This is the sort of thing the commentators have been calling a false equivalency: what Rush Limbaugh does and what Michael Moore does are very different. Michael Moore presents a case, e.g on national health care; you can disagree with his premises, with his examples, with his interpretation, but he is presenting a case. The only thing of his movies (I think I’ve seen 3) I could see someone saying was in bad taste was when he caught Paul Wolfowitz wetting his comb with his spit and then combing his hair with it.
Rush Limbaugh, among hundreds of acts committed by him, will be remembered for calling a slut and a prostitute a young woman who argued for birth control pills for a fellow student who needed them for medical reasons, not for contraceptive reasons.
Now my arguments with the whole conservative movement’s position on sex could take us into the next year, but I’m asking you what Michael Moore has done that matches the completely immoral, tasteless, unfair, vulgar, pandering of Limbaugh to the old White guy crowd that blames all the world’s problems on “young gals wearing short skirts”. Like all others of his kind, he is so conflicted sexually that he cannot reconcile his own sexual desire with his belief that any woman who wants sex, let along has sex, is a slut and a whore. He appeals precisely to those people who think that way.
I could go on with other reprehensible things he has done. That’s not a problem for me; the world is full of disgusting pieces of shit like Limbaugh, feeding at the trough of public fear and prejudice, pure demagogues who will join the ranks of Father Coughlin, Goebbels, Joseph McCarthy, Louis Farrakhan and, according to many, Che Guevara, as a rabble-rouser whose work has resulted in great harm to a great number of people. We may disagree about their ideas, but all of these people have spouted off to a gullible public in ways that roused others to evil deeds. The hatred Limbaugh has inspired finds no equivalence in the work of Moore.