This is a country of free speech, so it doesn't offend me when Michael Moore opens his mouth. What offends me is when he tries to pass off some of his rantings as anything resembling the truth and then somehow manages to convince people that his feverish antics are documentary in nature. Put his Bowling for Columbine in as pretty a package as you like, but it's still a con job and like any good con, Moore confuses and unbalances his audience with just enough truth to keep them from looking behind the curtain.

Now, I want to state for the record that I would not be even a fraction as harsh toward Moore's trite little monstrosity if he had offered it up as his opinion rather than tried to paint it all up as fact. He calls it a "documentary," stretching the poor definition of the word well beyond the snapping point. Bowling for Columbine is about as much a documentary as This Is Spinal Tap.

The trouble, of course, is that by calling it a documentary, those poor, gullible souls who lack the initiative to think enough for themselves to actually research the truth behind Moore's claims will allow the film's falsehoods to shape what they believe.

You may be getting the feeling that I think Moore is a chump. And you'd be right. This isn't only because I disagree with a lot of what he says, but because he lacks the will to rest his position only on the facts. He twists and bends reality around to suit his argument. If the real situation doesn't support his claims, he ignores it. In the case of Bowling For Columbine, for example, if an NRA press conference doesn't conform to his expectations, he edits it until it does.

And it's not like he isn't bringing up some honest and insightful questions in the film. For instance, one of the key sequences involves Moore opening an account at a bank and receiving a free gun. Moore is shown going in, cash in hand, and walking out with a rifle. In the real world, this is not how it works. Instead, when you open your account you are given a voucher. You must then take this voucher to a gun store and go through the standard backround checks and waiting periods. Only when you have cleared are you given your gun. Moore would have you believe that the bank is simply handing out the weapons like toasters. The fact is that this entire sequence was staged. Moore's production company purchased the firearm well in advance and made arrangements with the bank to have them hand it to him when he opened the account (despite many protests that this was not bank policy). It's good film, they were assured.

Moore's claim is that his way makes for better filmmaking and is better at getting his point across. I disagree. Maybe it's just me, but I've always believed that the truth was the best way to make a point. Moore's "infotainment" approach only destroys his credibility, making him something of a Chicken Little.

Take this bank thing. I'm pro-gun and I don't have a problem admitting that a bank (a BANK?!) giving away guns is just a bit absurd. I don't know, maybe Moore simply doesn't think much of the intelligence of his audience and so he feels that the only way he can make a point is to fabricate, mislead and outright lie. Banks probably shouldn't give away guns and you would think that this would be a strong enough statement to make. Also, kids shouldn't be shooting up schools, but is Moore's blatant falsification of the National Rifle Association's reaction to it really going to get the message across?

Maybe I shouldn't direct my ire toward Moore. Maybe I should be thanking him. As long as he continues to employ deceit as his primary weapon, he only succeeds in further erroding many already crumbling liberal viewpoints. Really, it's those in favor of gun control who should be furious with him. They should be rallying for his silence. Frankly, Moore is the sort of team member who best helps the team by playing for the other side. (You think I'm kidding, but consider: Moore is a card carrying member of the NRA and is vocally in favor of the second ammendment.)

The unfortunate fallout from Moore's little fiasco came during the Academy Awards, when his work of fiction beat out some real, honest documentaries. It proved, beyond a shadow of any doubt, the political leanings of Hollywood and that art and truth are conveniently forgotten in favor of posturing and popularity. If we are going to set the definition of a documentary based upon Bowling for Columbine, then I propose we also give a belated Oscar in that category to This Is Spinal Tap and Oliver Stone's JFK.