Stupid White Men....and Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!

[blankpage]

Stupid White Men....and Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation

Written by- Michael Moore

I picked up this book tonight. I have read a few pages, and must I say what an amazing book. The man speeks truth, and makes you laugh at the same time. I am looking forward to the rest of the book.

I am aware that many Schmoes have read the book, so I would like to hear your views on Michael Moore's book.

[SAI]

One of my favourite books of last year (The other being Bill Hicks bio American Scream) and the perfect companion to Bowling For Columbine.

Stupid White Men is a very important book, like Bowling For Columbine and like Moore's other books it presents serious issues in a truthful, acsessible and screamingly funny way. Here's hoping we don't have to wait long for Moore's next book

[Pootie]

i really wanna read this. because i found a newfound respect for Moore after he made canadian bacon AND bowling for columbine. and because Phat Mike told me to and im a slave to him.

[screamer581]

I just picked this book up yesterday and I am really digging it. Hopefully I will have time to finish it this week...damn school. Anyone else read Stupid White Men?

[Speermint]

I finished reading it about a week back, and being Australian, I found it quite an interesting read - that it was a careful study into the deformities of American democracy. Chapter 2: Dear George was classic, and it kept me laughing the whole way through. And to hear this coming from an American citizen really surprised me. it is one of the best books i have ever read.

Bowling for columbine was extremely good. i loved it. when it comes to DVD i am going to get it.

i am just about to log off because his show, "The Awful Truth" is nearly on.

Michael Moore is my favourite personality at the moment. i hope he keeps it up.

[Raymond Babbit]

Originally posted by Pootie
i found a newfound respect for Moore after he made canadian bacon AND bowling for columbine.

Moore didn't do Canadian Bacon. Are you thinking of John Candy?

[EoghainFOKeeffe]

Could someone please explain to me why BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE is 'screamingly funny' and 'hilarious'? Both phrases are from reviews quoted on the poster for the film. I thought it was an excellent documentary but I didn't laugh once. I didn't even FEEL like laughing. In fact, it scared me.

[SAI]

Originally posted by Raymond Babbit
Moore didn't do Canadian Bacon. Are you thinking of John Candy?
Moore wrote and directed Canadian Bacon

[Raymond Babbit]

I just finished Stupid White Men and I loved it. My favorite chapter was "Kill Whitey". The things Moore said about racism were so true.

[MarkItZero]

I read the words 'truthful' far too many times in this thread

Moore is not honest, he is a blatant liar. And when he is not lying, he is distorting the truth as much as he thinks he can get away with.

That being said, I enjoyed the book it was quite funny.

But remember to take it for what it is: fictional comedy

[Benny]

I read Stupid White Men last summer, and found it to be very funny and mostly truthful, expect it went a little too far sometimes. Moore is a rabble-rouser and wants people to be aware of issues that he does not like or wants changed. Most of the time, I think he has a point though. I wish he wasn't as one-sided as he is, too, which was one of the few problems with Bowling for Columbine.

[Reigh Kaufman]

Just finished this last night after getting a copy from my g/friend's brother - food for thought, eh? I just wish we had someone willing to go that extra mile in Britain, because the myths of politics and education and equality (and a thousand other socio-political debates) are in dire need of a man who will at least say something CLOSER - though he is still a biased ranconteur - to the truth than what the government and its apologists are saying. Kill Whitey was a masterclass of satire, and the open letter to George Bush, Jnr had me wondering just what the hell is going on over the pond - as Bill Hicks would have no doubt said it, 'Shit, they're lying to us!'

Oh, Bill Hicks, how we need you right about now...!

[Nate6]

Originally posted by Reigh Kaufman
Just finished this last night after getting a copy from my g/friend's brother - food for thought, eh? I just wish we had someone willing to go that extra mile in Britain, because the myths of politics and education and equality (and a thousand other socio-political debates) are in dire need of a man who will at least say something CLOSER - though he is still a biased ranconteur - to the truth than what the government and its apologists are saying. Kill Whitey was a masterclass of satire, and the open letter to George Bush, Jnr had me wondering just what the hell is going on over the pond - as Bill Hicks would have no doubt said it, 'Shit, they're lying to us!'

Oh, Bill Hicks, how we need you right about now...!

If you like, I can write a letter to Tony Blair.

"Hey, Blair! How long's it been since you've seen the sky? Not a lot of sun up George Bush's ass!"

I may give this Stupid White Men a look. I agree with some of what Moore says, but the guy annoys me sometimes.

[Billdemart]

Can't stand the guy, especially that speech he made at one of those awards ceremonies where he was booed off the stage. I wouldn't read this if someone paid me to.

[the night watchman]

Moore isn't any different from Anne Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, or Rush Limbaugh; he just occupies the political pole opposite them, and his perspective is dictated by his ideology. That said, I do like him better than the three conservatives I mentioned, if only because he's not as shrilly hysterical as Coulter, as arrogantly hate-mongering as O'Reilly, and a hypocritical as Limbaugh. And also because he's not a Conservative. And he is actually pretty funny.

[Billdemart]

He is pretty funny but his hatred for the President and conservatives clouds his better judgement sometimes. It happens on both sides. Im not a big fan of any of the people you mentioned either. Extremists on any side are all too myopic for my tastes.

[rupert pupkin]

i enjoyed the book in a sense...it was well written but sadly not balanced

for better attacks on corporate america see eric schlosser and of course noam chomsky for a less vitriolic argument

i often like moore's work and have read all his books and his tv series.....but do not like the person ...he is a skilled operator but he is extremely pompous and self righteous

in bowling for columbine when he placed the picture on hestons doorstep....that was a very cheap and manipulative trick

[jeo4]

Originally posted by rupert pupkin
i enjoyed the book in a sense...it was well written but sadly not balanced

for better attacks on corporate america see eric schlosser and of course noam chomsky for a less vitriolic argument

i often like moore's work and have read all his books and his tv series.....but do not like the person ...he is a skilled operator but he is extremely pompous and self righteous

in bowling for columbine when he placed the picture on hestons doorstep....that was a very cheap and manipulative trick

And it's not the first time he has twisted scenarios, facts, etc. to "prove" his point. He's a dickhead. He is also (as mentioned earlier) the very embodiment of the same conservatives opposite him. He'll do anything to make himself look right.

[the night watchman]

But, do you notice how liberals can actually achieve humor and satire, while conservatives cannot? I think there's a certain self-effacement in liberals, that conservatives are incapable of reaching, which makes liberals, to a certain extent, more trust worthy. In other words, liberals can criticize themselves, while conservatives are interesting only in defending, almost to ridiculous degrees, their ideology. G. W. Bush is ripe for criticizing, especially regarding the Iraq fiasco, but you'll never hear conservatives saying one negative word against him, his polices, or his actions as president. What makes them so neurotic?

[Billdemart]

Originally posted by the night watchman
But, do you notice how liberals can actually achieve humor and satire, while conservatives cannot? I think there's a certain self-effacement in liberals, that conservatives are incapable of reaching, which makes liberals, to a certain extent, more trust worthy. In other words, liberals can criticize themselves, while conservatives are interesting only in defending, almost to ridiculous degrees, their ideology. G. W. Bush is ripe for criticizing, especially regarding the Iraq fiasco, but you'll never hear conservatives saying one negative word against him, his polices, or his actions as president. What makes them so neurotic?

Not to get into a political discussion on this thread but there isn't much merit to what you are saying. Conservatives can be just as satirical or humorous and trustworthy. And can also be self critical. You can take your entire paragraph and switch conservatives and liberals and conservatives would agree that this is the truth. Neither side is better at anything. They are all a bunch of hypocrites and not one single one of them is objective about anything.

Except maybe what ive seen from William J. Bennett. Although he too crosses the lines sometimes.

[the night watchman]

Originally posted by Billdemart
You can take your entire paragraph and switch conservatives and liberals and conservatives would agree that this is the truth.

Let's try it:

"But, do you notice how conservatives can actually achieve humor and satire, while liberals cannot? I think there's a certain self-effacement in conservatives, that liberals are incapable of reaching, which makes conservatives, to a certain extent, more trust worthy. In other words, conservatives can criticize themselves, while liberals are interested only in defending, almost to ridiculous degrees, their ideology. [Bill Clinton] is ripe for criticizing, especially regarding the [Lewinsky] fiasco, but you'll never hear liberals saying one negative word against him, his polices, or his actions as president. What makes them so neurotic?"

Well, conservatives might agree with this, but they'd have a hard time offering up evidence to support it.

Here is an example of my position -- two shows that lean more toward the liberal side: The Simpsons and The Daily Show with John Stewart. Both take heavy aim at extremism or just plain stupidity on both poles. I can't think of any conservative programs like them. The only overt conservative humor I can think of is the comic strip "Mallard Fillmore," by Bruce Tinsley. If you compare that comic with, say, The Daily Show, you'll see DS uses exaggeration for its satire, while "Mallard" uses gross misrepresentations of the opposing side (and only the opposing side). The humor between the two is quite different. Compare the humor of Michael Moore and Al Franken to the attempts at humor by Bill O'Reilly and Anne Coulter. I'm not saying that Moore and Franken get everything right or are unbiased, but they without a doubt have a better grasp of the views and concerns of their opponents than O'Reilly and Coulter do. And, more to the point, both are just plain funnier. I guess my observation was that conservatives fail miserably at humor while liberals are often quite adept at it, and that the left tends to more accurately critique the right than the right critiques the left, even if the left's ability to support their own position remains mired in ideology.

[Billdemart]

I supposse you can get away with saying the left is "funnier" than the right. But what does that support? Im not sure the Daily show is a good example. Like you said they talk shots equally at both sides. I wouldn't call it a "liberal" show. Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter doing humor? I think they aren't good examples. Yes they are prominent right side figures but they are far from comedic. O'Reilly is a news guy. That's totally different than Michael Moore the author and film guy who can pretty much do whatever he wants. Plus they are just different kinds of people. You don't expect Arnold Schwarzenegger to do stand up comedy and Eddie Murphy to do action films do you?

This is like me saying that the only good action heroes are conservatives (Arnold, Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis) and therefore liberals can only star in dramatic roles like Martin Sheen. Therefore the right is more trustworthy because Action Heroes are more trustworthy.

[the night watchman]

I added something a little late to my final sentence in my last post (in italics) you might have missed:

Originally posted by the night watchman
I guess my observation was that conservatives fail miserably at humor while liberals are often quite adept at it, and that the left tends to more accurately critique the right than the right critiques the left, even if the left's ability to support their own position remains mired in ideology.

I brought up Coulter, because the histrionics with which she usually conducts herself are often defended by her supporters as "satire." Well, if paranoid rants that deliberately indulge in exquisite fabrications are satire, then I suppose satire has no intellectual value whatsoever.

But humor depends on a substantial amount of insight and self-awareness to be effective. If conservative attempts at humor fail -- and if, indeed, conservatives tend to eschew humor altogether most of the time as a general rule -- is it possible to infer a lack of those qualities on the conservative side, that, say, starring in an action movie wouldn't compensate for?

Also, Moore and O'Reilly are both polemicists; they're different breeds of the same species. There technique is different, and I suggest that this difference -- humor vs. sober sincerity -- is telling.

Lastly, I said that the Daily Show leans toward the left, far more than it does the right. It doesn't condemn gays or revere religion, it doesn't back away from criticizing Bush, etc. My argument was, such a show would necessarily be more middle-to-left-wing in its political stance, than middle-to-right. And since it uses humor, it is more self-aware and self-critical than a right-wing show.

Ultimately, my question is: Why is the right more defensive of its ideology, and less able to poke fun at itself than the left?

[Billdemart]

Not sure.

I saw Coultier on Hannity and Colmes a few times and I wasn't impressed. She gets way too angry or emotional, not sure the word im looking for but she wasn't able to convey her points without pointing fingers and freaking out.

Michael Moore did the same thing on the Dailey show, only he does it with a much more laid back attitude almost cockiness.

They are all just a bunch of finger pointers. Never have any answers for the issues. Just want to take turns bashing each other for what the other believes.

Politics are tiring.

[the night watchman]

Originally posted by Billdemart

They are all just a bunch of finger pointers. Never have any answers for the issues. Just want to take turns bashing each other for what the other believes.

Politics are tiring.

Agreed.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Billdemart
Not to get into a political discussion on this thread but there isn't much merit to what you are saying. Conservatives can be just as satirical or humorous and trustworthy. And can also be self critical. You can take your entire paragraph and switch conservatives and liberals and conservatives would agree that this is the truth. Neither side is better at anything. They are all a bunch of hypocrites and not one single one of them is objective about anything.

That says it all. I'm sick to death of both sides of the political fence. I'm also tired of the finger-pointing that goes on from both sides. They blame one another for all the wrongs in America and they glorify themselves as much as possible. Michael Moore is extremely guilty of this. He has pulled some rather classless stunts. BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE was one big joke to me. He really slanted everything in the film to represent his opinion. No objectivity whatsoever. His Oscar speech, while having at least one or two points, was done at the wrong time and with no concern for the Oscar he had just won. It was tacky and tasteless to do what he did when he chose to. And in my opinion, he never earned the Oscar. I won't waste time with small-minded behavior like this because I can't possibly take it seriously. He's a complete disgrace. As for my vote, those independent parties are looking better with every election year.

[the night watchman]

Vote Libertarian! :D

[quoth_the_raven]

Just to give me 2 pence, I enjoy reading Moore. He makes a lot of good points, regardless of issues of bias, and twisted situations, and is more than capable of making me laugh loud enough to wake up a whole house.

I would seriously suggest everyone reads Stupid white men, Dude wheres my country?, Downsize this, and the TV nation book, regardless of your personal political stance.

You might learn something, you might think a little more, which is always a good thing. You might also laugh, again a very good thing.

here endeth the lesson ;)

[SLAW]

Conservatives are different because they want us liberals to shut up (as if it's American to want that), we want to discuss what's wrong with the world, it's just that criticism isn't ok.

PS: and just last week I heard Bill O'reily say that Moore and people who listen to him hate America. He's just such a moron.

[jeo4]

I don't necessarily want either side to shut up, but both sides could try speaking with a little more forethought. Hell...they might even come off as intelligent. Although I loathe most liberals, I'm not at all pleased with conservatives either. There's plenty of blame to dish out. Moore's attitude makes him less intelligent in his presentation of arguments. It also negates his credibility. As for having a sense of humor, I think it's rather hard to take any political pundit seriously if they are constantly ribbing others instead of presenting valid facts. Again, there's plenty of blame to hand out on both sides of the fence.

[MarkItZero]

Originally posted by jeo4
Again, there's plenty of blame to hand out on both sides of the fence.

That pretty much sums it up.

Wouldnt it be refreshing to hear someone speak who actually looked at both sides of the issue and used reason to form their views instead of just following the party line. Sadly, someone like that would never be given the opportunity to have his/her voice heard to the masses.

[the night watchman]

The "masses" are to blame as much as the ideologues. There's a frustrating anti-intellectual bent among most Americans today. People tend to mistake reason for rationalization. In fact, that's being too easy on them. Most people are just intellectually lazy, prefering soundbites and emotional manipulative rhetoric to the challenge of actually thinking about issues. The person willing to explain the pros and cons of his position doesn't have a chance.

[MarkItZero]

Originally posted by the night watchman
The "masses" are to blame as much as the ideologues. There's a frustrating anti-intellectual bent among most Americans today. People tend to mistake reason for rationalization. In fact, that's being too easy on them. Most people are just intellectually lazy, prefering soundbites and emotional manipulative rhetoric to the challenge of actually thinking about issues. The person willing to explain the pros and cons of his position doesn't have a chance.

Good points all around.

Most people are morons. The media (Moore,O'Reilly etc) are just catering to people's short attention spans.

I think they should rescind 95% of the publics voting rights. Or perhaps there should be an IQ and issues test before you enter the voting booth.....Of course, no one ever listens to my ideas.

[Grebdron]

Dennis Miller's conservative...and funny.

But the extreme on both sides are full of shit, and give our country a bad name.

[HeavyK]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Dennis Miller's conservative...and funny.

But the extreme on both sides are full of shit, and give our country a bad name.

Couldn't agree more.

[Grebdron]

People seem to think that activists/extremists like Moore affect change. In truth, it's those of their ilk that prevent anything from happening.

[jeo4]

davester and Greb both make great arguments here. I think that most of the American population tends to gravitate toward the middle of the political spectrum. Those candidates and celebs who find middle ground with the American public tend to be more popular and respected than those who go to extremes, such as Moore, Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. I tend to agree with conservatives regarding family issues, a strong military and tough foreign policy toward hostile nations, but I agree with the liberal points of conservation of the environment, job protection and domestic issues. To take any of these to an extreme would be very bad, as would ignoring any one of them.

[Erin123]

Originally posted by MarkItZero

Wouldnt it be refreshing to hear someone speak who actually looked at both sides of the issue and used reason to form their views instead of just following the party line. Sadly, someone like that would never be given the opportunity to have his/her voice heard to the masses.

I think that perhaps you are all taking Moore too seriously. If you are looking at someone to present a logical argument which considers both sides of an issue, maybe you should read up on some Professors of Political Science...or some texts found in university curricula.

To me, Moore, in both his books and documentaries etc, is trying to address some really important issues..but he is also trying to entertain. In Stupid White Men, Moore does both of these things. Whether you take on his opinions about the points he raises or not...at least take it with a grain of salt...lighten up and have a laugh!

If you want to enquire seriously into the issues (or you happen to discredit Moore for whatever reason)...then do so elsewhere!

Personally, I think Moore's material is brilliant. He addresses some fundamental wrongs in America and the world...and I have a good laugh along the way ;)

P.S This was not meant to be a personal attack in any way...I just think people are using Michael Moore to vent any political frustrations they might have against other people...take him for what he is... An entertaining critic of American society!

[jeo4]

Pardon me if I'm not entertained. :rolleyes:

[SLAW]

You'll be ok, Jeo. Then again, maybe not.

[horror junkie]

I read that a few months ago. Very funny and makes you think too!