Michael Moore Destroys Wolf Blitzer Live On CNN!

Posted by Pile (44835 views) Add this story to MyYahoo Add this article to del.icio.us Submit article to Reddit Add story to Furl Add story to StumbleUpon [E-Mail link]

[News Media]
It's been three years since Michael Moore appeared on CNN, and he took full advantage of appearing LIVE in front of Wolf Blitzer to respond to the network's hit piece on his movie "Sicko" and call out CNN for their irresponsible journalism on the Iraq war and more. This is one clip you must see.

First, here's the hit piece on "Sicko" done by CNN leading up to Michael Moore's ass-kicking (Conveniently removed from Youtube - here's another version):

Now the main course..

Michael Moore's counter from his web site:

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN: "(Moore says) the United States slipped to number 37 in the world's health care systems. It's true. ... Moore brings a group of patients, including 9/11 workers, to Cuba and marvels at their free treatment and quality of care. But hold on - that WHO list puts Cuba's health care system even lower than the United States, coming in at #39."


* "But hold on?" 'SiCKO' clearly shows the WHO list, with the United States at number #37, and Cuba at #39. Right up on the screen in big five-foot letters. It's even in the trailer! CNN should have its reporter see his eye doctor. The movie isn't hiding from this fact. Just the opposite.
* The fact that the healthcare system in an impoverished nation crippled by our decades-old blockade (including medical supplies and drugs) ranks so closely to ours is more an indictment of the American system than the Cuban system.
* Although Cuba ranks lower overall than the United States, it still has a lower infant mortality rate and longer life span. (see below)
* And unlike the United States, Cuba offers healthcare to absolutely everyone. In an independent Gallup poll conducted in Cuba, "a near unanimous 96 percent of respondents say that health care in Cuba is accessible to everyone." ("Cubans Show Little Satisfaction with Opportunities and Individual Freedom Rare Independent Survey Finds Large Majorities Are Still Proud of Island's Health Care and Education," January 10, 2007.

CNN: "Moore asserts that the American health care system spends $7,000 per person on health. Cuba spends $25 dollars per person. Not true. But not too far off. The United States spends $6,096 per person, versus $229 per person in Cuba."


* According to our own government – the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Expenditures Projections – the United States will spend $7,092 per capita on health in 2006 and $7,498 in 2007. (Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/proj2006.pdf)
* As for Cuba – Dr. Gupta and CNN need to watch 'SiCKO' first before commenting on it. 'SiCKO' says Cuba spends $251 per person on health care, not $25, as Gupta reports. And the BBC reports that Cuba's per capita health expenditure is… $251! (Keeping Cuba Healthy, BBC, Aug. 1 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/5232628.stm ) This is confirmed by the United Nations Human Development Report, 2006. Yup, Cuba spends $251 per person on health care. (http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html). As Gupta points out, the World Health Organization does calculate Cuba's per capita health expenditure at $229 per person. We chose to use the UN numbers, a minor difference - and $229 is a lot closer to $251 than $25.

CNN: In fact, Americans live just a little bit longer than Cubans on average.


* Just the opposite. The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report's human development index states the life expectancy in the United States is 77.5 years. It is 77.6 years in Cuba. (Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme, 2006 at 283. http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR06-complete.pdf)

CNN: The United States ranks highest in patient satisfaction.


* True, but even when the WHO took patient satisfaction into account in its comprehensive review of the world's health systems, we still came in at #37. ("World Health Organization Assesses The World's Health Systems," Press Release, WHO/44, June 21, 2000. http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2000/en/pr2000-44.html ).
* Patients may be satisfied in America, but not everyone gets to be a patient. 47 million are uninsured and are rarely patients - until it's too late. In the rest of the Western world, everyone and anyone can be a patient because everyone is covered. (And don't face exclusions for pre-existing conditions, co-pays, deductibles, and costly monthly premiums).
* It's not that other countries are unhappy with their health care – for example, "70 to 80 percent of Canadians find their waiting times acceptable." ("Access to health care services in Canada, Waiting times for specialized services (January to December 2005)," Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/82-575-XIE/82-575-XIE2006002.htm )

CNN: Americans have shorter wait times than everyone but Germans when seeking non-emergency elective procedures, like hip replacement, cataract surgery, or knee repair.


* This isn't the whole truth. CNN pulled out a statistic about elective procedures. Of the six countries surveyed in that study (United States, Canada, New Zealand, UK, Germany, Australia) only Canada had longer waiting times than America for sick adults waiting to schedule a doctor's appointment for a medical problem. 81% of patients in New Zealand got a same or next-day appointment for a non-routine visit, 71% in Britain, 69% in Germany, 66% in Australia, 47% in the U.S., and 36% in Canada. (The Doc's in, but It'll be AWhile. Catherine Arnst, Business Week. June 22, 2007 http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2007/
* "Gerard Anderson, a Johns Hopkins health policy professor who has spent his career examining the world's healthcare, said there are delays, but not as many as conservatives state. In Canada, the United Kingdom and France, 'three percent of hospital discharges had delays in treatment,' Anderson told The Miami Herald. 'That's a relatively small number, and they're all elective surgeries, such as hip and knee replacement.' (John Dorschner, "'SiCKO' film is set to spark debate; Reformers are gearing up for 'Sicko,' the first major movie to examine America's often maligned healthcare system," Miami Herald, June 29, 2007.)
* One way America is able to achieve decent waiting times is that it leaves 47 million people out of the health care system entirely, unlike any other Western country. When you remove 47 million people from the line, your wait should be shorter. So why is the U.S. second to last in wait times?
* And there are even more Americans who keep themselves out of the system because of cost - in the United States, 24 percent of the population did not get medical care due to cost. That number is 5 percent in Canada, and 3 percent in the UK. (Inequities in Health Care: A Five-Country Survey. Robert Blendon et al, Health Affairs. Exhibit 5. http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/21/3/182)

CNN: (PAUL KECKLEY-Deloitte Health Care Analyst): "The concept that care is free in France, in Canada, in Cuba - and it's not. Those citizens pay for health services out of taxes. As a proportion of their household income, it's a significant number … (GUPTA): It's true that the French pay higher taxes, and so does nearly every country ahead of the United States on that list."


* 'SiCKO' never claims that health care is provided absolutely for free in other countries, without tax contributions from citizens. Former MP Tony Benn reads from the NHS founding pamphlet, which explicitly states that "this is not a charity. You are paying for it mainly as taxpayers." 'SiCKO' also acknowledges that the French are "drowning in taxes." Comparatively, many Americans are drowning in insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pays and medical debt and the resulting threat of bankruptcy – half of all bankruptcies in the United States are triggered by medical bills. (Medical Bills Make up Half of Bankruptcies. Feb. 2005, MSNBC. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6895896/)

CNN: "But even higher taxes don't guarantee the coverage everyone wants … (KECKLEY): 15 to 20 percent of the population will purchase services outside the system of care run by the government."


* It's not clear what country Keckley is referring to. In the United Kingdom, only 11.5 percent of the population has supplementary insurance, but it doesn't take the place of NHS insurance. Nobody in France buys insurance that replaces government insurance either, although a substantial amount buys some form of complimentary insurance. ( Private health insurance and access to health care in the European Union. Spring 2004. http://www.euro.who.int/document/Obs/EuroObserver6_1.pdf)

CNN: "But no matter how much Moore fudged the facts, and he did fudge some facts…"

* This is libel. There is not a single fact that is "fudged" in the film. No one has proven a single fact in the film wrong. We expect CNN to correct their mistakes on the air and to apologize to their viewers.

Michael Moore's response from his web site correcting CNN's "facts".

Michael Moore is asking if people want to contact CNN to get them to apologize like they said they would, you can contact CNN here.


moore owned? I think the opposite
Posted by andy on 2007-07-10 02:46:43
Looks like all you guys looking to buy their 14th mercedes got owned by moore. CNN looked like the idiots that they are. Moore isn't perfect, but he makes all you look like jerks. Cause, you are!
Posted by Rj on 2007-07-10 03:47:46
This is very true. Mass media is a business. And business tries to make money no matter what the cost of true knowledge may be.
Posted by Mark Crosby on 2007-07-10 05:16:06
Great! Truly Great! Well done for putting this up!
Posted by [X] on 2007-07-10 08:08:25
You cannot(stress, cannot) fail to recognize that Moore must be the most evasive person in media history. He answers every question with another question. It bothers me that so many people can listen to him, love his work, etc, and not recognize the logical fallacies. Seriously, come up with something reasonable to say, or stop posting.
Message lost under Moore's huge Ego.
Posted by TM on 2007-07-10 08:31:38
That was the most softball so-called "hit-piece" that I have ever seen. Did any of you even watch it? It said: Moore might be a little shaky on a few minor facts (which is true, because some statistics will always be questioned, depending upon which studies you trust) but overall he is right that the U.S. health care system needs a major overhaul. Moore's Ego is so out of control that he gets offended and goes on a nonsensical tirade involving his perceived slighting over Farenheit 911 not being universally accepted and preached far and wide by CNN. It's too bad Moore lets his own bloated sense of worth and huge Ego get in the way of his message....if he really cared more about getting a better health care system here in the U.S. he would have spent the ten minutes promoting his movie and talking about how we can get a better health care system in place, rather than lashing out to salve his bruised ego.
Posted by Yo on 2007-07-10 08:57:29
I can appreciate some of Moore's work, just because it does ask questions you dont normally ask or delve into, which could lead to phallicies, but isnt that really for you to decide? He does a great job putting people in a state of shock and/or having them be offended.
it's a business
Posted by sam charles on 2007-07-10 09:12:47
If Moore had spent 10 minutes promoting his film.....it would say that Moore can be bought.
I think Moore has more integrity than that.
It wasn't his ego that was dammaged, he seemed like he is just sick of the kind of "news" we are getting these days. (And I think he has every right) Sometimes the business of News becomes....business BEFORE news.
and Sometimes....that sucks for us the people.
Still a "hit piece"
Posted by Pile on 2007-07-10 10:11:26
I think the fact that the hit piece was so soft is testimonial to the fact that the facts of "Sicko" are hard to disprove.

About the only thing you can do, as evidenced in the report, is cite some slightly different statistics, from an even more dubious source, or as was the case in F911, just find someone in one of the countries that Moore visited who disagrees with what he said. I wouldn't call that "fact checking" the movies' claims, but this is what CNN did, and along those lines, it most certainly is a "hit piece" - add that to the fact that the commercials running at the time on CNN were primarily pharmaceutical and oil and gas companies.

This is part of this new propaganda tactic of trying to "balance" stories with bogus contrary information. Like doing a story about the holocaust and bringing on the one guy in the entire area who is stupid enough to try to claim it didn't happen. That's not "balanced journalism". It's irresponsible and that's exactly what CNN did. They put together than piece with the intent of discrediting parts of Moore's movie. There was virtually no substantive rejection of Moore's claims yet the tone of the piece suggested otherwise. Even if it was "soft" it was still an attempt to discredit the movie.

I think most of Moore's ire was the result of looking at what's happened in Iraq, and how he exposed the issue long before MSM like CNN started acknowledging it, and he's right.. it is people like Wolf Blitzer's fault. He has a right to be angry, as do we all. We've spent $12 Billion over there and we can't even take care of New Orleans! It's disgraceful.
Posted by master-baker on 2007-07-10 15:42:47
12 billion is that what the news tells you ? boy, i hate to inform you that the war in iraq has cost 482 billion dollars, enough to solve world poverty and hunger with plenty to spare, Change everyones car over to ethanol, pay for Every single citizen's gas for their car for an entire year.
but hey dont listen to me watch the news, its already been sold out
Posted by ueberbill on 2007-07-10 16:22:40
I think Pile was referring to the fact that we spend $12 billion A MONTH over there, which just came out in the papers. Picture that amount of money handed out monthly for state school budgets, wouldn't that be nice? Or half that amount to help New Orleans and the Gulf Coast get back on their feet, oh what a world it would be!
Absolutley awesome!
Posted by Fish on 2007-07-10 17:15:08
Wolf is so pathetic as he argues back with Moore. He doesn't answer the questions Moore asks and just brings up stuff that was aired on CNN. Honestly, I never believe anything on CNN, if it is something about the war in Iraq I just change it and always say, "That pointless war is still going on?"
Posted by MAD DOUG on 2007-07-10 19:48:05
Can anyone honestly explain to me why they consider a system to be bad that does not demand payment at the point of service?

Why is a system so repugnant that cares for the sick according to their illness and not their financial standing, but instead is paid for by a small tax based on the income of every healthy citizen?

Why is so horrible that if one is faced with a calamitous life threatening illness one is freed from the financial worry of the cost?

What is so good about the US health care system that drives countless numbers of seriously sick people bankrupt because of the cost of sickness?

What is so good about US health care that rations health resources by high at the point of service costs which leaves 47 million US citizens outside the system?

I have lived for many years in two countries with universal health care, they were not perfect because they are always under attack by the seekers of profit, I have also lived for many years in a country without universal health care and I know which of these three countries I would rather be if I became seriously ill!
Posted by Pile on 2007-07-10 20:52:15
There's nothing horrible about it.

Can you imagine a privatized fire department? Where the service you get when your house is burning depends upon how much you've paid and your level of coverage?
Posted by Anonymous on 2007-07-11 06:39:35
X and TM, You are what's happening to this country. Because you don't like the message you will fight it . Michael had every right to be pissed for what they did. He knew they were lying to the watchers and any man who sticks up for WHAT HE KNOWS IS TRUE is a real man in my book. Truth and honesty are not on the side of our nations top media outlets, and that's the real shame here.

Mike, there's another movie right there. The Media.
To Mad Doug
Posted by Krissy on 2007-07-12 04:33:31
Unfortunately, the answers in life are rarely very easy. I can honestly say that this is a far more complex issue than people give it credit for.

People are motivated by different things. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. In general, the want to live without troubles is an excellent motivator, and money alleviates troubles. Most people will be motivated, to some degree or another, by money.

A very special few people are motivated by the want to help others.

A 'free' system doesn't pay it's doctors as much as a 'for profit' system does, as a /general/ rule. So, the free system is relying on a smaller number of people to support it, as unfortunate as that is.

But this speaks nothing of skill. A person of true skill, someone who will push a field to it's limit... these are also rare. And unfortunately, being rare, they're more than likely to be motivated by money than they are by /just/ helping people.

So, whichever location pays more will have the more skilled workers, in general. This is true of the medical industry, too. This is actually the basis of the 'free market', capitalism at work.

The free market works on a simple principal... survival of the fittest. If you're inadequate at your job, you won't be doing your job for long. It encourages the strong to take up the mantle by offering great rewards. It's a somewhat cruel system, but out of it, we manage to get some very good, intelligent workers.

Unfortunately, a free system doesn't work as well as we'd often like it to. The taxes required to maintain it stifle off our cash flow, hurting the economy. Government ends up having to control it, and the government has proved to not be the best at controlling things in the past. Michael himself said that Medicare was good... /but/ most of it's control has been handed over to private companies.

There are benefits to both systems. Our current free system breeds people of exceptional skill in very specialized fields, allowing us to create quite a few medical breakthroughs. And there are quite a few pharmaceutical companies creating stuff over here, because there's more money to be had here than in countries where they're unable to make any money, because they're not allowed to charge very much.

A system which ignores money is fortunate enough to be able to take care of anybody, but the staff will be limited due to lower pay.. and if you pay them more, then taxes need to increase to do so, further stifling the cash flow of everyone.

There are many sides to this, and it's unfortunately rare for anybody to pay much attention to the fine details /and/ have it show up on the news. People want to see something more extreme, something that's easy to get behind, or easy to debunk, not something that forces you to ask hard questions, or leave you without a clear answer.
Admit it
Posted by Anonymous on 2007-07-12 10:44:28
No matter what crazy arguments and facts either side will provide everyone must agree that the American healthcare system is not the best in the world, let alone perfect.

Thus, my point is: until the U.S. will have a perfect system (which coincidentally will be never), they should accept criticism to improve on what they have. Whether the criticism comes from Micheal Moore or Jesus himself is irrelevant.

Moores "Sicko" points out some major blemishes in American health care. Now it's the government's job to eradicate the problems, which from the look of things, they will not do.
It's a Movie
Posted by Cutler on 2007-07-12 11:42:29
It's a movie, it doesn't have to be factual. He could say unicorns are the cause of everything and really mean it.

Plenty of crazy facts are found in journals, which doesn't make it true. Either side of any debate or issue can find facts that have no real credibility. Unless you go and read these 'journals' that both sides have used, you'll never really know what is the truth about anything.

I don't watch CNN/FOX or any of Micheal Moore's Movies because everyone has to much of a bias to really present a good argument. I think it's sad that most of the above posts are in support of this weird-o.

I do have to admit that Micheal Moore is very good at twisting the facts to make himself look like a poor soul that nevers gets to speak on TV. SAD!
fighting fire with fire
Posted by britdiff on 2007-07-12 13:22:39
I believe moore to be a lot more moderate than he presents himself. But he's decided to argue his points in such an extreme manner to get noticed and get the other sides of the arguement across. If he were a lot more reasonable and sat quietly in his chair politely answering the questions Blitzer chose to ask he wouldn't get the airtime, and that's what he wants to get his message in the public eye, so he does it by acting so extreme. I wouldn't buy fully into his arguements, i know he has flaws in them, but his overall messages are worth getting across.
Posted by mme on 2007-07-12 15:09:00
Towelhead Gupta got Pwned.
If only...
Posted by Lauren on 2007-07-12 16:51:04
I would completely agree with Michael Moore... IF he wasn't so inflammatory in his manner of speech. He says some things that are very true, but at the same time his decision to attack Wolf Blitzen made me sympathize with the victim. This is conjecture, but it's possible that Blitzen allowed him to continue to speak aggressively for that express reason, to discredit Moore and gain sympathy as a Gandhi-like image.

Also, (sorry, but I just finished a Statistics course and I'm a little proud of myself) nothing is certain in statistics. Every study will get a slightly different result, just because you can't test everyone in a population.

For someone so brave to go on live on a top news agency to defend his views, there are things he could still do to earn more support. Moore's words sound more like a trial lawyer's than a logician's.
ROFL Liberals
Posted by Jim McJimmers on 2007-07-12 19:50:58
I love you guys. You are all so easy to amuse. He's a rabble-rouser and all of the girly-men in our country believe him. Hah. 5 Minutes of his interview was him being a girl about how "eh, you made fun of me about my old movie, eh." Hah, i guess our "bad" health care has something to do with our unhealthy people. Michael, your getting fat dude, hit up the weight watchers, right bro? Whatever, the guy gives me a headache. You people keep sucking it up, and burn in hell when you die. pansies.
oh my goodness...
Posted by decembersun on 2007-07-12 21:17:50
wow, i love how he goes off topic and brings up his OLD movie. so, now it's CNN's fault that Iraq didn't go as planned? give me a break.
Posted by elephant never 4gets on 2007-07-12 23:55:59
The real truth is: you'll be killed in Cuba if you rebel and claim the government provides poor health care. All "surveys" are fixed to make the government look wonderful. Therefore, their poll records are about worthy enough to wipe your ass on (a strange similarity shared by Michael Moore's script for "Sicko")... that's why it's rated so "high" in the first place... anyone who believes in this garbage doesn't deserve our health care treatment, much less Cuba's...
Free market?
Posted by Waiting to see on 2007-07-13 06:34:20
What does a Free Market have to do with DECENT Health care? America is all about making money these days No one can deny that. I've seen the same services that my parents had increase in cost well beyond the rate of inflation. Even people in the medical profession will tell you that the rising cost of health care in America is out of hand and approaching being ridiculous. Michal Moore did not tell any lies and he did not scue the facts. The truth is there for anyone to look at. Insurance companies are a business and they are here to make money at all cost we all know this as well. Just look at the auto Insurance companies. When the state governments made it mandatory to have insurance on your vehicle my rates nearly tripled with in 6 months and I have a good driving record. If this kind of coverage is so important why not just sell it with the car?

I agree that making money is important to everyone but to say that is the only reason for innovation and productivity is a ridiculous comment. MOST people in America are in jobs that do not pay by productivity but instead by the hour and they do a very good job in most cases.
In many cases these days you don't see companies trying to make a living or just make money they are trying to make a killing. Nothing aloud to run wild is ever a good thing, it leaves too much room for abuse.
Because there is so much money to be made in the medical field these days you are attracting profiteers instead of the people who are really best suited to that type of work.
So come on people we all know we would be better off with some kind of public health care rather than what we have. The only people opposed to this type of service are the ones with a vested interest in keeping things the way they are and I can guarantee you that it is not your best interest they have in mind.
Posted by Proud Patriot on 2007-07-13 14:26:35
I can't help but wonder why all of you that think the health care in other countries is so awesome don't go live in those countries. Mind you, I'm not asking you to leave, I am simply saying, this is a free country. No one is forcing you to stay in this country. I'm sure one of the other countries you are all raving about would love to have you come contribute to their way of life. If your so gung ho about using your money to pay for other peoples health care I'm sure you can go down to your local hospital or Doctors office and put in a donation for the next homeless person that walks in needing attention. Another question, if Cuba is so spectacular, why is it that so many refugees have come floating up on the shores of Florida? Why do you think a person would risk their life, and the lives of friends and family to get away from Cuba if it's so wonderful? Don't get me wrong, there is plenty in the United States to be concerned about, but if you don't think this is the best country on the planet then please, don't let the screen door hit ya, where the good Lord split ya. LEAVE! God Bless our troops, our leaders and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
Posted by Cancerous on 2007-07-13 19:38:31
What you dingbats (i.e. Proud Patriot, elephant never 4gets, et al) need to realize is that the topic of Sicko is HEALTH CARE and HEALTH CARE only. So Cuba disallows free speech. Boohoo! The point of the movie (which you would know if you saw it) isn't about government but about HEALTH CARE. The scene in Cuba includes prices of medications that are far less cheaper than what we pay. On that situation alone, how is it that a pharmaceutical company charges an American $120 for a medicine whereas in Cuba you can get it for PENNIES? Sure we have capitalism here but let's talk when you get laid off, can't afford COBRA and depend on 7 different medications to keep you alive.

Secondly, "I can't help but wonder why all of you that think the health care in other countries is so awesome don't go live in those countries." My response, is duh. Believe me, the very same people would move to France to get better care if they could AFFORD the move. What can a couple do if the husband is laid off and laden with medical problems as is his wife, who has cancer? "No one is forcing you to stay in this country," Proud Patriot says. I'd like to see Proud Patriot be in that same situation. I wonder what it's like to die from cancer, untreated. Maybe you can tell me.

But once again, the point is that our government spends useless amounts of money on private jets for our politicians and allows our people to be charged outrageous rates whom we will pay because we are desperate to sew on a finger we lost. Or, we decided to take the luxury route by giving birth at a hospital. Sure! Ok! We need to examine the frivolous expenditures that goes unnoticed (for example, California politician are befuddled over the missing thousands of public vehicles - HELLO! How do you lose even 1000 vehicles?!) and move those funds into things that help the people. I mean, isn't that the point of government? To organize and protect people?

By the way, I used to work in the health care industry. There was a plethora of claims that sat on my desk that were rejected from payment. It turns out that the claim department tracked how many claims processors got through in an hour and were paid bonuses for being "efficient." Physical therapy bills took too long to process so... DENIED.
Insane, childish expectations
Posted by Geezer on 2007-07-13 21:58:41
"I would completely agree with Michael Moore... IF he wasn't so inflammatory in his manner of speech." If he wasn't so outraged by the outrageous things he films, you'd agree with him? Are you nuts or just a wimp?

"I can't help but wonder why all of you that think the health care in other countries is so awesome don't go live in those countries." Another loser. Most of the civilized world won't take US emigrants. We're too uneducated, too poor (no savings), and our skills are mostly obsolete. However, talent is escaping this country at an alarming rate. Singapore is draining our genetic engineering talent. Europe is drawing the top from our electrical and mechanical engineering graduates. If "love it or leave it" is the depth of your argumentative skills, you don't have to worry about moving to another country, either. You're barely smart enough to live here.

Moore doesn't have to pander to pussies with his films, there are more than enough courageous, intelligent people who understand that outrage is warranted under outrageous conditions. He doesn't have to insure his statistics are perfect because statistics is an imperfect "science" and social statistics are rarely tight numbers. Finally, he doesn't have to solve the problems, he only has to highlight them. Problem solving is not the job of the media, although Moore has suggested many more solutions than have the people who are paid to solve social problems.
Consider this.
Posted by underscore_b on 2007-07-14 14:26:20
While Moore provides a very compelling argument in Sicko, the 2007 Canadian documentary "Manufacturing Dissent" is a very even-handed an intriguing assessment of Moore's work and character. http://www.manufacturingdissentmovie.com/, if you're keen.

[PILE] This "documentary" is dubious at best. It's obviously a hit-piece on Moore and is most certainly not "even handed." The big question is, which pharmaceutical company is paying these two Canadians to put out that libelous trash?
Proud [idiot] Patriot
Posted by Pile on 2007-07-14 14:31:52
I wonder if "Proud Patriot" had been born 150 years ago he'd say the same thing about slavery?

"If you think not owning black people is so great, why don't you move to a country where there is no slavery?"

Or maybe 75 years ago...

"If you want your women to have the right to vote, why don't you move to a country where women can vote and leave this wonderful United States!"
Posted by anonymous on 2007-07-16 09:05:45
Who is John Galt?
Posted by DEven SUllivna on 2007-07-16 23:20:59
Micheal Moore is a f*ckin commy
America sucks, its health care sucks, the war sucks
FATASS......glad i got that off my back
Posted by Pile on 2007-08-07 00:44:48
Kill the messenger, ignore the message..

- The mo of the common internet idiot
Posted by Joyce Francis on 2007-10-12 08:38:57
Michael Moore is a big blow-hard -- he's a fat man looking for the thin man within himself. What's more frightening, however, is that his behavior is condoned by Americans. I think his movies, ideas and person are despicable.


Name: (change name for anonymous posting)

1 Article displayed.

Pursuant to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230), BSAlert is a user-contributed editorial web site and does not endorse any specific content, but merely acts as a "sounding board" for the online community. Any and all quoted material is referenced pursuant to "Fair Use" (17 U.S.C. § 107). Like any information resource, use your own judgement and seek out the facts and research and make informed choices.

Powered by Percleus (c) 2005-2047 - Content Management System

[Percleus 0.9.4] (c) 2005, PCS