In his most recent letter on his website entitled, "It's All About Who You Sleep With...A Cautionary Note from Michael Moore," he writes the following:
"I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me -- while I'm glad they've seen the light -- their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land."
Anyone remember whom Moore supported for president in 2004? That's right--it was Kerry/Edwards. Matter of fact, when I went to his rally in Boca Raton, he insulted those who were not supporting Kerry, even if their candidate of choice was anti-war. Michael Moore: pro-choice for abortion, not so for elections.
Why are Kerry and Edwards not "fit for the job" now? Why can they "never enter the promised land?" Moore had no problem fighting to make sure they won the presidency two years ago, and insulting anyone who disagreed with him. Has Moore now "seen the light" and recognized that it was a mistake to insult those who stood resolute in their desire to vote for someone who opposed the war from the beginning? If so, he doesn't say so in his letter. Many argue, and I don't think I'd disagree, that he actually did more harm to Kerry than good, because the last person Kerry (who had his own issues with straightforwardness) needed to be associated with was a hypocrite. If Kerry and Edwards were good enough for Moore in 2004, then he shouldn't denounce them simply because, with Joe Leiberman's loss to Ned Lamont, it's politically expedient to do so now. However, I'm not surprised--he did the same thing by supporting Ralph Nader in 2000 and then quickly jumping on the Nader-bashing bandwagon.
Any future candidate who receives Michael Moore's endorsement should be wary.
No comments:
Post a Comment