On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:16:46PM -0800, Isaiah Weiner wrote:
> Okay, so tell us what you think about his open letter to Bush. ;)
>
> http://www.michaelmoore.com/2002_0129.html
>
Wow! What a lot of drivel!
First thing, his snide, sniping tone tells me that he most likely plays
fast and loose with facts. I don't much listen to folks who write like
this, because they never fail to throw out a million "facts" that may or
may not be true. You could make a career out of trying to track down
what they purport to be true. And most often, I find that either their
"facts" are incorrect, or the spin they've put on them makes them seem
like something entirely more sinister than what they are.
Part of this point is that Bush is "in bed" with Enron and other people
connected with Enron. But selecting people for your administration from
people you like and work with is a time-honored tradition practiced by
Republicans and Democrats alike. I couldn't care less. Whether they can
do the job is the real issue. And if they've actually been in business,
then I suspect they're ten times better than a bunch of lawyers and
people who've spent most of their adult lives at the government trough.
I've dealt with a few lawyers close up (no one on this list, and not as
a client). They're hell to deal with. They'd rather argue than eat. I
wouldn't have them administer a pizza parlor.
Also, remember that not everyone connected with Enron were crooks. Just
because someone worked for or had something to do with Enron does not
mean they deserve to be pilloried. Some Enron/Andersen folks were evil,
some were hapless dupes and some were completely out of the loop. It's
like saying someone who visited Europe is a socialist.
And if even half of these allegations were true, do you imagine for a
second that they wouldn't be splattered all over the front pages of
every newspaper in the country, starting with the New York Times?
Absolutely they would. The liberal press hates Bush. In fact, I haven't
seen this much hatred since Ronald Reagan. I take it as an index of how
decent the guy is, when the press can't stand him.
And having skimmed this letter, you can pretty much grok the tone of his
book. Why would you want to read something like that? If someone's going
to make accusations, let them make them in a calm, reasoned manner. Not
this catty, nyah nyah nyah attitude. Ugh.
And FWIW, much as I dislike Clinton, I wouldn't read this kind of drivel
about him either. I think Clinton was a criminal of the highest order. I
think there are serious crimes he committed that we'll never know about.
But I don't really care to read innuendo and baseless sarcasm masked as
"facts" about him.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:06:34 EDT