Editorial on Michael Moore’s Oscar Speech from an Ohio newspaper
I replied to this with the following:
Re: Editorial on Michael Moore
And the 2003 award for most obviously Republican-slanted editorial goes to: The Advocate!
The biggest problem with the debate about the war is that people automatically associate support for the troops as support for the war. For a lot of people, this isn’t true. My cousin is in Afghanistan as a Ranger, and I fully support him and all the troops around the world, but I still question the decision to get involved in this war in the first place. Yes, Hussein is a bad man and has committed atrocities against his own people and other countries, but the primary reason for this war (Weapons of Mass Destruction) still has not been evidentially and convincingly proven to the world at large.
Another issue is the idea of the US as the world’s policeman, which was a term that Republicans bandied about during the previous administration as a reason to NOT send troops on peacekeeping missions. The entire situation could be viewed as a regional issue just as well.
Michael Moore spoke what he believed. Lots of people don’t agree with him. That’s OK; it’s an opinion, just like this editorial.
——————-
After a re-read, I sent another letter:
Re: Editorial on Michael Moore
I thought Saddam Hussein was the tyrant. Moore gave a rant, or he went on a tirade.