Backdraft 9/11: Michael Moore Backlash

Working Psychology ^ | 1/1/05 | Dr. Kelton Rhoads

[soccermom]

Not posting here, because this is an academic piece with a copyright. But I encourage everyone to read:

Backdraft 9/11

[soccermom]

In light of the most recent Ann Coulter comments, there has been a debate as to whether or not her comments are a good thing. (I happen to think she was wrong, but I don't want to turn this into yet another thread on defending or condemning Coulter.) I merely want to take issue with the notion that the left "gets away" with personal attacks and that we should "fight back". If "fighting back" means taking them on, issue by issue and exposing their low-blow tactics, I agree. If it means sinking to their tactics, I disagree. When I came across this study, I saw that it used many of the same examples I have been using -- F-9/11 and the Wellstone Funeral -- to illustrate that the left does not "get away" with these things at all.

[soccermom]

ping

[soccermom]

ping

[soccermom]

ping

[upcountry miss]

This has been my view all along. Even the distortion of Dems names sometimes makes me cringe. It just lowers our respectability. This Rudy debate seems to be reaching low levels as I'm afraid the Fred Thompson one eventually will also. If it's tongue-in-cheek, I can understand, but real viciousness is below the belt. Long ago, I posted, expressing my distaste for the Reps that were confronting me at my church door protesting some gay agenda that my church was not a part of and was promptly flamed. I still feel I should be able to enter my church without having to literally push my way past hateful shouting-be they Dems or Reps.

[Logical me]

If it means sinking to their tactics, I disagree

Fine! I don't agree with everything that is said by everybody, liberal or conservative. But to have at least one person with the backbone to expose some of the trash is refreshing. By the way, we lost the House and Senate because we did not fight. Sometimes fighting, with truth, is a little harsh but good for moral.

[Iris7]

The Left gets away with full bore, pure quill, unadulterated propaganda. I watched a year (and so did you) of endless pounding anti-Bush anti-Iraq "news coverage". The American anti-Iraq "dissent" has been manufactured by television propaganda.

The idea that the Left is not getting away with murder is ridiculous. Just ask the millions killed in South East Asia the last time the Left put on a full blast "anti-war" propaganda campaign.

It is foolish to underestimate those people.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Wrong. The left gets away with hate speech.
The right doesn't.

[Niteranger68]

Coulter did not call him a faggot. She told us what would happen if she did call him one. Why is that so difficult for everyone to understand???

[soccermom]

I agree. I hope we can take Ann out of the equation for a moment and just look at the results of these types of tactics as objectively as possible. What I find intriguing about this guy's study of Moore and his supporters is how delusional they all were. People like to project their own biases and hopes on to everyone else. He and his fans thought it would work. So did much of the press. They didn't anticipate the backlash. (Of course, Moore also predicted the 2002 election would forever be remembered as "payback" for Bush winning in 2000. That's the problem with people like Moore. He surrounds himself with adoring fans and has no perspective on how the rest of America sees things.)

[avacado]

That was an excellent read! I love how the author analytically explains how Michael Moore actually screwed the Democratic Party and helped get Bush back into the Whitehouse!

Most excellent!

[soccermom]

"But to have at least one person with the backbone to expose some of the trash is refreshing." Exposing trash is fine --- fighting trash with trash is not. "By the way, we lost the House and Senate because we did not fight." Funny, people here keep telling me we lost because weren't conservative enough. "Sometimes fighting, with truth, is a little harsh but good for moral." Nothing wrong with fighting back with truth -- just not trash.

[soccermom]

You can keep saying that, until you're blue in the face. I'm presenting you with a study that suggest otherwise. Why don't you read the study, instead of projecting your own feelings onto the facts?

[soccermom]

Thank you for actually taking the time to read it.

[avacado]

"Thank you for actually taking the time to read it."

No problem. It was an excellent read and very interesting. I liked how the author shows how Moore actually got "played" by the Republicans.

[HitmanLV]

What backlash? The dems control the House and Senate and have Dubya in a conciliatory mood. They won - the electorate rewarded them despite their tactics by giving them a stunning victory and a stark repudiation of the president.

Being the better people, but in the losers circle, still puts us in the losers circle.

[soccermom]

Yeah, I'm saving it. I think it'll come in handy for my 15-year-old. Moore is one of his favorite subjects for tackling. He drove his English teacher nuts with his essay, "Michael Moore: Master of the Mockumentary" -- but she gave him an "A".

[soccermom]

Read the study. It pertains to the 2004 election. Before the 2006 election, Moore wasn't the one with the controversial coverage -- Coulter was.

[HitmanLV]

I did read the article, but just pointing out that your conclusion is dubious.

[avacado]

What backlash?

Read what Soccermom posted. It's not that long and is very interesting.