The Declarer (Floyd McWilliams' Blog)

Monday, June 28, 2004

Is it fair to make fun of Michael Moore's girth? Jeff Goldstein explains why he does so -- though on AndyMatic's blog, not his own:

You may not believe me (and hey, that's cool, I'll live with the shame and disappointment), but when I aim a fat joke at Michael Moore, I believe myself to be answering him back in the same language he uses to attack his subjects -- unserious, broad pandering. Moore is a decent humorist, but his lazy collage of elliptical "arguments" do not make him a serious critic of the Bush administration. They make him a crank with a camera and budget and an opinion. When Moore makes a serious argument, I'll happily debate him on the merits. But he's not making a serious argument; and so he doesn't deserve a serious response. Worse, he intentionally plays fast and loose with the facts, and then when he's called out on his errors, suddenly he's a "satirist" rather than a documentarian. I try to reinforce Moore's unseriousness every day by ignoring his "arguments" altogether and instead harping on his girth. It's my way of showing that I don't take him seriously. And to my way of thinking, it's even more important to do so now, when his premieres are attracting the who's who of the Democratic party. Like it or not, Moore is becoming tied to the Dems. Terry McAuliffe seems to want to make the tether official. Fine by me. But I'll continue belittling more for being unserious, in the hope that the same stigma gets attached to McAuliffe, et al.



Post a Comment