I watched Bowling for Columbine yesterday. I can't believe this won the Oscar. The first half hour or so is very good, looking at guns, and then it veers into things like racism and fears in the late '70s (killer bees) that are completely unrelated. Yes, I get that with the killer bees, he's trying to show that Americans have a culture of fear, but the racism is hardly tied in at all. It sort of comes off as Bowling for a Smorgasbord of Things Liberals are Pissed Off About. And yeah, I'm a bleeding-heart myself, but I don't think Michael Moore causes anyone to change sides by making a movie where he throws in 20 disparate elements.

I also don't like the idea, regarding the killer bees and such, that just because it didn't happen, we shouldn't have been afraid of it. I don't like that idea in general; it's important to be prepared than to be caught off guard. Would we have been better off if the killer bees had come, so that we wouldn't have looked stupid? He talks about how there was never a razor in an apple, and says that in the last 40 years, only two kids have died from Halloween candy, and they were poisoned by relatives. Okay, fine, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be careful on a holiday that flies in the face of the most basic lesson we're taught as tots -- don't take candy from strangers. How many kids have been injured from Halloween pranks? Probably more than have died from them, but Michael Moore has no way of knowing.

The part in the movie about Welfare to Work is very good. But he could have done a whole movie about that. In fact, there are a lot of good points and moments in the movie that, with actual research and more examples from around the country, could have convinced people who were on the fence about changing things. Michael Moore's smartass, taunting actions (like going to people's private homes and offices and demanding to see them) aren't a substitute for the good research and examples he has at the beginning of the movie. They can too easily be picked apart. I admire him for having the courage to shock people, and some conditions in this country are so terrible that we need someone to shock us. But when he just comes off as a smartass or extremist, he is going to just start getting ignored.

Finally, part of the documentary shows how the network news reports so much violence. But doesn't a documentary on gun violence cause fear also? So, do we need good journalism or not?

Well, I didn't intend to ramble on about this for this long. I guess I would like to see him keep doing what he does. On the whole, we need Michael Moore more than we don't. I've seen episodes of his cable show, and they were very good. Anyway, he won an Oscar, so maybe I'm just whining.

On another note, I'm going to be on the radio at 3 or 4 a.m. Sunday morning being interviewed on WOR-AM about my books. I'm not sure exactly what time it will run, or if I will sound coherent, so don't wait up. I'm going to try to tape it.

On another note (2), last night at 3 a.m. I heard two girls who had just broken up with each other having a loud argument. The bars let out at 3 a.m., and that's when I always hear fights. One girl was outside the other one's car, shouting through the window. She wanted to know when she could come pick up her "shit," but she didn't trust her ex-girlfriend because of all her lies. "You owe me for a lifetime!" she yelled. They also argued over who had been calling whom too much. "You called me Tuesday, you called me Wednesday, and you text messaged me Wednesday," the one outside said.