Why michael moore is like star trek



 You know it’s a slow month for new sci-fi movies when Movie Club members can be found taking in the latest political documentary!  But seriously folks, we went to see the new Michael Moore movie “Capitalism: A Love Story” on purpose.  Why?   Because we love Michael Moore.  In fact, I’ll go as far to say that all true Star Trek fans should love Michael Moore…

I know there are people out there who say they hate Michael Moore, but one of my favorite quotations about hate goes something along the lines of “hate is not the opposite of love – apathy is.”  See, hate is a very strong emotion, and you can only get that worked up emotionally over something you really care about.  So hate can’t be the opposite of love.  It’s only when you don’t give a shit at all anymore – when you become apathetic – that you’ve truly crossed over into anti-love territory (like the way we all felt about Star Trek after the first season of Enterprise).

But people who “hate” Michael Moore tend to get so into their tantrums they froth at the mouth and spew bile (figuratively and literally).  They generally feel that Moore is too biased and fudges his facts to sway opinion in favor of his side of the issue (of course, we could easily say the same of Roddenberry and Trek’s political allegories). 

But you can’t blame the naysayers, Moore’s work tends to tackle some pretty incendiary issues; he’s made films about corporate greed, teen violence, gun control, terrorism, health care and now the financial crisis.  Folks tend to get uppity about highly-charged issues and don’t take kindly to hearing a point of view they disagree with get so much attention.  Naturally they’re going to fight back!

And thus why we should all tip our hat to the filmaker – whether or not you like Michael Moore and his political beliefs, he’s shining a dilithium-powered spotlight on issues and concerns that the public at large often ignores –  and making us talk about them!  Just like Star Trek when at its best, his work is challenging people with ideas and concepts they may not otherwise have contemplated and his movies regularly provide a catalyst for discussion. 

Wait, did I say discussion?  That’s putting it mildly –  his movies spark long, heated debates that regularly get people’s panties in a twist, live on TV!  The “discussions” in the press that follow most Michael Moore movies are generally only one, small step away from turning into the Jerry Springer show (you know, just like fan debates over Kirk vs Picard).

 *Sigh,* if only Star Trek did that more often (and no, debating if the movie was any good doesn’t count).

So next time someone says they hate Michael Moore, maybe give them the ironic reminder that it’s only because of him that they now have an audience for their own points of view…




PS: Oh yeah, the movie was great, too.  Everyone living in the US owes it to themselves – and their future – to see it.  And discuss!

27 Responses to “Why michael moore is like star trek”

  1. September 29, 2009 at 4:00 am

    Trek is fiction, while Moore is expected to produce facts. If he fudges the numbers that’s dishonesty, not scriptwriting.

    Having said that, I used to think he was just a sensationalist. While that may still be true, he won a lot of ground with me by making an anti-capitalism movie (I haven’t seen it, or Sicko that’s been sitting on my HDD for months).

    While we’re on the subject, Star Trek is like a kids show compared to the new BSG. To think that a french man was once my favourite starship captain. Pff.

  2. 2 Chris
    September 29, 2009 at 5:11 am

    Boy, am I disappointed by this post! I think Moore is a hypocrite and liar.

    If Star Trek is like Moore, it would have failed long ago.

  3. September 29, 2009 at 3:55 pm

    Haven’t seen the new one yet, but I have to disagree with you. Moore’s problem is that he’s sloppy. He’s a decent raconteur, but he’s careless with many facts, which severely hinders his persuasiveness. He’s got a decent audience, but they’re almost all people who already agree with him. He just doesn’t hold up well to critical thinking. (Oh wait, that kind of is like the new Trek, isn’t it?)

  4. 4 Colonial Warrior
    September 29, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    I remember MM’s tv show from the early 90s. I really enjoyed it when he would go out rent/borrow the garbage truck drive it to the home of a garbage collection company owner and just bang the hell outta the dumpster 3 or 4 times at like 4:30am until the owner would come out and complain about the noise. Then MM would ask him why that bothers him since he’s basically having this done every day all over the city etc etc.. Or parking a charter boat just off of a private beach and swim to the beach. Oh and let’s not forget about the Car alarms ( similar situation as with the garbage truck). Ya just have to laff at it.
    It’s making a great point at the same time being entertaining tv. Does he see things in the world differently than the majority of the mundanes well yes he does. But he’ll make ya think for a moment and he’ll do it with a sharp humor twist that ensures that you’ll remember it longer than what was on last nites headlines.

  5. 5 darthmojo
    September 29, 2009 at 10:08 pm

    As I said in the post, I understand people’s disdain for Moore, but in the end it doesn’t matter if he flat out lies or ignores certain facts to make his point – what matters is that someone is making movies about these issues and gets them thrust into the public eye.

    Let me ask all the Moore-haters a question: if you could press a magic button that would stop him from ever making another movie, would you press it? Would it have been better if he hadn’t brought subjects like health care and teen violence into the limelight? Even if you disagree with his point of view, isn’t it a blessing that his films give a public forum to important issues?

    In a way, it’s even better that people accuse him of being a liar and a hypocrite; it raises people’s ire and provokes MORE debate! If everyone agreed with Moore’s ideology and found no fault with the films, far fewer people would argue about them.

    So to all the haters, please consider how unfortunate it would be if these films weren’t being made at all. How lucky we are that a guy making DOCUMENTARIES has achieved enough popularity that his movies get wide release and spurs debate amongst millions.

    Would you really want to put an end to that?

  6. September 29, 2009 at 10:49 pm

    Mojo: That should be Mike al-Moor….

  7. 7 DanH
    September 30, 2009 at 6:20 am

    Mojo: We already have a voice for our opinions. It’s called the 1st Amendment. There was debate among millions before him, and there will be afterwards. We’ve also got this other thing now called the Internet where millions talk about such issues, and their facts are more accurate 99% of the time before the pandering begins.

  8. September 30, 2009 at 8:43 am

    I see your point, but I stand by what I’ve always said about Moore: He could be a perfectly credible voice of reason and intelligent opposition *without* having to resort to distortion, misleading edit and outright fabrication. He’s an excellent film-maker, and he goes for topics desperately in need of discussion, which makes me rip me hair out in sheer despair that he just doesn’t stick with the gorram truth. It’s not like he even *needs* to screw around with reality on most of the stuff he discusses. Particularly with The War Against Terror (feel free to use the acronym) and it’s impact on our civil liberties, there was a veritable *mountain* of fact that showed how off-piste the US leadership was.

    I think it’s a terrible waste that what should have been valuable and cogent opposition let itself get mired in sexing things up, and making things up – exactly the problem I have with most of his topics of discussion.

  9. September 30, 2009 at 10:48 am

    Phew. I’m glad my somewhat appreciation for Michael Moore isn’t misplaced. I thought he covered a lot of good tracks in his film “sicko” and totally applauded the moment when he was walking up to a congress building with a bag full of laundry saying “In the mean time, I’m going to get the government to do my laundry.” WIN!

    I am definitely going to see this movie. I’m not saying I agree with a lot of Michael Moore’s opinions, but like Darth-Mojo says, he does bring issues like this out into the open and gets us talking about it.

  10. 10 james Rye
    September 30, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    Well, I like Michael Moore films. I am a UK resident, and I love visiting America and I like American culture. But Michael Moore opened my eyes to some of the amazing problems America (and therefore the world) faces:

    The right to bear arms.
    Crazy lawsuits (although we have this problem now).

    I am just grateful (for the world at large) that the biggest problem (Bush) is now gone. Moore ridicules the business philosophy that has blown up the economy, resulted in 6 million job losses and required more than a $1 trillion in bailout money to keep the banks afloat — while millions of people have lost their homes to foreclosure. He’s a man who has made perpetual outrage an art form in every sense of the word.

    Star Trek IMHO is as anti-capitalist and pro-rationalist as TV gets. We have evolved beyond the need for material gain I think Picard says in First Contact.

  11. September 30, 2009 at 5:42 pm

    “Let me ask all the Moore-haters a question: if you could press a magic button that would stop him from ever making another movie, would you press it? Would it have been better if he hadn’t brought subjects like health care and teen violence into the limelight”

    I don’t know if I’m a Moore-hater, but yeah, I probably would press the button.

    You can do a greater disservice by ‘bringing up an issue’ and surrounding it with easily refutable distortions and untruths than if you did nothing at all. It’s a pity, because he’s genuinely more entertaining than the standard docu fare. He really should hire a fact-checker from the CATO institute (or wherever) to keep him honest.

    Check out “Food, Inc.” for a recent version of a documentary done right.

  12. 12 CenturionTerminator
    October 1, 2009 at 12:14 pm

    So, you like Michael Moore?

    Okay, Darth Mojo…

    Let me ask you about another celebrated filmmaker.

    What do you think of Roman Polanski?

    Do you think he should be set free or go to jail?

    Just curious.

  13. October 2, 2009 at 2:15 am

    Trek is fiction, while Moore is expected to produce facts. If he fudges the numbers that’s dishonesty, not scriptwriting.

    Moore does produce facts; the only problem here with how you look at them is the amount of self-brainwashing you do to yourself that results from ingesting too much neocon Kool-Aid.

    Having said that, I used to think he was just a sensationalist. While that may still be true, he won a lot of ground with me by making an anti-capitalism movie (I haven’t seen it, or Sicko that’s been sitting on my HDD for months).

    Maybe you should see Sicko, and get some perspective on what a human health care system is like, rather than accusing him of fudging facts (the MSM does it too, only you don’t see to notice.)

    While we’re on the subject, Star Trek is like a kids show compared to the new BSG. To think that a french man was once my favourite starship captain. Pff.

    If you truly believe that, I have a certain article/review you should be reading; http://reflectionsonfilmandtelevision.blogspot.com/2005/06/making-lemonade-or-i-feel-need-need.html

  14. 14 darthmojo
    October 4, 2009 at 1:54 am

    CENTURION: How do I feel about the Polanski case? While I don’t think the US should forgive and forget simply because he has avoided America and his Hollywood friends are calling for it, I think pursuing extradition after all this time is ridiculous.

    In this country the wishes of victims are taken into consideration, and in this case the “victim” has made it clear she forgives him and wants the whole thing dropped. And I wish the media would stop calling it a “rape” case because that is being overly glip. She was 13 and her mother routinely took her to Hollywood parties where she would often get drunk. She was drunk at this particular party, Polanski hit on her and she slept with him. Yes, that is statutory rape, but legally it is VERY different from flat out rape, which is what I hear a lot of news outlets calling it.

    Was Polanski wrong for doing this? Of course. But given the circumstances I wouldn’t treat Polanski like a violent rapist who needs to be brough to justice no matter the cost. At the same time, I have to wonder why no one has ever tried to prosecute the mother, who is clearly guitly of neglectful parenting – she should never have allowed her daughter to be in that situation.

    I’m not saying Polanski doesn’t deserve punishement – this is why he has had to avoid stepping foot in the US – because the momene he does, he will be taken to trial and deservedly so.

    However, this has served as a certain punishment for him – for the last 30 years he hasn’t been able to come into this country and he’s had to live under the spectre of the case. But given the circumstances and the time that has passed, I think suddenly looking to extradite him and forcably bring him to trial is uncalled for. If they felt he deserved trial so strongly, they should have taken these steps decades ago.

    I don’t think he should be let off simply because some of the media are calling for it, but if he wishes to avoid prosecution by continuing his self-imposed exile until he dies, fine.

  15. 15 CenturionTerminator
    October 5, 2009 at 8:54 am

    DARTH: Thank you for answering my question. For over a year now, I have enjoyed reading your blog.

    But I cannot believe what you just stated in your response. I am shocked.

    The truth is Polanski raped a child. He drugged her, with Quaaludes and alcohol, and then proceeded to sexually assault her while she repeatedly said no. (Here is the victim’s full grand jury testimony of how Polanski raped her: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.html)

    Rape is rape whether it is statutory rape or flat-out rape. I can’t understand why you don’t see it for what it is. It is violent by nature. It involves force. It is one of the worst crimes imaginable when it especially involves children.

    It does not matter if the crime was committed thirty years ago. We cannot the let the rich and powerful get away with raping young children by living a life of luxury after fleeing justice. Such predators must be pursued relentlessly and be made examples of.

    And to blame the mother for the crime is just pure audacity. Why not blame Marc Klaas or John Walsh?

    At least, Michael Moore is not like Roman Polanski.

    I am utterly disappointed in you.

  16. 16 darthmojo
    October 5, 2009 at 8:02 pm

    And I am utterly disappointed that one of my readers would choose to ignore the law in favor of a black and white view fuelled by little more than an emotional, knee-jerk reaction.

    Neither may be pretty, but despite your keenly intellectual interpretation that “rape is rape,” there IS a difference between rape and statutory rape – that’s why we have two seperate legal terms with seperate rules and seperate punishments. I’m grateful you’re not a judge!

    Also, I never said that Polanski should get away with anything. Our justice system decided long ago not to look for extradition in this case, but to simply make it clear that if he ever were to step foot in this country again, he would be arrested and prosecuted.

    Considering that the victim has forgiven him and wants to put the whole thing behind her, I support this handling of the case.

    On the other hand, to decide after 30 years that they finally want to get him and are now thinking about extradition is arbitrary and without merit. If they felt this crime was worthy of stronger enforcement they should have done it a long time ago – especially when the events were new and witnesses could recall what happened. ANY trial that takes place 30 years after the fact is going to be iffy at best.

    You say that the rich and powerful cannot be allowed to get away with such things. Hey, I agree, so you should write a letter to the US Attourney General’s office and complain that they let him get away 30 years ago! Ironically, you’re missing what should really be your own point here – if you want to see Polanski burn, you should be praising his celebrity status, since that’s the only thing keeping this case alive.

    If he had been some average joe who fled the country after committing this crime, there is no way in hell that anyone would still be looking for him – and no chance at all that a foreign government would have recognized and held him for extradition!

    In either situation, all I’ve said is that I disagree with any decision to enforce this case 30 years later. If Polanski comes back to the US, then sure, arrest him and get on with it – but upping the ante now is absurd at best and possibly unconstitutional at worst.

    And I never blamed the mother – I simply said she should be chastised as well for taking her daughter to adult parties where she had no place. Drew Barrymore has told many tales of being taken to Hollywood parties when she was younger than 13, where she would run around to different tables and finish off people’s drinks. God knows what else went on. Should Barrymore’s parents/guardians not be held accountable?

    It seems to me that you are simply taking a black and white approach of “rape is wrong and Polanski should hang at dawn, no matter what.” Personally, I think such a limited view is just as bad as the people who are clamoring for Polanski to be completely forgiven; extreme opnions such as these do not further justice – every situation has it’s own intracasies and shades of grey and the heart of what really should be done generally lies somewhere in the greyscale.

    Which is exactly where I said I stand on this.

  17. 17 CenturionTerminator
    October 6, 2009 at 8:55 pm

    Darth, did I touch a nerve?

    I can sense the growing rage and stinging sarcasm in your words. Your response is basically one of knee-jerk moral relativism.

    By your very reasoning, hunting down old Nazi war criminals is a waste of time. After all, mass murder and child rape become equivalent to jaywalking — especially, after so many years and if anybody still cares.

    I do not know if you have any children, but if your young daughter was victimized the same way Polanski brutalized his poor victim — then thirty years or half-hearted forgiveness would not make any difference. You would pursue your daughter’s rapist to the very end. To you, rape would be rape. (There may be a semantic difference between statutory rape and flat-out rape, but they are essentially the same. Both are sex without consent and involve some use of force.)

    A crime like rape is not just a crime against the victim. It is a crime against society. (That is why criminal court cases are always known as “The People of [County, State, Nation] versus The Alleged Perpetrator”.) Not only did Polanski devastate the life of a young girl, he offended the whole of society as well. That is why he should still be prosecuted. Our system is based on justice and not on forgiveness.

    If Polanski was an average joe and had fled the country after raping a young girl — he would have been pursued no matter what. Ever hear of America’s Most Wanted?

    This seeming tolerance of child abuse is so disturbing. A blase attitude like this enables thousands of little children each day to be trafficked and then raped for profit by vile sex tourists who travel to developing countries in order to secretly fulfill their perverse fantasies. This global trade in underage sex slavery is a horrendous human tragedy.

    Come on, Darth Mojo. I know you’re better than this. There are shades of gray sometimes. But there is also black and white. There is right and wrong.

    Just like your namesake, I hope you turn from the dark side and come to the light.

  18. 18 darthmojo
    October 7, 2009 at 1:54 am

    It is difficult to argue right and wrong with someone who refuses to acknowledge the laws or constitution of his country but prefers to follow his own moral beliefs in the pursuit of justice.

    The fact simply is that rape is not rape. Depspite your supposition, statutory rape does not involve any force or violence:

    A defendant may be convicted of statutory rape even if the complainant explicitly consented to the sexual contact and no force was used by the actor. By contrast, other rape generally occurs when a person overcomes another person by force and without the person’s consent.

    But if we left things to the court of Centurian Terminator (an odd choice of nickname for someone who claims such moral high ground), even the 21 year old guy in a comitted relationship with a 17 year old is guilty of “violently raping a child” and anyone who thinks otherwise is “contributing to the global trade in underage sex slavery.”

    What really sickens me is your accusation that anyone who doesn’t see things your way is guilty of tolerating child abuse and fostering the rape of little children. You should be ashamed of yourself for grossly over-reaching to connect such deplorable behavior with what is simply our obligation to uphold and foster the laws we live by.

    As I said before, thank god you’re not in charge.

  19. 19 CenturionTerminator
    October 7, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

    Despite our raging differences, our lively debate was most invigorating.

    Still, I am astonished that you actually believe the pursuit of convicted predators, who flee prosecution, is somehow unlawful or unconstitutional. Laws are meant to protect people — especially, those who are innocent and defenseless like children. And there are really heinous crimes that should not be entitled to a statute of limitations.

    In the Court of Darth Mojo, the court of a self-styled Sith Lord, anything goes. Roman Polanski, and others like him, would probably walk scot-free.

    But in the Court of CenturionTerminator, a court based on clear standards of right and wrong and on due process for everyone equally, the harshest punishment would be inflicted for the harshest of crimes. (Remember, there were Centurions and Terminators who fought against their evil counterparts.)

    What really ignited this debate was your initial response. It was essentially: “Roman Polanski raped a child? So what?!” Such a shocking response deserved an impassioned rebuttal.

    Yet I will give you the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think you would ever condone the abuse of a child. (Right?)

    But, having had a startling glimpse into your character, I will feel some ambivalence as I continue to read your blog. Working for Hollywood has apparently imbued you with Hollywood values.

    And I am glad you are not in charge, either.

  20. 20 darthmojo
    October 7, 2009 at 11:10 pm

    Centurion, you’ve got a giant screw lose and I think your swishing red eye is wildly distorting everything you see. Either that or we have yet another example of the far right purposely twisting the words and ideology of whomever disagrees with them.

    You know very well (unless you were never taught to read) that your glib distillation of my thoughts on Polanski’s crime is a gross misrepresentation. I think what he did – as I already said – is terrible and he deserves to be punnished; however I disagreed with the idea of deciding to finally pursue the case 30 years after the fact.

    Which brings us to your other flagrant distortion of my words – your assumption that in the “court of Mojo” we would just let criminals off scott free and not pursue justice. I have no idea how you could possibly draw this conclusion based on anything I said, although once again I see your patten of black and white thinking at work here, accusing people who don’t agree with your stance of supporting the polar opposite – if I don’t see white, I must be black!

    I’m truly sorry if you are unable to conceive of anything in between extreme viewpoints, although I am concerned that you’ll rot in hell if you are purposely trying to pin exteme views on people simply for disagreeing with you. For your own sake, I suggest that you come to terms with the fact that people who can actually see the numbers between 1 and 10 are not evil, and trying to accuse someone of supporting child rape for disagreeing with your view simply puts the devil at your side.

    For 30 years, the US has not sought extradition of Polanski and simply taken the position that if he enters the country he will then be brought to justice. I simply feel that arbitrarily deciding now that they way to pursue the case is wrong.

    Contrary to what you believe with your twisted programming, I absolutely believe that criminals should be pursued and brought to justice – that’s only basic common sense and decency. But our laws also insist that justice must be fair and timely; a decision to wait 30 years before doing so is neither.

    The simple fact is that if the US thought it was important to “get” Polanski, they should have pursued him as soon as he fled. If anything, your anger should be directed at the people who made the decision to drop the case all those years ago.

    My belief that it borders on unconstitutional to pursue him now is not the same thing as believing he should not be punnished, can you grasp that concept?

    Some people get away with their crimes because of technicalities or loopholes in our system or due to inept prosecution; of course these people deserve to be punnished, but to do so would mean abolishing our constitution and bill of rights. Would you accuse me of being soft on crime and wanting to set criminals free if I elect to keep our system – however flawed? Or would you gladly toss out our laws so you can exact punnishment simply bacause you think it’s morally right?

    We can’t have it both ways. I think Polanski should be sent to jail for his crime, but if it requires ignoring the law to do so, then we simply have to accept the fact that the government blew it with Polanski and put our energies towards making sure the NEXT one doesn’t get away.

    Surely we can both agree on that!

  21. 21 CenturionTerminator
    October 8, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Darth, your words still drip with seething rage and condescension.

    Luckily, you’re not a real-life Sith Lord. I would be in big trouble. Even with my massive strength and built-in weapons as a Centurion, your dark Force-powers and red lightsaber would truly be formidable.

    We may enjoy the same sci-fi universe. But we apparently inhabit different moral universes.

  22. October 13, 2009 at 5:04 pm

    Hookay, if you two are done…

    I finally saw Capitalism, and it was about as bad as I feared. Lots of good stuff, but so partisan that he undermined his own points. (Pop Quiz, identify the Democratic appointees in the film) Throw in a mis-represented memo and some theatrics (which are, admittedly, his best bits) and what could have been an educational film becomes a two-hour-hate (with home movies!)

  23. 23 darthmojo
    October 14, 2009 at 4:04 am

    It was “as bad as you feared?” That sounds a lot like someone who walks into a theater expecting, and possibly even WANTING to hate something. Honestly, Church, it sounds like you had your review in mind before the lights even dimmed.

    I saw it with a packed house and even people who disagreed with Moore’s politics enjoyed the movie. And, back to my original point – even people who disagree with the politics agree with the basic principle – that there’s a lot of greed and corporate manipulation severely hurting this country.

    Why can’t people who hate Michael Moore ever concede that we’re still better off with his films than without? Or, at the very least, that the core issues he’s spotlighting are important?

    And you know what, I think it’s better for Moore to overstate a problem than understate. I’m all for a crowd of angry moviegoers demanding a solution to a bitter problem and then finding out, “oh, it’s not as bad as we thought? Ok then…” rather than people underestimating the corruption and hardship.

    I would MUCH rather find out the world is a better place than a worse one!

  24. October 14, 2009 at 7:42 am

    I said “as bad as I feared” because I have seen his other movies, and I’m aware of his shortcomings. I was hoping they wouldn’t be on display here, but I was disappointed.

    I agree with you that Moore can be very entertaining (although this one felt about a half hour too long) and if that’s what you’re looking for, he’s your man. It’s no accident that his docos get mainstream distribution while most do the art house rounds. I’d just like him to be *persuasive* as well.

    The problem with Moore, as I see it, is that he undermines himself on two fronts. He cannot get over his partisan leanings, and he invariably includes easily refutable or mis-represented information. This is an important issue, and deserves better treatment. Maybe a little less time on the banal ‘plutonomy’ letter and a little more on the Wall Street appointees in the current administration?

    Sure he tackles important issues, but I fear that he takes the oxygen out of the room. And if he does that to the detriment of someone who has a more reasonable approach, someone who might be able to convince people on the other side of the aisle to pay attention, then he’s doing more harm than good.

  25. 25 CenturionTerminator
    October 14, 2009 at 12:20 pm

    Michael Moore is many things: filmmaker, agitator, activist, social critic.

    He has attacked both the Democrats and Republicans.

    He stands for the little guy. And he himself is a big guy.

    He is a devout socialist in ideology and a rich capitalist in practice.

    But, at least, he not like Roman Polanski.

  26. 26 Scott
    October 20, 2009 at 11:12 am

    Why I hate Michael Moore: (quote)

    “The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the revolution, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow – and they will win.”

    This was Moore, while our brothers and daughters are fighting there. And I don’t care whether you were for the war or against it. THE MINUTEMEN? Yeah, okay. You stay classy, Moore.

    And Polanski should be castrated, not jailed. There is no excuse. NO EXCUSE, for taking advantage of a 13-year-old. I don’t care if she even asked for it (and the transcript above makes it pretty clear what happened). Justifying that as anything other than straight-out rape is, well, creepy.

  27. December 14, 2012 at 6:34 am

    Michael Moore is very much like an especially lardy and ugly version of Gorgan… http://www.startrek.com/database_article/and-the-children-shall-lead
    …and he reveals much about his inner darkness and exploitation of young mushy minds very well here:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

September 2009

%d bloggers like this: