It would appear that the creator of this site is trying to backtrack and say thank you for the money now that he’s in the spotlight

He writes in his most recent comment on moorewatch.com:

” Lastly, I have in fact thanked Michael time and time again, and would take this opportunity to do so once more:

Michael Moore: Thank you. Regardless of all the publicity, the emails, the nonsense that others are adding to this situation, you did in fact help me at a time when I needed it, and I am grateful for that. Emotionally, I feel like you did something nice. It doesn’t change how I feel about your work intellectually, but you did do something that truly helped me and my family and for that, I thank you.”

But just a little while ago before all this broke he was singing a different tune (from, http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1627/):

“If this was Moore behind it all, then I have to say…nice try, dude, but I’m not going to play your game. You can call it a cost of promotion. This site has sold more books and DVDs for you than that $12,000 could ever buy. You’ve gotten your money’s worth. If it was you, Mikey…your $12,000 doesn’t buy my silence. It won’t buy my affection, nor will I shy away from talking about whatever may or may not be in your new film. I’ll still be the same guy, expressing my opinion and trying his best to research facts you tend to skip over or ignore. All you bought for your money - if it was yours - was the peace of mind of knowing you actually helped someone who needed it.”

The latter is hardly a thank you. But I commend the owner of this place for at least getting around to doing the right thing.  Sites like these are useful if they attempt to (as much as possible) objectively debate the ideas of those they oppose.  90% of everything on this place is slanderous personal attacks and redundant rhetoric that are arguably more unfounded and less objective than Moore himself.  I watch Mike’s movies with a grain of salt, but I don’t passionately hate the guy which appears to be at the core of the people behind this place.

The site admin repeadtedly points out all immature emails he gets, yet his discourse is rarely any better.  Not to mention that there are dolts on all sides of the spectrum.  If this were a left wing site and Ann Coulter had done something generous for the site’s owner in a fashion similar to this, you’d have the equivilent right wing loonies doing exactly what this guy is complaining about.

To the guy who got 12 grand.  Just say thank you.  Wait for the movie to come out, and objectively critique it.  Point out both the good and bad.  The polarization of politics and the inability for Americans to give concessions to one another is fucking ridiculous.  It’s time to cut out the pissing match and have a civil debate.

Check out the rules - 10 posts before you are allowed to start a thread.

This is really pretty basic, I don’t understand why people are having such a hard time with it.
a) He’s thankful for the gift. You’ll notice that even in the earlier post you mention, he acknowledges that Moore helped him.
b) Just because he’s grateful does not mean he’s now obligated to never be critical of anything Moore does again.
If you really want to make a point, please explain where any statement he made in the later post actually contradicts any statement in the earlier post. I’m not really going to hold my breath though.

my apologies.  I won’t post anything else until then.

No, adamb, you can post, you just can’t start a thread. Welcome to the forum.

Yeah that’s what I meant.  Cheers! :)

By the way, I’m a commie pinko libtard and I can tell you right now that in these forums 90% is most certainly not “slanderous personal attacks and redundant rhetoric”. If you’ve got an argument, this is a place to set it out, and you’ll soon discover new ways of looking at things, whether you like it or not. Read some of the discussions in the General Discussion area. Have a laugh in the Hangout section. Honestly, it’s worth taking a peek. This is different from the main site (where I only go if prompted by something on here, which very rarely happens).

point noted, I’ll keep an eye on these forums.

CM - 20 May 2007 05:44 PM

By the way, I’m a commie pinko libtard.....

:bug: I knew it! Do they have Dental?

Rapid R - 20 May 2007 10:26 PM

CM - 20 May 2007 05:44 PM

By the way, I’m a commie pinko libtard.....

:bug: I knew it! Do they have Dental?

They have everything. And it’s all ‘free’!

Welcome Adamb.  Unlike some of the other tourists we’ve had here this weekend, you seem like you’re not a total crackpot.  Anyone who uses the word “objectively” and then puts it in bold lettering can’t be all bad. ;-)

You say JimK should be quiet, say thank you, wait for the movie to come out and objectively critique it.  That seems fair enough.  But wouldn’t you agree that it’s possible for someone (me for instance) to objectively critique Moore’s tactics in this whole JimGate affair - to mount an objective, rational argument critiquing the ethics of Moore’s actions.

And wouldn’t you also agree that if it’s possible for me to make such an argument, then it is also possible for JimK to do so.  You could say that he lacks objectivity, but then again he can counter that by saying he has the best handle on the facts.  Sure, he risks looking ungrateful by retorting as he has, but I guess JimK has weighed that risk and decided that he’s far better off doing what he’s always done - saying exactly what he thinks.

CM - 20 May 2007 05:44 PM

By the way, I’m a commie pinko libtard

Says who? You’re a Euro Thinker.

biafra - 21 May 2007 08:20 AM

CM - 20 May 2007 05:44 PM

By the way, I’m a commie pinko libtard

Says who? You’re a Euro Thinker.

I fear that’s not going to mean much to people like adamb who haven’t had the fortune (before now) to inhabit your universe.

(edit - ‘fortunate’ becomes ‘fortune’)

r.j. - 21 May 2007 07:17 AM

Welcome Adamb.  Unlike some of the other tourists we’ve had here this weekend, you seem like you’re not a total crackpot.  Anyone who uses the word “objectively” and then puts it in bold lettering can’t be all bad. ;-)

You say JimK should be quiet, say thank you, wait for the movie to come out and objectively critique it.  That seems fair enough.  But wouldn’t you agree that it’s possible for someone (me for instance) to objectively critique Moore’s tactics in this whole JimGate affair - to mount an objective, rational argument critiquing the ethics of Moore’s actions.

Ok sure...here’ my attempt at an “objective” take on it since total objectivity is never possible, as I think you were trying to show: 

I would say that I don’t think Michael Moore is doing this out of the goodness of his heart.  If he was, it wouldn’t be in the movie, and he wouldn’t have outted himself as the donor.  But irrespective of this, Jim did get 12k from Moore after essentially making it his mission to take the guy down.  Jim has apparently benefited substantially from this.  On the other hand, Jim has become a piece of content for a movie that is being sold to millions...and in a sense he has been compensated for this in an unnegotiated sort of way, which is perhaps unfair...so I wouldn’t say he was “given” the money.  In fact, I can agree with many of his arguments, I just don’t care about his situation and I admittedly get a chuckle from it.  I think in a way, a poetic justice has been done because whether you agree with Moore or not, the main page of this site has rarely risen above Moore and often stooped below by too often concentrating on villifying the guy personally (his weight, etc.).  Rising above Moore would be conceding when he makes a point and debating his ideas when he doesn’t, the over simplicity of his solutions.  I’m sure that happens here, but it gets mixed in with all this viscious garbage.  Here’s the first thing I see when I come to the main page of this site:

“Chuck Yarborough is a columnist for the Cleveland Plain Dealer.  He’s also—and there’s no polite way to put this—a total fucking douchebag, a real dumbass moron.  Here are his words on the $12,000 incident. “

michaelmoore.com, for all of its spin and one sidedness doesn’t include language like “fucken douchebag or dumbass moron”.  Language like this makes the site look inarticulate and lacking intelligence.

Moore appears to be a little self absorbed, but I don’t know the guy and I would reckon that nobody involved in the creation of this site does.  Therefore all you have to go on is heresay or reports of people who have worked with him.  Even then, everyone has friends and enemies.  Its fine to mention his hypocracy, but to dwell on it, doesn’t really challenge his ideas.  Anyone who enters the public spotlight can instantly become a hypocrite if enough dirt is dug up on them.  Hypocracy is something that you could probably find in the vast majority of humans.  We simply don’t do as we say 100% of the time.  This is by virtue of the fact that our rhetoric tends to espouse what we would idealize most of the time, living up to all this rhetoric seems easy until we are forced to do it.  For the 99.9% of people who aren’t in the public eye, nobody really notices.  If all the sides in the political sphere waited around for saints to represent them, nothing would get done.  Bush has done hypocrtical things.  So has Moore, and basically anyone else out there.

Anyway..that’s sort of my take on it.  If this site cleaned up its act a bit, it could offer a formidable alternative to Moore’s viewpoints.  It doesn’t take Mike to make the creators look like asses, you just have to read the first page to get that impression.  That said they’re probably not asses on the whole, but that’s the message they communicate.

Adamb,

Let me direct you to blahduck’s post near the end of the “Who is JimK” topic.  There, she gives another new user some very helpful advice on how to find the actual Moore-related material on this site.  It’s been a while since F911, so a lot of the blog posts over the last couple of years are often about other things.  I’m not sure you’ll find the language much better, but it will show you what this site offers when Moore is actively pushing an agenda.

adamb - 21 May 2007 06:13 PM

michaelmoore.com, for all of its spin and one sidedness doesn’t include language like “fucken douchebag or dumbass moron”.  Language like this makes the site look inarticulate and lacking intelligence.

If you want to discuss rap just open another thread.

But the fact is some of us just hung out the DU to learn proper dialogue, discussion and dissent because they were understandably eons ahead of us both technically and lingually. Oh and they simply own Photochop.  We’re just life imitating art here. 

But see, Mikey website doesn’t have a forum section either does it? “So much for dialogue, discussion and dissent.”

Mikey even shills for Fox if Fox says what he likes. Shouldn’t Mikey steer his sheep away from Fox? 

“Brilliant and Uplifting”
-- FOX News