The Iowa cauÂcus is finalÂly and merÂciÂfulÂly upon us. And right in time, filmÂmakÂer Michael Moore has offered an analyÂsis of the DemoÂcÂraÂtÂic field of canÂdiÂdates. There’s much here that I don’t parÂticÂuÂlarÂly agree with here, but Moore makes two large claims that strike me as being funÂdaÂmenÂtalÂly (and regretÂfulÂly) true:
- The “DemoÂcÂraÂtÂic front-runÂners are a less-than-stelÂlar group of canÂdiÂdates, and … none of them are the slam dunk we wish they were.”
- “For months I’ve been wantÂiÂng to ask the quesÂtion, “Where are you, Al Gore?” You can only polÂish that Oscar for so long. And the Nobel was decidÂed by ScanÂdiÂnaÂvians! I don’t blame you for not wantÂiÂng to enter the viper pit again after you already won. But getÂting us to change out our incanÂdesÂcent light bulbs for some irriÂtatÂing fluÂoÂresÂcent ones isn’t going to save the world. All it’s going to do is make us more agiÂtatÂed and jumpy and feelÂing like once we get home we haven’t realÂly left the office.”
“But getÂting us to change out our incanÂdesÂcent light bulbs for some irriÂtatÂing fluÂoÂresÂcent ones isn’t going to save the world.”
This is the stuff that annoys me about Michael Moore. He weilds so much powÂer, that he often uses well, but at othÂer times he is incaÂpable of curbÂing his arroÂgance, of thinkÂing of the litÂtle things, of stepÂping away from the grand gesÂture. A refusal to scruÂtiÂnise and change his own lifestyle underÂmines his authorÂiÂty.