Bowling For Columbine was my first exposure to Michael Moore, I was really interested in what he had to say. The movie left me wondering why the hell he was so bent on pushing his own agenda, bending lies & truth to his whims in a fashion that would even make Spin leader Bill O'Reilly blush, and yet never answer any of the questions that would maybe have shed some light on why America may have more murders and accidents with guns than other countries with large gun ownership. He just harasses people, edits with glee and forces his opinions without a lick of care for common honesty. I don't care to see his movies because of his abusive bias and lack of ability to see any side but his own. I was hoping he was going to make a difference, but all he is, is another editorialist with no more ethics than a Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Bowling For Columbine was an insult to those who lost their lives that day. Michael Moore is nothing but a Spin Doctor, just like the rest of his ilk.

I've loved all of Moore's films, but I think they are stronger when he lets his subjects speak for themselves and keeps behind the camera.

I've often made the observation that Michael Moore is nothing more than the left wing equivalent of Rush Limbaugh. Same lunatic, different side of the fence.

Wow, that's like saying Martin Luther King and the KKK are the same - just on different sides of the fence.

Wow, that's like saying Martin Luther King and the KKK are the same - just on different sides of the fence.

PLUS - Just out today... He's a multimillionaire who complains that "Capitalism did nothing for me!". I guess those stupid worn out ball caps he wears are supposed to be "poor man" camouflage. The ruse seems to be working for him, but he maintains it's not capitalism. ("Do as I say, not as I do".)

“Well, capitalism did nothing for me, starting with my first film.”

“You know, I had to pretty much beg, borrow and steal,” he said. “The system is not set up to help somebody from the working class make a movie like this and get the truth out there.”

“In fact, in Fahrenheit 9/11 if you remember, capitalism, the Disney Corporation, tried to kill that film--tried to make it so that people couldn’t see it,” said Moore. “My book Stupid White Men--Harper Collins tried to kill that book so that people couldn’t see it. It's only because I put the light of day on it and told people what was going on did people get the chance to see these things.”

Despite their personal investment, the Weinstein brothers will not be the biggest financial beneficiaries of "Fahrenheit." The real winner: a charity, or charities, as yet unnamed, that will receive about 60 percent of the net profit ultimately generated by the film -- a tally that could be tens of millions of dollars.

Volunteer organisation which helps orphans in one of the poorest countries in the world (Malawi) by providing water, food, medical care and schooling.

Somehow Michael Moores little film about health care neglected to mention the thousands of Cuban doctors risking their lives to go to the U.S. Even the NY Times admits it.

So how does he spend the money that he earns?

What are his motives for making making films?

Unless you can answer those question your point has zero meaning and can only be seen as an nonobjective opinion.

There are lots of people that do what they do because that is what they are good at, the fact that some of them are able to earn more money at it does not prove that capitalism is good for anyone, other than the top 1%.

I would say he is not against people being able to earn a buck, but there should be a limit.

and if he can raise the awareness of the IMO largely complacent middle & lower middle classes, especially with regards to this most recent crisis, then I suppose he deserves his paycheck every bit as much as the baseball or football player who gets the same or more just for playing a game.