Something that Michael Moore either said or implied as a claim in the movie Farenheit 911 - Essay Example

MICHAEL MOORE Michael Moore is known for being one of America's most famous provocateurs and propagandists. His movies reach a broad audience and in them he makes powerful political arguments from the left-side of the spectrum. His blockbuster documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 is no different. This top-grossing film made millions at the box office while slinging mud at President George W. Bush for invading Iraq. A number of conspiracy theories are alleged in the film, which plays fast and loose with the truth.

It is no surprise that Moore is critical of Bush, a Republican. He is much easier on Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton, a left-leaning Democrat. One of the claims that Moore implies about Clinton is that Clinton was much more concerned about protecting the United States from terrorism than Bush was. Moore suggests that Bush was lazy and that Clinton was proactive. This is not true. President Bush worked diligently to protect national security, while President Clinton dallied with interns and used the tools of the American military might to distract from his own person problems.

President Clinton and President Bush were different men in many ways. It is true that Bush was born into a wealthy family and had an easy time growing up, where Clinton grew up without a father and had to struggle more. But the main difference between the men was not in their upbringing but in their discipline. Clinton gave into his every desire. He was easily distracted and easily indulged himself. Bush, who was formerly an alcoholic, turned away from indulgence in middle age. He stopped drinking, became religious, and make himself work very hard to succeed.

He woke early and exercised frequently. These were things Clinton rarely did. This approach was often seen in their style of government. Bush was focused and driven, where Clinton was dilettantish and distracted. He was seen by Bin Laden and Saddam as weak (Pender, 96). Michael Moore would have his viewers believe the opposite, but the historical record does not lie. Much has been written and argued about the warning signs that Osama Bin Laden planned to strike within the United States. In Moore's movie, Clinton is portrayed as being very concerned about this and it is suggested that Clinton tried to kill Bin Laden.

Clinton was always looking out for national security. Bush, on the contrary, spent most of his early presidency on vacation, according to Moore, ignoring signs that terrorism was threatening the United States in a serious way. This again is not true. Clinton had the opportunities to kill Bin Laden, but refused to use them effectively (Miniter, xx). At the time he was too distracted by his problems with Monica Lewinsky. What Moore doesn't tell his viewers about Clinton is that Clinton spent much of his late presidency embroiled in a controversy over his personal life.

He gave his enemies powerful ammunition to impeach him. Indeed, he perjured himself. The result was that instead of focusing on threats to national security during the last years of his presidency, Clinton was battling those in Congress who wanted to impeach him. These were distractions of his own making. It is hard for Moore to properly make the argument that Clinton was a responsible president without getting into the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's perjury. The truth is that Clinton was unable to properly get a handle on national security issues during this time.

After 9/11, Bush had a laser-like focus on terrorism. He saw that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the United States. Saddam had attacked American allies and was harbouring anti-American terrorists. If another attack was going to come, it would most likely come from Iraq. This is an issue that Clinton never face up to during his terms in office. He was always too concerned about what the world would say. He let Saddam rule Iraq during his whole term and kill and torture his own people. After 9/11, Bush said that enough was enough.

He remained focused on ridding the world of those who supported terrorism. If the United States hadn't become bogged down in Iraq, other terrorist-supporting nations would have been next in line following Iraq. The years covered by Michael Moore's documentary were difficult ones for the United States. Traumatic terrorist attacks reshaped the political landscape. But in a sense America was not living in a new era. Attacks had occurred during Clinton's presidency too, but he never took serious action against those responsible.

The difference between Clinton and Bush was the Bush was focused and disciplined. He refused to allow terrorist-supporting nations to thrive following 9/11. It is possible to take exception to some of his methods, but his intentions were always good. Moore is incorrect to besmirch these intentions. Work consulted Miniter, Richard. Losing Bin Laden: How Bill Clinton's Failures Unleashed Global Terror. Regnery Publishing, 2004. Fahrenheit 911. Dir. Michael Moore. Miramax, 2004. Pender, Sam. Saddam's Ties to Al Queda.

Virtualbookworm Publishing, 2005.