 Michael Moore's hypocrite house To Al Gore's power-sucking mega-mansion we can now add Michael Moore's vast estate on the lake. Gore was accused of hypocrisy for building himself a massive home many times larger than any one person could require, while criticizing others for wasting eneCommentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
By Michael Moore
Friends,
Twenty-two years ago this coming Tuesday, I stood with a group of factory workers, students and the unemployed in the middle of the downtown of my birthplace, Flint, Michigan, to announce that the Hollywood studio, Warner Bros., had purchased the world rights to distribute my first movie, 'Roger & Me.' A reporter asked me, "How much did you sell it for?"
"Three million dollars!" I proudly exclaimed. A cheer went up from the union guys surrounding me. It was absolutely unheard of for one of us in the working class of Flint (or anywhere) to receive such a sum of money unless one of us had either robbed a bank or, by luck, won the Michigan lottery. On that sunny November day in 1989, it was like I had won the lottery -- and the people I had lived and struggled with in Michigan were thrilled with my success. It was like, one of us had made it, one of us finally had good fortune smile upon us. The day was filled with high-fives and "Way-ta-go Mike!"s. When you are from the working class you root for each other, and when one of you does well, the others are beaming with pride -- not just for that one person's success, but for the fact that the team had somehow won, beating the system that was brutal and unforgiving and which ran a game that was rigged against us. We knew the rules, and those rules said that we factory town rats do not get to make movies or be on TV talk shows or have our voice heard on any national stage. We were to shut up, keep our heads down, and get back to work. If by some miracle one of us escaped and commandeered a mass audience and some loot to boot -- well, holy mother of God, watch out! A bully pulpit and enough cash to raise a ruckus -- that was an incendiary combination, and it only spelled trouble for those at the top.
Until that point I had been barely getting by on unemployment, collecting $98 a week. Welfare. The dole. My car had died back in April so I had gone seven months with no vehicle. Friends would take me out to dinner, always coming up with an excuse to celebrate or commemorate something and then picking up the check so I would not have to feel the shame of not being able to afford it.
And now, all of a sudden, I had three million bucks! What would I do with it? There were men in suits making many suggestions to me, and I could see how those without a strong moral sense of social responsibility could be easily lead down the "ME" path and quickly forget about the "WE."
So I made some easy decisions back in 1989:
1. I would first pay all my taxes. I told the guy who did my 1040 not to declare any deductions other than the mortgage and to pay the full federal, state and city tax rate. I proudly contributed nearly 1 million dollars for the privilege of being a citizen of this great country.
2. Of the remaining $2 million, I decided to divide it up the way I once heard the folksinger/activist Harry Chapin tell me how he lived: "One for me, one for the other guy." So I took half the money -- $1 million -- and established a foundation to give it all away.
3. The remaining million went like this: I paid off all my debts, paid off the debts of some friends and family members, bought my parents a new refrigerator, set up college funds for our nieces and nephews, helped rebuild a black church that had been burned down in Flint, gave out a thousand turkeys at Thanksgiving, bought filmmaking equipment to send to the Vietnamese (my own personal reparations for a country we had ravaged), annually bought 10,000 toys to give to Toys for Tots at Christmas, got myself a new American-made Honda, and took out a mortgage on an apartment above a Baby Gap in New York City.
4. What remained went into a simple, low-interest savings account. I made the decision that I would never buy a share of stock (I didn't understand the casino known as the New York Stock Exchange and I did not believe in investing in a system I did not agree with).
5. Finally, I believed the concept of making money off your money had created a greedy, lazy class who didn't produce any product, just misery and fear among the populace. They invented ways to buy out companies and then shut them down. They dreamed up schemes to play with people's pension funds as if it were their own money. They demanded companies keep posting record profits (which was accomplished by firing thousands and eliminating health benefits for those who remained). I made the decision that if I was going to earn a living, it would be done from my own sweat and ideas and creativity. I would produce something tangible, something others could own or be entertained by or learn from. My work would create employment for others, good employment with middle class wages and full health benefits.
I went on to make more movies, produce TV series and write books. I never started a project with the thought, "I wonder how much money I can make at this?" And by never letting money be the motivating force for anything, I simply did exactly what I wanted to do. That attitude kept the work honest and unflinching -- and that, in turn I believe, resulted in millions of people buying tickets to these films, tuning in to my TV shows, and buying my books.
Which is exactly what has driven the Right crazy when it comes to me. How did someone from the left get such a wide mainstream audience?! This just isn't supposed to happen (Noam Chomsky, sadly, will not be booked on The View today, and Howard Zinn, shockingly, didn't make the New York Times bestseller list until after he died). That's how the media machine is rigged -- you are not supposed to hear from those who would completely change the system to something much better. Only wimpy liberals who urge caution and compromise and mild reforms get to have their say on the op-ed pages or Sunday morning chat shows.
Somehow, I found a crack through the wall and made it through. I feel very blessed that I have this life -- and I take none of it for granted. I believe in the lessons I was taught back in Catholic school -- that if you end up doing well, you have an even greater responsibility to those who don't fare the same. "The last shall be first and the first shall be last." Kinda commie, I know, but the idea was that the human family was supposed to divide up the earth's riches in a fair manner so that all of God's children would have a life with less suffering.
I do very well -- and for a documentary filmmaker, I do extremely well. That, too, drives conservatives bonkers. "You're rich because of capitalism!" they scream at me. Um, no. Didn't you take Econ 101? Capitalism is a system, a pyramid scheme of sorts, that exploits the vast majority so that the few at the top can enrich themselves more. I make my money the old school, honest way by making things. Some years I earn a boatload of cash. Other years, like last year, I don't have a job (no movie, no book) and so I make a lot less. "How can you claim to be for the poor when you are the opposite of poor?!" It's like asking: "You've never had sex with another man -- how can you be for gay marriage?!" I guess the same way that an all-male Congress voted to give women the vote, or scores of white people marched with Martin Luther Ling, Jr. (I can hear these righties yelling back through history: "Hey! You're not black! You're not being lynched! Why are you with the blacks?!"). It is precisely this disconnect that prevents Republicans from understanding why anyone would give of their time or money to help out those less fortunate. It is simply something their brain cannot process. "Kanye West makes millions! What's he doing at Occupy Wall Street?!" Exactly -- he's down there demanding that his taxes be raised. That, to a right-winger, is the definition of insanity. To everyone else, we are grateful that people like him stand up, even if and especially because it is against his own personal financial interest. It is specifically what that Bible those conservatives wave around demands of those who are well off.
Back on that November day in 1989 when I sold my first film, a good friend of mine said this to me: "They have made a huge mistake giving someone like you a big check. This will make you a very dangerous man. And it proves that old saying right: 'The capitalist will sell you the rope to hang himself with if he thinks he can make a buck off it.'"
Yours,
Michael Moore
Ahh Michael Moore, that entire little love letter to himself just made me chuckle. He doesn't even see his own hypocrisy.
And you don't see yours. It's part of the human condition.
This is similar to th "global arming is a pile of crap because AlGore is fat" argument. Michael Moore looks pretty fat too actually. I suppose, for the more gullible amongst us, this kind of personal attack will suffuce in place of any actual ratonal position.
Ahh Michael Moore, that entire little love letter to himself just made me chuckle. He doesn't even see his own hypocrisy.
And you don't see yours. It's part of the human condition.
This is similar to th "global arming is a pile of crap because AlGore is fat" argument. Michael Moore looks pretty fat too actually. I suppose, for the more gullible amongst us, this kind of personal attack will suffuce in place of any actual ratonal position.
Well, umbrage aside, do you not see a bit of hypocrasy in banging the drum for the impoverished 99% and then at the end of the day retiring to your umpteen square foot home to eat a fresh baked sharkfin pie?
Come on, I get that the Post is taking a bit of a cheap shot but this is kinda like Lindsey Lohan waving her finger at those who drive drunk while sitting behind the wheel of her Mercedes with four fingers of tequila in her hand!
I see your point here, it's like someone pointing out David Suzuki is making greenhouse gas while spreading the word of the evils of greenhouse gas by busing and flying around Canada, but it's not quite the same.
Well, umbrage aside, do you not see a bit of hypocrasy in banging the drum for the impoverished 99% and then at the end of the day retiring to your umpteen square foot home to eat a fresh baked sharkfin pie?
Come on, I get that the Post is taking a bit of a cheap shot but this is kinda like Lindsey Lohan waving her finger at those who drive drunk while sitting behind the wheel of her Mercedes with four fingers of tequila in her hand!
I see your point here, it's like someone pointing out David Suzuki is making greenhouse gas while spreading the word of the evils of greenhouse gas by busing and flying around Canada, but it's not quite the same.
Oh, I DO see the hypocricy. I just don't see hypocricy, in and of itself, as particularly worthy of condemnation. Hypocricy is the gap between what you want be and what you are. None of us is the peson we want to be. Show me a man who says he's not a hypocrite, and I'll show you a hypocrite.
However, your'e right. The article was actually not all that bad, and umbrage overruled reason as soon as I saw the invovlement of the radical right (Breitbart et al). I don't think the writer was actually taking quite the same stance though.
Same thing happened to Kurt Cobain and the Sex Pistols. They became that which they despised. I gues you could argue that by self-eradication, Kurt was the least hypocritical of the lot of them. Personally, I would have preferred he remaind a live hypocrite. Thanks for caling me on it though--you were right.
Well, umbrage aside, do you not see a bit of hypocrasy in banging the drum for the impoverished 99% and then at the end of the day retiring to your umpteen square foot home to eat a fresh baked sharkfin pie?
Come on, I get that the Post is taking a bit of a cheap shot but this is kinda like Lindsey Lohan waving her finger at those who drive drunk while sitting behind the wheel of her Mercedes with four fingers of tequila in her hand!
I see your point here, it's like someone pointing out David Suzuki is making greenhouse gas while spreading the word of the evils of greenhouse gas by busing and flying around Canada, but it's not quite the same.
Oh, I DO see the hypocricy. I just don't see hypocricy, in and of itself, as particularly worthy of condemnation. Hypocricy is the gap between what you want be and what you are. None of us is the peson we want to be. Show me a man who says he's not a hypocrite, and I'll show you a hypocrite.
However, your'e right. The article was actually not all that bad, and umbrage overruled reason as soon as I saw the invovlement of the radical right (Breitbart et al). I don't think the writer was actually taking quite the same stance though.
Same thing happened to Kurt Cobain and the Sex Pistols. They became that which they despised. I gues you could argue that by self-eradication, Kurt was the least hypocritical of the lot of them. Personally, I would have preferred he remaind a live hypocrite. Thanks for caling me on it though--you were right.
I guess the thing that bugs me is that coming out during the day, standing with the homeless and the poor, then retiring to your mansion really irks the crap out of me. I'd be less irked if he moved in to an occupy movement (yeah, he'd still get to go home some time but for a while he'd be sharing the discomfort) It's these really easy stances that not only cost him nothing but earn him street cred amongst the liberal elites for really doing nothing and sacrificng nothing just burns me!
Well, umbrage aside, do you not see a bit of hypocrasy in banging the drum for the impoverished 99% and then at the end of the day retiring to your umpteen square foot home to eat a fresh baked sharkfin pie?
Come on, I get that the Post is taking a bit of a cheap shot but this is kinda like Lindsey Lohan waving her finger at those who drive drunk while sitting behind the wheel of her Mercedes with four fingers of tequila in her hand!
I see your point here, it's like someone pointing out David Suzuki is making greenhouse gas while spreading the word of the evils of greenhouse gas by busing and flying around Canada, but it's not quite the same.
What utter bullshit. He didn't make his money ripping anybody off, he didn't play the rigged stock market with insider information, he didn't get a huge bonus for driving his company into bankruptcy. He created a product people wanted to consume. And as he said, he pays his taxes on the money he earns. If someone can show that he evaded his taxes, or invested in derivatives or some such, then fine, he's a hypocrite. But until then, he's someone who uses his talent to spread hi message and makes an honest living out of it.
Exactly how poor do you have to be to be concerned about poverty? Hypocrites are the ones the slag Moore instead of just being honest and saying "I don't give a fuck about anybody but me."
I guess the thing that bugs me is that coming out during the day, standing with the homeless and the poor, then retiring to your mansion really irks the crap out of me. I'd be less irked if he moved in to an occupy movement (yeah, he'd still get to go home some time but for a while he'd be sharing the discomfort) It's these really easy stances that not only cost him nothing but earn him street cred amongst the liberal elites for really doing nothing and sacrificng nothing just burns me!
You've bitched and moaned about the occupy people, and how they should all go home and get jobs. So what now, if you're poor you should leave the occupation and get a job before you can protest, but if you're rich you're a hypocrite unless you "share the discomfort?" Man you twist and weasel out of everything.
He created a product people wanted to consume.
Interesting, you just described a lot of people in that 1%.
Well, umbrage aside, do you not see a bit of hypocrasy in banging the drum for the impoverished 99% and then at the end of the day retiring to your umpteen square foot home to eat a fresh baked sharkfin pie?
Come on, I get that the Post is taking a bit of a cheap shot but this is kinda like Lindsey Lohan waving her finger at those who drive drunk while sitting behind the wheel of her Mercedes with four fingers of tequila in her hand!
I see your point here, it's like someone pointing out David Suzuki is making greenhouse gas while spreading the word of the evils of greenhouse gas by busing and flying around Canada, but it's not quite the same.
What utter bullshit. He didn't make his money ripping anybody off
There's a lot of millionaires who fit that bill, so maybe you ought to just shut the fuck up before you make yourself look like a bigger idiot (I know I know, tough to do)
I guess the thing that bugs me is that coming out during the day, standing with the homeless and the poor, then retiring to your mansion really irks the crap out of me. I'd be less irked if he moved in to an occupy movement (yeah, he'd still get to go home some time but for a while he'd be sharing the discomfort) It's these really easy stances that not only cost him nothing but earn him street cred amongst the liberal elites for really doing nothing and sacrificng nothing just burns me!
You've bitched and moaned about the occupy people, and how they should all go home and get jobs. So what now, if you're poor you should leave the occupation and get a job before you can protest, but if you're rich you're a hypocrite unless you "share the discomfort?" Man you twist and weasel out of everything.
Holy fuck, your ongoing whinefest ass kissing the pot heads and bongo players and crying for more more money to you and your class of hopeless underachievers (added to your bullshit racism) is a dead horse thrashed to the bones.
He created a product people wanted to consume.
Interesting, you just described a lot of people in that 1%.
Yes I have. And good for them. We have at least one 1 percenter on this forum, and if he fits that description, (and I'm sure he does) good for him too. We've always had the 1 percent - obviously. But at one time that 1% paid a lot more in taxes. So instead of them taking money out of their businesses they re-invested in their business, which created the economic post WWII boom. (Ask Lemmy about hot money if you don't believe me) And, nowadays more and more 1 percenters are also not described by that statement, but got that way by various shenanigans.
The question is how much are the 1% (and really everybody except the very bottom) willing pay re-invest in the society that helped them earn that wealth?