] It is one of the paradoxes of Michael Moore's career that
] by railing against the vested interests that make the
] rich richer, he has himself become incredibly wealthy. So
] when he became one of the handful of Americans to benefit
] substantially from George Bush's tax cut last year, he
] said it would be "a sin" to use the money in any way
] other than to defeat the very man who had given it to him
] in the first place.
]
] In a few months, if things go to plan, he will lob the
] product of some of that money into the already bloody
] American electoral battlefield with the release of his
] upcoming film Fahrenheit 9/11. The film examines the
] relationship between the Bush and Saudi dynasties, and
] offers a critical view of the experiences of soldiers and
] their families in the Iraq war. On Saturday it won the
] coveted Palme d'Or at Cannes. And, during a tight
] presidential race in an increasingly polarised nation,
] some are now asking whether the film could play a role in
] losing Bush the election.
]
] At this stage, there remains the possibility that things
] will not go to plan. Earlier this month Disney blocked
] distribution of the film, claiming it risked politically
] alienating too many people. The question of who gets to
] see Fahrenheit 9/11, and where, will determine whether it
] affects the outcome of the election. Drawing big crowds
] in Democratic heartlands such%

On CNN last week, rightwing pundit Tucker Carlson said: "Michael Moore alleges the following things: that President Bush is responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11; that Bush's family is connected to Osama bin Laden in some important, sinister way; and that Bush intentionally caused the deaths of thousands of people in the war with Iraq simply to enrich his friends in the oil industry." Referring to the former Clinton and Gore advisers on the Miramax team, he asked: "What happens when the lunatic fringe and the mainstream of the Democratic party become indistinguishable?"

It was not clear whether Tucker had seen the film or not, but Pikser points out that Republicans don't have to have seen it in order to misrepresent it. "They're very good at that. Just as many liberals didn't see the need to actually watch Mel Gibson's The Passion in order to know that it was anti-semitic, so Republicans don't need to see Moore's film to hate it, or him, and use it accordingly."

For the time being, conservatives' attentions are elsewhere - focusing on the calamitous situation in Iraq and Bush's equally calamitous plunge in the polls. Several were asked to comment for this article, but none responded. But for liberals, Moore's forthcoming film is one more reason to imagine what, until a few months ago, they thought was unimaginable - that Bush could lose.

Katha Pollitt, a liberal columnist for the Nation, said: "I haven't seen it, but it sounds like a 100-minute negative ad against Bush and co. And negative ads work."

Resource Community:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/f911