Moore has appeared regularly on television lately and said many times publicly with no appologies that he would like to see George Bush defeated in the upcoming election and hopes that this film contributes to that defeat. (Personally I'm not sure who I'm voting for but I don't like people trying to manipulate me this way.)

As for professional historians, not only do they have the perspective of time, often decades or centuries to distance themselves from the emotions of the moment, but if they are worth anything at all, they do extensive research reading private correspondence, diaries, listening to what others who have researched the subject have to say, and put all of the facts in context. Yes sometimes they disagree but as more and more time elapses and the events lose their current edge in the haze of antiquity, they are seen though entirely different eyes. It is amazing how few Republicans now would dream of repealing Social Security or Medicare (although they might like to tinker with them) when just a few decades ago, they denounced them as Socialism. There are very few people left anymore who feel that somehow the United States could have stayed out of World War Two or get worked up over World War One or Prohibition or the Civil War. At the time, these were all hot button issues. The time between then and now distances us from those events and even the most extreme differences that still exist among historians are orders of magnitude less than they were at the time. The facts in most of them are generally accepted, the interpretations may differ. But the discussion is usually scholarly, not passionate. That's what separates historians from pundits and we shouldn't confuse the two. I'm sure most professional historians and even amateur historians would agree.