As the nominees for best documentary were announced at the Oscars this past Sunday, I remember rooting for Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine to bring it home. Following Moore’s acceptance speech, I remember rooting for someone in the audience to throw something at him. Inevitably, someone at the Academy Awards was going to say something regarding the war in Iraq. Several did, most notably best actor winner Adrien Brody’s heartfelt wishes for a swift resolution and the safe return of our American troops. But on a night where the glamour of the Academy Awards was already dimmed by conflict overseas, Moore’s comments cast further shadows over the ceremony.
In case you weren’t one of the 30 million viewers who caught Sunday’s telecast, Moore chose to use his acceptance speech as a political podium to declare George W. Bush a “fictitious president,” and “a man who is sending us to war for fictitious reasons.” Despite Moore’s later declaration that there were merely five loud people responsible for jeering, to my ears it sounded like the chorus of boos that accompanied Michael Moore offstage came from a much larger segment of the audience. I have to hand it to the man, being too liberal for Hollywood is an accomplishment indeed.
Moore’s comments were the most widely reported in the press amongst the anti-war faction in Hollywood, and he is by far not alone in his opposition. Several other celebrities, such as George Clooney, the Dixie Chicks, Sheryl Crow and Ed Harris have gone on record stating their pacifist leanings, especially while on foreign soil. I respect their rights as private citizens to express their Constitutional right to free speech, but I have to wonder how much of what is being said comes from people who are truly against military action in Iraq from a humanistic viewpoint, and what is simply the latest manifestation of celebrity ego qualifying them to provide their unique insights on affairs of state.
The fact is, almost all of these individuals, Moore included, who are now claiming pacifism never raised their voices during the Clinton administration’s involvement in Serbia–another country that seemingly poses no threat to the United States. Unlike the anti-war movement on this campus, which I believe comes from a genuine concern for our fellow man, Hollywood’s campaign seems to further the interests of those who demonstrate opposition. In other words, being anti-war is trendy and a good career move.
By claiming we are at war for fictitious reasons, Moore undermines what the men and women of the Armed Forces are doing: protecting his freedom to publicly embarrass himself. His comments were tasteless, appalling and un-American to the core. I respect those that are against the war and would like to believe that those who are for it convey these sentiments respectfully, by being fully aware that these actions taken to ensure our safety come at a steep cost–the lives of our troops.
To provide a reminder, just look around each Wednesday and notice how many of your classmates wear an Air Force or Navy uniform. Then, imagine that seat vacant because he or she has been called into active duty in Iraq. The last thing I would want for that poor individual is for them to read a newspaper from back home and assume that the general public has written them off as aggressors in a bogus war because of comments like Moore’s.
After recent reports of American POWs being showcased on Iraqi television, the last word I would use to describe any aspect of war is “fictitious.” Some of those people were shown dead, and things simply don’t get any more realistic than that.
