Why Fred Thomson Should Ignore Michael Moore
Why Fred Thomson Should Ignore Michael Moore
by Abel KeoghMay 17, 2007
It appears Shawn Hannity and Rocky Anderson may have started an unfortunate trend: celebrity vs. politician debates. Earlier this month the radio talk show host and Mayor of Salt Lake City faced off in a debate over the Iraq War. The debate was a culmination of months of highly publicized name calling and posturing by the two men.
If you didn’t watch the showdown in Salt Lake, you didn’t miss much. Though a tad more interesting that the incredibly boring and scripted presidential debates – this debate was really a chance for both Hannity and Anderson to stroke their egos by flaunting the position of the other person.
But the publicity it generated seemed to have gotten into the heads of others who would like nothing more than free publicity. The latest war of words that threatens to boil over into a full fledged debate is between pseudo-documentary film maker Michael Moore and former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson.
Earlier this month the U.S. Treasury Department announced it was investigating Moore to see if he violated the Cuban trade embargo by taking ailing 9/11 rescue workers to Cuba for free medical care. The trip was to film part of Moore’s latest “documentary” Sicko. (No, it’s not a movie about himself. This time Moore’s decided to take on the health care industry.)
Once word of the investigation was made public, Thompson wrote an article in National Review chiding the filmmaker for being part of Fidel Castro’s propaganda machine. Moore shot back and challenged Thompson to a pubic debate about the quality of the U.S healthcare system.
How to handle people like Moore is a sometimes a challenge for people in positions of power and authority. It’s easy to fall prey to the temptation to lash out and squash your opponent. However, if the person who is casting stones is small and insignificant, often the best response is to simply ignore them. Fighting back often gives the adversary more attention and can raise their status to that of a hero. It was President Kennedy’s failed Bay of Pigs invasion that led to the international star status of Castro. The Cuban leader was viewed as the victim of a CIA plot to overthrow him which endeared him to his own people and leftists worldwide.
Moore is a slick propagandist who craves the spotlight. He would like nothing more than free publicity for his latest movie and a chance to take on a potential political giant like Thompson. He has nothing to lose in a debate with the Law & Order star. Even if he lost – which he probably would – the debate would give Moore and his movie validity in addition to potential millions of additional dollars at the box office.
Thompson, however, has indicated he may seek the Republican nomination for president. Presidential candidates need to look and act presidential. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain by strutting around on the same stage as Moore.
So far Thompson seems to be playing his cards right. His brilliant video response to Moore that showed he has nothing but contempt for the “documentary” film maker. In the video Thompson, chewing a Cuban cigar, turns in his chair and looks up from some paperwork like he just noticed Moore. He then tells Moore that he doesn’t have time on his scheduled for Moore and tells him about another documentary filmmaker, Nicolas Guillen, who was sent to a mental institution by Castro and says, “A mental institution, Michael, might be something you ought to think about.” Then Thompson puts the cigar back in his mouth and turns his back to the camera and continues his work.
The message of Thompson’s video was absolutely clear: Michael Moore, you aren’t worth my time. By treating Moore as insignificant, Thompson put himself in the position of superiority – a good move for someone who might become the next president of the United States. He has more pressing challenges to worry about with than a documentary filmmaker and proven liar.
The power contempt is one Hannity learned the hard way. Instead of ignoring the mayor of a mid-sized American city, Hannity let Anderson’s comments and antics goad him into a debate – one that a nationally syndicated talk show was ill suited for. Anderson is a skilled lawyer and politician and more used debate-type format and Hannity’s most ardent supporters admit that Anderson came out on top in the debate. All Hannity managed accomplished by flying to Salt Lake City was to raise Anderson’s profile and credentials and lower his own.
Ignoring weak enemies is a powerful tool. Thompson's ability to recognize Moore as insignificant, indicates he might be well suited for a presidential run after all.
***
Abel Keogh is the editor of FreeCapitalist.com affiliated with Rick Koerber
You can email him here. His book, Room for Two, will be published by Cedar Fort this fall.
by Abel KeoghMay 17, 2007
It appears Shawn Hannity and Rocky Anderson may have started an unfortunate trend: celebrity vs. politician debates. Earlier this month the radio talk show host and Mayor of Salt Lake City faced off in a debate over the Iraq War. The debate was a culmination of months of highly publicized name calling and posturing by the two men.
If you didn’t watch the showdown in Salt Lake, you didn’t miss much. Though a tad more interesting that the incredibly boring and scripted presidential debates – this debate was really a chance for both Hannity and Anderson to stroke their egos by flaunting the position of the other person.
But the publicity it generated seemed to have gotten into the heads of others who would like nothing more than free publicity. The latest war of words that threatens to boil over into a full fledged debate is between pseudo-documentary film maker Michael Moore and former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson.
Earlier this month the U.S. Treasury Department announced it was investigating Moore to see if he violated the Cuban trade embargo by taking ailing 9/11 rescue workers to Cuba for free medical care. The trip was to film part of Moore’s latest “documentary” Sicko. (No, it’s not a movie about himself. This time Moore’s decided to take on the health care industry.)
Once word of the investigation was made public, Thompson wrote an article in National Review chiding the filmmaker for being part of Fidel Castro’s propaganda machine. Moore shot back and challenged Thompson to a pubic debate about the quality of the U.S healthcare system.
How to handle people like Moore is a sometimes a challenge for people in positions of power and authority. It’s easy to fall prey to the temptation to lash out and squash your opponent. However, if the person who is casting stones is small and insignificant, often the best response is to simply ignore them. Fighting back often gives the adversary more attention and can raise their status to that of a hero. It was President Kennedy’s failed Bay of Pigs invasion that led to the international star status of Castro. The Cuban leader was viewed as the victim of a CIA plot to overthrow him which endeared him to his own people and leftists worldwide.
Moore is a slick propagandist who craves the spotlight. He would like nothing more than free publicity for his latest movie and a chance to take on a potential political giant like Thompson. He has nothing to lose in a debate with the Law & Order star. Even if he lost – which he probably would – the debate would give Moore and his movie validity in addition to potential millions of additional dollars at the box office.
Thompson, however, has indicated he may seek the Republican nomination for president. Presidential candidates need to look and act presidential. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain by strutting around on the same stage as Moore.
So far Thompson seems to be playing his cards right. His brilliant video response to Moore that showed he has nothing but contempt for the “documentary” film maker. In the video Thompson, chewing a Cuban cigar, turns in his chair and looks up from some paperwork like he just noticed Moore. He then tells Moore that he doesn’t have time on his scheduled for Moore and tells him about another documentary filmmaker, Nicolas Guillen, who was sent to a mental institution by Castro and says, “A mental institution, Michael, might be something you ought to think about.” Then Thompson puts the cigar back in his mouth and turns his back to the camera and continues his work.
The message of Thompson’s video was absolutely clear: Michael Moore, you aren’t worth my time. By treating Moore as insignificant, Thompson put himself in the position of superiority – a good move for someone who might become the next president of the United States. He has more pressing challenges to worry about with than a documentary filmmaker and proven liar.
The power contempt is one Hannity learned the hard way. Instead of ignoring the mayor of a mid-sized American city, Hannity let Anderson’s comments and antics goad him into a debate – one that a nationally syndicated talk show was ill suited for. Anderson is a skilled lawyer and politician and more used debate-type format and Hannity’s most ardent supporters admit that Anderson came out on top in the debate. All Hannity managed accomplished by flying to Salt Lake City was to raise Anderson’s profile and credentials and lower his own.
Ignoring weak enemies is a powerful tool. Thompson's ability to recognize Moore as insignificant, indicates he might be well suited for a presidential run after all.
***
Abel Keogh is the editor of FreeCapitalist.com affiliated with Rick Koerber
You can email him here. His book, Room for Two, will be published by Cedar Fort this fall.
