I pointed out that people (I wasn't more specific than that--I really didn't think I needed to be) had been dismantling Moore for years now, carefully and with references, and that nobody gave a rat's rump until suddenly two leftist filmmakers I don't know from a hole in the ground said something.
Why? Apparently because they have the right political stickers on their car. Screw the facts, screw the research. It doesn't count until the right person says it.
And this is what I got back from you. Not Bowser, you:
Maybe it's just because people no longer trust the "official sources". It's one of the unintended consequences of having an effective, disciplined and highly organized public relations machine. After a while, no one believes you any more.
I just sat there with my jaw open. Who the heck did you think I was talking about when I said others had criticized Moore? Who did you mean by "official sources?" Or a "highly organized public relations machine?" Did you think I got the information off a White House web site? From Karl Rove? Fox News? The Illuminati? Where on Earth did that idea even come from?
In point of fact, most of the people who have been showing Moore up for what he is are amateurs, basically no different than me, people on blogs or other places who just took the time and effort to actually check things out. I said so:
Do you think the criticisms I'm talking about came from "The Man?"
Here's just just one webpage on "Bowling For Columbine." With links.
Do you understand that all it usually takes to expose bullshit is a little time and some basic research? I do it here all the time. It's something any reporter could do if they really gave a rat's ass about the truth.
That last part was a rant against the "professional" news sites and movie reviewers, who suck up Moore's stuff because it makes them feel good, and because they want it all to be true. Despite the fact that they have even more access to research than the rest of us, they didn't care if it was lies or not.
Why you lit on me for that, I don't know.
If I come back at people again and again, it's because I don't let them get away with the evasions, incorrect facts, and vague bloviations that probably serve them quite well in their normal arguments. The rest of the time the back-and-forth is because I have to keep frigging explaining and, too often, simplifying my point until I'm ready to scream.
Here's the bottom line:
Michael Moore has been shown in no arguable terms to be a consistent and deliberate liar almost from his first film. This was not done by calling him names, but by careful research and step-by-step descriptions. Moore has not responded with any real answers. He doesn't care. He knows his target audience doesn't either.
That suddenly some leftist discovers this does not change this fact in any way.