>What am I supposed to be grateful for? The chance to look like an ass? The chance to be in his movie? For him throwing me pocket change in order to try to humiliate me later? That’s why he did it. Period.
How about, “badly needed care for his wife at a hard time?” Why is this all about him, instead of about his wife? He doesn’t think Moore is sincere? Fine. He can still say “thank you. This won’t change what I think of Michael Moore, this won’t affect what I write, but thank you.”
Like I said before, Moore set up JimK to look like an idiot. That’s why I drew a distinction between JimK’s right to criticise both Moore’s politics and his tactics. You are saying he can do one but not the other. JimK is simply arguing that Moore’s tactics in “writing him into the story” are below the belt.
Just think about what Moore did - He gave someone 12K anonymously, then told the world he did it right before the release of his new film. You can argue the toss about whether JimK should have accepted it, but how can you possibly argue that Moore’s actions in going public were right and decent.
And given that Moore’s actions were less than honourable, doesn’t JimK have the right to say so.
So he thanked Moore, but then as soon as he found out that Moore was going to use it in the movie - oh dear oh dear oh dear.
>Jim is in a bit of a lose/lose situation right now — and Moore is the one mostly to blame for putting him there. As I see it, at this point, Moore is defining the situation, people are getting bad information, so JimK is trying to get his voice heard.
Lose lose?? It’s win-win: his wife got cured and he’s going to get many, many more hits on the site. Instead of smiling through this, and taking it like a pro, he’s whimpering and whining about exploitation. And this is ridiculous JimK has made himself a public person by putting himself out as the anti-Moore. Have any defects or mistakes or errors in Moore’s persona been off base for attacks on this site? But the rules are different for JimK?
But here’s a thought. Moore’s film is about shortcomings in the American healthcare system. Why doesn’t JimK just take the high road and tell everyone how well the free enterprise/charity safety net in the system worked for him?
Like I said before, Moore set up JimK to look like an idiot. That’s why I drew a distinction between JimK’s right to criticise both Moore’s politics and his tactics. You are saying he can do one but not the other. JimK is simply arguing that Moore’s tactics in “writing him into the story” are below the belt.
Set up?? If so, JimK played absolutely perfectly into Moore’s hands. Maybe part of this has to do with why Moore is an internatinally recognized filmmaker whose films have set box office records for documentaries, and JimK is a bedroom blogger who can’t pay his wife’s medical bills. But can whine about getting a huge burst of publcity that will translate directly into web hits.
Just think about what Moore did - He gave someone 12K anonymously, then told the world he did it right before the release of his new film. You can argue the toss about whether JimK should have accepted it, but how can you possibly argue that Moore’s actions in going public were right and decent.
And given that Moore’s actions were less than honourable, doesn’t JimK have the right to say so.
Don’t forget, rj: He didn’t just reveal himself as the donor in the press, he used the story as a bit in the movie.
IMO, that is a very important piece of the story that everyone should remember.
Set up?? If so, JimK played absolutely perfectly into Moore’s hands. Maybe part of this has to do with why Moore is an internatinally recognized filmmaker whose films have set box office records for documentaries, and JimK is a bedroom blogger who can’t pay his wife’s medical bills. But can whine about getting a huge burst of publcity that will translate directly into web hits.
There’s that compassion for the “little guy” for which Moore fans are renowned.
LOL no offense, but seeing some of these new posts actually makes me appreciate CM and rj. While you guys might be pinko commies, lol. At least you know how to read.
>Jim is in a bit of a lose/lose situation right now — and Moore is the one mostly to blame for putting him there. As I see it, at this point, Moore is defining the situation, people are getting bad information, so JimK is trying to get his voice heard.
Lose lose?? It’s win-win: his wife got cured and he’s going to get many, many more hits on the site. Instead of smiling through this, and taking it like a pro, he’s whimpering and whining about exploitation. And this is ridiculous JimK has made himself a public person by putting himself out as the anti-Moore. Have any defects or mistakes or errors in Moore’s persona been off base for attacks on this site? But the rules are different for JimK?
But here’s a thought. Moore’s film is about shortcomings in the American healthcare system. Why doesn’t JimK just take the high road and tell everyone how well the free enterprise/charity safety net in the system worked for him?
I say lose/lose because Moore is defining the story, he’s doing so incorrectly according to Jim, and there are thousands of people coming to this site, sending emails, reading about the story elsewhere who are completely mistaken about the facts.
Jim tries to set the record straight, and people go off on him and say he should just be quiet and take the money. If Jim stays quiet, then people assume that Moore’s narrative is true, and Jim looks bad.
Either way, Jim stands to have his reputation suffer. This isn’t just about money, and at this point it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he was given a check and everything to do with Moore’s decision to exploit that fact.
There are two sides to every story, and you are basically calling Jim names for trying to tell his side. That’s not asking him to “take the high road”, that’s asking him to “play the fool” and I don’t blame Jim for not going along with it.
Just think about what Moore did - He gave someone 12K anonymously, then told the world he did it right before the release of his new film. You can argue the toss about whether JimK should have accepted it, but how can you possibly argue that Moore’s actions in going public were right and decent.
“Going public??” He’s a documetary filmmaker. Going public is what he does. He ‘went public’ on gun dealers and General Motors and Paul Wolfowitz and My Pet Goat. Is the idea that documentary filmmaking isn’t ‘right and decent’ unless the subjects love the result?? Or was there something inaccurate about the report in the film?
There’s that compassion for the “little guy” for which Moore fans are renowned.
Yup, it’s amazing, isn’t it? Somehow, all Moore’s tactics are excused because he is “looking out for hte little guy”, even the tactic that involves stepping on the little guy because it fit’s the narrative.
Just think about what Moore did - He gave someone 12K anonymously, then told the world he did it right before the release of his new film. You can argue the toss about whether JimK should have accepted it, but how can you possibly argue that Moore’s actions in going public were right and decent.
“Going public??” He’s a documetary filmmaker. Going public is what he does. He ‘went public’ on gun dealers and General Motors and Paul Wolfowitz and My Pet Goat. Is the idea that documentary filmmaking isn’t ‘right and decent’ unless the subjects love the result?? Or was there something inaccurate about the report in the film?
Uhhh...the idea that it was a generous, anonymous donation is inaccurate if it ended up being revealed in the film. Is this really that hard to get?
Either way, Jim stands to have his reputation suffer. This isn’t just about money, and at this point it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he was given a check and everything to do with Moore’s decision to exploit that fact.
Reputation suffer how? Not for accepting the money. For not making enough to cover his wife’s medical expenses and having to ask for charity? I don’t think so, though, again, he might want to comment on the American healthcare system in light of his experience.
So where’s the damage? As far as I can see, the part that isn’t in his own mind is totally self-inflicted, by his churlish and self-centered reaction to the facts coming out - in the press and the Moore documentary.
But these are facts. And we have a contradiction. Here’s someone who spends his waking hours posting “facts’” attacking one person. Then when facts about him come out, he’s a poor, downtrodden little guy who’s being abused. Give us all a break.
There’s that compassion for the “little guy” for which Moore fans are renowned.
Where’s the pride and lack of self pity that American rightwing bloggers are known for demanding in others?
Show me where JimK acted shameful and pitiable. He’s upset that a supposedly aonymous donation was actually exploited for publicity by the donor. Can’t say I blame him. Now, show me this compassion that leftwingers claim is their native domain.
LOL no offense, but seeing some of these new posts actually makes me appreciate CM and rj. While you guys might be pinko commies, lol. At least you know how to read.
No need for me to add anything futher other to say that I agree 100% with Ducky’s analysis, who has this one well and truly nailed.
