Moore's shooting "Fahrenheit 9/11" sequel really just shooting himself in the foot

Now Michael Moore is going too far. We get it, you don't like Dubya. I think you've made your point.

Michael Moore has decided to get the ball rolling on a sequel to Fahrenheit 9/11, his Bush-bashing film released this past year. Now, I'm not saying I defend Bush at all. As a matter of fact, I really don't care for him. I didn't vote for him. I didn't like him as a president or as my state's governor. I'm not making two movies about him, though.

Michael Moore has decided to make Fahrenheit 9/11 and a half because, according to Moore, 51-percent of the country was "misinformed" about the issues in this past election. "They weren't told the truth," he said in a recent interview.

Now, for this next 'experiment' please bare with me.

Let's assume that Moore is right and 51-percent of the American population was misinformed (and what a coincidence that it was also 51-pecent of the American people that voted for Bush). Just ignore that. Pretend that Moore is right. If you weren't misinformed then someone else was. More than half of the country was lied to about the issues in this past election.

Okay, here's the problem with that idea - even if it is true (which it isn't): The majority of people who voted to re-elect Bush (that "misinformed" 51-percent) cited MORAL VALUES as the primary reason for voting for Bush. Now, the last time I checked, moral values aren't exactly hardline issues. The concept of moral values is how someone feels one candidate best relates to them. Would that candidate do the same thing a voter would want done based on that voters morals?

So unless more than half of the American public was misinformed about Bush's values, then Michael Moore's given reason for making Fahrenheit 9/11 and a half is complete crap. If Bush suddenly starts promoting abortions, allows gay marriages, and puts a moratorium on the death penalty, then, YES, we were lied to about his moral values. He won't do that, though.

If moral values truly were the primary reasons for the American public supporting Bush - which I don't argue with, I find it very difficult to argue with his legitimacy as president. I find it even more troubling that Moore has invented this statistic about 51-percent of the American public being misinformed.

You can't misinform someone about Bush's moral values. Maybe his policies on certain hardline issues such as the economy and the war in Iraq are not clearly defined, but his moral values - the key reason for his supporters to vote for him - are set.

Moore's comments are absurd, and they embarrass me as a democrat.