Via Andrew Sullivan, this Drudge report on an exchange between Michael Moore and Bill O'Reilly. Generally I think O'Reilly comes off well, but he totally flubs the answer to Moore's first question to him. Moore asks "would [you] sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah?" and asserts "it's Bush sending the children there [Iraq]." What O'Reilly fails to call him on, and what others haven't called Moore on when he has made the same assertion in times past, is that no one is sending children to Iraq. Bush is sending adults to Iraq, adults who made a conscious decision to join the military knowing that they might be put in harm's way.
The question "would you sacrifice your child?" is a false one. No parent makes that choice. Parents educate their children to have certain values: honor, love of country, self-sacrifice. The adults those children become decide how to honor those values. Many people choose to pursue risky, selfless professions: soldier, police officer, aid worker, fire fighter. Ask any one of their parents "under what circumstances would you sacrifice your child?" and the answer will be "none." A parent's first instinct is to protect. Moore isn't interested in getting a reasoned answer - any reasoned attempt to answer would come across as callous - he is just interested in asking a question that can only make his target look hypocritical. That is the tactic of a propagandist, not a documentarian.
Posted by awm at July 28, 2004 06:52 PM