Here's an excerpt from Michael Moore's own website: you can read the rest
here
How to Deal with the Lies and the Lying Liars When They Lie about "Bowling for Columbine"
by Michael Moore
One thing you get used to when you're in what's called "the public eye" is reading the humorous fiction that others like to write about you. For instance, I have read in quite respectable and trustworthy publications that a) I'm a college graduate (I'm not), b) I was a factory worker (I quit the first day), and c) I have two brothers (I have none). Newsweek wrote that I live in a penthouse on Central Park West (I live above a Baby Gap store, and not on any park), and the Internet Movie Database once listed me as the director of the Elvis movie, "Blue Hawaii" ( I was 6 at the time the film was made, but I was quite skilled in directing my sisters in building me a snowman). Lately, my favorite mistake is the one many reviewers made crediting the cartoon in "Bowling for Columbine" as being the work of the "South Park" creators. It isn't. I wrote it and my buddy Harold Moss's animation studio drew it.
I've enjoyed reading these inventions/mistakes about this "Michael Moore." I mean, who wouldn't want to fantasize about living in penthouses roughhousing with brothers you never had. But lately I've begun to see so many things about me or my work that aren't true. It's become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks mostly to lazy reporters or web junkies who do all their research by typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so I wonder that if I don't correct the record, then all of the people who don't know better may just end up being filled with a bunch of stuff that isn't true.
Of course, it would take a lot of my time to contact all these sites and media outlets to correct their errors and I think it's more important I spend my time on my next book or movie so I just let it ride. But is that fair to you, the reader, who has now been told something that isn't true?
With the unexpected and overwhelming success of "Bowling for Columbine" and "Stupid White Men," the fiction that has been written or spoken about me and my work has reached a whole new level of storytelling. It's no longer about making some simple errors or calling me "Roger" Moore. It is now about organized groups going full blast trying to discredit me by knowingly making up lies and repeating them over and over in the hopes that people will believe them – and, then, stop listening to me.
Oh, that it would be so easy!
Some things about the statements made from the website AlphaGam1019 utilized: Obviously the authors of the website are incapable of reading at a level above the 8th grade. Their reading comprehension is mired in absolute literalism. Moore may call the Democrats losers, but that doesn't mean there isn't a candidate who has the best chance of winning among the Democrats does it? I think not.
You can read Moore's own defense about Bowling for Columbine on the link above, however I figure most ultra-conservatives probably won't, simply for the fact that they'd rather remain ignorant so they can bitch rather than actually listen, blindly attack rather than think.
As for Stupid White Men: Moore did not say that Bush stole the election because convicted felons were not allowed to vote, he said that Bush stole the election because 1000s of people who were not convicted felons were prevented from voting. Jeb and Katherine Harris purged the voting status of people who shared the same birthday, last name, first name or race with the convicted felons. No where does he say that he thinks convicted felons should have voted. However, he does say that simply because you share the same birthday and color of skin as the convict does not mean that you should not be allowed to vote.
In terms of Enron the reader is obviously unable to understand sarcasm though they seem to be able to use it themselves...
As for "Dude" it's pretty easy to take three words out of a 250 page book and twist it into a statement that serves your very politically slanted purpose. If one goes on to read on to the next page Moore says this,
"Now when I say there is no terrorist threat, I am not saying that there are no terrorists, or that there are no terrorist incidents, or that there won't be other terrorist incidents in the future. There ARE terrorists, they HAVE commited evil acts, and, tragically, they WILL commit acts of terror in the not-too-distant future. Of that I am sure.
But just because there are a few terrorists does not mean we are all in some exaggerated state of danger. Yet when they speak of terrorists, they speak of them as if they are in the millions (emphasis by author), that they're everywhere, and they are never going away. Cheney has called this a "new normalcy," a condition that "will become permanent in American life." They only hope.
Quite the different story when you go beyond three words...