Michael Moore

Michael Moore’s “Bowling for Columbine” took home the Oscar for best documentary. If Moore’s inane comments during his acceptance speech didn’t rile me enough, this article, sends me over the edge. The article’s author, David T. Hardy, makes no bones about his thesis: “‘Bowling’ uses deliberate deception as its primary tool of persuasion and effect.”

Hardy’s article is painstakingly well-cited, giving the reader every opportunity to double check his sources. In the piece, Hardy demonstrates that Moore uses fraudulent tactics and blatant lies in order to advance the gist of his movie. No words can sugar-coat Moore’s transgressions: The man is a liar. Hardy’s article is excellent in its well-cited deconstruction of “Bowling for Columbine.”

This entry was posted in Articles. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Michael Moore

  1. Yeah, Moore can be an ass. No doubt about that.

    But unfortunately, so can the author of the article you qoute (who is right wing, and probably a NRA member).

    A mature stance on your political adversaries:
    “If it’s anything like other left-wing vote efforts you’ll be packing the polls with illegal immigrants, convicted felons, heroin addicts, winos, and dead people. And then, when even those efforts can’t get your candidate elected, you’ll sue and cry racism.” – from http://right-thinking.blogspot.com/2002_10_27_right-thinking_archive.html

    And just a paragraph later he quotes one Wayne LaPierre for this incredibly intelligent statement:
    “”I honestly think that if a madman had driven a car into a crowd and if there was a car convention scheduled, they wouldn’t cancel the convention,” LaPierre said.”
    That sure is sharp, boy howdy. The obvious answer to the above would of course be “Cars are made to transport people, guns are made to kill people. That’s where the controversy is, see?”

    Well, in my eyes, the piece on Moore could have been better if it had been written by someone without an agenda as obvious as the right-thinking blog writing wonder.
    On his own pages he himself only presents his side of the various subjects he writes about… and that’s just dull 🙂

  2. Adam says:

    I think the point of Hardy’s article was to say that Michael Moore shouldn’t have one the award for best documentary because his movie didn’t meet the criteria for it. A point I think he made quite well. Whether he had an agenda to go along with it…….

  3. Brooke says:


    Thank you for posting that article because someone needed to. The issue is not the political affiliation of Michael Moore or David T.Hardy. The issue is that Moore consistently used false means by which get his point across. Given his icon status among the far left, he holds the powers of influence and persuasion and has thus far abused them terribly.

    It is important to hold in our minds that no one is without an agenda, some may come across as more subtle or may have the illusion of being more benevolent, but don’t believe that its not lying below the surface. Everyone has an agenda and (as the line goes) anyone who claims otherwise is selling something. It is definitely a good point that Hardy has his own agenda in writing his in response to Bowling for Columbine, its just not relevant in regards to the accuracy of his article. He obviously did his homework andpresented his argument with truth and accuracy which is more that we can say for the practices of Moore. So, regardless of his reasons for doing so, I respect that.

Comments are closed.