I've mentioned him before as an influential liberal and been told he's nothing more than an entertainer and cannot be considered a Democrat mouthpiece.
Let's lay that fiction to rest, once and for all. He obviously has closer connections to the Democrat Party than Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter have to Republicans.
Excerpt:
...Michael Moore previewed his Bush-bashing documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11," before a mostly Democratic audience in the nation's capital Wednesday night.Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe said he thought [Fahrenheit 9/11] would play an important role in this election year.
Michael Moore a spokeman for my party. I'm depressed....
Posted by: Frank Martin at June 24, 2004 06:35 AMIt's okay, Marty. At least you don't have Bill O'Reilly or Tom DeLay.
Posted by: nathan at June 24, 2004 08:47 AMMarty-
Just because Terry McAuliffe has something to say about it and Democrats made up the majority of the audience does NOT make him "our" spokesman. No more than Margaert Cho, anyway! :)
Posted by: Jo at June 24, 2004 09:49 AMAnd from the horse's mouth (i.e. Moore):
"I have not publicly endorsed John Kerry. I am an independent. I am not a member of the Democratic Party."
Nor any less a spokesman than Margeret Cho, either. Which demonstrates my point.
So if Michael Moore says he's the purest example of unbiased objectivity, we should believe him because...?
Posted by: Nathan at June 24, 2004 10:20 PMLie down with dogs, get up with fleas. And the Democrat Party has been sleeping with some of the mangiest mutts for more than a decade.
Posted by: Nathan at June 24, 2004 10:21 PMJo, Marty, maybe you could just accuse him of being "put up to it" by Karl Rove.
I really don't think Moore's movie is going to help elect Kerry, or hurt Bush in any way, so this line could even be believed by the tinfoil-hat crowd.
You guys get free of Mikey's malodorous embrace, and us righties get to watch the moonbats eat their own. Everybody wins.
Whaddaya say?
Posted by: McGehee at June 25, 2004 06:51 AM"I really don't think Moore's movie is going to help elect Kerry, or hurt Bush in any way"
of course it isn't. I highly doubt a significant percentage of people who see the film will have their minds changed.
There's bonafide nutters on both sides of the political spectrum, I think we can both agree. That doesn't mean we necessarily align with them.
Go here for a complete library of the person I choose to be my official spokesman for the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Frank Martin at June 25, 2004 08:11 AMAnd actually, I don't have a problem with O'Reilly or Delay.
I think Delay is an excellent politician. I like that he knows how to use the power he has accumulated. I disagree with him on what he does with the power, but he is good at what he does.
And O'Reilly is an entertainer. I prefer him to Limbaugh or Coulter (although Ann is way easier on the eyes - in my opinion, anyway.)
Even Hannity is OK. While opinionated and firm in their beliefs, O'Reilly and Hannity at least try to be fair. Well, sometimes...
Posted by: Frank Martin at June 25, 2004 08:16 AMAs a lifelong democrat, I am sad to see the influence of Michael Moore on the democratic party elite. He seems to be leading them by the short ones.
My party is losing its relevancy and its integrity at an exponential rate. Only inertia is keeping me in.
Posted by: Helen at June 25, 2004 11:24 AM
Prev | List | Random | Next Powered by RingSurf! |
Pagerank |
Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |