Michael Moore loses it and attacks CNN

[Don Corleone]

No, I made an educated guess. So far nothing has belied my guess. It's all about that horrible slob with the five o 'clock shade and his antagonists Mr B. and Mr O', not about the subject of his movie (which I have seen).
So there, you young whippersnapper.

Actually, Dr. Gupta was making the point that Moore had made a good movie and he didn't need to resort to the hyperbole, exaggeration and unsupported assertions he engaged in. He's right. Moore is right, we have a big mess with our health care system. But why does it have to be black and white? Why is that Moore and others get to frame the discussion as "if you agree the US health care system isn't optimized, then you must agree to immediately enact full universal health care with complete government oversight"? And yes, that is the way he's framing the discussion. No discussion of in-between answers. Where's Germany and Italy or other countries that have achieved great results with something less than a complete government takeover?

[PanzerJaeger]

No, I made an educated guess. So far nothing has belied my guess. It's all about that horrible slob with the five o 'clock shade and his antagonists Mr B. and Mr O', not about the subject of his movie (which I have seen).
So there, you young whippersnapper.

I never said you weren't a good guesser.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

No, I made an educated guess. So far nothing has belied my guess.

If you bothered watching the clip it would.

So there, you young whippersnapper.

[Geoffrey S]

Nope, he agrees with what the clip shows: that the hyperbole damages the debate, and that people like Moore and O'Reilly aren't helping one bit. A good guess indeed.

[Adrian II]

Nope, he agrees with what the clip shows: that the hyperbole damages the debate, and that people like Moore and O'Reilly aren't helping one bit. A good guess indeed.

Yeah, the way in which so many political topics are narrowed down to personality clashes in today's mainstream media really annoys me. On the substance, the funny thing is I tend to agree (as a non-American outsider, let it be said) more or less with Michael Moore despite his whining and hypocrisy. And his movies are very well made, it has to be said. Whereas I disagree strongly with Al Gore because he is a demagogue who gets his facts wrong, not because he built a 200 gallon jacuzzi for his dog or whatever the indictment was. And by the way Gore's movie sucks horribly. Yikes, what a waste of time that was - if it hadn't been my job to cover it, I would have walked off after ten minutes and left Mr Gore (who was present at the Dutch premier) standing there.

[Goofball]

Cool, this thread has a little bit of everything in it: healthcare, conservatism, Reagan saving the economy, MM, Bill O'Idiot...

Just the kind of "sampler" thread I needed to get my feet wet again after being away for so long.

Thanks guys...

[Banquo's Ghost]

Just the kind of "sampler" thread I needed to get my feet wet again after being away for so long.

You've been missed. Welcome back.

[PanzerJaeger]

You've been missed. Welcome back.

Most definitely.

[Kommodus]

Meh. I read CNN's response to Michael Moore's attacks, and it looks like they were just quibbling about some details. CNN by-and-large agreed with Moore's chief points; they just criticized him for fudging a few facts (which didn't even have much bearing on his arguments anyway).

Having not seen SiCKO, I can't really comment on it - but with regard to the general notion of implementing public health care in the US, I think most Americans, on some level, would like to see it happen. The real question isn't if, but how - we want to see it done right.

For example, points commonly made against public health care include:

1. Cost in taxes

In countries with public health care, taxes are much higher than they are in the US, and many Americans don't like the idea of giving more of their money to the government. But remember that currently, our employers pay a lot for our health care coverage and would be able to increase wages if they didn't have to. The facts are clear: Americans currently pay much more per person than most for health care, one way or another.

2. Decrease in quality

Free-market competition is known to increase the quality of goods and services, and Americans are proud of their high-quality (if expensive) health care. I think that this concern is valid, but not overwhelming - many western countries with public health care retain high-quality service. I would be willing to accept a small decrease in quality if it meant my poorer friends and neighbors could get easy access to the life-saving treatments they need.

3. Increase in wait times

Americans hear some complaints coming from Canada concerning long wait times, sometimes in dire circumstances. This concern, however, is normally based on anecdotal evidence rather that statistics, and tends to be emotional in nature. Ultimately, this is not an argument against public health care, but against poorly administered health care - the important thing is to do it right, ensuring that wait times do not become excessive.

I know the issue is complex, and I'm certainly no expert, but I think that on this issue Michael Moore is largely correct. His methods may be offensive to some, but that shouldn't prevent us from addressing the issue logically.

[KafirChobee]

In 1948, Truman promised healthcare for all Americans on an ability to pay and that all would be covered. His do nothing Republican congress not only stopped it, but accused Truman of being a Commy (or Socialist sypathyser at best).

Since then the subject has been breached and rejected by congress and/or a preisdent a couple times. To compensate for the lack of balls by congress a few Prezs' have been inventive enough to exclude the "all" idea and concentrate on specific categories that congress couldn't denie aid to. Ergo, we got Medicare, Medicaid, and a few things for kids ('til Reagone - who considered ketchup a vegetable, and that poor kids shouldn't get a free breakfast or lunch. Then again, what would one expect from such a man? Ask me, and I will tell. Reagon's childhood was not idealic).

Historically as a nation the USA (the wealthy) always depended on the charity of its villages to take care of their less fortunate - and to some part they did. I recall a story from my maternal-grandmother how (during the great depression) she wrapped a hambone in newspaper and put in the garbage knowing an old couple would come down their alley and find it - she said they were all but in tears for finding it. They could make a soup.

Deal is, if a person is attacking Moore just to attack the ideas he suggest? What is their real purpose? Keep it the same as 1948?

[Lemur]

I'm just glad that El Presidente is protecting me from efficient systems that ensure health coverage for children. You can't object to this program's effectiveness, so we'll just have to kill it on ideological grounds.

[S-CHIP is] now aiming at encouraging more people to get on government health care. That’s what that is. It’s a way to encourage people to transfer from the private sector to government health care plans…. I strongly object to the government providing incentives for people to leave private medicine, private health care to the public sector. […]

I mean, think of it this way: They’re going to increase the number of folks eligible through S-CHIP; some want to lower the age for Medicare. And then all of a sudden, you begin to see a — I wouldn’t call it a plot, just a strategy — (laughter) — to get more people to be a part of a federalization of health care.

So, no new money for kids on S-CHIP. But we have some spare change to send to Pakistan's tribal areas. Aid, don't'cha know.

As irritating as I find Michael Moore, I hope his polemic inspires some sort of change in my country.

[Privateerkev]

While Moore is far from the perfect messenger for this particular message, I thought his movie was well done and thought provoking. And CNN had Gupta put out, what I thought was, a hit-piece. The cynic in me suspects it might have something to do with all of the Big-Pharma ads on CNN (I leave CNN on as background all day and Pharma ads seem to be the majority of commericials.)

As for health care, I think we are simply a better society if we make sure that everyone has access to high quality health care. Not only is it more humane in my opinion, it is actually cheaper in the long run. Even big business is turning on the health insurance industry and preparing to throw them under the bus.

[ajaxfetish]

This is still my favorite live criticism of CNN.

John Stewart on Crossfire

Ajax

[Privateerkev]

This is still my favorite live criticism of CNN.

John Stewart on Crossfire

Ajax

And they swear that had nothing to do with Tucker being fired and Crossfire being canceled.

[wammer]

I hate Michael Moore
I hate Wolf Blitzer
I hate O'reilly

But they do give out a lot of free hot air. Thats gotta mean something.

[Ronin]

This is still my favorite live criticism of CNN.

John Stewart on Crossfire

Ajax

I love that video...


talk about pwnage!

[Don Corleone]

While Moore is far from the perfect messenger for this particular message, I thought his movie was well done and thought provoking. And CNN had Gupta put out, what I thought was, a hit-piece. The cynic in me suspects it might have something to do with all of the Big-Pharma ads on CNN (I leave CNN on as background all day and Pharma ads seem to be the majority of commericials.)

As for health care, I think we are simply a better society if we make sure that everyone has access to high quality health care. Not only is it more humane in my opinion, it is actually cheaper in the long run. Even big business is turning on the health insurance industry and preparing to throw them under the bus.

How is "He's 90% right, and he's correct in the general sense that something needs to be done" a hit piece?

[Gregoshi]

I hate Michael Moore
I hate Wolf Blitzer
I hate O'reilly

But they do give out a lot of free hot air. Thats gotta mean something.

There's the real cause of global warming.