Rating: 
Summary: The State of the Nation...for the uneducated
Review: Michael Moore panders to young socialists who know nothing better than to listen only to those who use humor to convey their extremist ideas. Anyone up with the issues will know that Michael Moore is notorious for being a demagogue. I have read the book and I am disgusted by it.This is the same man who denounces corporations but uses private jets to travel across the country. He reveals conservative talk-show hosts' phone numbers and accuses them of murder. He is a racist. The funny thing is that he is racist against himself. F.
Rating:
Summary: I'm the Stupidest White Person!!!
Review: For reading this book that is! A complete waste of money. It was required for a class that I took and provided for some lively discussion. Fortunately for myself I was able to find it in a library and spared providing Michael Moore with any additional income. His endnotes are all but worthless! He documents little and places his own opinion in place of facts. While it's humorous it's sad to think that there are really people out there with the lack of individual thought that take this book seriously. If you mistake much of what's contained within this book for fact then you probably believe just about any conspiracy theory out there. Get over it! This is "junk science" at its finest. So before the government reads your thoughts it might be best if you covered your head with aluminum foil.
Rating:
Summary: Third World Country Reviewers Should Crawl Back Under Stones
Review: I swear that the subordinating people from third world countries who post their Moore-sponsored, self-victimization mentalities are getting more despicable by the second. Two reviews down is a "review" purportedly from a poster from Thailand, organized crime capital of Asia, who chides America as becoming a third world nation. Now irony aside, the irony being from that insolent ba$tard writing out of an underdeveloped Asian backwater, that moron has a twisted version of what constitutes the third world, ergo Thailand, for instance. That mislead fundamentalist insults that America was more of a 1st world country 20 years ago, being ignorantly indifferent to the fact that, in the early 80s, unemployment was in the double digits, production was being wasted by the Japanese, interest rates were in the double-digits, choking economic growth, and NY State was nearing bankruptcy. Yep, to Asian backwater boy, that apparently was the climax of being a first world country, as he's cursed in his sick, backwards misdirection. That insolent rogue actually further spits on the state of America's economy nowadays, one of the achievements qualifying America for the highest quality of life in areas that matter, despite of America's unemployment rate now being among the lowest in the world, its markets being the vehicle of choice for foreign investment, its interest rates at record lows, its manufacturing returned to competitiveness, and with its GDP the world's highest, being depended on by recession-prone France and Germany. Yet that Thai backwater boy "longs" for the America of 20 years ago, when he was allegedly "here", probably getting a first world education from one of America's colleges, only so he can perpetrate one of the most disloyal acts that's quite common in today's world: return to his native land to bittch about the "evils" of America and incite anti-American sentiments. This ill attitude reminds me of frail, proletariat socialist's thinking, where ingrates like our Thai "reviewer" dictatorially equate 1st world status with overtaxation of its wealthiest citizens, its number of growth-hampering, social support programs, universal "healthcare", affirmative action, coddling all minorities and discouraging them from being able to make it independently--which is simply convoluted! In short, he'd be referring to banana-republics like Thailand itself! Nah, reconsidering, I know what ails that Thai rebeller, something common in Muslim countries also; the moronically unenlightened inferiority and jealousy that comes from a superpower taking action, which is materialized in these poor, third world backwaters as paranoid conspiracy theories about "colonization". Certainly, that Thai hysteric is also committing an additional evildoing by fanning the flames of demoncratic-style hearsay in his willfully undereducated, propaganda-fed deluding of "Halliburton making money off soldier's deaths". I looked at today's Halliburton's earnings report, and, for a company that's been accusatorily harassed by demoncrats and third world scum as "profiteering from people's deaths", its report was sure bleak. Bleak as in NOT EARNING more EPS than in its same quarter last year, even failing its consensus estimate and lowering its earnings expectations for its next quarter. There you have it jacka$$ third world Thai--you've been subserviently programmed by dumba$$es John Kerry and Howard "Anger Problem" Dean! On second thought, that delinquent, malicious Thai "reviewer" was probably impersonated by some fu#@ed up college kid simpleton who's mislead as hell in his easily exploited idealism of the world!
Rating: 
Summary: Better written than I expected; perhaps a bit too long
Review: Summary:
The basic argument of 'Stupid White Men' is that most of the ills of society can be attributed to oppressive, white men. Despite focusing primarily on Republicans and most especially on what Moore considers to be the 'stolen' election by George Bush, Moore does not overlook the Democrats and their sketchy record. Much of this ire is aimed at the surprisingly pathetic career of Bill Clinton who, according to Moore, despite talking the talk, didn't walk the walk of social democracy. Moore also discusses several other issues, including the continued racism in the U.S., conflict in the Middle East, and his involvement in the Florida election debacle and convoluted support for Ralph Nader. The format of the book varies from informal prose to several letters by Moore to political leaders and bodies, including George Bush, Yassar Arafat, and Secretary General of the U.N., Kofi Annan. The ultimate political conclusion of the book can be summed up by a quote from the book itself, "There are about 200-plus million of us who would like to see a real two-party system (or three-party, or four-party - hey, it's a big country!), with one party fighting for the right to write off one's backyard tennis court as a business expense and the other fighting for the right to see a doctor if one gets sick. It really is that simple" (p. 225). In essence, Moore is arguing that the rich can fight for their luxuries, but they need to at least afford the poor the same opportunity. As for the Democrats, despite pretending to be the representatives of progressive socialism in this country, they have sold out to big money, leaving the poor of this country without representation. My Comments:
I think Moore makes a lot of great points. There are, however, several menial things about this book that bothered me. First, why is Michael Moore qualified to write this book? Before you crucify me for evaluating a piece of work on the credentials of the creator, hear me out. Moore readily admits that he doesn't have a college degree of any sort (either graduate or undergraduate). I'm okay with that, I really am. But without any credentials, I would really like to know why Moore is qualified to write this? Has he spent years and years studying politics? Has he held political office? Does he have some sort of insider perspective? I should probably admit here that I am just finishing my Master's degree and am beginning work on a PhD, so I may be a bit biased. Nevertheless, I would be a bit more trusting of Moore's perspective if he were to explain why he is qualified to write this book. Even if he just argues that he is qualified because he is a politically active citizen of the U.S., I would accept that, but I'm hesitant to just accept any Joe Shmoe's opinions on politics. The second problem I had with the book is that Moore never really explains why whites are a/the problem. Yes, his point is well taken that whites have been responsible for a lot of problems, but haven't they also been responsible for a lot of societal advances (advances Moore doesn't point out)? And isn't Michael Moore white? Just as he didn't make explicit connections between his conceptual points (ownership of guns and violent crimes) in Bowling for Columbine, Moore doesn't make any clear connections between why whites are a problem. Given the title, you would think that Moore is, in some sense, attacking the white race. Obviously, he isn't going that far, but he doesn't really say why the race of these alleged 'perpetrators' is really a big deal. Is there still racism in the U.S.? Sure, I won't deny that. But by claiming whites are the problem (or at least white leadership), isn't Moore really just making matters worse? Why doesn't he say what he really means? The bourgeoisie continue to exploit the proletariat, and because money tends to pass from generation to generation at the same socioeconomic level and originally it was whites that had had the money (while brutally enslaving blacks), it just so happens that whites continue to dominate. This really doesn't have anything to do with race. It has everything to do with political leaders (who are predominantly white) selling out. Don't get me wrong. I think Moore is making some really good points. But I think he used the title to sell books, despite it not really being the issue he is addressing. Overall, I think Moore should be commended for being forthright. Many of the points he makes are good points. I would have liked to see Moore explicitly cite references, but I can understand that in popular literature that just isn't the norm. In short, this is a provocative book aimed at getting people to think. Though not always perfectly clear, the basic points are good ones. If you're a political conservative, you may not like the book, but you may still want to read it just to see what the opposition is saying. If you're the liberal opposition, instead of complaining about the format, you may want to appreciate the fact that the book is popular and perhaps being used as a tool to gain converts toward your cause.
Rating:
Summary: Long on humor; manipulative and short on content
Review: Michael Moore is funny and very clever at manipulating opinion. But I find that even when I agree with his opinion, I wince at the poor reasoning, misleading statements and half-truths. He is very quick to insult people; he loves to take cheap shots.
Rating:
Summary: I Love This Book: Which Means I Have An Inferiority Complexx
Review: I am a black person, a minority. After reading Moore's opinions, he clearly doesn't believe that I am intelligent or capable enough on my own to rise through the social ladder. Moore instead wants to give me handouts and enforce the racist stereotype against blacks that they need to be given everthing automatically.
Rating:
Summary: Stupid White Male Writer
Review: Remember those heady days, when you were a college freshmen, and you were being exposed to startling ideas and agendas? Then you probably recall how easy it was to blame all the world's ills on the shoulders of STupid White American Males. This was kind of revolutionary, you know? Feminists were good at this. So were stupid white liberal males. They thought they were really being daring. Most of us outgrew this embarassing phase. Michael Moore never did. He sounds a lot like fakey civil right activists who are also good at blaming Stupid White American Males for everything wrong with the world. If there's an earthquake, it's the fault of STupid White American Guys. Moore is more than repulsively hypocritical. He likes to project this naughty, shambling,good old boy, scruffy and impish. In real life, he lives in a penthouse apartment and has a chaffeured limousin at his beck and call. He's grown rich from Stupid White Book Buyers who can't tell when they've been suckered.
Rating: 
Summary: The reasons the USA is turning into a 3rd world nation...
Review: with nuclear bombs. I lived in America two decades ago for 10 years before coming back to my country. Now I watch with horror the way USA is degenerating. Please, American people, you had such a great country. Don't let these thieves in high places (the Stupid White Men in the book) kill your great nation. Kick them out of the office in the next election and rebuild your nation. I'm rooting for the great USA I knew and loved. American soldiers are dying in Iraq right now to benefit the finance of those thieves. Iraqi people are dying to enrich the thieves. If this is not evil, I don't know what is.
Rating:
Summary: He is not a republican
Review: I love this book, because neither am I. If you are anywhere to the right side, you will hate this book. I do many things for shock value and enjoy slamming things in the face of others who just do not understand. Some of his writing seemed over the top, even to me! All in all, there is a lot of fact in this book loaded with an equal amount of humor. How well you like or dislike this book is a function of your political beliefs and your immaturity.
Rating: 
Summary: A Far Left Manifesto disguised as humor
Review: David Brock's "Blinded by the Right" is an "insider expose" of the Far Right, by their former "hatchet man," who was raised in a liberal family, but driven to the Far Right by the extremism of doctrinaire leftists. Joe Conason's "Big Lies" is a closely-reasoned deconstruction of the Far-Right strategy. Moore's "Stupid White Men," on the other hand, is a bitter diatribe by an avowed Leftist and unrepentant Nader-supporter who spouts nearly as much invective against Clinton and Gore as he does against Bush and Cheney, and is loaded with exactly the sort of Far-Left rhetoric that drove Brock into the hands of the Neocons, and generally made the very word "liberal" a pejorative term. In the book, Moore berates virtually the entire Democratic party for backing away from the immature "punish business" attitude that it once espoused, and that Moore apparently still does espouse, and he fails to see Nader's own inherent base selfishness. Bottom-line: If you want political discourse, go to Brock or Conason. If you want bitter political humor, go to George Carlin. Don't bother with this one.
| 
