Skip to main content

Dodd And Him (Michael Moore)

Michael Moore’s new anti-capitalist propaganda epic steps on a few sore Democratic toes, according to the Washington Post

“Moore zeroes in less on Phil Gramm or other GOP string-pullers than he does on White House economic adviser Larry Summers, Robert Rubin and Sen. Chris Dodd. Especially Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Moore gets an on-camera interview with the mortgage officer who handled the special VIP loans provided to Dodd and other big names, which have dogged Dodd's reelection bid.”
The film’s ideological pretensions pivot around last fall’s bailout. On the right side of the barricades, according to Moore, stood valiant populists pitted against Wall Street titans “calling in their Washington chits.”

The film itself does not confront one obvious wrinkle: Conservatives were heartily opposed to the bailout, and in fact still are.

The Washington Post – which may possibly expect to be harangued in Moore’s next film – notes:

“Left unsaid is that a larger proportion of House Republicans than Democrats voted against the bailout -- many of the same Republicans, in fact, who have been leading the anti-government, anti-universal health care charge that Moore claims to oppose.”

It’s not what you know or who you know that makes for a good propaganda film: It’s what you know that you leave out of account.

But Moore is not bothered by and Democratic Party push-back.

Said the Palme d’Or  winning documentary maker: "One of the important things to recognize in my films is that I always went after whoever needed to be gone after. But people will be surprised by how many Democrats I went after for being too close to big money."

And when a presumptuous reporter asked Moore whether his film “glorified the anti-bailout position assumed by so many conservative Republicans,” he responded, "I wanted to stop the revisionist version of how the bailout is remembered. [Republicans] are trying to ride some phony populist wave because they know there's anger brewing. Beneath the surface, history is full of people taking advantage of [populist anger] and taking this country to an extra reactionary place."

Clearly, for propagandists the enemy of your enemy isn’t always your friend. And if booting Dodd off the progressive boat into shark infested waters helps to sell Moore's propaganda film, what anti-capitalist worth his salt would hesitate to shove him off the plank?

Sorry Chris, it’s business.

For a candid docudrama on Moore, see here:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...