"Shooting Michael Moore" is nothing more than a sly tongue-in-cheek call to violence against Mike. It's not funny, and I'm not laughing.
I live in Davison, Michigan, the hometown of Michael Moore. Mike has a lot of fans here, but unfortunately I've heard more than one nut state that he'd like to shoot him.
Nobody claims that Michael Moore is perfect, but it seems to me that it is a lot easier to find flaws in a couple of his tactics than to dispute the main points that Mike has made in his movies; i.e. G.M. used Flint to build an empire, then left it a wasted core of a city. Instead, many like Leffler blame Michael Moore for making Flint look bad by showing characters like "The Rabbit Lady" in "Roger and Me". Pointing fingers at Mike for the problems of Flint is absurd, and will never result in a single of the city's problems being solved.
Kevin Leffler is like many in this town, who seem to be living off of grudges gathered thirty years ago in high school. Instead of trying to make a quick buck off of an old classmate, why not try to present alternative solutions to the problems Mike has discussed in his films?
Like him or not, in an era when Americans are accused of having a short attention span and an appetite for nothing more than vapid action films, Michael Moore has convinced millions of us to shell out 8-10 bucks apiece to see a documentary about the most important issues of our time: Urban blight, gun violence, and health care reform.
Could Kevin Leffler do that? In an era before Michael Moore, could anybody imagine that anybody could get millions of Americans to see a documentary?
I doubt it.
I live in Davison, Michigan, the hometown of Michael Moore. Mike has a lot of fans here, but unfortunately I've heard more than one nut state that he'd like to shoot him.
Nobody claims that Michael Moore is perfect, but it seems to me that it is a lot easier to find flaws in a couple of his tactics than to dispute the main points that Mike has made in his movies; i.e. G.M. used Flint to build an empire, then left it a wasted core of a city. Instead, many like Leffler blame Michael Moore for making Flint look bad by showing characters like "The Rabbit Lady" in "Roger and Me". Pointing fingers at Mike for the problems of Flint is absurd, and will never result in a single of the city's problems being solved.
Kevin Leffler is like many in this town, who seem to be living off of grudges gathered thirty years ago in high school. Instead of trying to make a quick buck off of an old classmate, why not try to present alternative solutions to the problems Mike has discussed in his films?
Like him or not, in an era when Americans are accused of having a short attention span and an appetite for nothing more than vapid action films, Michael Moore has convinced millions of us to shell out 8-10 bucks apiece to see a documentary about the most important issues of our time: Urban blight, gun violence, and health care reform.
Could Kevin Leffler do that? In an era before Michael Moore, could anybody imagine that anybody could get millions of Americans to see a documentary?
I doubt it.