Blues wrote:

Peg, I'm still confused by what you mean.(Really, so help me out here.)
--okay, I will try but I may get confused myself.

The point I made is that "working class" folks were booing the man about whom you said "many Americans admire his work on behalf of the working class." It sounded as if these "working class" union stage hands didn't think much of Moore's point of view.
--first of all, it was ONE stagehand who was mentioned...and the reaction of anyone in that audience or theatre is not reflective of everyonein America; how could it be?


You replied:
"You seemed to think a Hollywood stagehand at the Oscars was a good example of a "working class" employee and I wanted to point out that such a worker was treated far better by his/her union than most."

Now isn't that the pinacle for which working class folks are striving for? Aren't they still working class? Do you have to belong to a crappy union, or be poorly paid, or just un-employeed to be working class?
--yes, I agree such working conditions are what working people strive for and the labor movement has worked for this. I am involved in a union effort myself at the moment. My point was that those who do NOT belong to such successful (or fortunate) unions might be more likely to support Moore since he champions working people who have been shafted (more likely to have happened to auto workers than to Equity stagehands). In other words, not everyone in the "working class" has suffered the same at the hands of corporations; Moore seems to be concerned with this distinction.


The reality of it is, I think if you interviewed "the working class", whoever they might be (you pick 'em), I think you might find little support for Moore's message.
--I disagree; what about the people in his films?? But in part you may be right that anyone asked to watch a documentary might be put off; my experience when watching the press screening of Bowling for Columbine was when people wandered in (as they do in multi-plexes, seeming to think catching part of a movie in addition to theone they paid to see is somehow a worthwhile thing to do) they soon wandered out again, muttering or complaining. To them this sort of thing isn't a "real" movie.


In fact, I think that many of them would probably boo MM too. (Whose kids do you think are serving overseas, those of the actors and studio owners, or those of working class families?)
--a fair point, but I agree with whoever said that parents of armed service personnel overseas might be happy that someone is pointing out the folly of this invasion. Not all families support their kids being in the military.


Then again, I could be wrong.
--any of us could be; and much of what we are talking about is very subjective. Thank you for your respectful questions.


Peace,
Blues



Troll wrote:

Blackcatter, you see what I mean.
--excuse me, Troll, but why are you trying to insinuate Blackcatter into your little game? What does any of this have to do with you? You are just like the playground bully who is too cowardly to fight anyone himself but likes to egg on other kids to fight each other.

Offer up a definition regarding ANY post of Pegs that is in any critical of her or that Could br construed as critical of her and you get "Grow up" and "asinine" and other such disparaging terms.
--But your tone and choice of language in these posts IS asinine and immature. I am perfectly capable of acceptingthat someone disagrees with me. You think being "critical" of someone on a personal level should not be responded to? You use petty personal insults to try and make a point, rather than the traditional modes of argument. Such behavior is traditionally responded to in kind. If you respectfully disagree with someone and explain why, you will be treated with respect (as Blues has tried to do and as I thought he deserved in kind--both of us perhaps taking a page from Thomas the Rhymer's thoughtful ditty).


Her response was especially humerous since I never mentioned her name; I simply responded to your post.
--yes, it's very HUMOROUS that you think you are cleverly ganging up with others to attack me. Must make you feel all righteous inside. But why not let Blackcatter respond himself? (I assume it's a he).


It is unfortunate that there are so many thin-skinned people in the world; people who feel that their every utterance is golden and worthy of enshrinement in some repository of wisdom, while anything that anyone else says that doesn't agree with their sacred pronouncements is ignorant, stupid, immature and/ or asinine, to name a few.
--None of this has ANYTHING to do with someone disagreeing with me. As I said above, and have demonstrated here, I am capable of civil debate with respectful discourse. I am far from being thin-skinned. If I were, I'd have abandoned this. I have been responding to personal insults that YOU have aimed at me. And you are still doing it. It is not my low self-esteem or moral superiority or intellectual arrogance that prompted you to insult me. It is your mean-spirited, small-minded personality.


Oh well, there's a special corner of Hell reserved for those who try to clarify things. I should have known better.
--well, enjoy it when you get there. Dick.