Michael Moore and Sean Hannity may be polar opposites when it comes to their politics, but when it comes to speaking tactics, their differences melt away.
We?re glad that both men were allowed to speak. Though they differ in their political views, Moore and Hannity attempted to show us why their individual parties should win in November. However, after viewing the two political focal points in their element, we wonder how the voting body has been affected. After nearly four hours of political sermons and nearly $100,000, the question remains: How much have these two men actually changed anyone?s way of thinking?
We hope it caused people to question the political process; not denounce it or abstain from it, but realize election outcome is determined by individual people voting. While the Michael Moore Slacker Uprising Tour aimed to push young voters to the polls to vote for Sen. John Kerry, Hannity sought to convert liberals to conservatives.
After attending both performances, it?s as if the two men had the same speech coach in high school.
Both men are entertaining and witty and get visible joy out of jabbing their respective enemies. Both effectively pandered to their favorable audience members and jeered at their detractors. Both are charismatic, comedic and dramatic. That?s how they got to where they are today, through their impassioned sensationalism bordering on propaganda.
It?s easy to imagine both pundits standing before a pulpit in a country church delivering sermons of hellfire-and-brimstone. After all, Moore grew up in Catholic schools and spent a year studying in seminary, and Hannity is a devout Catholic. Rather than providing engaging, intellectually enlightening arguments, Hannity and Moore relied on cheap shots and sarcasm. Their messages were attacking and defensive rather than constructive and proactive.
Both men painted the mainstream media as a scapegoat for today?s political problems. Moore claims a right-wing bias; Hannity, a liberal bias. Moore accused the media of playing ?kissy face? with the Bush administration during events leading up to military action in Iraq. Hannity accused the media of concealing the truth from voters.
The atmosphere during both speeches was akin to a football pep rally, bordering on a frenzied chaos at times. Moore used props like Ramen noodles, packaged underwear, homemade Bush ads and even an appearance by Roseanne Barr to add glitz to an otherwise yawn-drawing diatribe.
Hannity used a Moore look-alike, members of the audience, and impersonations of John Kerry, Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy to supplement a lack of real substance to his speech. Hannity played clips of what he called Kerry ?flip-flopping? while Moore played clips of what he claimed was George Bush?s redundancy and lack of finesse during the recent presidential debates. This list goes on and on for both men.
Granted, many audience members knew what they were getting into when they attended Hannity and Moore?s speeches. They were consumers seeking a product: entertainment. Now we just hope everyone seeks a little more than 'entertainment' when they vote on Nov. 2. We're not choosing a pundit, we will be choosing the President of the United States.