Moore’s affect on foreign policy (or the lack of it)
Michael Moore has been invited to address the Los Angeles World Affair Council on Dec 6.
For those of you unfamiliar with the LAWAC, they describe their organization like this:
The Los Angeles World Affairs Council seeks to promote a better understanding of current world affairs by hosting prominent speakers and giving our members the chance to hear them first-hand.
The Council does not endorse or promote any specific viewpoint, but invites speakers with differing opinions and expects attendees to show respect for those viewpoints.
In their recent press release, they prefaced Moore’s speech with the following:
By all accounts, one of the most electrifying motion pictures of the last year was Michael Moore’s Fahrebheit 9/11. The film, a harsh blast against George W. Bush, his administration, the Iraq war, shattered box office records while attracting both fierce advocates and furious detractors, reflecting in many ways the extreme polarization of the American public. But, what long-term affect , if any, do controversial films such as Fahrenheit 9/11 have on American conscoiusness and on the way we shape and implement our foreign policy.
It has also prompted a backlash against Michael Moore, from websites to books to a counter-“documentary” , Michael Moore Hates America.
( I guess we would be some of those “furious detractors”?)
I guess thier question is a valid one, if not a little obvious. Has Fahrenheit 9/11 affected our foreign policy? Well, let’s see....
The day after 9-11, President Bush told us:
Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans. Our military is powerful, and it’s prepared. Our emergency teams are working in New York City and Washington, D.C. to help with local rescue efforts.
Our first priority is to get help to those who have been injured, and to take every precaution to protect our citizens at home and around the world from further attacks.
The functions of our government continue without interruption. Federal agencies in Washington which had to be evacuated today are reopening for essential personnel tonight, and will be open for business tomorrow. Our financial institutions remain strong, and the American economy will be open for business, as well.
The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I’ve directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.
...and that’s pretty much been our foreign policy since. Even Moore conceded on The Tonight Show this week that Bush set out a course and stuck to it. So, if there’s been no change in policy, then I guess it wasn’t affected.
I think it’s pretty important for the President to stick to his guns, not be bull-headed, but maintain focus on the task of addressing this golbal terrorism issue. So far, he done an incredible job of refusing to pander to folks like Moore, no matter how much they scream. Perhaps things would have been different if Kerry won the election. He “claimed” not have not seen Moore’s movie before the election, but he quoted scenes from it verse-and-chorus several times during the campaign. We might have found ourselves with a more easily influenced President if it wasn’t for us red staters.
Some might argue that since Osama Bin Laden also referred to the Sarasota, Florida classroom scene, it may affect people outside the US. However, I think that Moore fell short in actually changing the course of anything in US foreign policy, if indeed that was his goal. I suspect he actually met his goal of becoming a household name ( and filthy rich).
In the absence of a foreign policy affect, there was domestic impact. Moore definitely added to the polarization of the country and I think Moore made the “documentary” profitable in the eyes in Hollywood, so we can expect to see more copycat films like this for the next few years. He invented talking points. He energized the moonbats and reinvigorated the greying flower children. He also really energized the young right wingers, and for that we can be thankful. ( even though at 38 I can’t be considered young anymore, he energized to too) He did make a big wave domestically, not in policy, but among the folks. He did do a lot.
But did he affect foreign policy?
Save your 65 dollars monday night and skip the speech.
The answer is no.
RSS (Subscribe)