Michael Moore & Owning Oil Stocks: What Exactly is the Story Here?

[orleans]

i know this is old fodder--i remember hearing about it--it's a distant bell but i honestly don't remember what the story was.

but someone "threw it up" in my face the other day--basically saying what freaking hypocrites WE ALL ARE (this in comparison to abramoff & libby & delay & delay's little spot on his new committees--one of which will look into abramoff--signing statements, frist and his stock sale, trying to pass laws so we can't sue vaccine manufacturers, etc. on and on and i'm trying to explain all this to a repuke because this person didn't really know shit about any of this)

and they say this crap about michael moore to me: well you know michael moore...blablabla!--as if it even matters! as if michael moore is an elected official! gimme a break!

i said i remembered hearing something about that--but i don't really remember what i heard one way or the other.

okay--so what the hell was the big deal and the story about michael moore owning oil stock? i mean--is it true? not true? did he deny it but he lied? i don't know about it. can someone please explain.

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Sounds like the story that Al Gore was oppressing the Uwe Indians

All because he owned some stock in a company that wasn't very nice to the Uwes.

Then it turned out that a certain other presidential contender owned a bunch of the same stock.

That one sure disappeared in a hurry!

Anyway, the Michael Moore thing will play to the political wonks -- alone.

--p!

[punpirate]

2. As best as I can find...

... the situation is a bit more complicated than what is being described. After the success of "Roger and Me," Moore created a foundation he called The Center for Alternative Media and Culture.

It's a tax-exempt non-profit that funds some production costs for independent filmmakers specializing in political and social subjects. The foundation's financial affairs are handled by a financial management firm in NYC called Starr and Co.

If Starr and Co. has been handling investments, it's possible they've been buying whatever brings in money to the foundation. Should Moore know about that? Yeah, likely (although he might find some amusement in using stock profits to fund documentaries exposing such firms). Does he own the stock himself? No, as far as I can tell.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

3. Why don't you make the WINGNUT show you THEIR documentation?

Why do they get the right to say whatever they heard on Rush Limbaugh and YOU have to scramble for sources to refute it? That shit drives me crazy here!

[Justice Is Comin]

4. I saw Mike on C-Span

only a few months ago. I can't remember the exact purpose but it was one of the most watched in the C-Span archives for quite some time.

In his introducing remarks he said some have accused him of owning these stocks. He laughed out loud, ridiculed it, and said it was absurd. He was describing things the grand oil party was trying to paint him with. He said it was downright amusing some of the things he reads.

Tell your uniformed passerby to go drink his gallon jug of Bush sugar. Use a straw, it'll last longer.

[AndyTiedye]

5. I Could See MM Owning a Few Shares of Oil Stock

That gains him admission to the annual shareholders' meeting.

Do you think Michael Moore might be able to have some fun at one of those? :-)

[radwriter0555]

7. Anyone can go to a shareholder's meeting. You don't need to own

shares in stock to go to shareholder's meetings.

Meetings are also sales pitches for prospective buyers.

Moore doesn't own any shares of oil stock OR Halliburton.

[0rganism]

6. Let's suppose Michael Moore owned a controlling interest in Exxon stock...

HOW THE HELL WOULD THAT MAKE ANYONE OTHER THAN MOORE HIMSELF A HYPOCRITE?

There is no reason in the world to even fight that battle for Moore, as it has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on anything else you mentioned. Moore can do well enough in his own defense on that point, I'm sure.

I'll take it one step further. Suppose YOU YOURSELF owned a controlling interest in Exxon and were also a corrupt money-laundering lobbyist. You, sir, could be the mightiest of all hypocrites for criticizing the Abramoffs and Libbys for their activities. And you know what?

THAT IN ITSELF WOULD IN NO WAY INVALIDATE ANYTHING YOU SAID ABOUT THEIR CRIMES, WHATSOEVER.

And THAT is precisely the point you should be making. All the tu quoque and non sequiter fallacies in the world do not change the simple fact that the republican party is now led by liars, sycophants, and thieves on behalf of the ultra-wealthy, or that it has risen to its recent heights of power by playing on the weaknesses and fears of the gullible, the prejudiced, and the religiously insane.