« NYT op-ed fails Civics 101 | Main | Kimberley Strassel on "truth" »

July 26, 2007


I'm not a big fan of Moore, but this just sounds like sour grapes on your part--you couldn't get from the media jury a conviction against Moore for dissembling in his previous movies, but you're determined to try him again on the same charge even though you were unable (darn it!) to find new evidence of the crime in his new movie. Bah. This is less fact-checking than a vendetta. It would have been far more sensible to just credit Moore for a movie that you give, however grudgingly, your stamp of approval.

The comments to this entry are closed.