Moore always knew what sells to his readers: in this case, Rahmflu.
He writes a letter to Obama offering himself as a replacement to Rahm.
Michael does see the writing on the wall as many of us do
More and more people are looking at the wreckage of their middle class lives and they’re not buying the propaganda you’re catapulting anymore. They’re starting to trust their lying eyes. All you need is one good movement to catch fire.
But Moore has a readership/viewership to protect and he thinks that attacking Obama might cause him to lose some paying customers.
So he twists himself like a pretzel to “hate the sin, absolve the sinner” So he comes up with laughable sentences such as
I will come to D.C. and clean up the mess that’s been created around you.
Barack – the little boy who can’t clean his room and needs MM to push the toys and empty bottles away. Or change his diaper. Or wipe his nose.
Or maybe shoo the flies that are sitting on his face.
Because in MM’s world (the one he’s selling today), Obama is just a sweet naive guy who got fooled by the mean Republicans
You’re such a good guy, Mr. President. You came to Washington with your hand extended to the Republicans and they just chopped it off.
Yeah, Michael. it was Republicans who danced a jig over the firing of a whole school of teachers. It was Republicans that overfed the evil, destructive Goldman Sachs. It was Republicans that made secret deals with pharma and hospitals and said they never campaigned on the public option. It was Republicans who just tried to dip in the Social Security and Medicare. It was Republicans who extended the Patriot Act and let Bush’s torturers off the hook. Or was it?
I guess that’s all part of “the mess created around Obama”. By whom?
Of course, Michael does know. He hinted it last September in his interview with Amy Goodman
But as I point out in the film, President Obama received an enormous amount of money from financial institutions, employees of those institutions. And the employees of Goldman Sachs were his number one private contributor, donating almost a million dollars to his campaign.
So, Michael, if you will replace Rahm, who will replace Goldman Sachs?
And why should I trust you any more than Rahm when you are so deceptive in your job application?
In B0botland this is their favorite topic. Pretty much wall to wall swooning with a few exceptions taken by Deaniacs
18. I love MM, but I have to correct him on one thing. It was Howard Dean
NOT Rahm Emmanuel who won a majority for the Dems in 2006. Other than that, as always, he makes good points and does it simply and with humor.
ChiciB1
65. That Was ONE Comment That Stuck Out To Me!!! RAA-UUUMMM Took CREDIT
for it, and many in D.C., because they couldn’t stand Dean, just went right along and GAVE him the credit!But IT WAS DEAN and his 50-state strategy that was so effective! Given RAA-UUUMMM’s ego, he just strutted right up and said… Yeah, I WAS THE ONE, I DID this, so “see me, hear me, LOVE ME!” While I was never one to like him much, when he pulled this one and dissed Dean, my ire increased immensely!
I have very little respect for him, and have several choice names to define him, but I’ll leave it at that!
I think I’ll give them that one. With all the glory that goes with it – cramming the party with anti-choicers leading to the crappy HCR today
Howard Dean is justifying fielding pro-life candidates in 2006 – his famous 50 states strategy did this to us.
“Those candidates are so much better on all the other issues”
(in other words, who cares about women’s rights – we get our numbers)
Only one seems to get it
It is time for the left and center-left people in this board to stop trying to project things on a center-right fellow like Obama. I understand that the Obama electoral machine was fairly hand wavy regardless their actual ideological leanings, probably to maximize their electoral base by allowing people to project their expectations on Mr. Obama. But honestly, he walks, talks, and quacks like a moderate conservative, so I think it is time to stop giving the benefit of the doubt… and stop enabling this whole charade.
Want liberal agendas and policies to be enabled or at least represented? Simple, elect actual liberals to office.
but the rest ignore that flicker of sanity. Moore made them feel good again – they can cheer and applaud again!
I still believe in a great President Barack Obama… I can only hope he makes it so!
THANKS MM!!!!
Anther con-artist blew in town and made it all better. At least for his followers. The rest…
…
12 comments
March 6, 2010 at 8:26 pm
cj
Did Hollywood get a fresh batch of kool-aid last week…and the same simple-minded script? “Poor naive Barack, his only real flaw is the goodness in his heart?”
If that’s the new talking point out of Hollywood (via the WH), then they’re dumber than I thought.
March 6, 2010 at 8:44 pm
edgeoforever
In all fairness, they are kinda fresh out of tricks…
March 6, 2010 at 11:45 pm
hennie1
I don’t know, Michael Moore replacing Rahm doesn’t sound like a bad idea. We could get George Clooney to take David Axelrod’s job as senior advisor. And Susan Sarandon would be the pefect replacement for Valerie Jarrett. I’m thinking Matt Damon is just about the right heighth to take Robert Gibb’s job. We need some real liberals working for America. It’s almost starting to sound like a blockbuster.
March 7, 2010 at 2:02 am
Fredster
Nah, cuz they’re all still believing the bullshit that Barack peddles. Sorry, that won’t work.
March 7, 2010 at 7:09 am
edgeoforever
And that was exactly my reservation too. Well, besides none of them, present and wanna be replacement knows anything about policy and governing.
March 7, 2010 at 7:25 am
Pips
So why don’t we put the kids in command once and for all? You know, the ones that made mom and dad vote for Obama. 😉
March 7, 2010 at 12:02 pm
hennie1
Damn! I thought Hollywood had all the answers. They talk as though they do. I’m not too sure that anyone in the administration knows much about policy or governing. Except for Hillary.
March 7, 2010 at 7:46 am
Pips
While I know that Obama’s campaign wasn’t flawless (another “sell” by the media), I actually think they got the “You/they’ve got nowhere else to go.” right!
Come election time, too many Democrats will still/again be scared /shamed /persuaded into voting for the one they believe to be the D. Just like in 2008!
And it still annoys me to think back to how many votes Hillary Clinton secured for Obama. So many, who knew better, still voted for him because “Hillary told me to” !
(This is not a slam at Hillary Clinton, merely an example of how … insecure many voters can be.)
March 7, 2010 at 7:50 am
edgeoforever
If you read the excellent Riverdaughter piece I linked in the beginning of the entry – she makes the good point that voting is not mandatory. As my cartoon in the end illustrates, this time, a lot of people will stay home (like many did in Massachusets senate election)
March 7, 2010 at 11:49 am
Pips
My comment was ment, partly, as a response to Riverdaughter’s post. 😉 I just don’t see Democratic voters not once again being scared /shamed /persuaded (manipulated!) into voting for the presumed Democrat.
Of course, they’ll have to come up with new tactics as “coathangers” to scare, “race” to shame, and “hope’n change” to persuade won’t cut it the next time around.
I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong but, come 2012, I believe once again the media gets to decide. Don’t forget that, according to this, http://tinyurl.com/ydomqyf
“most of what the public learns is still overwhelmingly driven by traditional media—particularly newspapers.”
And … MM is a fool !
March 7, 2010 at 2:02 pm
la-t-da
Very nice piece, edgeoforever. Indeed, seems they all had a meeting last week to rally the cry babies warriors.
“Axelrod suffering from burnout under the guise of scrutiny.”
http://wiredleft.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/violins-anyone/
March 7, 2010 at 2:38 pm
edgeoforever
Great piece on the article! The same BTW that Obama Times published today on page one. Disclosing their “source” much?