bowling for Columbine" continues to roll on across the country in a way no one ever imagined. It has not only set the new all-time box office record for a documentary, it has more than DOUBLED that record.
Except that "Bowling for Columbine" isn't even the highest grossing documentary in current release, much less all time. Moore's film has grossed over $16 million through Jan. 5, but "Space Station" has grossed over $30 million, and "Jackass" has grossed over $64 million.
Posted by: Joshua on January 8, 2003 12:25 AM
I bet "Jackass" is more intellectually stimulating than "Bowling For Columbine", too.
None of you have the nomenclature quite right yet.
Micheal Moore is a fuckstain. Or as we would say it where I'm from, "The best part a' that bo' done rolled down the whorehouse wall, ayup."
Posted by: Eichra Oren on January 8, 2003 02:05 AM
Remember this is the typical self loathing of white liberal. As for the homoerotic, after I read the article I felt that he would be on his knees in front of the first black guy to give him the angry brother routine. From personal experience a lot of these guys MM worships are cowardly thugs. If you show fear they'll eat you alive. If you don't, they generally think twice. And if you've got a gun they tend to run.
Posted by: Ray on January 8, 2003 04:32 AM
I think the children on the D.C. plane were black. (They'd won a trip to a National Geographic convention.)
Posted by: Joanne Jacobs on January 8, 2003 05:06 AM
Moore, like Paul Begala, isn't suffering from any high-fallutin' psychological disorder. They're just assholes.
Posted by: Will Collier on January 8, 2003 05:46 AM
Todd "Let's Roll" Beamer, one of those credited with helping prevent Flight 93 with more carnage, was white. Moore is a fucktard.
Posted by: bill on January 8, 2003 08:58 AM
Every time I think I might be able to make it as a professional writer and political columnist, someone like you hits me with a Clue bat...
> Being an intelligent man, Moore knows deep down that he is full of....
And then it got even better. A very nice hit job, Ms. Lucas. You have a gift.
Posted by: Lee Dise on January 8, 2003 09:00 AM
Mike Moore (lets drop "Michael", OK?) is fat and ugly. If he lost weight he'd be slim and ugly. He always struck out with girls who ignored him in favor of (drum roll . . .) other WHITE MEN. That's why he hates white men, he sees them as the enemy he couldn't, cannot and never will be equal to or conquer.
That being said, what Mike really wants is attention. I'm no shrink, but I suppose this has something to do with his childhood. The more is said and written about him, the more his insecurity is fed and the more insufferable he becomes. I know its tempting to write about him but the only real response his antics deserve is disinterest. Let's try it.
Posted by: Redman on January 8, 2003 10:54 AM
[a note I sent Mike at email@example.com]
Comments like yours give black folks a bad name.
Just ask the black couple down the street from me who fears the
"niggers" (their term) coming from South Chicago as Democrat Daley
destroys their public housing units along the Dan Ryan expressway. The
couple near me is a hard-working two-income family. As more poor blacks
enter the city, more whites leave and the black families that were here
first get nervous.
Why is that Michael? Is that because of "big black dudes" who "take no
disrespect" from anybody?
Be a man, Mike. Admit what you spew is bullshit. All anyone wants is
to live in peace. Who needs vicious rappers who exploit women and
promote drug use under the phony guise of an "authentic black protest
against years of white exploitation"?
And who needs their defenders?
I'm no prude, Mike. I've had my share of fun in life. But I have an
8-year-old daughter and what am I supposed to tell her? Slick Rick,
Snoop Dogg and Eminem are her role models? I know you will mock this
line of reasoning. Your view is, the more mayhem and misogyny, the
better. Kids'll grow out of it.
Not this time, Mike. Kids have nothing to believe in these days.
Nothing to fight for. No causes other than those that promise them easy
riches. And for adults to be egging them on is irresponsible. If my
daughter asks me if I did drugs and had sex with other women besides her
mother, I lie. At least until she's 21.
In your book that's a joke. In mine, morality.
May we part ways friends.
Posted by: on January 8, 2003 10:55 AM
That's good! Excellent.
You may like to know that Moore said in a recent Rolling Stone that Eminem and Marilyn Manson are what have saved suburban kids.
I am serious.
Posted by: Rachel on January 8, 2003 12:04 PM
Looking back, my first post was kind of tangental, but I think those folks had the same black envy Moore appears to have.
As for your question, peggybundy, I think anyone who talks about standing up for the common man/woman will generate a lot of public enthusiasm. Initially, anyway.
Posted by: Anne on January 8, 2003 12:10 PM
Good grief. I can't believe that so many people would waste so much of their valuable time talking about this waste of human skin.
And includes you, Rachel. Do some WWII work instead, damnit -- in 20 years time, Moore will be a smudged footnote of history, while our WWII soldiers will still be a shining example of selflessness and sacrifice.
Posted by: Kim du Toit on January 8, 2003 01:06 PM
Is this a bad time to say how much I love Celine Dion?
Iím not too sure if this is relevant but I think I should warn you that over here in England, Mr. Moore is getting quite popular. I think it is important that people like Rachel and other lovely people like her continue to watch Moore because he is becoming increasingly influential. The problem is that his bias, unbalanced films are simplistic (so everyone understands them i.e. impressionably adolescents) and are often seemingly unchallenged. And that is the crux of it. The people he seems to be reaching out to have NO idea about the things he is talking about so they lap it up like so many cats to milk. Itís like they are playing a game of chess only they donít know how to play and Mike does. Wow, thatís a lot of crazy metaphors, I hope it makes some kind of sense! Eh, my point being that if he is allowed to reign unchallenged he pretty much has the world in his hands. I'm sorry for that metaphor as well.
Posted by: Poosh on January 8, 2003 05:32 PM
I've just commented extensively on Right Wing News...
Having said tha, I read Rachel Lucas and listened to the Mike Curb Congregation sing 'Burnin' Bridges'.
One of my all-time favorite songs. I'll offer that as my tribute to that asshat Michael Moore...
Posted by: Christopher on January 8, 2003 06:11 PM
for comment from someone who actually saw the London show in question.
Posted by: nabakov on January 8, 2003 07:53 PM
Pardon my language if you will, but I wish Todd Beamer were still alive to s-it on Moore's face.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 8, 2003 08:38 PM
Well, I went to http://d-squareddigest.blogspot.com/ and have one thing to say...
Give me a break!
Moore was trying to point out the complacency of the middle class by calling white men cowards? Not likely.
Moore, like a lot of lefties these days, is finally having to recognize that his anti-white anti-American, and anti-middle class convictions are flawed. He's also come face to face with the fact that he's not quite the "idol of millions" he fancies himself.
Looks like he's headed for the all time greatest spot in the Idiotarian Hall of Fame.
Posted by: Steve on January 8, 2003 09:03 PM
So Moore's hitting the "big time" in the UK, hey?
One day he'll be just another has-been Ex-Pat caging drinks off American tourists in airport bars.
Stick a fork in him, he's done.
Posted by: feste on January 8, 2003 10:47 PM
One question for Moore - what race were the firemen from Sept. 11? Young white men, most of them - were they not? In fact, blacks and other minorities were conspicuously absent, which still didn't stop them from trying to misrepresent who the real heroes were (by demanding 'equal statue-time'). What can you say about a person like Moore - those who hate and denigrate their own race and culture are usually displaying self-hatred without even realising it. He is a stupid man - the colour 'white' is only incidental.
Posted by: D Charles on January 8, 2003 10:48 PM
I have a news flash for Moore and all who think like him: None of those _heroes_ (on Flight 93, the firefighters, the rescue workers, etc.) were giving a g--dg-dd--n (if you will pardon the language again) about anybody's ancestry, skin color (black, white, red, yellow, green, blue, purple, or what have you), age, sex, sexual orientation, religion (unless terrorist), or any other irrelevancies. Their _only_ concern was the task at hand and mustering up the guts to do it.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 8, 2003 11:49 PM
Dear Rachel: I love the _style_ in which you wrote this diagnosis of Moore. Impeccable. Once again, I love your _style_!
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 9, 2003 12:01 AM
Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 9, 2003 12:02 AM
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Posted by: Mike Moore on January 9, 2003 07:22 AM
Michael Moore is a jerk, a coward, a schoolyard bully with a talent for self promotion. His comments on 9-11 have shocked even the British left, which must be a rare accomplishment. As a Brit, may I politely ask our American cousins to keep their asshole leftists at home. We have enough here in Blighty as it is.
Moore is poisoning the well of political discourse. Of course there have always been folk who have used rough humour to make political points, such as the great PJ O'Rourke, for example. But with O'Rourke, there is a key difference. Unlike Moore, he is genuinely funny, is a decent fellow, and once wrote this: "The Ferrari and the F16 fighter - these are the conveyances of free men".
Brilliant stuff Rachel.
Posted by: Tom on January 9, 2003 09:42 AM
Maaaan, you all are a bunch of self-satisfied conservative preachers-to-yourselves, ain'tcha?
MM annoys me sometimes too, but he's a bracing palliative to the dominant right-wing media. And it's *so* significant that no one has a transcript or tape of his "tantrum" or his controversial "black passengers" scenario.
A number of you also seem irony-impaired. Call it Coulter Syndrome?
Posted by: Bill W on January 9, 2003 11:46 AM
RE: Michael Moore: A psychological analysis
"I'll refrain from discussing the homoerotic undertones of this."
Why refrain? Having a PC moment? LOL
You should have STARTED with the homoerotic undertones (tendencies), as I think it explains just about everything about Moore.
He's just another deviant biological error.
Posted by: Nunya_Bidness on January 9, 2003 11:56 AM
It appears, as usual, that this whole thing has been blown out of all
proportion. According to the Guardian;
The Roundhouse's executive director, Marcus Evans, says the report is "a
storm in a teacup, probably down to a stage-hand getting a bit miffed."
He says it is true Michael Moore "got a bit upset. He'd had a death
threat and I think the pressure got to him. But he didn't hold the
audience up at all, and finished his last performance saying, 'This is a
great venue, and thankyou to everyone at the Roundhouse.'" Evans also
says that Moore apologised to him personally, and points out that
responsibility for Moore's pay, and for the hiring of staff, was down to
Moore's producers, who leased the Roundhouse for the duration of the run.
You can read the full article here:
Posted by: Bucky on January 9, 2003 12:10 PM
Sounds like Michael Moore is yearning for a black male lover...it figures.
Posted by: Harold on January 9, 2003 12:14 PM
Good observations. One of Jung's contentions is that we all project onto others what we fear about our selves [or words to that effect].
Now do Osama.
Posted by: Blake on January 9, 2003 02:08 PM
Along the lines of what Bucky said, you ma want to check this out, Ray-dawg.
You may wish to throw MM back into the category 'of guys I hate cuz what they actually do'
(the story is from Jan 9th)
Posted by: Nick on January 9, 2003 02:24 PM
I have now seen over the last several days several recountings of what MM has been saying in the UK recently. If the leftists of the UK are upset with what he said, what do they think Americans think about his insulting behavior. I think Rachael has made some very good points about MMís personality. I tent to view him as a very sick, self-loathing a$$hole. If he had said those things in close proximity to me, he might have paid a significant physical price. One of my friends was on the Pentagon flight. He was a retired Navy Captain, fighter pilot and test pilot. After the combat missions he flew, to call him a coward is beyond reprehensible. The cowardly rag heads used the airline rules against us. As the heroes of flight 93 demonstrated, it wonít happen again.
We white guys are used to being insulted by draft dodging scum like MM, but do you think black men are insulted by called thugs? If I were MM, I donít think I would want to find out.
I understand he is back in the USA. I suspect he is keeping a low profile at the moment. He shows his face in public, he is apt to get his a$$ kicked.
Posted by: Tom C. on January 9, 2003 02:34 PM
If Mr. Moore is indeed a homosexual, then I wish that his fellow homosexual Mark Bingham was also alive to have a little chat with Moore and ------------ (pardon the language again please). Bingham, you see, was one of those "scaredy-cats" on Flight 93. There are a good number of people of that sexual persuasion who don't share Moore's political persuasion by a long shot (e.g., Andrew Sullivan, Camille Paglia).
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 10, 2003 03:13 PM
The anti-Mike Moore (other than Rachel herself): Jim Goad, Angry White Man, _not_ racist, also _not_ Politically Correct. Gun Nut. He put out the excellent misanthopist magazine "Answer Me!" for a while, and is the author of "The Redneck Manifesto", a _must-read_. I'm urging everybody to read it. Probably the most dangerous book in America, and the definitive answer to Moore's stupid "Stupid White Men". I love Goad, he offends _everybody_. His populism complements my own Nietzschean elitism.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 10, 2003 04:09 PM
I decided to read one of Moore's books recently. A friend lent me "Stupid White Men". I'm so glad I didn't pay money for it. I can buy cheaper toilet paper almost anywhere and I'd hate the thought that Moore had made any money out of me.
Moore is sexist and racist well beyond the point of insanity, IMNSHO. Maybe he should get together with Andrea Dworkin, or another kindred spirit like her.
I realise that it's possible for an insane bigot to say something truthful on issues not related to their bigotry, but I don't think this is the case with Moore. At best, he's looking at a tiny part of the picture and extrapolating wildly. Even ignoring his racism and sexism, I get a picture of someone lying in the middle of the road and loudly proclaiming that roads are white, because they are staring intensely at the lines painted in the middle of the road and ignoring everything else.
As an aside...does anyone know of any examples of anyone who is hugely prejudiced against a biogroup that they are themselves part of, other than some feminist men like Moore?
Posted by: Angilion on January 11, 2003 07:33 PM
I like your analysis of Moore.
Personally, I detest his values, hypocrisy, and most of all, his mediocrity. I don't know how he has convinced so many people that mediocrity is interesting. Anyone who stops for a second to think about what he says will find that his "arguments" are all about hype and minimal actual information. Bowling for Colombine was simply a rant with soundbites, the questions he presents in the beginning center around those kids and "why did they commit this gruesome crime". Instead of leading in the direction of answers to what started as an interesting question, Moore indulges himself (and the uncritical masses) in a rant about guns, welfare, and oh yeah- how all is better in Canada.
It's time to stop defending blue-collar just because it's "chic".
Posted by: ranabak on January 12, 2003 02:14 AM
I'd like to hear less about Moore. He isn't the problem. I'm more concerned about the people who buy his s***. If it weren't for them, Moore would be just another fat loser working in a convenience store.
Posted by: Alan Sullivan on January 12, 2003 09:58 AM
Moore is an Idiot who would have converted to Islam and joined the F kers on the planes heading for the targets.
The rest of us regardless of our colour,
Whould heve followed any one who was leading regardless of ethnicity...
once we realised there intentions.
I have several friends black ,white ,rich ,Semi rich ,semi poor who would not go quietly.
I fly a lot for business and what used t to be pleasure .
And i assert that all the passengers are profiling.
And i Assert that the Americans i meet regardless of age or sex or background are ready to fight .
YOu may kill some of us but we will not be beaten by an 80 pound weekling with a box cutter.Cheers from Sunny Florida
Posted by: NEilVanEerde on January 12, 2003 01:06 PM
Maybe Mike's just having some personal problems.
In one of his early books he admitted to being impotent... That would be enough to make ME chew people's heads off 4 days out of 5.
Posted by: Anonymous on January 13, 2003 10:50 AM
In answer to Angilion's excellent comments here and to his question, there is indeed a precedent for Moore: Otto Wieninger, a Jew in the early part of the 20th century, who accepted, internalized, and articulated the anti-Semitic ideology that became Nazism, and committed suicide. Hitler once said Weininger was the only Jew he liked.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson on January 14, 2003 09:23 AM
(1) Great article; I've never liked Moore.
(2) To Bill W., who made a comment about "the dominant right wing media", what the heck are you thinking? Statistics show that the media is far to the left of the American public. Worse, they try to force their propaganda down the throats of innocent, well-meaning citizens. Ever read "Bias" by (I believe) Bernard Goldberg? I suggest you give it a read.
Posted by: CTC on January 20, 2003 02:39 PM
I'd like you to back your accusations up with some proof before you drag Moores good name into the mud. Why do you hate what you don't understand. Thats the problem here I believe that you just don't understand Moore. Why would someone care if there shoes are made by 14 year old girls in Indonesia. Why would someone care about 30,000 workers in FLINT OF ALL PLACES! I MEAN WHO'S EVER HEARD OF FLINT! I think your idea's boil down to a don't ask don't tell policy. The less you know the better it is for you. Ya know what thats just wrong...Moore has a consince, some human decency. It's something we lack in this world today. I respect him for it and hope he continues on with his work.
Posted by: Joe on January 29, 2003 10:02 PM
The scary part I've encountered in the workplace is intelligent professionals actually take a silly left-wing twit like Mike Moore seriously. If people like Moore ran this country we'd still be debating whether to go into Afganistan and apologizing for making those poor 911 darlings so angry in the first place...
Posted by: Darius on February 11, 2003 07:30 AM
I hate that fat fucking piece of shit named Michael Moore. What a fucking dickhead....The press of course didnt cover his comments, because most in the press are a bunch of leftist pussies. Funny how liberal Michael Moore is...who know how many "big corporation" hostess twinkies " Cokes he downs a day.
Posted by: GG on February 15, 2003 09:27 PM
Post a Followup