Hey Amy!
Something happened to your post. When you see it on the blog page it is the Hitchen's debate. When you click on comments it is the Friedman thing. Both are great by the way. Just thought you would like know.

Thanks. It seems to be working now. Maybe your browser is defaulting or something?

Michael Moore: Once a pompous, sanctimonious, windbag simpleton, always a pompous, sanctimonious, windbag simpleton.

Yes, that's what a self-avowed liberal feminist looks (and sounds)like.

Meh.

Moore said:
"I'm a supporter of abortion, so I don't believe that all human life is sacred."

How telling is that? Both admitting that humans are being killed, and that they are being held as less important than others in one breath. Bet the troops weren't happy that was let out.

"Bet the troops weren't happy that was let out."

I'm okay with it.

Kid got owned, sure... but I really doubt that was Moore. Here's what he looked like in the '70s: http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-06-20-moore_x.htm

He's a "young Michael Moore" inasmuch as he calls to mind his namesake...

I think Friedman missed one existential fact: Ford and other companies DON'T publish how 'less' safe cars are (at least as far as I know). They list safety features these days, sure, but how am I supposed to quantify that? Are ten airbags safer than five? A rubber bumper better than steel? It's kind of the diet problem we all run into with Paleo vs SAD. We're *told* what is good for us, and how do we know any better without trying something new? That's a lot easier to do with food than a car.

Interesting how he did spin the question around though. I got where the young kid was headed, he just didn't voice it clearly enough.

Chris wrote:

'I think Friedman missed one existential fact: Ford and other companies DON'T publish how 'less' safe cars are (at least as far as I know). '

Well, then, you're not paying attention.

Ford and all the other major makers make big play of safety testing results, both government-mandated and independent (eg IIHS). You don't have to try and subjectively quantify the relative safety of cars offered for sale - objective test data is freely available for you to make those comparisons.

llater,

llamas

I've always heard that was Moore - it would be somewhat less interesting to see him get spanked and then go right along with his career of deception.

(I wasn't a fan, then I found out that while filming "Roger and Me", that he in fact, interviewed Roger Smith twice on camera.)

Exactly. It's about the numbers.

The government's (arbitrary) CAFE standards and fuel-milage requirements cause far more people to be killed than ever died due to a gas-tank rupture in the Pinto. Where's the outrage over that?

Oh, well, see, it's more important that we "reduce our oil use" than you know, save lives. When it's the government mandating it, rather than a company making a cost/benefit analysis.

You know, the DeLorean was a pretty safe car.

The kid came in with a list of talking points and Friedman didn't play along with him. You could see the kid was ill-prepared for an actual debate whereas Friedman was well-prepared. At one point the kid was reduced to simply repeating his talking points ad nauseum.

Which is a shame, because the kid could have come up with some halfway decent rebuttals to Friedman's points if he'd paid attention and actually prepared himself.

And in doing so, he would have learned a great deal both about his own positions and about debating issues with well-educated experts.

If this was Michael Moore, he seems to have learned little from the experience. He still clings to talking points and responds to anyone trying to have an actual debate by endlessly repeating the talking points.

michael moore is an asshoile, and anybody that pays money to see anything he produces is an idiot

"michael moore is an asshoile, and anybody that pays money to see anything he produces is an idiot"

Staggering in its brilliant simplicity. With this formula I can now reduce any argument to "Fuck you, I say so" and win!

Sigh... there was a time when Moore could have chosen a different, more worthwhile path. I recall one time, back when Moore was doing his clips for 60 Minutes, that he was going around Detroit challenging various car company execs to change the oil in a car. One of the guys he challenged was Lee Iacocca, who said "Okay". They got a car, took it to garage somewhere, and Iacocca got underneath the car and changed the oil while Moore filmed it. Moore was actually quite impressed, and he said so on camera.

Nowdays, Moore is stuck, both in his own mind and politically/financially, with the Marxist Left. He cannot change his mind or even question it without losing all credibility with the people who pay his way for him. And so now, like a good little Party minion, he does whatever his masters tell him to. He is caught in a trap of his own design.

And with your car it would be so easy.
step 1: remove lug nuts.
step 2: bend at the knees and lift up the car...

"Here's what he looked like in the '70s: http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-06-20-moore_x.htm"

Turns out "Young Michael Moore" actually looks more like Young Paula Poundstone. But yeah, he's certainly Michael Moore-like. You can tell he wasn't expecting Milton Friedman to be able to respond. The guy didn't even flinch.

My (blonde, leggy) sister recently sent a text to my dad with a picture of her blown out tire on the side of the highway and a good samaritan putting the spare on. It said "Thank you for teaching me how to change a tire. And thank you for the genes that meant I never have to do it myself."

Towards the end of the video around 5:15 or so, Milton sums up the gist of Moore's argument that day but ironically also describes Moore's future well-known style:

"What I am trying to say to you is that these things are a little bit more suble and sophisticated than you are first lead to believe. There are no easy answers along this line. Your way of putting things doesn't get at the fundamental principles involved."