Even if everything you say about Moore and the movie is true, I still can't get past my irritation at the invective hurled at Moore by the same people who give Rush, Laura, Ann, O'Reilly, and Savage a free pass. If the conservatives get a free pass by the Moore bashers -- No! Wait! They get better than a free pass: Rush has had Cheney and Wolfowitz on his show, when they would never talk to Moore -- why can't Moore get a free pass based on the same standards of truth telling and propaganda mongering? Sheesh. If I may answer my own rhetorical question, the answer is because Moore really is good -- maybe even an artist! Even if he comes out with work only once every couple of years, this is somehow more dangerous than the 24/7 lying and propaganda of the conservative pundit onslaught put together.

-- Matt Burr

I have seen Mike's movies and for the most part he is very liberal with his interpretation of facts. Some he just assumes. Mostly I think it's just a big, dumb, fat white guy getting rich off the backs of whoever is the best vehicle. Your article that puts him in the company of Dickens, Springsteen? At least they had a salable talent. Whether you agree with his politics or not, the quality of Moore's movies is B-movie crap. Maybe his next will be "The Fat, Stupid White Guy Who Screwed Us All ... for Money."

-- Jim Milam

I take issue with Stephanie Zacharek's claim that "the issues at stake are too serious for a spotlight-hungry manipulator like Moore to be mucking around with." What gives Zacharek the right to decide who can comment on important issues?

The precise reason that people defend Moore as a much-needed liberal voice is that he speaks for and to working-class people. While he may not approach issues with the level of analytical rigor, intellectual nuance or artistic sophistication necessary to impress Zacharek, he can at least be counted on to provide an accessible and critical take on American government policy, even when better educated and more cerebral liberals are content to sit on their hands quietly.

Moore was born in working-class Flint, Mich., has no college education and, to my knowledge, has no formal training in film. If he is a "faux populist," what exactly does it take to be a real populist? Moore is and continues to be a valuable voice because the liberal intelligentsia in America has abandoned and ignored the left wing's populist base. His filmmaking does not negate the more powerful work done by Jehane Noujaim in "Control Room," nor does it undermine more rigorous left-wing journalism or scholarship. If anything, Moore inspires more interest in such work, and for that, he deserves our respect.

-- Tim McIntyre

Recent Stories