Page 1 of 1 pages
Wow. I thought Sicko was an autobiography. . . :)
Posted by wolf on Jul 10, 2007 at 6:37 AM
Fuck you wolf, you motherfucking TROLL!!!!!!!!
I know you get your perverted jollies coming on to left-wing websites and make your insulting and disruptive comments. Go to the Free Republic or those loopy Ayn Rand websites, jackass.
Posted by lams712 on Jul 10, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Michael Moore (or ANY documentary filmmaker) does NOT have an obligation to be “balanced”. They do have an obligation to tell the truth. I would invite America’s Health Insurance Plans or PhRMA or any other front group to underwrite a documentary and provide their own slant on the truth regarding our healthcare system and see which one your average American relates to. I know which film my money would be on.
Posted by lams712 on Jul 10, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Michael Moore “obligated” to tell the truth?
Well, certainly if it is a documentary it must be true. I mean did Al Gore not stick to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in his documentary?
OK, the insurance companies and pharmas are screwing us
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 11, 2007 at 5:57 AM
Unless you are trying to be disruptive, why use a personal attack on Michael Moore?
Can you refute any of his assertions?
Have you anything to say about the technical or artistic values of the film?
If we who consider ourselves progressive spend our time attacking each other for what ever small minded reason, how do we expect to move forward?
Posted by mdruss42 on Jul 11, 2007 at 6:46 AM
Michael Moore starts conversations that need to be started, nationally.
Why fault him for making a profit? It allows him to keep starting new, important conversations.
I love Sicko. I have a lot of familiarity with the National Health in Britain.
Okay, it is not so perfect as is portrayed in the film, but it is so much better than what we have here. In the UK, one knows one will get outstanding medical attention for a serious problem without questions about ones ability to afford it. Prescriptions are affordable. Yes, sometimes the National Health does limit the availability of certain drugs, but then if there is an outcry, the National Health reconsiders. Right now there is upset about a new macular degeneration drug that National Health wanted to limit. Medical appointments with ones GP are 10 minutes, but if one knows there is something significant that needs discussion, one simply books a double appointment. Sometimes there are tests or treatments that National Health does not easily provide. One can always go private. I have found that there are numerous charities and health organizations through which one can get alternate treatments, quite reasonably priced. My husband, who is British and living in England, is currently undergoing a series of treatments not offered by National Health. I found a charity that offers the treatments at about $12 a visit.
We are the only developed nation that does not offer universal health care..We are the only developed nation where one can lose ones health insurance if one loses ones job or becomes self employed..some countries do have a public-private system…such as Australia, where one is covered under the public system, but one can buy extra private insurance for more upscale accomodations etc.
Why should a person have to live in terror that he might become ill? How conducive is it to healing to have the extra worry that ones health insurance company may deny some necessary treatment? There is the discussion that universal care will raise our taxes. I currently pay $700 a month for health insurance for me and I know that at least 30% of that is insurance company overhead ( how much of that cost is salaries for staff to deny care?). Spread among all of us, the taxes cannot be higher, and no one will be denied health care. We are all in this together. We need to reform the election process so Pharma cannot bribe Congress. We need to throw out the bums and bring in people who have our best interests at heart. Thank you Michael Moore for having made this film.
Posted by Southwind on Jul 11, 2007 at 10:11 AM
Yes whattheheck, any documentarian has an obligation to tell the truth. They may inject their own slant on the truth, but they are not allowed to outright lie or defame. I am willing to wait and see if Moore gets sued for any assertions made in his film but I bet he won’t because he did tell the truth (as did Al Gore).
Posted by lams712 on Jul 11, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Iams,
re: Obligation to tell the truth
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 12, 2007 at 8:32 AM
whattheheck,
In one film it is very difficult to address every nuance. Michael Moore gave a great overview.
The MRI machines in Britain are strategically placed around the country.
Your city of 150,000 having several machines does not mean those machines were fully utilized. Hospitals buy all the latest and greatest for competitive advantage and it raises costs astronomically. When all hospitals in a city work together to give you care, having one across town, is workable.
Yes, some Canadians do trickle down, but the great majority don’t. I understand the numbers are small and may indicate more a personality trait than actual immediate need. Universal health care is the most popular program in Canada. There are critics who want more funding and each province has some grumble with their specific funding, but find me any issue involving money and there will be people wanting more and more and more.
While I can’t speak to every single queue in England, most waiting lists are for non critical situations like having knee surgery or replacing a hip or getting cataracts dealt with…and the waits are not excessively long in most instances. Two years ago, here in the States, my sister was diagnosed with a brain tumor. She had to wait 8 weeks to start radiation because the machines were all booked up( and this is in a major American city)...and all the while, she was exhibiting worse symptoms. (By the way, she hasn’t died, but she is completely helpless).
Going private in England is an option. You say they have paid all their lives, well, what have we done…we have just done it through a profit making, capricious, cherry picking system that over medicates us, does very little in the way of prevention, and treats symptoms rather than underlying causes. Get real, our system sucks and we need to have a complete revolution in the way care is provided. Everyone deserves to be covered. We are all skin and contents and we should all get care according to our need.
Posted by Southwind on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:41 AM
Just as in the case of Moore’s other films (whether or not one chooses to label them documentaries as opposed to political pieces), there has been far more loud accusations than calm listing of any factual errors. I have not worked in the auto industry, political office or suburban high schools but I have retired out of the health care industry. When I saw the film, I felt at least minimally equipped to detect gross error. I didn’t find it that difficult to separate a factually based statistic from Moore’s opinion. If I am not mistaken, he has yet to be successfully sued for calumny, slander or the like. It may benefit the discussion to eschew ad hominem attacks and focus a bit more on the gist of what he is saying.
Posted by paulbulger on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:51 AM
WTH,
Your entire POV is succinctly encapsulated in the words “I see little hope…”
Why, then, do you even bother? Why don’t you just roll up into a little ball and die? What do you think is accomplished by spreading your dour message of hopelessness? If we were all to take your inestimable advice and give up all hope of making the world just a little better place and submitting ourselves and our progeny to whatever awful fate lies in store, what satisfaction could you possibly derive?
Or are you discretely advising violent revolution? That may yet happen, but historically only when conditions have deteriorated to the point they are universally intolerable.
Don’t you think it preferable that prescience and foresight brought into the discussion may have some utility in avoiding such severe consequences?
After all, those who are concerned with staying in their cushy jobs must inevitably respond if growing public pressure and consciousness begins to overwhelm their ability to influence opinion by means of distracting and disingenuous PR.
But then again, you seem to believe that public awareness represented by Moore’s distillation of facts we all know to be true should rightfully be canceled out by a presumptive balance of truthiness in what is objectively false and self-serving propaganda.
It is very difficult to make any sense of your reasoning process except to conclude it isn’t really very rational.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Hi, Y’all !
LB, darling, you are wasting you’re time. Right-wing thinking is a mental illness.
Unfortunately the right-wing hu-boons have learned a new trick: fling poo at those who criticize them. Don’t try to fix things, don’t do something that would be worthy of re-election, just fling poo and fawn to the handlers who got them elected or hired as Faux News commentator.
Michael Moore says the machine is broken? Blame him for poinitng that out!
I’ve watched all of his films except this new one( it’s on my to do list) and he never fails to make a valid criticism of what’s wrong. Yet, the right wishes to pick fly specks out of pepper and criticize him as being totally inaccurate.
Yes, he did re-arrange some of the events in Roger And Me, yet, that doesn’t negate his thesis.
Still, the right must always be that.
Let’s just hope they never get really ill.
Ta- Ta!
Posted by Aunty Rightwing on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:00 PM
LB,
I hadn’t thought I was giving advice
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 14, 2007 at 8:06 AM
WTH,
Sorry, I’m not feeling in much of a light-hearted mood over health care in this country.
It isn’t a ‘fun’ situation.
I’ll leave the satire to Michael Moore in this case. You want to be amused, see the movie.
Until you do, keep your opinion to yourself.
That’s my advice.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 14, 2007 at 9:32 PM
LB,
Last I heard opinions were still a part of free speech.
If you can’t stand the free exchange of different opinions perhaps you should just be content to live in the land of movies and make believe.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 15, 2007 at 5:35 AM
WTH,
Free speech also includes the right to call you on your bullshit.
Also to offer unsolicited free advice.
You’re free to take it or leave it.
Still, I think it’s a good idea to actually see a movie before presuming to characterize it.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 15, 2007 at 7:13 AM
LB,
I still think 150 years of data is too llittle to base this whole crisis on. That’s my opinion. Call it anything you choose.
We are obviously not going to agree. Why you think we should need to do so is your problem
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 15, 2007 at 9:16 AM
WTH,
“I really don’t care.”
Another epitomization of your opinion. Exactly what I’ve been saying all along.
What makes you believe I am stressed out by your bullshit? Is laughter your idea of stressing out?
Why do you think calling you on your bullshit is ‘(over)reaction’?
How many thousands of years of data on health care do you believe is necessary to make a decision? (We have 400,000+ years of reliable data on CO2 and global temperature. We also have direct empirical observation and multiple source corroboration of causal linkages, not just statistical correlations. Is that enough? If not, why? Please answer on the appropriate thread. Scorpy needs your help. He’s floundering badly. Let us not get side-tracked on this one. I’m sure you don’t mean to be throwing out red herrings, or do you?)
If you have a heart attack, do you expect to be on an ECG machine for a period longer than your lifespan for your doctor to make a diagnosis?
What utter bullshit! Get yourself a brainscan. I think you might be suffering from alzheimer’s.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 15, 2007 at 10:08 AM
LB,
Are you deliberatly being obtuse?
When I said I don’t care it was in reference to the two of us agreeing.
A. You can think what you will nd I will think otherwise. OK?
B. Even if we were to agree it would not influence the outcome.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 16, 2007 at 6:19 AM
WTH,
“When I said I don’t care it was in reference to the two of us agreeing.”
Oh, really? Like my questioning of your comparison of weather and climate predictability was somehow an hysterical (over)reaction to your comment on Y2K?
In this case, my (admitted) cherry-picking is intended to make a valid point. You obviously care only about muddying the waters, certainly not in engaging in reasonable and principled debate.
Much less what we, as citizens living in a purported democracy, can do to improve our health care system. If one assumes, a priori, that nothing can be done, one ensures only that nothing will be done.
Whether we agree or not, not allowing your bullshit to stand might have some small influence in allowing others to avoid falling into similar mendacious traps.
“No man is an island.”
——John Donne
“For want of a nail, the shoe was lost…”
——Ben Franklin
I hope you don’t find these quotes too ‘obtuse’.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 16, 2007 at 7:01 AM
These detractors would have you believe Moore is the devil for pointing out the problem.
nazario,
I put Moore and Gore in the same class as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 18, 2007 at 5:38 AM
“I put Moore and Gore in the same class as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh
Posted by wolf on Jul 18, 2007 at 7:57 AM
nazario,
Spot on analysis of WTH and wolfgang.
Wolfgang, your ‘intellectual’ prowess, being as mediocre as it is, does not inspire me with great confidence. I don’t think the left is in much need of your help. The very fact that you make assertions (argumentum ad nauseum) without the slightest hint of a rational argument supported by any evidence whatsoever is quite substantial proof that you have all the scholarly skill of a lump of dogshit.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 18, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Wolf,
I guess you don
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 19, 2007 at 7:48 AM
wth - There used to be a saying “Feminists have no sense of humor”. I think it applies to many (certainly not all) of the leftists who frequent this site. I typically do not respond to posters who make very little sense or to posters who quickly become overtly hostile. Why bother? It just riles them up and inspires them to post rants or attacks. Which really benefits no one (well, unless it serves as some sort of cathartic release for them).
On the other hand, i have had some very nice “conversations” with people here, both those who think very differently from me and those of a similar mind.
I rarely watch TV news, but do occasionally watch the BBC international news. I get the rest from a local paper and the internet.
Back to the topic of this thread, i saw an interesting article that asserted that Sicko was really a comparison of the worst of the US health care system to the best of the other systems it was being compared against. A very cogent analysis.
Posted by wolf on Jul 19, 2007 at 9:15 AM
fahrenheit 9/11 is top grossing documentry of all time. Has anybody who put down this film apologize for being wrong. As it turns out everything moore said or predicted was right on the money.
Bush and the neo-cons could not sue moore for slander or anything else, because it was true. So what did the neo-cons do, was put down the messenger, don’t go and see this movie, he is a left wing libral extremist, nut case. Swift boat this bastard.
That is why 2 out of 5 people still think iraq took out the twin towers, and had wmd’s, if you as president say it enought times on tv people will believe it is true.
Sicko is another example for the right wing to put down another moore movie, they won’t even go and see it.
Neo-cons will find so many ways to knit pick the shit out of this or any moore movie, so the message of fixing health care will be lost.
Too many people getting rich off the system we have now, why would they want to change it.
Posted by brian28 on Jul 19, 2007 at 10:25 AM
brian28 - Yeah, Moore has become a real money making machine. Making leftist propaganda films has been good to him. Give the people what they want and all that. . .
In any case, i do agree that the US health care system can be improved. However, any fix to the system must NOT make working/middle class health care suffer. After all, we are the ones who actually support such things through our labors. And for many of us, the system is working fairly well.
For an interesting review of this “documentary” see: http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563758/story.jhtml
(Excerpted from the above review:
A 52-year-old woman in Calgary recalls being in severe need of joint-replacement surgery after the cartilage in her knee wore out. She was put on a wait list and wound up waiting 16 months for the surgery. Her pain was so excruciating, she says, that she was prescribed large doses of Oxycontin, and soon became addicted. After finally getting her operation, she was put on another wait list — this time for drug rehab.
...
Fidel Castro’s island dictatorship, now in its 40th year of being listed as a human-rights violator by Amnesty International, is here depicted as a balmy paradise not unlike the Iraq of Saddam Hussein that Moore showed us in his earlier film, “Fahrenheit 9/11.”)
Another interesting review: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/28/AR2007062802280.html
(The really sad thing is that some people think either Israel or the US took out the twin towers. Talk about crazy!)
Posted by wolf on Jul 19, 2007 at 10:58 AM
brian,
You are so right. WTH and wolf are getting their critical input solely from the right-wing nit-pickers, with out even seeing the movie on which they are making judgment.
WTH seems to think that his ad infinitum strawman and categorically false assertion about all politicians being always untrustworthy and totally out for themselves, and the rather trivial observation that mainstream corporate news outlets are somewhat less than objective nor comprehensively informative is unimpeachable evidence that we as thinking beings must be entirely incapable of discerning fact from propaganda. If I don’t accept his poor reasoning as transcendent wisdom I am unbalanced and immoderate.
Funny guy.
Wolfgang, too, makes such logical boners in his attempts to counter reason that the unintentional irony of his assertions, besides their obvious risibility, clearly reveals his own lack of analytical capability. The dig about ‘feminists’ (what a strawman fallacy that is!) having no sense of humor is shatteringly belied by the fact that Moore is a sublime humorist. It is telling they presume to believe that just because Moore’s ouevre is not one of balancing one point of view against another with the assumption that they are both equally errant, but that of the satirical polemic, revealing at once the absurdity of received conventional wisdom and presenting a reasonable and proven, if less than perfect, solution to the burden of human suffering such cleaving to the given order creates, Moore’s POV is therefore automatically deserving of presumptive dismissal. I reiterate, without even having seen the movie.
Just hysterical.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 19, 2007 at 11:24 AM
wolf,—- ann coulter, orielly, hannity, write books for the right wing propaganda neo-cons and make millions of dollars doing it, I don’t see wolf nit-picking the shit out of their books.
Give the people what they want, you have been drinking to much orielly kool-aid.
Posted by brian28 on Jul 19, 2007 at 1:53 PM
brian28 writes: “ann coulter, orielly, hannity, write books for the right wing propaganda neo-cons and make millions of dollars doing it, I don
Posted by wolf on Jul 19, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Wolf,
I
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 20, 2007 at 6:28 AM
wth - it appears that any criticism of Moore (peace be upon him) on this website is tantamount to walking into a mosque and declaring that Mohammad was not really right about lots of stuff. . . But at least (as far as i know, anyway) no fatwa has been issued for our deaths. :)
Posted by wolf on Jul 20, 2007 at 8:38 AM
WTH,
Medicare is a good example of congressional action brought about by public pressure. Did you think it fell from the sky?
I admit that I exaggerated your statement on congressmen by omitting your substanceless qualifier. What difference does it make? The conclusion you imply is that ‘all is hopeless, why even try’, no matter how one parses it.
As to global warming, I appreciate that you admit there might be a problem. From the gist of your arguments I got the impression you were saying that there was no need to address the problem because there was substantial doubt that there was a problem. Or rather, the uncertainty of the future in the general case being sufficient reason to dismiss the relative certainty of future extrapolation in this particular case.
The most reasonable response to a problem cannot begin to be addressed until the problem is recognized to be a problem. Making snarky attacks from a position of ignorance on those who are trying to confront the reality of said problem seems to me entirely unproductive. As I said, mere muddying of the waters. Whether we can expect congress to make an immediate and perfect response to a problem is quite beside the point unless the people (that’s you and me) can get on the same page about the nature of the problem. That’s democracy.
It seems we are making progress. Can you make the next step?
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 20, 2007 at 8:46 AM
wolfie,
It is interesting that you cite an anomalous anecdote about excessive wait times for specialized elective surgeries in Canadian hospitals from a right-wing source as support for your assertion that Moore gives a slanted and one-sided presentation of the facts in his movie.
However, the truth is that Moore does address the problem of long wait times in developed nations with universal health care. To wit:
<blockquote> SiCKO: Canadian “wait times” not nearly as long as some try to allege.
* According to Statistics Canada, the official government statistical agency, “In 2005, the median waiting time was about 4 weeks for specialist visits, 4 weeks for non-emergency surgery, and 3 weeks for diagnostic tests. Nationally, median waiting times remained stable between 2003 and 2005 - but there were some differences at the provincial level for selected specialized services.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 20, 2007 at 10:13 AM
wolfie,
Don’t you think that if Mr. Loder was really interested in balance and objectivity he might have mentioned that Amnesty International cites Cuba 3190 times in its archives and the United States 7670 times?
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 20, 2007 at 11:00 AM
LB,
Since you only took issue with the last comment, I guess we agree on the reast of my comments
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 21, 2007 at 8:57 AM
WTH,
A false assumption. Though congress may have been responsible for the transgressions you impute in recent history, it does not follow that it always has or always will be the case. It seems you are falling into that error of inductive reasoning of which you erroneously and with profound ignorance of the scientific knowledge and methodology assign to climatologists.
See the movie and maybe you will find that you are not so much in disagreement with Moore as you would like to believe.
Or maybe not, but then at least your opinions will be based on evidence and not ignorance.
At the least, you may actually learn something. I was myself greatly impressed by the perceptions of the round table of Americans living in France, and just the visual information from the scenes from Cuba, particularly inside the Havana hospital.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 21, 2007 at 12:47 PM
What’s the matter with you people? An artist always presents information and events from his or her own point of view. You have to take everything written, printed, filmed, recorded with a grain of salt—none of it is “true” in any absolute sense. In fact, we live in a society that is complicated by the duality of truth. Everything is both true and a lie, depending on how you look at it. Moore is the greatest propagandist since Goebels but that doesn’t mean he isn’t telling a great deal of the truth. To believe otherwise, you’d have to be living under a rock. We all know (don’t we?) that health care in this country is both good a bad, expensive and cheap, depending on who you are. All Moore is saying is, “Take a look at this system and tell me we can’t improve it, possibly by adopting ideas from other parts of the world.” In other words, he’s TRYING TO MAKE YOU THINK! Here’s the real question prompted by this website and others like it: does thinking about difficult issues need to involve name calling and denigration of others? Why can’t Americans simply have open conversations anymore, without imitating CROSSFIRE (now defunct)? Our lives would be improved immeasurably if people simply exchanged their ideas and worked to understand where others are coming from. Please leave the deep cynicism at home or in the office where it belongs. You’re not a Progressive anything if you don’t show respect.
Posted by babyface on Jul 21, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Babyface,
You make some good points. We should be able to exchange ideas.
I am basically in agreement with Moore that the system needs improvement and that insurance companies are a large part of the problem. But I believe Moore is accomplishing very little since those of us for whom health care is a problem have little influence with those who could do something.
IMO (as stated earlier) Moore’s exaggerations and one-sided presentation is counter productive to producing change.
The problem between Luminous Beauty and me is one of experience versus faith
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 22, 2007 at 5:51 AM
WTH,
Faith vs. experience?
Hardly. I’d put it more like principled reason in service of humanity and the greater world as opposed to personal and self-referent opinion. You don’t think my experience hasn’t brought my share of loss, disappointment, betrayal, frustration, the end of hopes and dreams, heartbreak and pain? You are an idiot for making that assumption.
Why do you think spreading your antagonist opinion on a Progressive site gives you some right to have that opinion left uncontested?
It is sad that your experience has led you to such a cynical pass. It is a shame that your experience hasn’t brought you the spiritual strength to rise above your own private suffering. It is perverse that you feel the need to undermine those who do seek to keep open the possibilities of a better world.
I’m not attacking you as a person, but the poverty of your ideas.
Get over yourself.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 22, 2007 at 7:28 AM
P.S.
See the fucking movie. Until you do, your opinion of Moore’s presentation being worthless is just ignorant opinion. Of less worth than a stinking pile of pigshit.
I don’t believe you even read this article, beyond scanning the headline.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 22, 2007 at 7:44 AM
LB,
Wow! Talk about intolerance!
My expectations of the likelihood of congress doing anything worthwhile still stand. I expect little from them other than more of what we’ve already seen. And in many cases or issues I think we’re better off without their meddling.
If you choose to be a Pollyanna or to have a conniption over my views
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 22, 2007 at 2:33 PM
WTH,
What? I’m supposed to tolerate your sniveling bullshit? Please!
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Your concern over congress is a red herring. A dissembling distraction from the topic at hand.
Be a nihilist if you wish, but don’t expect to find adulation or respect.
See the fucking movie. Coward!
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 22, 2007 at 5:10 PM
LB,
By
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 23, 2007 at 6:12 AM
wth - just out of curiosity, why do you even bother responding to LB? While he makes claims of being so very enlightened, at the same time he reacts in much the way a spoiled child might (his last few posts being excellent examples).
I am sure that LB is a fine person, but his, um,*style* of communication makes it so very difficult to discuss anything meaningful with him (unless you happen to be in complete agreement, in which case he undoubtedly would imagine you to be very intelligent and perceptive).
Posted by wolf on Jul 23, 2007 at 8:46 AM
Realism is seeking to identify and implement a practical solution to a real and pressing problem, no matter how intractable it may appear on it’s face. Saying, a priori, it is useless to even contemplate solutions because the opposition is too powerful and Congress too corrupt is nihilism.
I don’t think the confusion is on my side.
My ‘vision’ is seeking to making life in this country a little better by advocating single-payer universal health insurance. Your ‘opinion’ seems to be throwing poo at anyone who would dare make an effort.
If you actually had a competing and divergent idea, I might find it deserving of respect, but all you are doing is attacking the messenger without bothering in the slightest to hear the message.
See the movie.
If you do see it, I think you will find that your opinion and Moore’s are not as divergent as you think. You might even gain some new insight into the issue.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 23, 2007 at 9:08 AM
Correction: ...following “divergent ideas.”
We’ve moved on to:
• Whether congress is competent
etc.
——————————————————————-
Wolf,
I must admit to just killing time here. I’ve said all I have to about the film and Moore in the first couple of posts. I guess I am just toying with LB as I might with a kitten. (At age19 our cat is not playful anymore.)
It is also an experiment to see if LB really ever even reads what is in opposition to his views. On another thread I recently explained that I was able to get another excitable character to reply in multiple postings (4 x 4000 words or 16,000 words ‚ my record). When I said LB was no fun anymore I thought that would be the end of the game — not so.
Since I’m still getting replies it seems apparent there has been little care given to what anyone really writes. Too busy composing the next rant, I suppose.
I often told my advertising clients that subtlety in the headlines or text of their ads was wasted on many in their audience. The current style, especially in TV ads is probably a waste of the ad budget, since it is often difficult to tell just what they are trying to sell.
While the shouting cars salesman is repulsive, there is a middle ground approach. Get their attention — give the salient facts and benefits — and let them decide. If LB really wants to influence my thinking the method being used is the very worst. Rule Number One: Never piss off your audience.
I think everyone else has had their say. It is encouraging to see that many, while presenting differing views, are at least still civil in any objections.
Maybe this one will get through the diatribe.
:-)
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 23, 2007 at 9:16 AM
wolf,
Say something meaningful and we’ll see how it goes. Ad hominum seem about the limit of your capabilities.
Have you seen the movie, yet? If you do, you may discover just how completely wrong your poorly informed characterizations of it are.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 23, 2007 at 9:17 AM
WTH,
Cut the smug self-congratulation and see the movie.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 23, 2007 at 9:22 AM
WTH, wolf,
The opening sentences of the article we are presumably discussing are:
“The health care industry is having palpitations over Sicko. “I don’t think Michael Moore set out to make a balanced movie,” said Karen Ignagni, president of the trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans, regurgitating the industry’s key talking point. But truth is not always found in the balanced middle.”
Please tell me how either of you are not just regurgitating that same key talking point?
What meaningful response have you made to the idea behind the high-lighted theme?
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 23, 2007 at 9:42 AM
WTH,
You want to diverge from a discussion of Moore’s movie and it’s examination of other nations’ universal health-care systems in comparison to the private insurance scam in this country and instead whine about how your Congressman is not responsive to your opinion, how I am disrespectful and insulting of your opinion, how incompetent Congress is; any non-sequitor distraction from the primary subject.
That is what is meant by ‘red-herring’.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jul 23, 2007 at 10:05 AM
LB,
The subject was exhausted long ago.
I’m sure your congressman would enjoy hearing from you.
You could borrow from the old SNL show and slightly modify, “Jane, you ignorant slut…”
I’m sure he’ll guess who it’s from.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 23, 2007 at 5:02 PM
When hilary makes president and more seats are won by democrates in the house and the senate, then you will see progress. Now the neo-cons block all bills being passed. If they are not blocked by neo-cons the president will veto them and there is noway to over ride the veto,so hang in there people help is on it’s way. Jan. 2009 we can get out of the mess bush-ites have put us in. People who voted for bush must live with your mistakes.
With bush approval rate so low nation wide people finally have come to their senses, to bad it took so long.
Posted by brian28 on Jul 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM
I don’t get what’s so hard about Universal Health Care. It’s so desparately needed. Pass it already. It’s a classic no brainer move.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Jul 25, 2007 at 6:40 AM
cabdriverinchicago,
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 29, 2007 at 5:57 AM
cabie, sorry I had to leave
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 30, 2007 at 6:20 AM
Heh heh. Guess LB misses Mike so much he decided to take over his role here. Pale comparison, to be sure, but still it seems Mike was such an excellent example of the futility of resorting to insults in debate it was out there as a constant reminder to the rest of us.
This said, the quality of the discussion has definitely improved. I figure Mike must be dead if he didn
Posted by recursive prophet on Aug 2, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Dozens of advanced countries with better average living standards for workers than ours and comparable rates of GDP growth also have universal health care as a given with no negative effects of any kind whatsoever!! Our current system is so filled with waste, financial delinquency, CEO extravagence, and instability anyhow that we might just as well go to a new system. There is little to lose and much to gain. Our current system already gives out tons of free medical care and sliding scale based services and medications. I am a diabetic with high average daily bloodsugars well over 200. My dangerous situation will get me free or cheap insulin and medical attention through Cook County Hospital.
Our current system is inhumane and wasteful. Let’s have reform now. It is possible to do. Only big corporate profits stand in the way of progress on this particular issue.
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Wow. I thought Sicko was an autobiography. . . :)
Fuck you wolf, you motherfucking TROLL!!!!!!!!
I know you get your perverted jollies coming on to left-wing websites and make your insulting and disruptive comments. Go to the Free Republic or those loopy Ayn Rand websites, jackass.
Michael Moore (or ANY documentary filmmaker) does NOT have an obligation to be “balanced”. They do have an obligation to tell the truth. I would invite America’s Health Insurance Plans or PhRMA or any other front group to underwrite a documentary and provide their own slant on the truth regarding our healthcare system and see which one your average American relates to. I know which film my money would be on.
Michael Moore “obligated” to tell the truth?
Well, certainly if it is a documentary it must be true. I mean did Al Gore not stick to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in his documentary?
OK, the insurance companies and pharmas are screwing us
Unless you are trying to be disruptive, why use a personal attack on Michael Moore?
Can you refute any of his assertions?
Have you anything to say about the technical or artistic values of the film?
If we who consider ourselves progressive spend our time attacking each other for what ever small minded reason, how do we expect to move forward?
Michael Moore starts conversations that need to be started, nationally.
Why fault him for making a profit? It allows him to keep starting new, important conversations.
I love Sicko. I have a lot of familiarity with the National Health in Britain.
Okay, it is not so perfect as is portrayed in the film, but it is so much better than what we have here. In the UK, one knows one will get outstanding medical attention for a serious problem without questions about ones ability to afford it. Prescriptions are affordable. Yes, sometimes the National Health does limit the availability of certain drugs, but then if there is an outcry, the National Health reconsiders. Right now there is upset about a new macular degeneration drug that National Health wanted to limit. Medical appointments with ones GP are 10 minutes, but if one knows there is something significant that needs discussion, one simply books a double appointment. Sometimes there are tests or treatments that National Health does not easily provide. One can always go private. I have found that there are numerous charities and health organizations through which one can get alternate treatments, quite reasonably priced. My husband, who is British and living in England, is currently undergoing a series of treatments not offered by National Health. I found a charity that offers the treatments at about $12 a visit.
We are the only developed nation that does not offer universal health care..We are the only developed nation where one can lose ones health insurance if one loses ones job or becomes self employed..some countries do have a public-private system…such as Australia, where one is covered under the public system, but one can buy extra private insurance for more upscale accomodations etc.
Why should a person have to live in terror that he might become ill? How conducive is it to healing to have the extra worry that ones health insurance company may deny some necessary treatment? There is the discussion that universal care will raise our taxes. I currently pay $700 a month for health insurance for me and I know that at least 30% of that is insurance company overhead ( how much of that cost is salaries for staff to deny care?). Spread among all of us, the taxes cannot be higher, and no one will be denied health care. We are all in this together. We need to reform the election process so Pharma cannot bribe Congress. We need to throw out the bums and bring in people who have our best interests at heart. Thank you Michael Moore for having made this film.
Yes whattheheck, any documentarian has an obligation to tell the truth. They may inject their own slant on the truth, but they are not allowed to outright lie or defame. I am willing to wait and see if Moore gets sued for any assertions made in his film but I bet he won’t because he did tell the truth (as did Al Gore).
Iams,
re: Obligation to tell the truth
whattheheck,
In one film it is very difficult to address every nuance. Michael Moore gave a great overview.
The MRI machines in Britain are strategically placed around the country.
Your city of 150,000 having several machines does not mean those machines were fully utilized. Hospitals buy all the latest and greatest for competitive advantage and it raises costs astronomically. When all hospitals in a city work together to give you care, having one across town, is workable.
Yes, some Canadians do trickle down, but the great majority don’t. I understand the numbers are small and may indicate more a personality trait than actual immediate need. Universal health care is the most popular program in Canada. There are critics who want more funding and each province has some grumble with their specific funding, but find me any issue involving money and there will be people wanting more and more and more.
While I can’t speak to every single queue in England, most waiting lists are for non critical situations like having knee surgery or replacing a hip or getting cataracts dealt with…and the waits are not excessively long in most instances. Two years ago, here in the States, my sister was diagnosed with a brain tumor. She had to wait 8 weeks to start radiation because the machines were all booked up( and this is in a major American city)...and all the while, she was exhibiting worse symptoms. (By the way, she hasn’t died, but she is completely helpless).
Going private in England is an option. You say they have paid all their lives, well, what have we done…we have just done it through a profit making, capricious, cherry picking system that over medicates us, does very little in the way of prevention, and treats symptoms rather than underlying causes. Get real, our system sucks and we need to have a complete revolution in the way care is provided. Everyone deserves to be covered. We are all skin and contents and we should all get care according to our need.
Just as in the case of Moore’s other films (whether or not one chooses to label them documentaries as opposed to political pieces), there has been far more loud accusations than calm listing of any factual errors. I have not worked in the auto industry, political office or suburban high schools but I have retired out of the health care industry. When I saw the film, I felt at least minimally equipped to detect gross error. I didn’t find it that difficult to separate a factually based statistic from Moore’s opinion. If I am not mistaken, he has yet to be successfully sued for calumny, slander or the like. It may benefit the discussion to eschew ad hominem attacks and focus a bit more on the gist of what he is saying.
WTH,
Your entire POV is succinctly encapsulated in the words “I see little hope…”
Why, then, do you even bother? Why don’t you just roll up into a little ball and die? What do you think is accomplished by spreading your dour message of hopelessness? If we were all to take your inestimable advice and give up all hope of making the world just a little better place and submitting ourselves and our progeny to whatever awful fate lies in store, what satisfaction could you possibly derive?
Or are you discretely advising violent revolution? That may yet happen, but historically only when conditions have deteriorated to the point they are universally intolerable.
Don’t you think it preferable that prescience and foresight brought into the discussion may have some utility in avoiding such severe consequences?
After all, those who are concerned with staying in their cushy jobs must inevitably respond if growing public pressure and consciousness begins to overwhelm their ability to influence opinion by means of distracting and disingenuous PR.
But then again, you seem to believe that public awareness represented by Moore’s distillation of facts we all know to be true should rightfully be canceled out by a presumptive balance of truthiness in what is objectively false and self-serving propaganda.
It is very difficult to make any sense of your reasoning process except to conclude it isn’t really very rational.
Hi, Y’all !
LB, darling, you are wasting you’re time. Right-wing thinking is a mental illness.
Unfortunately the right-wing hu-boons have learned a new trick: fling poo at those who criticize them. Don’t try to fix things, don’t do something that would be worthy of re-election, just fling poo and fawn to the handlers who got them elected or hired as Faux News commentator.
Michael Moore says the machine is broken? Blame him for poinitng that out!
I’ve watched all of his films except this new one( it’s on my to do list) and he never fails to make a valid criticism of what’s wrong. Yet, the right wishes to pick fly specks out of pepper and criticize him as being totally inaccurate.
Yes, he did re-arrange some of the events in Roger And Me, yet, that doesn’t negate his thesis.
Still, the right must always be that.
Let’s just hope they never get really ill.
Ta- Ta!
LB,
I hadn’t thought I was giving advice
WTH,
Sorry, I’m not feeling in much of a light-hearted mood over health care in this country.
It isn’t a ‘fun’ situation.
I’ll leave the satire to Michael Moore in this case. You want to be amused, see the movie.
Until you do, keep your opinion to yourself.
That’s my advice.
LB,
Last I heard opinions were still a part of free speech.
If you can’t stand the free exchange of different opinions perhaps you should just be content to live in the land of movies and make believe.
WTH,
Free speech also includes the right to call you on your bullshit.
Also to offer unsolicited free advice.
You’re free to take it or leave it.
Still, I think it’s a good idea to actually see a movie before presuming to characterize it.
LB,
I still think 150 years of data is too llittle to base this whole crisis on. That’s my opinion. Call it anything you choose.
We are obviously not going to agree. Why you think we should need to do so is your problem
WTH,
“I really don’t care.”
Another epitomization of your opinion. Exactly what I’ve been saying all along.
What makes you believe I am stressed out by your bullshit? Is laughter your idea of stressing out?
Why do you think calling you on your bullshit is ‘(over)reaction’?
How many thousands of years of data on health care do you believe is necessary to make a decision? (We have 400,000+ years of reliable data on CO2 and global temperature. We also have direct empirical observation and multiple source corroboration of causal linkages, not just statistical correlations. Is that enough? If not, why? Please answer on the appropriate thread. Scorpy needs your help. He’s floundering badly. Let us not get side-tracked on this one. I’m sure you don’t mean to be throwing out red herrings, or do you?)
If you have a heart attack, do you expect to be on an ECG machine for a period longer than your lifespan for your doctor to make a diagnosis?
What utter bullshit! Get yourself a brainscan. I think you might be suffering from alzheimer’s.
LB,
Are you deliberatly being obtuse?
When I said I don’t care it was in reference to the two of us agreeing.
A. You can think what you will nd I will think otherwise. OK?
B. Even if we were to agree it would not influence the outcome.
WTH,
“When I said I don’t care it was in reference to the two of us agreeing.”
Oh, really? Like my questioning of your comparison of weather and climate predictability was somehow an hysterical (over)reaction to your comment on Y2K?
In this case, my (admitted) cherry-picking is intended to make a valid point. You obviously care only about muddying the waters, certainly not in engaging in reasonable and principled debate.
Much less what we, as citizens living in a purported democracy, can do to improve our health care system. If one assumes, a priori, that nothing can be done, one ensures only that nothing will be done.
Whether we agree or not, not allowing your bullshit to stand might have some small influence in allowing others to avoid falling into similar mendacious traps.
“No man is an island.”
——John Donne
“For want of a nail, the shoe was lost…”
——Ben Franklin
I hope you don’t find these quotes too ‘obtuse’.
These detractors would have you believe Moore is the devil for pointing out the problem.
nazario,
I put Moore and Gore in the same class as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh
“I put Moore and Gore in the same class as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh
nazario,
Spot on analysis of WTH and wolfgang.
Wolfgang, your ‘intellectual’ prowess, being as mediocre as it is, does not inspire me with great confidence. I don’t think the left is in much need of your help. The very fact that you make assertions (argumentum ad nauseum) without the slightest hint of a rational argument supported by any evidence whatsoever is quite substantial proof that you have all the scholarly skill of a lump of dogshit.
Wolf,
I guess you don
wth - There used to be a saying “Feminists have no sense of humor”. I think it applies to many (certainly not all) of the leftists who frequent this site. I typically do not respond to posters who make very little sense or to posters who quickly become overtly hostile. Why bother? It just riles them up and inspires them to post rants or attacks. Which really benefits no one (well, unless it serves as some sort of cathartic release for them).
On the other hand, i have had some very nice “conversations” with people here, both those who think very differently from me and those of a similar mind.
I rarely watch TV news, but do occasionally watch the BBC international news. I get the rest from a local paper and the internet.
Back to the topic of this thread, i saw an interesting article that asserted that Sicko was really a comparison of the worst of the US health care system to the best of the other systems it was being compared against. A very cogent analysis.
fahrenheit 9/11 is top grossing documentry of all time. Has anybody who put down this film apologize for being wrong. As it turns out everything moore said or predicted was right on the money.
Bush and the neo-cons could not sue moore for slander or anything else, because it was true. So what did the neo-cons do, was put down the messenger, don’t go and see this movie, he is a left wing libral extremist, nut case. Swift boat this bastard.
That is why 2 out of 5 people still think iraq took out the twin towers, and had wmd’s, if you as president say it enought times on tv people will believe it is true.
Sicko is another example for the right wing to put down another moore movie, they won’t even go and see it.
Neo-cons will find so many ways to knit pick the shit out of this or any moore movie, so the message of fixing health care will be lost.
Too many people getting rich off the system we have now, why would they want to change it.
brian28 - Yeah, Moore has become a real money making machine. Making leftist propaganda films has been good to him. Give the people what they want and all that. . .
In any case, i do agree that the US health care system can be improved. However, any fix to the system must NOT make working/middle class health care suffer. After all, we are the ones who actually support such things through our labors. And for many of us, the system is working fairly well.
For an interesting review of this “documentary” see: http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563758/story.jhtml
(Excerpted from the above review:
A 52-year-old woman in Calgary recalls being in severe need of joint-replacement surgery after the cartilage in her knee wore out. She was put on a wait list and wound up waiting 16 months for the surgery. Her pain was so excruciating, she says, that she was prescribed large doses of Oxycontin, and soon became addicted. After finally getting her operation, she was put on another wait list — this time for drug rehab.
...
Fidel Castro’s island dictatorship, now in its 40th year of being listed as a human-rights violator by Amnesty International, is here depicted as a balmy paradise not unlike the Iraq of Saddam Hussein that Moore showed us in his earlier film, “Fahrenheit 9/11.”)
Another interesting review: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/28/AR2007062802280.html
(The really sad thing is that some people think either Israel or the US took out the twin towers. Talk about crazy!)
brian,
You are so right. WTH and wolf are getting their critical input solely from the right-wing nit-pickers, with out even seeing the movie on which they are making judgment.
WTH seems to think that his ad infinitum strawman and categorically false assertion about all politicians being always untrustworthy and totally out for themselves, and the rather trivial observation that mainstream corporate news outlets are somewhat less than objective nor comprehensively informative is unimpeachable evidence that we as thinking beings must be entirely incapable of discerning fact from propaganda. If I don’t accept his poor reasoning as transcendent wisdom I am unbalanced and immoderate.
Funny guy.
Wolfgang, too, makes such logical boners in his attempts to counter reason that the unintentional irony of his assertions, besides their obvious risibility, clearly reveals his own lack of analytical capability. The dig about ‘feminists’ (what a strawman fallacy that is!) having no sense of humor is shatteringly belied by the fact that Moore is a sublime humorist. It is telling they presume to believe that just because Moore’s ouevre is not one of balancing one point of view against another with the assumption that they are both equally errant, but that of the satirical polemic, revealing at once the absurdity of received conventional wisdom and presenting a reasonable and proven, if less than perfect, solution to the burden of human suffering such cleaving to the given order creates, Moore’s POV is therefore automatically deserving of presumptive dismissal. I reiterate, without even having seen the movie.
Just hysterical.
wolf,—- ann coulter, orielly, hannity, write books for the right wing propaganda neo-cons and make millions of dollars doing it, I don’t see wolf nit-picking the shit out of their books.
Give the people what they want, you have been drinking to much orielly kool-aid.
brian28 writes: “ann coulter, orielly, hannity, write books for the right wing propaganda neo-cons and make millions of dollars doing it, I don
Wolf,
I
wth - it appears that any criticism of Moore (peace be upon him) on this website is tantamount to walking into a mosque and declaring that Mohammad was not really right about lots of stuff. . . But at least (as far as i know, anyway) no fatwa has been issued for our deaths. :)
WTH,
Medicare is a good example of congressional action brought about by public pressure. Did you think it fell from the sky?
I admit that I exaggerated your statement on congressmen by omitting your substanceless qualifier. What difference does it make? The conclusion you imply is that ‘all is hopeless, why even try’, no matter how one parses it.
As to global warming, I appreciate that you admit there might be a problem. From the gist of your arguments I got the impression you were saying that there was no need to address the problem because there was substantial doubt that there was a problem. Or rather, the uncertainty of the future in the general case being sufficient reason to dismiss the relative certainty of future extrapolation in this particular case.
The most reasonable response to a problem cannot begin to be addressed until the problem is recognized to be a problem. Making snarky attacks from a position of ignorance on those who are trying to confront the reality of said problem seems to me entirely unproductive. As I said, mere muddying of the waters. Whether we can expect congress to make an immediate and perfect response to a problem is quite beside the point unless the people (that’s you and me) can get on the same page about the nature of the problem. That’s democracy.
It seems we are making progress. Can you make the next step?
wolfie,
It is interesting that you cite an anomalous anecdote about excessive wait times for specialized elective surgeries in Canadian hospitals from a right-wing source as support for your assertion that Moore gives a slanted and one-sided presentation of the facts in his movie.
However, the truth is that Moore does address the problem of long wait times in developed nations with universal health care. To wit:
<blockquote> SiCKO: Canadian “wait times” not nearly as long as some try to allege.
* According to Statistics Canada, the official government statistical agency, “In 2005, the median waiting time was about 4 weeks for specialist visits, 4 weeks for non-emergency surgery, and 3 weeks for diagnostic tests. Nationally, median waiting times remained stable between 2003 and 2005 - but there were some differences at the provincial level for selected specialized services.
LB,
wolfie,
Don’t you think that if Mr. Loder was really interested in balance and objectivity he might have mentioned that Amnesty International cites Cuba 3190 times in its archives and the United States 7670 times?
“Moore
LB,
Since you only took issue with the last comment, I guess we agree on the reast of my comments
WTH,
A false assumption. Though congress may have been responsible for the transgressions you impute in recent history, it does not follow that it always has or always will be the case. It seems you are falling into that error of inductive reasoning of which you erroneously and with profound ignorance of the scientific knowledge and methodology assign to climatologists.
See the movie and maybe you will find that you are not so much in disagreement with Moore as you would like to believe.
Or maybe not, but then at least your opinions will be based on evidence and not ignorance.
At the least, you may actually learn something. I was myself greatly impressed by the perceptions of the round table of Americans living in France, and just the visual information from the scenes from Cuba, particularly inside the Havana hospital.
What’s the matter with you people? An artist always presents information and events from his or her own point of view. You have to take everything written, printed, filmed, recorded with a grain of salt—none of it is “true” in any absolute sense. In fact, we live in a society that is complicated by the duality of truth. Everything is both true and a lie, depending on how you look at it. Moore is the greatest propagandist since Goebels but that doesn’t mean he isn’t telling a great deal of the truth. To believe otherwise, you’d have to be living under a rock. We all know (don’t we?) that health care in this country is both good a bad, expensive and cheap, depending on who you are. All Moore is saying is, “Take a look at this system and tell me we can’t improve it, possibly by adopting ideas from other parts of the world.” In other words, he’s TRYING TO MAKE YOU THINK! Here’s the real question prompted by this website and others like it: does thinking about difficult issues need to involve name calling and denigration of others? Why can’t Americans simply have open conversations anymore, without imitating CROSSFIRE (now defunct)? Our lives would be improved immeasurably if people simply exchanged their ideas and worked to understand where others are coming from. Please leave the deep cynicism at home or in the office where it belongs. You’re not a Progressive anything if you don’t show respect.
Babyface,
You make some good points. We should be able to exchange ideas.
I am basically in agreement with Moore that the system needs improvement and that insurance companies are a large part of the problem. But I believe Moore is accomplishing very little since those of us for whom health care is a problem have little influence with those who could do something.
IMO (as stated earlier) Moore’s exaggerations and one-sided presentation is counter productive to producing change.
The problem between Luminous Beauty and me is one of experience versus faith
WTH,
Faith vs. experience?
Hardly. I’d put it more like principled reason in service of humanity and the greater world as opposed to personal and self-referent opinion. You don’t think my experience hasn’t brought my share of loss, disappointment, betrayal, frustration, the end of hopes and dreams, heartbreak and pain? You are an idiot for making that assumption.
Why do you think spreading your antagonist opinion on a Progressive site gives you some right to have that opinion left uncontested?
It is sad that your experience has led you to such a cynical pass. It is a shame that your experience hasn’t brought you the spiritual strength to rise above your own private suffering. It is perverse that you feel the need to undermine those who do seek to keep open the possibilities of a better world.
I’m not attacking you as a person, but the poverty of your ideas.
Get over yourself.
P.S.
See the fucking movie. Until you do, your opinion of Moore’s presentation being worthless is just ignorant opinion. Of less worth than a stinking pile of pigshit.
I don’t believe you even read this article, beyond scanning the headline.
LB,
Wow! Talk about intolerance!
My expectations of the likelihood of congress doing anything worthwhile still stand. I expect little from them other than more of what we’ve already seen. And in many cases or issues I think we’re better off without their meddling.
If you choose to be a Pollyanna or to have a conniption over my views
WTH,
What? I’m supposed to tolerate your sniveling bullshit? Please!
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Your concern over congress is a red herring. A dissembling distraction from the topic at hand.
Be a nihilist if you wish, but don’t expect to find adulation or respect.
See the fucking movie. Coward!
LB,
By
wth - just out of curiosity, why do you even bother responding to LB? While he makes claims of being so very enlightened, at the same time he reacts in much the way a spoiled child might (his last few posts being excellent examples).
I am sure that LB is a fine person, but his, um,*style* of communication makes it so very difficult to discuss anything meaningful with him (unless you happen to be in complete agreement, in which case he undoubtedly would imagine you to be very intelligent and perceptive).
Realism is seeking to identify and implement a practical solution to a real and pressing problem, no matter how intractable it may appear on it’s face. Saying, a priori, it is useless to even contemplate solutions because the opposition is too powerful and Congress too corrupt is nihilism.
I don’t think the confusion is on my side.
My ‘vision’ is seeking to making life in this country a little better by advocating single-payer universal health insurance. Your ‘opinion’ seems to be throwing poo at anyone who would dare make an effort.
If you actually had a competing and divergent idea, I might find it deserving of respect, but all you are doing is attacking the messenger without bothering in the slightest to hear the message.
See the movie.
If you do see it, I think you will find that your opinion and Moore’s are not as divergent as you think. You might even gain some new insight into the issue.
Correction: ...following “divergent ideas.”
We’ve moved on to:
• Whether congress is competent
etc.
——————————————————————-
Wolf,
I must admit to just killing time here. I’ve said all I have to about the film and Moore in the first couple of posts. I guess I am just toying with LB as I might with a kitten. (At age19 our cat is not playful anymore.)
It is also an experiment to see if LB really ever even reads what is in opposition to his views. On another thread I recently explained that I was able to get another excitable character to reply in multiple postings (4 x 4000 words or 16,000 words ‚ my record). When I said LB was no fun anymore I thought that would be the end of the game — not so.
Since I’m still getting replies it seems apparent there has been little care given to what anyone really writes. Too busy composing the next rant, I suppose.
I often told my advertising clients that subtlety in the headlines or text of their ads was wasted on many in their audience. The current style, especially in TV ads is probably a waste of the ad budget, since it is often difficult to tell just what they are trying to sell.
While the shouting cars salesman is repulsive, there is a middle ground approach. Get their attention — give the salient facts and benefits — and let them decide. If LB really wants to influence my thinking the method being used is the very worst. Rule Number One: Never piss off your audience.
I think everyone else has had their say. It is encouraging to see that many, while presenting differing views, are at least still civil in any objections.
Maybe this one will get through the diatribe.
:-)
wolf,
Say something meaningful and we’ll see how it goes. Ad hominum seem about the limit of your capabilities.
Have you seen the movie, yet? If you do, you may discover just how completely wrong your poorly informed characterizations of it are.
WTH,
Cut the smug self-congratulation and see the movie.
WTH, wolf,
The opening sentences of the article we are presumably discussing are:
“The health care industry is having palpitations over Sicko. “I don’t think Michael Moore set out to make a balanced movie,” said Karen Ignagni, president of the trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans, regurgitating the industry’s key talking point. But truth is not always found in the balanced middle.”
Please tell me how either of you are not just regurgitating that same key talking point?
What meaningful response have you made to the idea behind the high-lighted theme?
WTH,
You want to diverge from a discussion of Moore’s movie and it’s examination of other nations’ universal health-care systems in comparison to the private insurance scam in this country and instead whine about how your Congressman is not responsive to your opinion, how I am disrespectful and insulting of your opinion, how incompetent Congress is; any non-sequitor distraction from the primary subject.
That is what is meant by ‘red-herring’.
LB,
The subject was exhausted long ago.
I’m sure your congressman would enjoy hearing from you.
You could borrow from the old SNL show and slightly modify, “Jane, you ignorant slut…”
I’m sure he’ll guess who it’s from.
WTH,
See the movie.
When hilary makes president and more seats are won by democrates in the house and the senate, then you will see progress. Now the neo-cons block all bills being passed. If they are not blocked by neo-cons the president will veto them and there is noway to over ride the veto,so hang in there people help is on it’s way. Jan. 2009 we can get out of the mess bush-ites have put us in. People who voted for bush must live with your mistakes.
With bush approval rate so low nation wide people finally have come to their senses, to bad it took so long.
I don’t get what’s so hard about Universal Health Care. It’s so desparately needed. Pass it already. It’s a classic no brainer move.
cabdriverinchicago,
cabie, sorry I had to leave
Heh heh. Guess LB misses Mike so much he decided to take over his role here. Pale comparison, to be sure, but still it seems Mike was such an excellent example of the futility of resorting to insults in debate it was out there as a constant reminder to the rest of us.
This said, the quality of the discussion has definitely improved. I figure Mike must be dead if he didn
Dozens of advanced countries with better average living standards for workers than ours and comparable rates of GDP growth also have universal health care as a given with no negative effects of any kind whatsoever!! Our current system is so filled with waste, financial delinquency, CEO extravagence, and instability anyhow that we might just as well go to a new system. There is little to lose and much to gain. Our current system already gives out tons of free medical care and sliding scale based services and medications. I am a diabetic with high average daily bloodsugars well over 200. My dangerous situation will get me free or cheap insulin and medical attention through Cook County Hospital.
Our current system is inhumane and wasteful. Let’s have reform now. It is possible to do. Only big corporate profits stand in the way of progress on this particular issue.
register a new account »Posting Security