What's the difference. The damage is done. The publicity the media gave this crackpot was unprecedented. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Actually I think that 1) Moore's film was a clear case of "preaching to the choir" and 2) the string of stories debunking his assertions are having the exact OPPOSITE affect that Moore intended, that is to get "swing" voters to vote against Bush.
Despite the box office numbers very VERY few people have seen this movie. It took in 21 Million. At 8 bucks a pop that's only 2.6 million people or less than 10% of the population. I guarantee the majority of those people weren't going to vote for Bush to begin with.
The swing voters who didn't see the movie heard the hype pre-release and are now seeing the post-release stories calling the movie a load of crap. Many won't even bother to go and see it and if they do they will have the follow up stories to gauge what they are seeing.
In a couple of months the movie will be forgotten. The next time we hear about it will be during Oscar time next year.
That is the modus operandi of the left. Float out anything to shapes public opinion and when the truth comes out, it always appears defensive and weaker than the original claim.
The demoncratic candidates have used this process (Bush Knew, Bush should have known, Bush lied, Bush is a dry drunk, conservatism is a mental illness) you name it they have floated it.
You can fool some of the people all of the time and unfortunately there is no voter competency measurement to screen out the fools.
What damage? The only people who saw this crap were extreme left-wing wackos. Even ordinary liberals and Democrats stayed away.
These people aren't going to see this movie 4 or 5 times like teen girls did to Titanic. This movie is already tanking and will get blown away by Spiderman 2.