TO CUT UP ANTI-MOORE ERECTIONS

Here is a valuable (the only one) right wing post which was submitted on another board, and my answer to it :

From rasqual :

Time for some soul searching from Mike

As I posted some time ago, Moore is either irrelevant (at least, with respect to this election) or counterproductive, turning people off. I think the election results vindicate that judgment.

Let's say Moore's fans wish to preserve the notion that Moore made a big mark in Kerry's favor in this election. In that case, there's something peculiar that bears explanation. If we were to give however many votes they imagine Mike gleaned to Bush, then we'd see that apart from Mike's work, Kerry would have lost by an even wider margin. This seems implausible; how could Kerry possibly lose worse than Al Gore with Moore's help, and if we discount Moore's help, even worse?

The logical conclusion of that line of thinking is that Americans lent Kerry less credence than Gore even when up against a president so much worse, if Moore, the man who helped Kerry so much, is to be believed. But this is incoherent. How is it possible that Moore's message that Bush is terrible won voters, whereas the man who's certainly much better than such a bad man lost them?

No, the answer's simpler. Moore isn't irrelevant -- he hurt Kerry. His effort was unbelievably huge. A blockbuster film. A book. Or was it two? A campaign DVD release. Giving pirates a pass on downloads of his film (it's everywhere now). A pre-election PPV showing. An unprecedented celebrity tour of campuses and other venues.

And Kerry lost worse than Gore. More votes for Bush than ever for any president. The Senate tipped deeply into Republican territory. Daschle is history. A few seats gained for Republicans in the House. That doesn't show that people are dupes who are fooled by Bush. It shows that Americans tarred the whole freakin' Democratic party with a brush Moore helpfully dipped in unattractive paint.

Moore apparently didn't even have anything in the queue for posting at his site in the event of a loss. This is a man who's so delusionally narcissistic that he can't imagine losing. And really, that's his downfall. Believing he can do no wrong, he persuades everyong that he's a dangerous nut case.

Mike, time for some soul-searching. Americans rightly saw you as the leader of the tinfoil hat brigade. Turn a corner and put your immense skills to work in an honest way.

http://www.michael-moore.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2831&posted=1#post2831

I've got an itch to smirk at how Mike is suddenly acknowledged as utterly relevant toward the election now that he has lost it and that the right wingers want to believe his credibility is dead. But your sincere and intelligent analysis deserves no irony and I’ll answer as respectfully as you posted. Thanks for your class.

First of all, Mike’s relevance is a factor among others. It has to be objectively measured, in itself, compared to other forces and put into perspective, and it probably will be. I agree with you he was extremely relevant. I always said he was. I have admired his will and his ability to pull it through. The fact that he has lost doesn’t change anything, it only proves relevance is not mastering reality.

I also agree that my beloved Irish hothead does need a cold shower from time to time. If he had won, I’m dead sure that he would have clattered his high heels like mad, asked Kerry to kiss his ass and made himself totally unbearable. He’s very conceited. He’s as conceited as he’s humble, and he’s conceited because he’s humble and vice-versa – but that’s not our topic.

Now what I don’t agree with is that Mike has hurt Kerry. The most objective reason is that responses are dialectical by definition, not isolated. What defined Mike was the image Kerry granted to him : a leper. Kerry refused to see F9/11, never acknowledged Mike, copiously humiliated his far left voters, banking on the fact they’d vote for him because of their detestation for Bush anyway. By doing so, he deprived himself of his most powerful and most precious support, and he let Mike’s persona take over his film. Mike is very left, F9/11 is not. Kerry could have taken the film and let aside the filmmaker. He could have used its treasure of facts, taken pride in its artistry, defined it for the mere revelation of what CNN should have shown 3 years ago that it was. But he preferred to treat it as the monster the neo-cons said it was. He went for the 30 pieces of silver of a few moderate pussies and undecided wankers.

And so Mike gradually had to define himself according to this poor place, and what’s more he had to compensate more and more for Kerry’s poor campaigning and various blunders. He started as an independent and distanced himself from Kerry as long as he could – to preserve the balance with Kerry’s own ignoring and also because he was aware of how polarizing he was. When it became obvious that Bush’s obnoxious smearing against Kerry was working all too well, he broke his silence for the first time, but not to praise Kerry, just to speak out against the slandering methods – and I was very moved because I thought of how much he personally knew about slander… It’s only a month ago that he officially announced he’d personally vote for Kerry, and even so, he never actually called to anyone else to do so. His message remained : “Get involved”.

If someone has hurt anyone else, I’d say Kerry hurt Mike.

That’s the truth. Of course, Bush’s propaganda told quite another story. Kerry’s lack of story, to be precise. Moore was a liar, a traitor, a pinko, and wait – a Democrat. Yes he could be both a pinko and a Democrat, you can spoon-feed anything to brainwashed dimwits, especially as long as there are spineless Dems around to confirm it by fleeing in horror from Mike’s bravery’s glorious stench.

Moore apparently didn't even have anything in the queue for posting at his site in the event of a loss. This is a man who's so delusionally narcissistic that he can't imagine losing. And really, that's his downfall. Believing he can do no wrong, he persuades everyong that he's a dangerous nut case.

Mike has been caught in a mad spiral. He was so genuinely frightened of Bush’s victory (I have a lot of quotes proving it) that he simply couldn’t bear the thought it could happen (he told so, word for word). So in order to convince the others, he convinced himself, and as he was the only one he was sure to have an effect on, he brainwashed himself into believing Kerry could do no wrong. His latest letters were shrill, unconvincing, poorly written.

It was all or nothing. He played his word and lost. He acted like a prince. An exhausted prince.

You see, pragmatism is part of the American soul. If you win, you’re right. If you lose, you’re wrong. Mike uses this spirit but doesn’t share it, and that’s what makes him a universalist even more than an American patriot. He always said a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do, whatever the consequences. That’s what he does. That’s what he’ll keep on doing. And that’s why I thanked him BEFORE the results.

PS – An anonymous hero just posted this on my blog, probably meaning harm : “hey mike......you can take kerry's cock outta your mouth now......”

Yes you can, poor Mike. Somewhere, somehow, you must be relieved.