Dem Leader to Michael Moore: back off Dodd [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 09:25 AM

I guess most people around here don't like Michael Moore. I don't know. I haven't seen his healthcare one but I liked his Farenheit 9/11 and bowling for columbine. I think he's a good filmaker. He's made alot of money and I can't help but respect that. :cool:

Anyway, here he is talking about how a certain big time dem, I'm guessing Rahm Emmanuel, told him to shut up about Chris Dodd, who he apparently takes to the woodshed in his new movie Capitalism, (which I have to admit I probably also won't see just out of lack of interest.)

YouTube - Michael Moore Told to 'Cool It' on Senator Dodd (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0cBFZ1FXY)

also like the story at around 4 minutes of the steelworker (how did he know this? just wondering) talking at the screen in the movie theatre.

cheapseats

10-05-2009, 09:33 AM

Michael Moore is a High Flyer now. He perhaps has enough to lose these days that he will do as he is told. People with lots to lose are better line towers.

But the warning broadcasts Dodd's soft and sordid underbelly.

Anyone jockeying for his Senate seat should go for the jugular. Christopher Dodd is a Congressional Kingpin in our oh-so-euphemistic Economic Crisis . . . read that, Manmade Disaster.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 09:44 AM

Dod's approval is below the Bush mendoza line of 30 or so. He's toast regardless

SWATH

10-05-2009, 09:44 AM

Anyone jockeying for his [Dodd] Senate seat should go for the jugular.

You mean like Peter Schiff;)

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 09:51 AM

Schiff's timing couldn't be better. Plus, he's an expert on Dodd's biggest weakness.

Aratus

10-05-2009, 09:57 AM

the bi-election warms up as SNL pulls away from the Obama coalition...
michael moore has these "mavericky" days when he ain't a brand label???

yokna7

10-05-2009, 09:58 AM

Schiff's timing couldn't be better. Plus, he's an expert on Dodd's biggest weakness.

Has there been a debate scheduled? If anyone has this info let me know. This should be televised, it's gonna be a blood bath.

MRoCkEd

10-05-2009, 10:01 AM

This is why it's so important for Schiff to win his primary.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 10:07 AM

"michael moore has these "mavericky" days when he ain't a brand label???"

he was the first leftist I can recall to come out against the iraq war. He and Pat Buchanan were just about the only people in the media against it as far as I can recall.

that was when he really became a figure of speech for a leftist, moreso than the other movies.

Aratus

10-05-2009, 10:11 AM

michael moore does not often praise G.M and in light of this, a DNC dude or WAY higher is
saying for he to NOW go "soft" on Dodd... (okaaaay!) as ...G.M = gov't/private branding???
you did see the SNL skit where our potus is inside a saragasso sea of miasmas & incompletes?

Bman

10-05-2009, 10:17 AM

I hate Michael Moore, even if he does a good thing such as bash Dodd. His movies are so poorly researched and the conclusions he draws couldn't be further from the truth.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 10:21 AM

Bman- did you see "farenheit 9/11"?

Bman

10-05-2009, 10:46 AM

Bman- did you see "farenheit 9/11"?

My wife rented it, I know I saw it, but nothing is coming to mind about that movie, maybe Bush sitting there with a stupid lok on his face after they told him what happened. I do remember pieces of Bowling for Columbine.

YumYum

10-05-2009, 11:03 AM

My wife rented it, I know I saw it, but nothing is coming to mind about that movie, maybe Bush sitting there with a stupid lok on his face after they told him what happened. I do remember pieces of Bowling for Columbine.

I enjoy his movies. Love him or hate him, he does an excellent job presenting his arguements. If Fareheit 911 is packed with lies, why didn't the neocons refute his evidence?

Bman

10-05-2009, 11:04 AM

I enjoy his movies. Love him or hate him, he does an excellent job presenting his arguements. If Fareheit 911 is packed with lies, why didn't the neocons refute his evidence?

Well lets go with Bowling for Columbine since I can recall more of that movie. For instance how exactly does bullets being sold at Walmart equal people being shot in a school?

YumYum

10-05-2009, 11:10 AM

Well lets go with Bowling for Columbine since I can recall more of that movie. For instance how exactly does bullets being sold at Walmart equal people being shot in a school?

The argument that gun control freaks would argue, is for the same reason that you now need a licence to purchase amonia nitrate, the stuff McViegh used in the OK City bombing. Amonia nitrate is a great fertlizer. It also makes a great bomb.

Bman

10-05-2009, 11:13 AM

The argument that gun control freaks would argue, is for the same reason that you now need a licence to purchase amonia nitrate, the stuff McViegh used in the OK City bombing. Amonia nitrate is a great fertlizer. It also makes a great bomb.

It still is a stupid argument, that's my point about most of what Michael Moore says.

Andrew-Austin

10-05-2009, 11:14 AM

I haven't seen his healthcare one but I liked his Farenheit 9/11 and bowling for columbine. I think he's a good filmaker. He's made alot of money and I can't help but respect that.

Don't respect him, hes a hypocrite. He is a socialist, he denigrates capitalism and earning profits, and at the same time engages in capitalism and profiteering himself.

dannno

10-05-2009, 11:15 AM

Well lets go with Bowling for Columbine since I can recall more of that movie. For instance how exactly does bullets being sold at Walmart equal people being shot in a school?

It was Kmart, and I agree with him, why the hell should Kmart sell bullets?? They sell clothing and kitchen/bathroom stuff and they have a small sporting dept.. Their stores do not have the best security, they are NOT good places to sell guns/bullets!! Why not sell bullets at gun stores? I support the 2nd amendment just as much as you do, and I support Kmarts right to sell bullets, but I still don't think they should!

The thing that I liked most about his solution is that Michael Moore didn't petition the government to force Kmart to do anything, he asked them and they did it voluntarily. That is a free market solution.

OK.... I HIGHLY recommend you watch Bowling for Columbine again, because apparently you MISSED the first 80% of the movie which DEBUNKED lack of gun control as the reason why the shooting occurred!! He blamed it on our media, and he made some EXCELLENT points.. In fact, he taught me so much about media manipulation that I KNEW they were going to block Ron Paul out before it even happened!! So don't tell me his movies have all "bad" conclusions, because you don't seem to remember any of them!!

Fahrenheit 9/11 is about Bush's relationship to the Saudis. He spends 90% of the movie talking about the Saudis!! Not only is it accurate, but he provided us with an INCREDIBLE wealth of information about Bush' relationship with the Saudis we did not know before. You need to re-watch these movies if you are going to talk shit on them, because you don't even know what they are about! You obviously weren't paying attention because you already knew that you would hate the film before you watched it.

dannno

10-05-2009, 11:20 AM

Don't respect him, hes a hypocrite. He is a socialist, he denigrates capitalism and earning profits, and at the same time engages in capitalism and profiteering himself.

I don't respect him for that particular thing that you just said, BUT, he has gone out and done some amazing documentary work DESPITE that, and exposed a lot of important things that the media has not had the courage to expose!! For that, he is a patriot... for attacking capitalism, he is a bit ignorant.. I will give you that.

YumYum

10-05-2009, 11:33 AM

Don't respect him, hes a hypocrite. He is a socialist, he denigrates capitalism and earning profits, and at the same time engages in capitalism and profiteering himself.

You are attacking him ad hominian abuse. Forget him the person, and focus on his arguments. Refute his arguments. We all have some hypocricy in one way or another, so what and who he is irrelevant. He makes valid points. When capitalism is out of control it becomes legalized slavery, and invaribly people end up being exploited. People who are crazy shouldn't own guns, and the Cuban government, while poor, takes better measures to provide health care than our government. His observations need to be refuted. Keep his fat ugly ass out of the picture.

Bman

10-05-2009, 11:34 AM

It was Kmart, and I agree with him, why the hell should Kmart sell bullets?? They sell clothing and kitchen/bathroom stuff and they have a small sporting dept.. Their stores do not have the best security, they are NOT good places to sell guns/bullets!! Why not sell bullets at gun stores? I support the 2nd amendment just as much as you do, and I support Kmarts right to sell bullets, but I still don't think they should!

The thing that I liked most about his solution is that Michael Moore didn't petition the government to force Kmart to do anything, he asked them and they did it voluntarily. That is a free market solution.

OK.... I HIGHLY recommend you watch Bowling for Columbine again, because apparently you MISSED the first 80% of the movie which DEBUNKED lack of gun control as the reason why the shooting occurred!! He blamed it on our media, and he made some EXCELLENT points.. In fact, he taught me so much about media manipulation that I KNEW they were going to block Ron Paul out before it even happened!! So don't tell me his movies have all "bad" conclusions, because you don't seem to remember any of them!!

Fahrenheit 9/11 is about Bush's relationship to the Saudis. He spends 90% of the movie talking about the Saudis!! Not only is it accurate, but he provided us with an INCREDIBLE wealth of information about Bush' relationship with the Saudis we did not know before. You need to re-watch these movies if you are going to talk shit on them, because you don't even know what they are about! You obviously weren't paying attention because you already knew that you would hate the film before you watched it.

Sorry, I'm not going to watch the trash again. If you think I missed something, then maybe you can explain how Michael Moore is an advocate for Free Markets, Smaller Government, and Personal Liberties. He won't see another dime for me. And while I already had an opinion on Michael Moore by Farenheit 9/11, I had no opinion on him when I first saw bowling for columbine. It's too long ago for me to remember specifics, but all I remember is how I was told it was a great eye opening movie, and I left greatly disappointed. Watching it again because you liked it isn't going to change that fact.

dannno

10-05-2009, 11:39 AM

Sorry, I'm not going to watch the trash again. If you think I missed something, then maybe you can explain how Michael Moore is an advocate for Free Markets, Smaller Government, and Personal Liberties. He won't see another dime for me. And while I already had an opinion on Michael Moore by Farenheit 9/11, I had no opinion on him when I first saw bowling for columbine. It's too long ago for me to remember specifics, but all I remember is how I was told it was a great eye opening movie, and I left greatly disappointed. Watching it again because you liked it isn't going to change that fact.

It was an eye-opening movie, he completely pwned the media!! That was 80% of the film and you don't even remember it.. You obviously didn't "watch" the movie, you were just "sitting" in front of the screen with your brain turned off..

All you can think about is your ideology, and you can't get behind good ideas and good research from people outside that ideology... Really sad, actually... How are we ever going to merge our ideology with others good ideas if we don't attempt to understand others good ideas?

You don't have to spend money on him, there are plenty of other ways to watch his movies.

YumYum

10-05-2009, 11:41 AM

Sorry, I'm not going to watch the trash again. If you think I missed something, then maybe you can explain how Michael Moore is an advocate for Free Markets, Smaller Government, and Personal Liberties. He won't see another dime for me. And while I already had an opinion on Michael Moore by Farenheit 9/11, I had no opinion on him when I first saw bowling for columbine. It's too long ago for me to remember specifics, but all I remember is how I was told it was a great eye opening movie, and I left greatly disappointed. Watching it again because you liked it isn't going to change that fact.

The most important aspect of Ron Paul's Revolution is to educate people. How can you educate people if you don't take the time out to hear the other side's arguments? I don't agree with Michael on certain issues. I hate him for turning on Ralph Nader, so I am not here to defend his qualities as a human, but I will discuss his points of view, which he does a damn good job presenting.

YumYum

10-05-2009, 11:44 AM

It was an eye-opening movie, he completely pwned the media!! That was 80% of the film and you don't even remember it.. You obviously didn't "watch" the movie, you were just "sitting" in front of the screen with your brain turned off..

All you can think about is your ideology, and you can't get behind good ideas and good research from people outside that ideology... Really sad, actually... How are we ever going to merge our ideology with others good ideas if we don't attempt to understand others good ideas?

You don't have to spend money on him, there are plenty of other ways to watch his movies.

Well said. Ideologies lead to tyranny.

dannno

10-05-2009, 11:45 AM

When capitalism is out of control it becomes legalized slavery, and invaribly people end up being exploited.

Well the only reason capitalism is "out of control" is because we don't have free market capitalism. Anything related to "capitalism" that is out of control is due 100% to govt. intervention in the market, or govt. NOT prosecuting fraud (due to regulations, i.e. mandating fractional reserve standards, FDIC, etc..), or govt. NOT protecting private property rights (from pollution, etc..)

People who are crazy shouldn't own guns,

I'm a 9/11 truther. What if the govt. said that I was "crazy" because of that fact, and that I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun? Crazy people aren't allowed to protect themselves?

and the Cuban government, while poor, takes better measures to provide health care than our government.

..yet the health of their citizens is very poor... If Cubans had a free market healthcare system they would receive much better care, and there would be MORE care available.

dannno

10-05-2009, 11:48 AM

Well said. Ideologies lead to tyranny.

Free market ideologies lead to liberty ;)

YumYum

10-05-2009, 12:10 PM

Free market ideologies lead to liberty ;)

Great job, danno! You refuted my observations without calling me a communist/socialist purveyor. I must admit that I am having a hell of a time shaking off my old Leftist ways.:D

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 12:41 PM

I didn't agree with his gun control message (and I don't have aproblem with wal mart selling bullets)

but what was weird about that movie was when he went to Canada. they showed the kids there playing violent video games and they DON'T have gun control up there, and yet they didn't have a fraction of our murder rate.

THAT was interesting. he never does answer why. he just calls for gun control, which makes no sense because he was just in canada and... you see?

dannno

10-05-2009, 12:51 PM

I didn't agree with his gun control message (and I don't have aproblem with wal mart selling bullets)

He didn't HAVE a gun control message. I keep saying that he debunked lack of gun control as a reason for the shooting earlier in the film. Did you actually WATCH the film or not??

but what was weird about that movie was when he went to Canada. they showed the kids there playing violent video games and they DON'T have gun control up there, and yet they didn't have a fraction of our murder rate.

THAT was interesting. he never does answer why. he just calls for gun control, which makes no sense because he was just in canada and... you see?

Ok, nevermind, you did watch it..

But when did he call for gun control?? He didn't.. he blamed the incident on the MEDIA... That's what the bulk of the film is about.. and I completely agree with the bulk of the film..

All he wanted was for Kmart (not Walmart!) to stop selling bullets in their stores. They have GIANT stores with not nearly enough employees, and it is primarily a CLOTHING store.. There is no good reason why they need to sell bullets.

Once again, I believe Kmart has the RIGHT to sell bullets, but I don't agree that they should... and Michael Moore took a free market approach and ASKED them to stop selling the bullets because it would be more responsible of them to simply not carry the product. If I owned Kmart I wouldn't sell bullets in the store because it is irresponsible. If I wanted to sell bullets I'd open a gun store with the proper security.

What problem do you have with his free market approach?

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 12:54 PM

All he wanted was for Kmart (not Walmart!) to stop selling bullets in their stores.

well that's a form of gun control.

I don't have any problem with his approach or anything. I just don't think his solution of asking them not to stock bullets was a very profound one.

I think the reasons for our violent society have alot to do with our economy. It seems like he's going after the puppet, not the puppeteer

note: I live in Boston where we have total gun control and I am fine with that for here.

Bman

10-05-2009, 01:58 PM

dannno

10-05-2009, 02:17 PM

well that's a form of gun control.

No it isn't. Gun control comes from the government through force. Asking a private entity to stop carrying a product because they are not responsible enough to do so has nothing to do with gun control. If Kmart had an irresponsible incident like a little kid wandering from the toy dept. and finding some bullets and/or gun laying around and ended up injured, they lose a lot of business.

I don't have any problem with his approach or anything. I just don't think his solution of asking them not to stock bullets was a very profound one.

Well it wasn't my favorite part of the film, even though I agreed with the premise, but it wasn't the bulk of the film either...

I think the reasons for our violent society have alot to do with our economy. It seems like he's going after the puppet, not the puppeteer

note: I live in Boston where we have total gun control and I am fine with that for here.

True colors.. hmmm

I think Boston residents are less safe because criminals will always be able to get guns, but law abiding citizens cannot.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 02:32 PM

dannno

10-05-2009, 02:52 PM

I think the stats say otherwise.

have you ever been to europe? they have about a millionth of our murder rate and it's because they have no guns.

I was out in London a while back. it's nice, trust me. and I didn't get shot!

What about Switzerland? They used to REQUIRE that all citizens have a gun by law, and they had one of the lowest murder rates in the world :rolleyes:

This is what Bowling for Columbine was all about, and I believe that was the question Moore couldn't answer.. why do we have so much violence? Did we need gun control? No.. wasn't that.. He pinned it mostly on the media.. That's a big one, and somebody else mentioned the economy.. we have a lot of impoverished people due to the Federal Reserve.. that's probably another big reason even though other countries have bad economies, too.. So i'd pin the discrepancy mostly on the media.

Gun control does not keep one safe, it makes them less safe.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 03:41 PM

I think Boston is fine without guns. maybe other places want other things. that's our respective concerns

Mitt Romneys sideburns

10-05-2009, 03:48 PM

Man, Michael Moore needs to get over the Dem/Rep party thing. Hes all about party.

Bman

10-05-2009, 03:58 PM

Well it wasn't my favorite part of the film, even though I agreed with the premise, but it wasn't the bulk of the film either...

The premise of the film is that it is too easy for people to get firearms and that it shouldn't be easy to get firearms and such. In otherwords the movie is a plea for more gun control. So again explain, why is it a good movie? Or should I just assume you desire more government gun control?

A quick question. Did you grow up in a city environment or a country environment?

CountryboyRonPaul

10-05-2009, 04:00 PM

Gun Rights are not about protecting from common criminals, but from legitimized criminals. Boston has good reason to remember this, moreso than other places in our nation.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/t/d/tds12/massacre2.jpg

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 04:06 PM

bostons gun laws are bostons business!!

if people want one bad enough that can get it and keep it "illegally" as I'm sure many do.

JeNNiF00F00

10-05-2009, 04:08 PM

I think the stats say otherwise.

have you ever been to europe? they have about a millionth of our murder rate and it's because they have no guns.

I was out in London a while back. it's nice, trust me. and I didn't get shot!

I would hardly call London "Nice". They are full of big brother tyranny. Id also say the same for most of the rest of Europe, which I thought was the biggest shit hole I have ever been to.

lester1/2jr

10-05-2009, 04:15 PM

well I would beg to differ. and theres more to a country than their laws

Bman

10-05-2009, 06:33 PM

I think the stats say otherwise.

have you ever been to europe? they have about a millionth of our murder rate and it's because they have no guns.

I was out in London a while back. it's nice, trust me. and I didn't get shot!

So you've been shot in America? Care to post a picture of your wounds?

You don't need a gun to murder someone. Montana which is one of the top 3 states in gun ownership has the third lowest rate of murder in the entire country. You can't blame guns for murder. Sure people may use them in the act but if you think they are the cause you will find that numbers are not consistant. Plus D.C. has the smallest amount of gun owners and by far the most murders per capita. Can you explain?

Bman

10-05-2009, 06:36 PM

Stats? No consistant evidence that guns cause murders.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000

http://www.infoplease.com/us/statistics/crime-rate-state.html

http://www.swivel.com/data_columns/spreadsheet/7615487

TCE

10-05-2009, 06:46 PM

bostons gun laws are bostons business!!

if people want one bad enough that can get it and keep it "illegally" as I'm sure many do.

Agreed, but we can still have an opinion one way or the other. I agree, I wouldn't want the Federal Government coming down and requiring Boston to rescind their law.

You just proved our point. Why have gun control when criminals will get guns illegally? If a law-abiding citizen gets a gun, will they go postal?

acptulsa

10-05-2009, 06:56 PM

Dodd the Sacred Cow.

Regardless, if Dodd's any indication there'll be Porterhouse steaks in Calcutta soon enough!

angelatc

10-05-2009, 09:17 PM

angelatc

10-05-2009, 09:18 PM

Bradley in DC

10-05-2009, 09:22 PM

Promontorium

10-06-2009, 01:44 AM

I'm absolutely shocked anyone claiming to believe in individual rights would support Michael Moore's assertions.

Michael Moore does not shy away from who he is, and that makes him an admirable foe. But a foe nonetheless.

In his newest movie, he concludes that "capitalism is evil" and to him, I'm sure it is.

I understand socialism, I understand the collectivist ideal. What I don't get is how you could believe both in individualism and collectivism?

I don't want to break down all his works, because, I swear to god, I thought he's been pretty straightforward.

Bowling for Columbine.

Some dicks with social issues find each other's company beneficial to their anti-social behavior. Then they act without any regard to reason, or morality.

As an individualist I would say, they were bad people. It is their fault.
As a collectivist/socialist I would want to know, since individuals are never at fault, what collective issue is really the culprit?

Do you see where you branch off there? I don't care what Michael Moore unearthed. We are all individuals, and individually accountable. Certainly, it helps for people to learn why people act, and if there was some evil influence, but when you look for it in media, tv, movies, "popular culture" that's the fundamental idea of collectivism. That we are driven and defined by our mass populace. It's one thing if they were abused, mentally or physically, and/or compelled to commit the acts, but to blame "society", that's literally a different philosophical base of understanding.

If you believe that we are defined by the sum of our society, you can't be an individualist.

I think this is your case. Since you state that your city's ban on weapons is a good thing, regardless of the well being of the individuals among it that may not agree with you. You already acknowledge that criminals get their guns anyway, so it is only the compulsory disarmament, and its social/psychological impact, that you seem to be espousing.

I honestly don't know what you're doing here. It is a life contradiction, if you allow that thoughts and beliefs of others is your driving force. That if you decide to kill, it is the new's fault. You can not be both. Individual, or collectivist. Choose.

lester1/2jr

10-06-2009, 09:10 AM

I can be a fan of whoever I like for any reason I like. I like movies and his are entertaining.

City boy.

is that a bad thing?

Bman

10-06-2009, 05:00 PM

City boy.

LOL. You know, having grown up country I was thinking to ask if Danno was a city boy. It would have put this thread in perspective.

Bman

10-06-2009, 05:04 PM

is that a bad thing?

When it comes to comments such as Kmart shouldn't sell bullets it is. It shows that one has never lived in the countryside and doesn't understand that we generally get along without government enforcement.

dannno

10-06-2009, 05:06 PM

LOL. You know, having grown up country I was thinking to ask if Danno was a city boy. It would have put this thread in perspective.

Nope, grew up in the suburbs of a relatively small town, about 30-40 minutes from the city.

But guess what?

I hate the city and I hate the suburbs so I left.

Right now I basically live on the edge of a cliff.. in less than 4 minutes I can be completely out of civilization, and 4 minutes in the other direction I can be downtown in my small town..

dannno

10-06-2009, 05:11 PM

When it comes to comments such as Kmart shouldn't sell bullets it is. It shows that one has never lived in the countryside and doesn't understand that we generally get along without government enforcement.

Except that my comment specifically said (multiple times) that I don't believe that government should enforce it. Neither does Michael Moore, he used a free market solution to convince them to stop.

I believe PERSONALLY that Kmart should not sell bullets because it has a toy department and is a clothing/furniture/bath store. It is irresponsible. If I owned Kmart I wouldn't sell guns or bullets, that's all I'm saying.. and I hate fucking Kmart. Kmart is for city folks, so is stupid Walmart.

What the hell are you doing in a Kmart anyway? That's why I left the city because I hate mass consumerism. If I never went to another Kmart or Walmart that would be awesome.

Go to a gun store if you want a gun, go to a grocery store if you want groceries.. unfortunately we have to use Kmart and Walmart because specialty stores go out of business when the Fed subsidizes large corporations, so ya, occasionally I make an exception.

Bman

10-06-2009, 05:11 PM

Nope, grew up in the suburbs of a relatively small town, about 30-40 minutes from the city.

But guess what?

I hate the city and I hate the suburbs so I left.

Right now I basically live on the edge of a cliff.. in less than 4 minutes I can be completely out of civilization, and 4 minutes in the other direction I can be downtown in my small town..

What population do you consider a small town?

devil21

10-06-2009, 06:21 PM

I enjoy his movies. Love him or hate him, he does an excellent job presenting his arguements. If Fareheit 911 is packed with lies, why didn't the neocons refute his evidence?

Check out the documentary about Michael Moore himself on Youtube, called "Manufacturing Dissent". It's in 10 parts. Your opinion of his "presentation" may just change when you find out that he flat out knowingly lies in his documentaries. That's not to say he's not right on some things but he's far from objective and honest.

Him railing against capitalism while raking in millions of dollars is pretty fucking hypocritical. Him railing against politicians while mingling with them at black tie Democratic fundraising events is pretty fucking hypocritical. Him crying about how the Dems should have won in 2000, yet he campaigned for Ralph Nader in 2000, is pretty fucking hypocritical. Him railing against GM for destroying his home town of Flint MI is pretty fucking hypocritical, considering he's not even from Flint MI. The list goes on. He's just taking advantage of a niche in the political industry. It's very popular to hate Republicans and bankers lately.