I remember when it was "far left" to support Obama and centrist Democrats called him "unelectable".

[redgreenandblue]

"unelectable" being a not-so-subtle dog-whistle.

Michael Moore on the other hand was a supporter of Obama way before it was politically cheap to be one. Moreover, he was a true believer. He explicitly advertised Obama in his movie "Capitalism, a love story" as the person who would take on the capitalist elites head on. I can imagine Moore's disappointment is proportional to the hopes he had.

Ironic that people are now accusing Michael Moore of racism.

[Pholus]

1. From the "centrist" (rightist) point of view...

There are certain parts of the electoral process where the "far left" has its uses....and after that they should sit down and shut the hell up so the "grownups" can make some cash.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. Anyone who runs against Hillary

is 'unelectable.' Michael Moore has been an ally of the left for far too long to see him trashed over some comment he made. I question the motives of people who are making such a big deal over this.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

6. For some it's the "You are either with us or against us" crap....

The example I've used to demonstrate it was when environmentalists fighting for clean air were attacked by environmentalists who fought for clean water.

"We should reduce smog."

"Oh, so you don't care if all of the fish die?"

"Huh?"

"What have you got against fish?"

"Uh,...nothing, I,.."

"Fish murderer!!!"

"What are you talking about?"

"You're going to get us all killed!!!!"

"WHAT???"

[LuvNewcastle]

8. That's what it's like.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad. I understand why RWers are angry all the time. They have Fox and Rush, Hannity, Beck, etc. But liberals? There's no excuse for that other than some sort of neurosis.

[LondonReign2]

22. True, they have Fox, Rush, and Hannity

Whereas we have "conservative democrats", "reality based community" members, and "pragmatic centrists" to tell us that Republican policies are as good as we can hope for.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

31. Or worse, that we should adopt Republican policiies to avoid Republican attacks.

[madokie]

3. I see MM as going flapping in the wind

he picks up on something and goes with it. He has talent but that by no means makes him the smart one.

History won't remember him much at all.
I'd vote for Barack Obama again if given half a chance. He has made a difference.
Go see another Moore movie, probably not.

[Ikonoklast]

19. Moore is a member of the pundit class.

He has no more or less political acumen than most informed voters.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

4. Yup, and anyone who defends Michael Moore is under attack too.

[dsc]

5. I frankly don't recall many people raising his ideology as a reason he couldn't be elected

especially once he won the Iowa caucus.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

7. However, Hillary voting for the war was an issue.

[dsc]

9. yes it was

so in point of fact he was considered, from the point of ideology, more electable not less. Now I will say that there were many people arguing that he wasn't electable due to race (some were racist themselves and others felt the American public was so racist that he couldn't win) but it terms of being a far left liberal and thus not electable that was pretty much never argued by anyone.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

32. Actually, it was the "Hussein" thing that caused the "rational" Dems to wet themselves.

[bobduca]

10. Ironic or Pathetic and Predictable?

[treestar]

11. I'm tired of the disappointment meme

These are people who need to examine their expectations.

Why did they require Obama to have more power than the Presidency gives? Maybe they ought to think about that.

[U4ikLefty]

15. How cute...you try so hard.

[treestar]

18. Not an answer

people who are disappointed are never cute. They are just demanding and entitled.

[U4ikLefty]

20. Demanding is good. It implies an expectation of compitence...something you seem to know little

about.

[treestar]

25. Demanding what you want at the expense of others

is not good at all. Refusing to consider other people is inconsiderate.

This is why the Founders made a system where people had to work together. Nobody had the power to make demands of others and expect obedience.

[ZombieHorde]

27. This is a strawman argument.

Most people who are disappointed with President Obama are not disappointed because he isn't using power he doesn't have, they are disappointed because of some of his policies and some of his rhetoric.

[treestar]

33. They shouldn't be

They should be disappointed in Congress. Maybe they should have paid attention to who was there in the first place. Maybe they should have made sure Scott Brown didn't win the election to replace Teddy.

[brooklynite]

12. Funny, I don't remember anyone (here or in the blgosphere) saying he was unelectable...

...Care to offer some evidence?

[BlindTiresias]

13. The question of electability was mostly in mainstream media

I'd have to seriously do some digging to get specific posts from years ago but I do recall pro-hillary people reciting the MSM line about electability.

[brooklynite]

14. I was a pro-Hillary persona and I don't recall that at all.

[DCBob]

16. I dont remember that.

Any links to back that up.

[6000eliot]

17. This claim is simply untrue.

Obama was always a centrist Democrat. Supporting him was never "far left." All of this divisive talk will probably help get us all a Republican president in 2016, though.

[socialist_n_TN]

23. Have you ever considered that the Democratic Party running a divisive........

neo-conservative Democrat on the ticket will probably help get us all a Republican president in 2016?

[loyalsister]

24. "Obama was always a centrist Democrat"

Most definitely. In The Audacity of Hope, he talked about how an unsavory part of politics is that people impose their own beliefs on candidates.
That is exactly what happened. Obama opposed the war and said so, therefore he is liberal on all fronts.

There were other qualities imposed on him because he is African American by both the right and left.

"Versions of "angry black man" came from both sides. Some on the left expected a combination of the best of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and even a little Martin Luther King Jr.

The right had any and all thuggish movie characters in mind. When it was discovered that he is a devout Christian, they found the angry Rev. Wright.

I think Moore was one of many who adopted a version of what to expect from Obama based on a personal belief system colored by stereotypes and he can't or won't shake them.

The way I understood Moore's comments is, "Obama has not behaved according to my positive stereotypes of a Democrat who opposed the war, and our best black leaders - therefore he will only be remembered by his skin color."

It's kind of like a teacher discovering that their only Asian student isn't good at math. Take away that quality of excellence and what do you have? The first and only Asian kid in the class?

The flip side of Moore's reasoning is someone disappointed to discover that Obama is not an thuggish "angry black man." In which case, the best strategy to repair the disconnect might be to try to ensure that he meets the lowest standard of achievement possible.

Moore doesn't want him to fail. But, he's angry about the disconnect between his expectations and reality. His best hope is that history will validate his feelings.

In the end, negative AND positive sentiments can perpetuate stereotypes. Why would we qualify one as racist but not the other? For some, the determinant is malice. For me, it is consequences that follow assumptions.

I think racist is appropriate language to describe Moore's comments. You don't have to hate an entire group of people to devalue them. But, racism is ALWAYS about consequences.

What would a black president or any black man have to do to measure up to Moore's standards? A lot of my friends have told me about having to work harder than any other employee to be considered good enough. Expectations range from too high to barely competent. Either way the yardstick seems to be different for people of color.

Michel Moore has made some positive contributions to our culture. For me, his not being willing to question his assumptions brings his future credibility into question.

I think it's good practice to question ourselves and our heroes.

[treestar]

26. The POTUS will always be a "centrist"

In the center of where the nation as a whole is at the time. Especially the way the POTUS is elected by the electoral votes of each state. Nobody without broad support can be elected under that system.

[Major Hogwash]

21. Michael Moore is not a racist. In defense of Michael Moore, let me just add this . . .

If you go to the Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB) web site, you will find a link to all of Michael Moore's movies, all of the ones he helped write, produce, direct, or act in.

Here is the link to Michael Moore's biography at IMDB --
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0601619/?ref_=nmbio_ql

If you go farther down that page of movies that Michael was involved in, you will see a section titled "Thanks" that includes a "special thanks" to Michael for a documentary called "Blood in the Face".

Here is the link to that documentary, "Blood in the Face" --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101479/?ref_=nm_flmg_tk_19

This documentary was directed by Anne Bohlen, Kevin Rafferty, and James Ridgeway and released in late February of 1991.
The movie was based on a book by Ridgeway and includes a lot of archival footage.

The full cast and crew involved in that movie is at this link --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101479/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_dr#directors

Michael Moore is listed as an interviewer for that movie.
In one part of that movie Michael asks a Nazi/White Supremacist a few questions about his attitudes towards black people in this country and also what he thinks is the role of white people in this country.
Even though he doesn't appear on camera, there is no mistaking Michael Moore's voice in that movie, it's Michael Moore's voice asking that Nazi those questions.
Yeah . . that Michael Moore!

Michael was only 36 years old when he participated in that movie in 1990, when it was being made.
This was one of Michael's first steps in to the movie industry.

The very first movie that Michael Moore was involved with was about racism!

HIS VERY FIRST MOVIE!!

That movie was made in Michigan.
Michael is from Michigan, and he was involved in that movie because he hated the Michigan Nazis.
That movie was made back in 1990.
Back when George H.W. Bush was the President of the United States, while Bush was continuing to advance the white privilege policies and anti-gay policies that President Reagan had started when he was first elected president in 1980.
Michael could see through their bullshit clear back then!

Michael Moore is not a racist.

[CentralMass]

28. Were they wrong. About him being far left, or taking on captilism that is..

[bluestateguy]

29. And Hillary was called unelectable for being too polarizing

She's a Clinton. We don't want to make conservatives angry by dredging up all that old 90's stuff like Whitewater and Travelgate. She has that shrill voice. And so on...

[MohRokTah]

30. I truly do not recall any Democrat saying support of Obama was "far left"

It was only the likes of Sam Wurzelbacher and Sarah Palin who claimed that sort of bullshit, and that well after he had won the nomination.

Really, nothing about his policies screamed "far left"

The "far left" candidate was Dennis Kucinich in 2008, with the "totally unhinged nutcase" spot being taken by Mike Gravel.