[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

[bryant]

Speaking of Oscar nominations, here's the stupidest thing I've read today:

But here's an interesting dog that isn't barking... Michael Moore gets passed over for the big award he coveted... and the lefty bloggers aren't up in arms. In fact, nobody on the left is talking about Moore today.

I still strongly believe that no blogger is obligated to write about any topic, but I just find it interesting that web personalities who one would think would be big Michael Moore fans are collectively shrugging their shoulders over this. You know a lot of Christian conservatives are grumbling about the three nominations in technical categories for "The Passion of the Christ," and Kathryn's already noted this on the Corner.

Other possibilities, which Jim Geraghty seems to be incapable of considering:

• Much of the left isn't upset because they don't think Farenheit 9/11 deserved a nomination, because they don't automatically assume that movies which advance ideological agendas similar to their own are de facto great movies.
• As countless people pointed out all year, Michael Moore is not the spokesman for the Left.
• The Oscars are not controlled by a left-wing conspiracy. (Hard to believe, I know.)
• Geraghty's assumptions about who is a big Michael Moore fan are hopelessly flawed.

Less snidely, more seriously... I think it's really sad that a guy who writes for a fairly important conservative national magazine doesn't understand the difference between appreciating someone's ideology and appreciating their artistic talent.

Comments

Devil's Advocate Time!

[kniedzw.livejournal.com]

Slightly in his defense, the Oscars are far from apolitical, albeit within their own insular community. It has happened many a time that an actor, actress, director, or producer has won an Oscar for sub-par work as recognition for their previous achievements.

It's only a small step from there to establishing a broader ideological slant, especially given Hollywood's leftist leanings.

All that said, you're right. He's being an idiot.

[kirbyk.livejournal.com]

I thought the deal was that he withdrew his eligibility to show it on television in 2004. The fact that it didn't end up being aired outside of PPV didn't change the paperwork he filed.

But, I'm far from certain of my facts.

[bryant]

Nope. According to the official list, it was eligible. But I had to check to be sure -- it was aired on a US dish network in 2004.

[multiplexer.livejournal.com]

Perhaps no one is talking or thinking about Michael Moore because we all have better things to do?

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

National Review is still important? It's so slanted it's ready to fall over. Every damn thing i read over there (often at my brother's behest, sadly enough) makes my eyes bleed. The only thing separating NRO from NewsMax is the tittie jokes and the ad hominems.