What do you think?
Rate this book
Volle Deckung, Mr. Bush
Michael Moore schlägt wieder zu: In Stupid White Men hat er den fragwürdigen Wahlsieg und die greisen Hintermänner des amerikanischen Präsidenten mit einer Mischung aus Satire und bissiger Kritik aufs Korn genommen. Jetzt drischt er -- rechtzeitig zum aktuellen Präsidentschaftswahlkampf -- auf George W. Bushs Politik seit dem 11. September 2001 ein.
Krieg gegen den Terrorismus? Ein willkommener Vorwand, behauptet Michael Moore und stellt wie in seinem Film Bowling for Columbine unangenehme Fragen: Wo, Mr. President, sind eigentlich die Massenvernichtungswaffen von Saddam Hussein? Bis auf die Kampfstoffe, die in den 80er-Jahren von den USA geliefert wurden, hat man im Irak bis heute nichts entdeckt. Dafür hat die US-Regierung jahrelang Geschäfte zwischen den texanischen Ölkonzernen und den Taliban gefördert. Ein Skandal, wohl wahr! Wenn Michael Moore dann aber auch noch die Vermutung äußert, dass hinter dem 11. September keine Terroristen, sondern saudi-arabische Kampfpiloten stecken, hat man es weniger mit peinlichen Enthüllungen als mit Verschwörungstheorien zu tun.
Doch mit den Fakten nimmt es Moore auch sonst nicht so genau: Im Vorwort behauptet er zum Beispiel, die Krankenversorgung in Deutschland sei "umsonst". Schön wär's! Was Moore beherrscht, sind Ironie und beißende Satire. In dieser Hinsicht zieht er auch in Volle Deckung Mr. Bush alle Register seines Könnens, bis hin zu Gott, der höchstpersönlich klarstellt: Dass Bush die Wahl gewonnen hat, war nicht geplant. "Ich muss euch was beichten: Manchmal baue ich auch Mist..." --Bernhard Wörrle
316 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
About the author
Michael Moore
338 books503 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Michael Moore is an American filmmaker, author and liberal political commentator. He is the director and producer of Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, Sicko, and Capitalism: A Love Story, four of the top nine highest-grossing documentaries of all time.[3] In September 2008, he released his first free movie on the Internet, Slacker Uprising, documenting his personal crusade to encourage more Americans to vote in presidential elections.[4] He has also written and starred in the TV shows TV Nation and The Awful Truth.
Moore is a self-described liberal who has criticized globalization, large corporations, assault weapon ownership, the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush and the American health care system in his written and cinematic works.
Wikipedia
Michael Moore is an American filmmaker, author and liberal political commentator. He is the director and producer of Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, Sicko, and Capitalism: A Love Story, four of the top nine highest-grossing documentaries of all time.[3] In September 2008, he released his first free movie on the Internet, Slacker Uprising, documenting his personal crusade to encourage more Americans to vote in presidential elections.[4] He has also written and starred in the TV shows TV Nation and The Awful Truth.
Moore is a self-described liberal who has criticized globalization, large corporations, assault weapon ownership, the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush and the American health care system in his written and cinematic works.
Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 400 reviews
June 6, 2007
The older I get, the more disenchanted I become with Michael Moore. I don't consider myself a conservative by any stretch of the imagination, but his kind of activism is indicative of what's wrong with a lot of liberal activism- narcissism. He's so absorbed with his own righteousness -and the fact that so many people in his audience with reinforce his righteousness with blind praise and little analysis- that the causes he supposedly stands for are beside the point. Some might say this is giving too much credit to someone who's essentially a satirist, but his audience sees himself as more than that, and he seems to as well.
At any rate, this book seemed like little more than a cash-in after the success of Stupid White Men. It has its funny moments, but again, I can't read a page of Michael Moore without its author somehow reminding me that, hey, you're reading Michael Moore!
At any rate, this book seemed like little more than a cash-in after the success of Stupid White Men. It has its funny moments, but again, I can't read a page of Michael Moore without its author somehow reminding me that, hey, you're reading Michael Moore!
November 22, 2021
As I believe a fair amount of people ended up thinking, the more I read and see of Michael Moore the more his methodology negates any point he tries to make. It's like that point in Animal Farm I look at Michael and I look at his targets and am like... Spider-Man meme time!
Another trek in is own righteousness - with some great humour now and again admittedly - 5 out of 12!
Another trek in is own righteousness - with some great humour now and again admittedly - 5 out of 12!
July 3, 2017
In 2001, your chance as an American of dying in an act of terrorism in US was 1 in 100,000.
In 2001, you had a greater chance of dying from the flu or pneumonia (1 in 4,500), from taking your own life (1 in 9,200), being a homicide victim (1 in 14,000), or riding a car (1 in 6,500).
But no one freaked out over the possibility of being killed every time you drove in your dangerous car to buy a heart disease inducing doughnut from a coughing teenager. The suicide rate alone means that you were a greater danger to yourself than any terrorist.
All these causes of death were far greater than the terrorism, but there were no laws passed, no countries bombed, no emergency expenditures of billions of dollars per month, no non-stop tickers scrolling details across the bottom of CNN to send us in a panic over them.
Then why bombing countries and fighting terrorism take precedence over all other issues?
Michael Moore has tried to explain this and many other questions on US foreign policy, the integrity of its presidents and related issues wittily in this book.
A very fast, entertaining and insightful read.
In 2001, you had a greater chance of dying from the flu or pneumonia (1 in 4,500), from taking your own life (1 in 9,200), being a homicide victim (1 in 14,000), or riding a car (1 in 6,500).
But no one freaked out over the possibility of being killed every time you drove in your dangerous car to buy a heart disease inducing doughnut from a coughing teenager. The suicide rate alone means that you were a greater danger to yourself than any terrorist.
All these causes of death were far greater than the terrorism, but there were no laws passed, no countries bombed, no emergency expenditures of billions of dollars per month, no non-stop tickers scrolling details across the bottom of CNN to send us in a panic over them.
Then why bombing countries and fighting terrorism take precedence over all other issues?
Michael Moore has tried to explain this and many other questions on US foreign policy, the integrity of its presidents and related issues wittily in this book.
A very fast, entertaining and insightful read.
September 23, 2014
One of the early triumphs of Unified Media Theory was the discovery of the anti-coulter. Predicted in 2001 and experimentally verified the following year, the anti-coulter (often colloquially referred to as the "mooreon") is a heavy particle with positive charm, charge and strangeness and leftward spin.
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Goodreads policy reasons)
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Goodreads policy reasons)
March 28, 2019
I love Michael Moore's documentaries - they are funny, reflect on real events and always get my mind moving. With that in mind, picking up this book just seemed so natural! I found a copy at a local charity book sale and I figured, why not read it?
Unfortunately, I didn't love it as much as I thought I would have. I really think this book would have been better in film form (for me, anyways). I loved Michael's unique and funny style of crafting the narrative in this book but I just couldn't keep a hold on it. I had to read it a little bit at a time, and some of it just went over my head (that's what I get for keeping up with Canadian politics instead of American).
This book takes a look at the September 11th terror attacks and all the strange occurrences around it. The highest praise I can give this book is that it really got me thinking, and that is high praise!! Not often do I get to pick up a book that makes me think and connect the dots. The funny commentary made it even better since it didn't make the book feel like a textbook. If I had history classes with this sort of humor then I would have loved those classes!
In my opinion, this book is in a niche market. People are either going to get butt hurt over the funny commentary laced with terrorist attacks or they are not going to understand the humor. Michael Moore has a very specific sense of sarcasm that some people just don't get. I do think this is a great book and if you enjoy Michael's past work, then you'll enjoy this one! If you're easily offended, this book won't be for you!
Three out of five stars!
Unfortunately, I didn't love it as much as I thought I would have. I really think this book would have been better in film form (for me, anyways). I loved Michael's unique and funny style of crafting the narrative in this book but I just couldn't keep a hold on it. I had to read it a little bit at a time, and some of it just went over my head (that's what I get for keeping up with Canadian politics instead of American).
This book takes a look at the September 11th terror attacks and all the strange occurrences around it. The highest praise I can give this book is that it really got me thinking, and that is high praise!! Not often do I get to pick up a book that makes me think and connect the dots. The funny commentary made it even better since it didn't make the book feel like a textbook. If I had history classes with this sort of humor then I would have loved those classes!
In my opinion, this book is in a niche market. People are either going to get butt hurt over the funny commentary laced with terrorist attacks or they are not going to understand the humor. Michael Moore has a very specific sense of sarcasm that some people just don't get. I do think this is a great book and if you enjoy Michael's past work, then you'll enjoy this one! If you're easily offended, this book won't be for you!
Three out of five stars!
April 8, 2009
Don't waste your time.
While I would certainly identify my self as not only a Democrat but a huge 'anti-fan' (as they say here in Korea) of George-Dub, I found this book incredibly irritating.
Though well intentioned (meaning, I'm going to try to reveal Bush and his cronies for what they are), the book is simply irritating to read! Moore cannot get over his own biases and while he presents a great deal of well researched facts, he is clearly on a one sided agenda.
It seems a bit hypocritical that he would attack media outlets for being so onesided when he himself in his arguments never even tries to remain objective, though he will tell you otherwise.
Furthermore, the way that he uses small examples to extrapolate inferences about a larger population is not only unscientific but it's essentially fraudulant.
Lastly, it's made clear in the final chapter that the book's main goal is to de-throne the Bush administration after its first terms. Well, since that obviously didn't happen theres no point bitching and moaning about it now.
The man can make an interesting movie but the book would be better off as a tree.
While I would certainly identify my self as not only a Democrat but a huge 'anti-fan' (as they say here in Korea) of George-Dub, I found this book incredibly irritating.
Though well intentioned (meaning, I'm going to try to reveal Bush and his cronies for what they are), the book is simply irritating to read! Moore cannot get over his own biases and while he presents a great deal of well researched facts, he is clearly on a one sided agenda.
It seems a bit hypocritical that he would attack media outlets for being so onesided when he himself in his arguments never even tries to remain objective, though he will tell you otherwise.
Furthermore, the way that he uses small examples to extrapolate inferences about a larger population is not only unscientific but it's essentially fraudulant.
Lastly, it's made clear in the final chapter that the book's main goal is to de-throne the Bush administration after its first terms. Well, since that obviously didn't happen theres no point bitching and moaning about it now.
The man can make an interesting movie but the book would be better off as a tree.
May 31, 2015
I read this book quite a year after it was published when I was visiting the USA. The aftermath of 9/11, the shrill defending of action against Iraq in Fox News, etc., and the war on terror brought to your living room on TV, was a different backdrop when I read the book the first time.
Much has changed since the early 2000's. And yet, nothing seems to have changed. Politics in the USA has probably been quite the same - just adapting itself to the flavor of the season. The conservatives seem to be rooted to the same old beliefs, the same old rant is spouted on TV, and we read the same old fear mongering, etc. The liberals, while in large numbers, continue to be disorganized. Corporate America continues to rip off the wealth of the middle and the working classes.
As I read the book now, I see the relevance of some of the points made by Michael Moore even today. I enjoyed reading it for the second time. But would I recommend this strongly? No. There are so many fabulous books out there to read, and time is limited!
Much has changed since the early 2000's. And yet, nothing seems to have changed. Politics in the USA has probably been quite the same - just adapting itself to the flavor of the season. The conservatives seem to be rooted to the same old beliefs, the same old rant is spouted on TV, and we read the same old fear mongering, etc. The liberals, while in large numbers, continue to be disorganized. Corporate America continues to rip off the wealth of the middle and the working classes.
As I read the book now, I see the relevance of some of the points made by Michael Moore even today. I enjoyed reading it for the second time. But would I recommend this strongly? No. There are so many fabulous books out there to read, and time is limited!
July 7, 2008
I loved this book, and I would reommend it to anyone who has ever felt frustrated with George W. Bush and his administration. I would especially recommend it to anyone who is a fan of George W. Bush (if there are any left) and conservative republicans. Dude Where's My Country investigates the events leading up to and following the 9/11 attacks, the Bush Family's long time friendship with the Saudi Arabian Royal Family, the environment, and what we as a people can do to take back our country. At times Michael Moore hyperbolizes to make his point (something he has been criticized of before) so it's key to read this book with a discerning eye and a sense of humor. By the time I finished this book I felt as though Moore had confirmed a lot of the suspicions I'd had about the coverage of the "War on Terror." Somehow Moore also manages to maintain a suprisingly optimistic outlook for America's future. I found this book facinating, funny, infuriating, and inspiring all at the same time.
June 13, 2020
I was given this book in November, 2003 but it got lost in my life events until I was able to whittle down the books by reading them. Michael Moore is imminently intelligent, informed and comedic. This book is dated in respect to G.W. Bush but still highly relevant in its discussion and analysis of the still extant issues. He is very persuasive, using common values and common sense.
August 19, 2014
Can't say I have an overly strong opinion on this one ... In terms of what was good, a reminder of what transpired in the immediate years following September 11 and within the early days of the 'Bush era'.. And that all was not what the media/government portrayed it to be. What I was non-plussed on, some of Moore's attempts at sarcasm cheapened the message... But I don't mind Michael Moore and the fact that he champions a different perspective, so overall a decent read but not a life changer. Also - it was odd reading it so far down the line from when it was written, knowing that Bush got re-elected and how the world has changed in the meantime, but such is life.
October 26, 2008
Some good detail about Bush connections to the Bin Laden and Saudi royal families a nice chapter on a suggested liberal responses to one's yahoo relations short, readable, amusing enough, has some info re useful links.
November 29, 2023
I'm actually just the demographic I think Moore would want his work to target, given that, according to him, I still need convincing to join the "right" side of politics by throwing in my lot with the Left; I generally would identify as a centre-right conservative, though I am far from unwilling to give liberals my attention, and in many cases (especially in the last two years), I have moved somewhat leftwards in particular areas.
That being said, there is a lot that really grosses me out with the modern iterations of progressive politics, and while I do admire Moore's more traditional, working-man form of leftist ideology, there is still enough I deeply disagree with in this book to render at not altogether a relatable or convincing experience. The humour, first of all, is very hit and miss. Same as with his excellent Bowling for Columbine, I found most of the content more disconcerting and exasperating than joyously funny. I'm no fan of Bush or his brand of Republicanism, but the Bush-bashing does reach a high level of overkill here.
However, once I got used to Moore's facetious and obnoxious writing style, I actually did enjoy the book and found it surprisingly hard to dislike. On many issues, he does make some great points, and much of what he was rallying against really does, at least in his descriptions, appear insanely dangerous or stupid.
Until near the end, I was actually leaning towards giving it four stars. But unfortunately, there was a particularly distasteful part on abortion that disgusted me enough to deduct one star. I knew and was resigned to the inevitable fact he was pro-choice). In 99% of the left-wing literature I read, that ought to be taken as a given. So in allowing myself to like certain political pundits or more serious persons on the Left, I do so despite the fact they are for dismembering unborn children in the womb and even, should they survive the murderous attempt, simply leaving them to die crying on the operating table or in a medical waste bin. And usually this isn't impossible to do because most "respectable" pro-choice advocates don't actually go so far as celebrating the act itself, but rather focus on the woman's "right to choose". Or they obfuscate with colourful, politicised language like "keeping the government from controlling your genitals".
Moore made numerous references to his pro-abortion stance, including one obnoxious segment where he pretends to speak for God and says abortion is "totally fine". I was able, more or less, to overlook these many occasions. But then, in one part where Moore argues that most Americans are more progressive than their government, he appears to revel that since Roe v Wade, there have been more than 40 million abortions in America! And that this number is increasing!
It is stated in such a way that it's hard to convince oneself he doesn't think the statistic is one to be proud of in and of itself. Like, irrespective of the totally legitimate issue of women's rights, the isolated fact that 40 million voiceless humans (or would-be humans, whatever you want to call them) were denied their lives and violently killed is worth celebrating. If anything, it's just a shame the number wasn't even higher. Maybe we can put our minds to it, stop practicing any kind of restraint and responsibility, and get that number up to 140 million aborted foetuses instead.
Excuse my rant, and I expect nobody who reads this book to sympathise with this position in the slightest. But even if I'm completely wrong, and there is no humanness whatsoever in the child growing in the womb, I still don't see how the clearly unnatural act of violating what nature determined as a process by which all species promulgate should be glorified and encouraged as if it's a target to be met.
This is just the type of degenerate thinking that shows why Roe v Wade did need to be taken away from these people, for the sake of the actual soul of the nation Joe Biden so loves to talk emptily about. For too many of them, abortion is no longer taken seriously, and isn't seen as something that should be "safe, legal and rare". No longer focussed on the rights of women to choose what happens after their (in most cases) preventable pregnancy, the procedure itself has become a virtue that should be "safe, legal, commonplace and celebrated".
He also chuckles that, so long as we keep aborting, we might just manage to throw the next Sean Hannity into the bin and save ourselves the future trouble. I can barely stand the butt of the joke myself, but again its being here goes to show the utter lack of gravity and seriousness these people seem to grant abortion, so normalised has it become in our society.
That being said, there is a lot that really grosses me out with the modern iterations of progressive politics, and while I do admire Moore's more traditional, working-man form of leftist ideology, there is still enough I deeply disagree with in this book to render at not altogether a relatable or convincing experience. The humour, first of all, is very hit and miss. Same as with his excellent Bowling for Columbine, I found most of the content more disconcerting and exasperating than joyously funny. I'm no fan of Bush or his brand of Republicanism, but the Bush-bashing does reach a high level of overkill here.
However, once I got used to Moore's facetious and obnoxious writing style, I actually did enjoy the book and found it surprisingly hard to dislike. On many issues, he does make some great points, and much of what he was rallying against really does, at least in his descriptions, appear insanely dangerous or stupid.
Until near the end, I was actually leaning towards giving it four stars. But unfortunately, there was a particularly distasteful part on abortion that disgusted me enough to deduct one star. I knew and was resigned to the inevitable fact he was pro-choice). In 99% of the left-wing literature I read, that ought to be taken as a given. So in allowing myself to like certain political pundits or more serious persons on the Left, I do so despite the fact they are for dismembering unborn children in the womb and even, should they survive the murderous attempt, simply leaving them to die crying on the operating table or in a medical waste bin. And usually this isn't impossible to do because most "respectable" pro-choice advocates don't actually go so far as celebrating the act itself, but rather focus on the woman's "right to choose". Or they obfuscate with colourful, politicised language like "keeping the government from controlling your genitals".
Moore made numerous references to his pro-abortion stance, including one obnoxious segment where he pretends to speak for God and says abortion is "totally fine". I was able, more or less, to overlook these many occasions. But then, in one part where Moore argues that most Americans are more progressive than their government, he appears to revel that since Roe v Wade, there have been more than 40 million abortions in America! And that this number is increasing!
It is stated in such a way that it's hard to convince oneself he doesn't think the statistic is one to be proud of in and of itself. Like, irrespective of the totally legitimate issue of women's rights, the isolated fact that 40 million voiceless humans (or would-be humans, whatever you want to call them) were denied their lives and violently killed is worth celebrating. If anything, it's just a shame the number wasn't even higher. Maybe we can put our minds to it, stop practicing any kind of restraint and responsibility, and get that number up to 140 million aborted foetuses instead.
Excuse my rant, and I expect nobody who reads this book to sympathise with this position in the slightest. But even if I'm completely wrong, and there is no humanness whatsoever in the child growing in the womb, I still don't see how the clearly unnatural act of violating what nature determined as a process by which all species promulgate should be glorified and encouraged as if it's a target to be met.
This is just the type of degenerate thinking that shows why Roe v Wade did need to be taken away from these people, for the sake of the actual soul of the nation Joe Biden so loves to talk emptily about. For too many of them, abortion is no longer taken seriously, and isn't seen as something that should be "safe, legal and rare". No longer focussed on the rights of women to choose what happens after their (in most cases) preventable pregnancy, the procedure itself has become a virtue that should be "safe, legal, commonplace and celebrated".
He also chuckles that, so long as we keep aborting, we might just manage to throw the next Sean Hannity into the bin and save ourselves the future trouble. I can barely stand the butt of the joke myself, but again its being here goes to show the utter lack of gravity and seriousness these people seem to grant abortion, so normalised has it become in our society.
June 30, 2008
This book is overall anti-Bush, anti-republican. The author’s tone is of sarcasm and is towards getting some laughs; however, it defeats the purpose. It is probably ok to have the tone while making a point in a video, as is seen in his movie Sicko; however, had this book been better written, a thorough study of the subject indicated by the non-standard format bibliography / reference, would have been more effective. Independent of whether I agree or not with the thoughts, the book is bad to read. It came to me as a whiny author’s book. With that being said, some content however is pretty disturbing i.e. near page 148:
- Dead Peasants Insurance: Companies listed themselves as default beneficiaries in the insurance documents.
- Senior Death Discount: When EPA calculated $3.7M as a value of a life to charge companies producing pollution to calculate how many people will die due to pollution and its impact. To reduce the costs, they were made to make amendment making 70+ folks to be listed as $2.3 million. This reduced the costs for the companies; however, the fundamental principle that every human’s life is one unit is not followed.
Such things, if true, are disturbing and probably inhumane. The book therefore is good, however, since it is overall a badly written text, gets a one star.
NOTE: I “listened” to this in the audiobook format (while driving), therefore don’t have a summary, but have a review…
- Dead Peasants Insurance: Companies listed themselves as default beneficiaries in the insurance documents.
- Senior Death Discount: When EPA calculated $3.7M as a value of a life to charge companies producing pollution to calculate how many people will die due to pollution and its impact. To reduce the costs, they were made to make amendment making 70+ folks to be listed as $2.3 million. This reduced the costs for the companies; however, the fundamental principle that every human’s life is one unit is not followed.
Such things, if true, are disturbing and probably inhumane. The book therefore is good, however, since it is overall a badly written text, gets a one star.
NOTE: I “listened” to this in the audiobook format (while driving), therefore don’t have a summary, but have a review…
January 18, 2008
The book Dude, Where’s My Country? by Michael Moore, is written in the exact style that the title depicts. It is a very laid back, informally written book. However, underneath all the jokes, sarcasm, and the ridiculous chapter from “G-d”, Moore is providing a lot of insight into the 9/11 case, the ties between Bush and the Bin Laden families, and the corruptness of big corporations. The book also urges and declares that George W. Bush should not be reelected in 2004, leaving me with a helpless feeling since that time has already long gone. The book includes a lot of dry facts that are not fully explained, as well as assumptions Moore is making, that include bias, with few reasons to support it. This leads me to feel as though Moore rushed to write this book due to the limited time he had to convince people to vote Democrat in the 2004 election. Nevertheless, the abundant facts were reinforced by well-documented sources which added credibility to his argument. Overall, this was an entertaining book that allowed for an overview of the inconsistencies in the Republican party, urging for change. I would recommend this book to an open-minded reader with a sense of humor, who would like to know more about the political discrepancies, and can appreciate Moore’s obviously strong opinion.
July 25, 2007
This was the beginning of the end with my love affair with the left. Typical angry Moore makes some good points, but Moore doesn't think about the long-term consequences of his ideas. I can respect that Moore doesn't like corporations or conservatives or George W. Bush, but he really needs to reconsider how he attacks the other side, saying that someone is only a conservative because they wants lower taxes cheapens the ideas of conservative thought that have contributed to Moore's ability to write the books that criticize the United States and their politicians.
Currently reading
May 17, 2012 Michael Moore’s book Dude, Where’s My Country? serves the purpose of asking just that question. Moore uses his book as a platform to question the Bush administration, which was in power back when the book was written in 2003. Rather than attack Bush, however, Moore takes a different approach. He seems to reprimand the American people for allowing Bush into power and willingly and unquestionably accepting everything he did. The beginning of the book asks a series of questions regarding Bush’s relationship and reaction to the events that took place on September 11, 2001. Moore investigates business and personal relations that are widely unknown to the American people and may have affected the way Bush reacted on 9/11. He then goes on to call Bush out on lies told to the American people to boost support for the Iraq war following 9/11. Moore changes writing styles in the third chapter, which he uses to express his belief that since we are aware that oil reserves are depleting, we should try not to waste them so that future generations can benefit from them. As the book progresses, Moore continues his discussion on terrorism, how the government uses terror as a tool to pass laws restricting our freedoms, and how the best way to end terrorism is for Americans to stop being terrorists themselves. While the first chunk of the book focuses on foreign issues, the second half of the book leans more towards domestic issues. In typical Michael Moore style, he writes to a liberal audience about what the conservatives are doing wrong and why we need to stop letting them make bad decisions for us. The most memorable part of this book is definitely the first chapter, when seven questions are asked of George W. Bush. These questions range from “Is it true that the bin Ladens have had business relations with you and your family off and on for the past 25 years?” to “Why did you allow a private Saudi jet to fly around the U.S. in the days after September 11 and pick up members of the bin Laden family and then fly them out of the country without a proper investigation by the FBI?” and bring to light some facts that I had never been aware of before (Moore 17, 26). For example, the fact that Saudi Arabia has (or at least had at the time this book was published) a ton of money in the United States, and that Bush had a personal relationship with the prince of Saudi Arabia. Since Osama bin Laden’s family was from Saudi Arabia, and they had money in the U.S., they were basically supplying him with American-made money. I learned all of this from the book, and like Michael Moore, I question: how did this happen? When all U.S. airports were shut down and no planes were flying, why was a private Saudi jet allowed to go pick up members of the bin Laden family, who should have been the first suspects questioned, and return them overseas without any interrogation at all? Michael Moore’s commentary and investigation about various Bush-era issues throughout the book are both interesting and thought provoking.
Many issues from this book can connect to class conversations we’ve had in the past. One of the most obvious connections comes in chapter 4. Moore says, “Fear is so basic and yet so easy to manipulate that it has become both our best friend and our worst enemy. And when it is used as a weapon against us, it has the ability to destroy much of what we have come to love about life in the United States of America” (Moore 85). Here, he is talking about how our own fear can be used as a weapon against us so that we will allow the government to take more control of our lives. I made an immediate connection between this section and the discussion we had at the beginning of the year, where we said that fear is politics. I agree with Moore that the government often exaggerates threats to the country so that people will be more willing to give up their rights. Another section in chapter seven connects to some of the motivation behind the Occupy movements that started this year. “After fleecing the American public and destroying the American dream for most working people how is it that, instead of being drawn and quartered and hung at dawn at the city gates, the rich got a big wet kiss from Congress in the form of a record tax break, and no one says a word? How can that be?” asks Moore of his readers (Moore 122). This references tax cuts to the wealthy, while the lower and middle class Americans suffer. The situation Moore is describing should sound awfully familiar; part of the Occupy movement’s original purpose was to protest the uneven distribution of wealth in America. Earlier in the year we talked in class about Occupy Wall Street, the uneven distribution of wealth in America, and whether there should be tax cuts for the poor and tax hikes for the rich. Finally, in chapter 5, Moore details a list of things the government should do to make America safer. Number one on that list is “Catch Osama bin Laden. Whoa, there’s an original idea! I guess someone forgot to do this” (Moore 102). This connects to a recent class discussion about the anniversary of the death of Osama bin Laden. His death was a big deal in American politics because people wondered if the terrorist game was going to change. One year later, however, the game hasn’t changed all that much without the deceased figurehead.
It is hard to argue that Michael Moore is anything but biased in this book. His intended audience is clearly liberal and in a state of discontent with Bush. Moore says, for example, “If it takes a pro-choice, pro-environment general who believes in universal health care and who thinks war is never the first answer to a conflict, if that is what it takes to remove these bastards and do the job the Democrats should have done in 2000-then that is what I am prepared to do,” which suggests that he is open to voting this way, revealing that he is definitely on the more liberal end of the political spectrum (Moore 176). Since his entire book is based on politics, his political views play a huge role in his bias. Moore even devotes the entirety of chapter ten to the subject of “How to Talk to Your Conservative Brother-in-Law,” which shows that he is definitely not writing from a conservative point of view (Moore 152). This bias is established early on, when Moore says
What is the worst lie a president can tell?
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
Or…
“He has weapons of mass destruction-the world’s deadliest weapons-which pose a direct threat to the
United States, our citizens, and our friends and allies” (Moore 41).
Here, he implies his preference for former President Clinton over Bush. This comes across to the reader as a dislike for Bush and the things he says. Moore’s political affiliation is apparent many times throughout the book, and definitely affects his view on what he’s writing about. However, because we share many of the same political thoughts, I enjoyed the book and the questions it raised about the Bush era.
Many issues from this book can connect to class conversations we’ve had in the past. One of the most obvious connections comes in chapter 4. Moore says, “Fear is so basic and yet so easy to manipulate that it has become both our best friend and our worst enemy. And when it is used as a weapon against us, it has the ability to destroy much of what we have come to love about life in the United States of America” (Moore 85). Here, he is talking about how our own fear can be used as a weapon against us so that we will allow the government to take more control of our lives. I made an immediate connection between this section and the discussion we had at the beginning of the year, where we said that fear is politics. I agree with Moore that the government often exaggerates threats to the country so that people will be more willing to give up their rights. Another section in chapter seven connects to some of the motivation behind the Occupy movements that started this year. “After fleecing the American public and destroying the American dream for most working people how is it that, instead of being drawn and quartered and hung at dawn at the city gates, the rich got a big wet kiss from Congress in the form of a record tax break, and no one says a word? How can that be?” asks Moore of his readers (Moore 122). This references tax cuts to the wealthy, while the lower and middle class Americans suffer. The situation Moore is describing should sound awfully familiar; part of the Occupy movement’s original purpose was to protest the uneven distribution of wealth in America. Earlier in the year we talked in class about Occupy Wall Street, the uneven distribution of wealth in America, and whether there should be tax cuts for the poor and tax hikes for the rich. Finally, in chapter 5, Moore details a list of things the government should do to make America safer. Number one on that list is “Catch Osama bin Laden. Whoa, there’s an original idea! I guess someone forgot to do this” (Moore 102). This connects to a recent class discussion about the anniversary of the death of Osama bin Laden. His death was a big deal in American politics because people wondered if the terrorist game was going to change. One year later, however, the game hasn’t changed all that much without the deceased figurehead.
It is hard to argue that Michael Moore is anything but biased in this book. His intended audience is clearly liberal and in a state of discontent with Bush. Moore says, for example, “If it takes a pro-choice, pro-environment general who believes in universal health care and who thinks war is never the first answer to a conflict, if that is what it takes to remove these bastards and do the job the Democrats should have done in 2000-then that is what I am prepared to do,” which suggests that he is open to voting this way, revealing that he is definitely on the more liberal end of the political spectrum (Moore 176). Since his entire book is based on politics, his political views play a huge role in his bias. Moore even devotes the entirety of chapter ten to the subject of “How to Talk to Your Conservative Brother-in-Law,” which shows that he is definitely not writing from a conservative point of view (Moore 152). This bias is established early on, when Moore says
What is the worst lie a president can tell?
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
Or…
“He has weapons of mass destruction-the world’s deadliest weapons-which pose a direct threat to the
United States, our citizens, and our friends and allies” (Moore 41).
Here, he implies his preference for former President Clinton over Bush. This comes across to the reader as a dislike for Bush and the things he says. Moore’s political affiliation is apparent many times throughout the book, and definitely affects his view on what he’s writing about. However, because we share many of the same political thoughts, I enjoyed the book and the questions it raised about the Bush era.
December 17, 2014
Another rant about the failings of Corporate America
9 June 2012
I am probably going to go down the same road as many of the other commentators on this book, namely that while Michael Moore does make some good points, it does not appear to be a properly researched and documented work. While his videos were amusing (at first) they end up becoming little more than some self-righteous rant at a political ideology that the author (and this particular reader) does not necessarily believe. In fact, the further down the track that Michael Moore goes the more that he begins to sound like some radical left-wing conspiracy theorist who jumps at shadows and makes unfounded allegations with no evidence whatsoever. In fact, there have been numerous allegations that he has also manipulated evidence and video footage to make his point more clear. In doing so he has undermined his integrity.
What I want to comment about on this book though is the idea of the 'Dead Peasant's Insurance'. Technically there actually isn't anything wrong with this concept namely because it is a company insuring against the loss of a productive worker. It is the nature of insurance to hedge against risk, and what can be riskier, and more costly, than the loss of a very productive worker. However, Moore seems to suggest that the only thing the company insures is the worker, meaning that if the worker dies, then the worker's family gets squat. So the worker should, because in reality the worker should be the one insuring himself and his family against his own loss of productivity, or income stream. However, the problem arises when the employer deducts the cost of the dead peasant's insurance from the worker's wage. This, to me, is wrong, because the worker should not be paying for the company to insure against his loss of productivity. It seems to be the way that the capitalist society works, that is if there is a cost incurred, then look for a way to externalise that cost, whether passing it onto the consumer or docking the employee's wage.
I am not necessarily convinced that the corporate world is really out to oppress us, namely because, as I have written before, the corporate world needs us to turn over their profits, and they need to put money into our pockets so that we might spend it. While one might suggest that once the country of origin has been sucked dry then they look elsewhere to suck everybody else dry, the truth is that the corporation has to keep producing stuff, and thus making money, if it is to survive. If you are forever sucking money out of a worker, the worker will get to the point where the worker can no longer afford luxuries and as such the economy suffers. Jack up the price of essentials, and while the producer of the essentials makes profit, the producers of the non-essentials suffer.
One of the criticisms that has been levelled against Moore is the fact that he manipulates video footage. One example was from his film 'Roger and Me'. He buys shares in General Motors to allow him access to the AGM, and at the AGM footage is shown of him trying to question the CEO and the CEO refusing to answer his questions. Apparently the CEO did answer his questions, but that did not make for a good movie, so he cut and pasted the footage to make it look otherwise. It may not seem to be the case from the film, until you either go to an AGM, or look at it from behind the scenes. For instance, the footage of Moore is shown in a dark room with a spotlight on him, and the video is filmed from the stage. However, it appears, if you look closely, nobody else is in the room, which is not the case when it comes to AGMs.
The other thing about that film is that it appears to be little more than a rant about how GM shut down a bunch of factories and put workers out of work. However, if the company is suffering a loss, it cannot expect to keep a loss making enterprise going just to keep people in work. In any case, it appeared that the workers were able to find work, even if it involved them moving elsewhere. The whole movie was about how people once out of work struggled to make ends meet. Look, that happens, and it is not good, but a company simply cannot pay people to do busy work, they have to be productive in someway or another so that the company makes a profit. Underpaying workers is a different story, as well as companies actively preventing good workers from leaving while underpaying them. They say that if you are not happy with your wage, then leave, but that is not as easy as it seems, especially if you have made mistakes, or have a horrid manager that will never say a good word about you. Hey, that is also a conspiracy theory, but never under estimate a company where profit is concerned.
9 June 2012
I am probably going to go down the same road as many of the other commentators on this book, namely that while Michael Moore does make some good points, it does not appear to be a properly researched and documented work. While his videos were amusing (at first) they end up becoming little more than some self-righteous rant at a political ideology that the author (and this particular reader) does not necessarily believe. In fact, the further down the track that Michael Moore goes the more that he begins to sound like some radical left-wing conspiracy theorist who jumps at shadows and makes unfounded allegations with no evidence whatsoever. In fact, there have been numerous allegations that he has also manipulated evidence and video footage to make his point more clear. In doing so he has undermined his integrity.
What I want to comment about on this book though is the idea of the 'Dead Peasant's Insurance'. Technically there actually isn't anything wrong with this concept namely because it is a company insuring against the loss of a productive worker. It is the nature of insurance to hedge against risk, and what can be riskier, and more costly, than the loss of a very productive worker. However, Moore seems to suggest that the only thing the company insures is the worker, meaning that if the worker dies, then the worker's family gets squat. So the worker should, because in reality the worker should be the one insuring himself and his family against his own loss of productivity, or income stream. However, the problem arises when the employer deducts the cost of the dead peasant's insurance from the worker's wage. This, to me, is wrong, because the worker should not be paying for the company to insure against his loss of productivity. It seems to be the way that the capitalist society works, that is if there is a cost incurred, then look for a way to externalise that cost, whether passing it onto the consumer or docking the employee's wage.
I am not necessarily convinced that the corporate world is really out to oppress us, namely because, as I have written before, the corporate world needs us to turn over their profits, and they need to put money into our pockets so that we might spend it. While one might suggest that once the country of origin has been sucked dry then they look elsewhere to suck everybody else dry, the truth is that the corporation has to keep producing stuff, and thus making money, if it is to survive. If you are forever sucking money out of a worker, the worker will get to the point where the worker can no longer afford luxuries and as such the economy suffers. Jack up the price of essentials, and while the producer of the essentials makes profit, the producers of the non-essentials suffer.
One of the criticisms that has been levelled against Moore is the fact that he manipulates video footage. One example was from his film 'Roger and Me'. He buys shares in General Motors to allow him access to the AGM, and at the AGM footage is shown of him trying to question the CEO and the CEO refusing to answer his questions. Apparently the CEO did answer his questions, but that did not make for a good movie, so he cut and pasted the footage to make it look otherwise. It may not seem to be the case from the film, until you either go to an AGM, or look at it from behind the scenes. For instance, the footage of Moore is shown in a dark room with a spotlight on him, and the video is filmed from the stage. However, it appears, if you look closely, nobody else is in the room, which is not the case when it comes to AGMs.
The other thing about that film is that it appears to be little more than a rant about how GM shut down a bunch of factories and put workers out of work. However, if the company is suffering a loss, it cannot expect to keep a loss making enterprise going just to keep people in work. In any case, it appeared that the workers were able to find work, even if it involved them moving elsewhere. The whole movie was about how people once out of work struggled to make ends meet. Look, that happens, and it is not good, but a company simply cannot pay people to do busy work, they have to be productive in someway or another so that the company makes a profit. Underpaying workers is a different story, as well as companies actively preventing good workers from leaving while underpaying them. They say that if you are not happy with your wage, then leave, but that is not as easy as it seems, especially if you have made mistakes, or have a horrid manager that will never say a good word about you. Hey, that is also a conspiracy theory, but never under estimate a company where profit is concerned.
November 13, 2009
Deutlich besser als "Stupid White Men"
Mit diesem Werk legt nun Moore alles ab, was ich an "Stupid White Men" zu kritisieren hatte. Dort habe ich bemäkelt, dass es klischeehaft sei, dass es die Realität vereinfache und mittels Verallgemeinerungen Vorurteile schüren würde. Alle diese Schwächen finden sich hier nun nicht mehr. Weiters hat Moore ganz offensichtlich seine Recherche verbessert. Ein weiterer Kritikpunkt wurde ebenfalls erledigt: Der größte Teil dieses Buches richtet sich nicht bloß an US-Amerikaner, sondern ist für den politisch interessierten Europäer durchaus relevant.
Hatte ich "Stupid White Men" noch zu gute gehalten, dass es witzig geschrieben ist - so muss man nun sagen, dass genau dies Michael Moore hier noch um ein vielfaches besser gelingt. Mit viel Sarkasmus - aber auch durchaus satirisch - geht er auf viele Probleme des aktuellen US-Amerika ein. Die Darstellung, das Buch wäre eine Abrechnung mit George W. Bush, ist viel zu einfach - Moore hat hier eine bittere Kritik am aktuellen US-Amerika geschaffen. Dennoch bleibt immer erkennbar, dass er für dieses Land steht, es ist eben kein Buch, das antiamerikanisch ist - und das ist gut so. Vieles stimmt nicht mit diesem Land, dennoch ist es nicht das Feindbild, das so mancher darin gerne sehen möchten. Ganz im Gegenteil, sollte uns das vorliegende Werk zum Nachdenken auch über unsere Gesellschaft verleiten.
Inhaltlich beschäftigt er sich zunächst mit den Hintergründen des Kriegs gegen den Terror und gegen den Irak und den Lügen, die von der Bush-Administration zur Rechtfertigung vorgebracht werden. Danach versucht er zu klären, warum eine Mehrheit (Unter- und untere Mittelschicht) permanent einer Minderheit die sie unterdrückt die Stimme gibt. Schließlich (und nun wird es rein US-amerikanisch) macht er sich auf die Suche nach dem idealen Gegenkandidaten um eine Wiederwahl der Republikaner zu verhindern. Wie gesagt, sauber recherchiert, witzig geschrieben, nicht klischeehaft und in der Darstellung differenziert, daher: eine klare Empfehlung für dieses Buch.
Mit diesem Werk legt nun Moore alles ab, was ich an "Stupid White Men" zu kritisieren hatte. Dort habe ich bemäkelt, dass es klischeehaft sei, dass es die Realität vereinfache und mittels Verallgemeinerungen Vorurteile schüren würde. Alle diese Schwächen finden sich hier nun nicht mehr. Weiters hat Moore ganz offensichtlich seine Recherche verbessert. Ein weiterer Kritikpunkt wurde ebenfalls erledigt: Der größte Teil dieses Buches richtet sich nicht bloß an US-Amerikaner, sondern ist für den politisch interessierten Europäer durchaus relevant.
Hatte ich "Stupid White Men" noch zu gute gehalten, dass es witzig geschrieben ist - so muss man nun sagen, dass genau dies Michael Moore hier noch um ein vielfaches besser gelingt. Mit viel Sarkasmus - aber auch durchaus satirisch - geht er auf viele Probleme des aktuellen US-Amerika ein. Die Darstellung, das Buch wäre eine Abrechnung mit George W. Bush, ist viel zu einfach - Moore hat hier eine bittere Kritik am aktuellen US-Amerika geschaffen. Dennoch bleibt immer erkennbar, dass er für dieses Land steht, es ist eben kein Buch, das antiamerikanisch ist - und das ist gut so. Vieles stimmt nicht mit diesem Land, dennoch ist es nicht das Feindbild, das so mancher darin gerne sehen möchten. Ganz im Gegenteil, sollte uns das vorliegende Werk zum Nachdenken auch über unsere Gesellschaft verleiten.
Inhaltlich beschäftigt er sich zunächst mit den Hintergründen des Kriegs gegen den Terror und gegen den Irak und den Lügen, die von der Bush-Administration zur Rechtfertigung vorgebracht werden. Danach versucht er zu klären, warum eine Mehrheit (Unter- und untere Mittelschicht) permanent einer Minderheit die sie unterdrückt die Stimme gibt. Schließlich (und nun wird es rein US-amerikanisch) macht er sich auf die Suche nach dem idealen Gegenkandidaten um eine Wiederwahl der Republikaner zu verhindern. Wie gesagt, sauber recherchiert, witzig geschrieben, nicht klischeehaft und in der Darstellung differenziert, daher: eine klare Empfehlung für dieses Buch.
December 9, 2014
3 STARS
"The book shares much with Al Franken's Lies besides liberal sentiment and satirical tone; not only do both authors rely on the hoary device of having God tell them He doesn't support the president, but they each claim to pack their carry-on luggage with baseballs to bean would-be hijackers. But where Franken attacks individual conservatives, Moore focuses on issues. His first chapter is a series of unsettlingly specific questions (based on rigorously footnoted facts) about the political and financial ties among Bush, the Saudi Arabian government and Osama bin Laden's family, though he leaps from the facts to speculation when he wonders whether the September 11 attacks might have been hatched within the Saudi military. Other chapters attack the public's susceptibility to what he casts as the fear-mongering tactics the administration has used to justify foreign military interventions and, he says, the erosion of domestic civil liberties, and he lays plans for a Democratic victory in 2004: in addition to a half-serious nomination of Oprah, he offers a prescient, reasoned and highly favorable evaluation of Wesley Clark as a candidate. Moore's arguments work best when delivered mostly straight, since he isn't always as funny as he seems to think he is." (From Amazon)
I enjoyed Moore's point of view of America and its politics.
"The book shares much with Al Franken's Lies besides liberal sentiment and satirical tone; not only do both authors rely on the hoary device of having God tell them He doesn't support the president, but they each claim to pack their carry-on luggage with baseballs to bean would-be hijackers. But where Franken attacks individual conservatives, Moore focuses on issues. His first chapter is a series of unsettlingly specific questions (based on rigorously footnoted facts) about the political and financial ties among Bush, the Saudi Arabian government and Osama bin Laden's family, though he leaps from the facts to speculation when he wonders whether the September 11 attacks might have been hatched within the Saudi military. Other chapters attack the public's susceptibility to what he casts as the fear-mongering tactics the administration has used to justify foreign military interventions and, he says, the erosion of domestic civil liberties, and he lays plans for a Democratic victory in 2004: in addition to a half-serious nomination of Oprah, he offers a prescient, reasoned and highly favorable evaluation of Wesley Clark as a candidate. Moore's arguments work best when delivered mostly straight, since he isn't always as funny as he seems to think he is." (From Amazon)
I enjoyed Moore's point of view of America and its politics.
January 28, 2008
I'm independent. I don't buy the politics that anyone is shoveling - right or left. Being a person that keeps a finger on the pulse of world events and politics, I nevertheless enjoy reading up on what people believe about the world (or would like you to thing they believe). I always appreciate it if the approach is humorous and especially politically incorrect.
I put Michael Moore in the same boat as Anne Coulter (something which would probably horrify both) - as they are both outrageous entertainers who are focused on swaying through sensationalism, rather than serious politicos rationally debating the facts, such as Bill Buckley vs. Noam Chomsky. Outrageous humor is more fun to read though, and whatever your political bent, it's much too fun to laugh and cry at the vast hypocrisies of the American left and right.
I put Michael Moore in the same boat as Anne Coulter (something which would probably horrify both) - as they are both outrageous entertainers who are focused on swaying through sensationalism, rather than serious politicos rationally debating the facts, such as Bill Buckley vs. Noam Chomsky. Outrageous humor is more fun to read though, and whatever your political bent, it's much too fun to laugh and cry at the vast hypocrisies of the American left and right.
March 22, 2012
اهم ما خرجت به من هذا الكتاب انه لا يوجد نموذج مثالى للدميقراطية... فحتى فى الولايات المتحدة لا يستخدم الشعب الديمقراطية بشكل صحيح... بل على العكس تهيمن الكيانات الاقتصادية والشركات على العملية الديمقراطية بشكل يعكس رغبتهم باكثر مما يعكس رغبة الشعب...
النقطة الثانية هى التشابه الفظيع بين ليبرالين امريكا وليبرالين مصر... فكلاهما على مستوى واحد وغير محبوب من قبل المحافظين المتدينين... على الرغم من ان معظم الشعب يحمل داخله افكار ليبرالية او يسارية إلا انه لا يحب ان يعطى لنفسه نموذج معين.. سواء ليبرالي او يسارى.. ولذلك تجد ان معظم المحافظين حافظين مش فاهمين..
لكن فيه خلط كبير اوى ما بين الليبرالية واليسارية.... يمكن مايكل مور حب يصنف الليبرالية فى امريكا على انها نوع من اليسارية... رغم انه بيتكلم على مبادىء اشتراكية واضحة
كتاب ممتع وطريقة صياغته بسيطة وساهلة
النقطة الثانية هى التشابه الفظيع بين ليبرالين امريكا وليبرالين مصر... فكلاهما على مستوى واحد وغير محبوب من قبل المحافظين المتدينين... على الرغم من ان معظم الشعب يحمل داخله افكار ليبرالية او يسارية إلا انه لا يحب ان يعطى لنفسه نموذج معين.. سواء ليبرالي او يسارى.. ولذلك تجد ان معظم المحافظين حافظين مش فاهمين..
لكن فيه خلط كبير اوى ما بين الليبرالية واليسارية.... يمكن مايكل مور حب يصنف الليبرالية فى امريكا على انها نوع من اليسارية... رغم انه بيتكلم على مبادىء اشتراكية واضحة
كتاب ممتع وطريقة صياغته بسيطة وساهلة
March 31, 2012
Mr. Moore doesn’t blame Former President George Dubya or any of his crack staff for the state of our country. He puts the blame squarely on Americans for letting him do it. Once more he skewers hypocrisy, both in the government and in the private sector, while at the same time berating Americans for letting their privacy be whittled away little by little, all in the name of national security.
Mr. Moore makes quite a few uncomfortable points. There is humor here but also the clear-sighted view of a man who sees the downward spiral on which our country is sliding and is determined to call our attention to it. When he makes a point about how the Patriot Act means that nothing in your library records or emails is secure, you’d have to be completely oblivious not to be nervous.
Mr. Moore makes quite a few uncomfortable points. There is humor here but also the clear-sighted view of a man who sees the downward spiral on which our country is sliding and is determined to call our attention to it. When he makes a point about how the Patriot Act means that nothing in your library records or emails is secure, you’d have to be completely oblivious not to be nervous.
January 20, 2016
This is a very well researched, informed and written book which both shocked and riveted me while I read it on holiday (it is also quite amusing in places despite the sober subject matter). It cites specific references to many official documents and data sources in the same way that an academic research paper would to ensure traceability of the facts used back to credible sources. I wish I had read this 10+ years ago and will be looking for copies of Michael Moore's other work now. The first review comment in my copy is "If Michael Moore didn't exist, it would be necessary for the world to invent him" Guardian, clearly attempting to recycle Voltaire's "si dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer (If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him)"
September 21, 2011
I've always enjoyed reading political books retrospectively, and Moore didn't disappoint in this blistering critique of a post-9/11 Bush administration that is more concerned with crony capitalism and the defamation of the Constitution. Moore's political stance is only eclipsed by his no-nonsense approach to governance and the formation of a true Republic. Written in 2004, this book expounds upon not only upon Bush's precursor to the Iraq invasion (9/11) but also focuses on the collapse of Enron and its effects on both the American economy and psyche. Consider this book a call-to-arms for all patriots who desperately cling to the precepts and principals of our founding forefathers.
December 3, 2011
I had nearly forgotten just how bad the G. W. Bush administration really was. Glad I listened to this. It's amazing how the GOP is able to pull the wool over the eyes of so many, they are the party of the rich. I guess it's as Moore says, the great American Horatio Alger myth. If you are at all progressive or liberal ( see in particular definition 8 ) in your thinking, you owe it to yourself to listen to this audio book or read the book.
February 9, 2010
Informative. This perspective makes me question journalists and politicians. There needs to be something that holds them accountable for their action and their talk. Otherwise it is just frustrating. Does not make sense that other professions are held liable for their work and politicians and journalists are seemingly lying left and right. This can make a person very apathetic (after the anger simmers down) and depressed.
May 20, 2009
Oh, it's a diatribe, but a relatively cogent one. Michael Moore attempts -- and succeeds -- to espouse a liberal agenda in behalf of working-class Americans. For those who became fed up with liberals, Moore suggests it's time to get fed up with conservatives. It's hard to dispute the notion that the Republicans have screwed up the country. Moore is only too happy to be Everyman.
August 29, 2014
For what I assumed would be a leftie rant, I found his chapter on how to actually have a dialogue with the right educational. It was a book written to swing votes and remove the Stupid White Man from power so a little out of context to read it now. But Aus could do with a similar book right now to remove our current Stupid White Man
June 20, 2007
I like Michael Moore's writing more than his documentaries. He's got a relaxed, fun style with a surprising amount of depth beneath it. The book is a bit reactionary in parts (moreso than Stupid White Men), but it was an enjoyable read and well documented and researched.
December 24, 2008
Moore's brassy humor and unapologetically leftist slant are what sells here. His style has made him both revered and reviled. Incidentally, for those who have already seen "Farenheit 9/11", this book is what the movie is largely based on.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 400 reviews