Hmmm.... Yes, from this gynosexual's point of view, Leni Riefenstahl is very attractive, and much more attractive than Michael Moore. I was going to say that Michael Moore is better looking than I am, except that it looks like he needs a haircut.

Dean Esmay has written many posts comparing Moore to Riefenstahl, as well as to Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose, Lord Haw Haw (though he is not as great a poet as was that other traitor, Ezra Pound). Dean has called Moore "Tubby Riefenstahl" and "Lord Pork Pork". ha! ha!

I have always loved the _style_ of the _title_ of that film, "The Triumph of the Will". Too bad it glorified Hitler instead of Hitler's antipode, Nietzsche. Nietzsche despised anti-Semitism, racism, collectivism, statism. Nietzsche was an extreme individualist, egoist, and elitist, the opposite of Hitler in every way.

I must also mention that the Swastika was _not_ invented by Hitler, but, rather, is an ancient, sacred symbol which has been venerated since prehistory, on every continent, by men and women of every race and religion, including Jews. I have a book on the history of the Swastika. It will be a long, hard struggle, but we must fight to reclaim that ancient holy symbol, recapture it from the Nazis who stole it and profaned it.

We must also fight to redeem and reclaim classical music, the high music of our Western high culture, from the Nazis. We must reclaim Norse mythology and the entire European Romantic and Gothic tradition. The Nazis profaned and corrupted everything they touched, just as Communists infiltrated and corrupted labor unions and the Negro rights struggle. Just as many labor unions expelled Communists in the 1950s, so we must expel the last traces of Nazism (race-based communitarianism) from our Western culture, de-Romanticize it, Romanticize instead the opposite, Romanticize the Individual Ego striving eternally upward toward the Divine.

Holy Dawn and her holy Negro wife Norma. Wicked Wanda and her women (Wendy, Cindy, Sandy, Candy, Brandy, Brenda, Glenda, Stella, Hannah...).

One (alas), a brilliant filmmaker. The other, not.

A C? You would get an F. There is no substance to what you say. Really, I would like to hear specifically what it is about Michael Moore that drives you so crazy. Is there a succint argument against F911 out there? Have you written one? I searched your site, and it isn't even clear if you saw the movie, let alone analyzed it.

Also, don't you realize his movies are supposed to be funny?

As to your conclusion that I am a troll, so be it. I read your original post as a comparison of liberal Democrats to Nazis. I find such comparisons to be vile and inflammatory. If you want to conclude that I am a troll--just as Glenn Reynolds will likely conclude this is "hate mail"--that is your choice too.

But read how your original post has devolved into physical threats from people on your side. And read how the liberal commentors are being completely rational and reasonable there. And ask yourself--did your careless, inflammatory post cause some of this?

Oh, and for the record, yes, Instapundit is one of the targets of my blog. As I explained in a back and forth with one commenter to my blog, "This site has a specific purpose--call out the bloggers who are blind followers of Bush and his policies, dissect their arguments, and show readers where the arguments fall short. (Honestly, it is the easiest job in the world. Not one of these people can think his or her way out of a paper bag.) The premise is very simple: these clowns say stupid things, and I point the stupid things out."

So, yes, Instapundit, Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt. I may add a few more. I would like to see them raise their game, and the quality of the debate in the process. I would also like to see some of their readers understand when these bloggers have said incredibly stupid things. If I end up being called a "troll" in the process, so be it; I think it says more about the person calling me the name than it does about me.

I have to say, I read a fair bit of your blog since yesterday, and some of it is pretty good. I stand by my argument that your Nazi-Moore/liberals comparison is unhelpful.

Oh, and thanks for linking to that interview with me. It's a little out of date now, but maybe I will see a little spike in sales of that book.

No substance? You've hurt my self esteem!

I had PLENTY of substance! And how could you have missed an opportunity to say I was comparing Jimmy Carter to Adolf Hitler?

:(

Steven, you have substance! And STYLE! And I hope my careless, inflammatory posts help at least to encourage it (even if I can't cause it)!

Sorry, one more clarification, a brief retort, and a question.

My political blog is new, but I have two other blogs. I only mention it to counter your claim that I am a "brand new" blogger.

And a brief retort. Of course your comparison had no substance; it's about 50 words long. I want to see a five-paragraph essay, much like one would write for a college class.

But did you actually see the movie? I have read a number of rightwing bloggers who hate the movie without having actually seen it. How does one make conclusions about a movie that one has never seen?

William

I'm curious. When is someone stating they will defend themselves a "threat of physical violence?"

And why are you whining HERE instead of directly challenging such a poster?

Darleen,

I think it was quite clear that "Iron Fist" was threatening physical violence, and I challenged him on it over at the original post. See:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/001735.html#004445

But I am posting HERE because this post was about me.

BTW William

I haven't see F911 and never will. I won't waste my money or time to see a film by an anti-Semite and a hack who hasn't the talent to come up with even a title without ripping off a writer with more talent in his morning bowel movements than al-Moore could hope for in his whole "career."

(apologies, Eric, if that was too crude)

Am I to conclude from your silence that you never actually saw Michael Moore's movie, Farenheit 911?

Dear Eric:

Thank you! And you know that I feel exactly the same way about you.

Odd that anyone would demand answers to questions about Fahrenheit 9/11, as it wasn't the topic of this post. (Besides, Dave Kopel did a better job with it than I ever could.)

So, in other words, you never saw the movie. Have you seen any of his movies?

A quick answer will suffice, and I will move on...

Thanks!

Bill

Bill Trippe, you're answering your own questions. Pretty soon, this blog won't need me! (Heh.)

First you accused me of comparing Nazis to Democrats, and then after I did the detailed, thorough, meticulous comparison you demanded (and for which I clearly deserved an "A") you gave me a "F" -- and then demanded I answer very personal questions about an issue I never discussed!

I fear that my answers (if I gave them) would only lead to more questions.

(Such as whether I have watched "Triumph of the Will.")

Can't some things be kept in the closet?

Actually, Eric, it's pretty clear that Mr. Trippe has revealed you to be a fool. How do you write "satire" (your word) about Michael Moore's political views when you never even saw the movie?

Your protest is hollow, and makes you sound even more pathetic than your original posts did.

Gwen, by your logic, if I assert that you haven't watched "Triumph of the Will," then that would render your comment equally "foolish," "hollow" and "pathetic."

Besides, if I may quote again from Michael Moore -- when he was accused of glaring inaccuracies -- "How can there be inaccuracy in comedy?"

I think that when people waltz into a blog and start making peremptory demands, they're setting themselves up for a disappointment.
The temptation to respond in kind is well-nigh irresistable.

Trippe initially accuses Scheie of comparing Democrats to Nazis.

"I am sure you will decide this is "hate mail," but your link to the Nazi-Democratic party comparison argument on Classical Values was the worst..."

Simply not true. Scheie compares Michael Moore and Indymedia to Nazis.When this is pointed out by Glenn Reynolds in a "bizarre non sequiter", this is Trippe's response...

"Regarldess of my political party, I think anyone who compares either major party to the Nazis is being inflammatory. And anyone with a part in the public political debate should take the same point of view"

That's called a gracious admission of error.
What was the main point again? Oh yeah, Scheie never said that.

"Apparently, part of the breathless nitwit's problem is that she can't read. Or she reads something that says one thing, and goes running, screaming in another direction claiming it said something else."

Oops. "Nevermind..."

Right about now a brisk counter-attack would seem to be in order.

"So, here is the really key question. Are you being slow-witted when you link to this kind of garbage, or are you being calculating?"

Sounds like Trippe started mad and got madder. Are you merely stupid,Reynolds,or evil?

"And, please, avoid a smart-ass answer in responding to me. Try pausing for a minute to think about what I am saying--and what I am asking you."

See, real dialogue! Warms the heart, eh?

Delivered of a five paragraph essay, gratis, is Trippe the least bit grateful? No. There should have been more. Typical.

Pay close attention to this next part. At no point has Scheie referenced F911, in either his post or his comments.

"...There is no substance to what you say. Really, I would like to hear specifically what it is about Michael Moore that drives you so crazy. Is there a succint argument against F911 out there? Have you written one? I searched your site, and it isn't even clear if you saw the movie, let alone analyzed it."

Did everybody see the switch? Gwen? Tom? Good.
Trippe is equating Moore with F911.

Surely there's more to Michael Moore than his latest movie. He's a public figure, after all. Surely one could form an opinion of the man from his website, or his tv interviews, or meeting him personally, or viewing his other movies, or knowing someone who worked for him. Surely one could have done all this quite some time ago. Surely there are 3 c's in succint? Why the big emphasis on F911?

But Trippe has got a target-lock, and won't drop the pursuit.

"he hasn't answered my question yet whether he actually has seen F911. Is it possible that he wrote a lengthy, inflammatory post about Michael Moore without actually seeing the movie?"

Well, I don't know. Many things are possible. If Scheie HAD seen it, I think it would be amusing at this point if he told Trippe that he hadn't. Or simply told him nothing. Trippe's grand inquisitor act seems calculated to annoy. He stands at his podium and demands that the audience work for his superior attentions. Not a winning strategy.

By the way, I've seen it. Very impressive.

Justin

The evidence of changing necktie color would be easily enough disprovable that I am willing to trust, without having seen "Bowling For Columbine", the charge that two speeches were edited together and presented as one. The allegation that Michael Moore manipulated people at the bank and then misrepresented the significance of his holding the premium rifle also makes perfect sense to me.

Once I have as a background premise that Michael Moore misrepresents facts in order to present his political position, it is not necessary for me to watch F/911 in order to evaluate the documentation of 56 deceptions in that movie.