comment #1

Ford_Fletcher says ...

Again, I can't wait. Between this and Maher's religion doc, it's shaping up to be an excellent year for left wing documentaries.

comment #2

dixiedugan says ...

Hey, the second coming must be at hand - Fox News said it was 'brilliant'.

comment #3

jeffmcm says ...

Insert rambling, divisive, meaningless 100+-post discussion here.

comment #4

Larry says ...

"Benefits the few"? Since the vast majority of Americans get good to excellent health care, and many who would have died a generation ago are now surviving (thanks to research that's mostly done in the US), I certainly hope that this isn't one of the lies that Moore's film spreads.

It would be so nice to have serious health care reform debates without nutbags like Moore muddying the waters.

comment #5

D.Z. says ...

Larry: "Since the vast majority of Americans get good to excellent health care,"

You mean vast majority of Americans who can afford it.

"and many who would have died a generation ago are now surviving"

And many who could survive are dying, because we refuse to recognize the benefits of medical marijuana and stem cell research.

"It would be so nice to have serious health care reform debates without nutbags like Moore muddying the waters."

Yeah, because the President's suggestion of having insurance "accounts" is quite sane.

comment #6

rgmax99 says ...

"Hey, the second coming must be at hand - Fox News said it was 'brilliant'."

Roger Friedman of Fox411 made the comments in question. Sicko may indeed be a worthy film, but Friedman and the Weinsteins have had a lovely relationship dating back to Miramax. The man positively pushes just about everything that comes from The Weinstein Co. -- even Bobby, when he wrote that Sharon Stone was a LOCK for winning the Best Supporting Actress award.

If he had been writing online when Playing for Keeps was released, Friedman would have likely exploded with giddy praise for that movie.

comment #7

mario says ...

Larry, are Americans having serious debates about health care reforms? If they are, I don't see it. Except for here, of course.

I would say that Moore's goal is to inspire debate about this, as well as throw his own opinion out there.

comment #8

jeffmcm says ...

Any debate with DZ in it is not a serious debate.

comment #9

Jayne Gacey says ...

D.Z., there have been no successful trials of Embryonic stem cells. There have been strides in adult stem cells and amniotic stem cells. It would seem, like in the case of Gay Civil Unions, a win-win compromise would be in order. I'm entirely with you on medical marijuana though. I'm with you on all marijuana.

comment #10

Geoff says ...

But from a purely scientific point of view there is a lot of potential with embryonic stem cells. It needs to be fully explored for a long period of time. Private companies will probably be the ones with breakthroughs in this area. I simply detest those who get worked up over something smaller than this period. Right now there are thousands of embryonic stem cells out there somewhere ready to be tinkered with, where are all the god loving Christians who want to be impregnated with those, and thus, save "lives".

comment #11

le corbeau says ...

"You mean vast majority of Americans who can afford it."

Which is, in fact, the vast majority of Americans-- about 85%.

38 million Americans uninsured is always cited by proponents of this or that because it sounds like a huge portion of the population, but it really is only about 15%. Not that 15% isn't a significant number, but by any reasonable measure, 5 out of 6 having health care IS the "vast majority."

comment #12

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "Which is, in fact, the vast majority of Americans-- about 85%."

Eighty-five percent of Americans might be insured, but that doesn't mean most of them can afford it.

comment #13

jeffmcm says ...

Obviously they can afford it or they wouldn't be categorized in that group. If they couldn't afford insurance they would be in the other 15%.

comment #14

D.Z. says ...

jeff: They can afford what the insurance is willing to cover.

comment #15

jeffmcm says ...

Then you agree: by definition, they are insured.

It sure would be nice if you would have personal exchanges more often instead of just rhetorical bluster.

comment #16

D.Z. says ...

jeff: "Then you agree: by definition, they are insured."

No, they really are not, because if they were insured, they'd be covered for what they needed, instead of for the services the provider decided to pay. Depending on the ailment, you have a slightly lower chance of being broke and in debt with an HMO than without one.

comment #17

Movie Watcher says ...

Maybe, just maybe, the country can begin a serious movement about National Health Care. I know it's too much to ask the politicians to talk about it, because the presidental election fantasy is gearing up, but I hope that someday people who don't have health care can go to a hospital, get the treatment they need, and not worry about the bill. As it is, if you or your insurance won't/can't pay for treatment, you're screwed. They will come after your possesions, believe it. I wonder who will bring this up in a debate...no one.

comment #18

christian says ...

well it sucks to be them. what's on tv?

comment #19

christian says ...

and by the way, that 45 percent uninsured isn't just a group of unlucky americans. it flucutates between all of us, as anybody not wealthy and without good insurance can attest.

comment #20

christian says ...

i mean, "fluctuates."

comment #21

JChasse says ...

I read a little something in the paper today that I didn't know, and am offering it here in case others were unaware of it, as well.

At first blush, I interpreted the whole "Michael Moore took Ground Zero workers to Cuba" as meaning that they were looked at at some hypothetical Joseph Stalin Memorial Hospital in downtown Havana. Not so. Turns out that he took them to Guantanamo Bay, which I guess means that they're being seen by U.S. doctors, right?

Now, is it fair that terror suspects are getting medical care than the heroes of 9/11? If not, and we rectify this, what would the reaction be? "Boo hoo, not only are we holding them against their will, but we're sticking rectal thermometers under their tongue"?

That old can of worms was getting stale... let's open a new one.

comment #22

jeffmcm says ...

Maybe if they stopped being 'suspects' and actually received trials and became convicts it wouldn't be such a problem.

comment #23

christian says ...

now don't go getting democracy crazy on us while we're liberating the populace!

comment #24

Jayne Gacey says ...

It's not 45 percent, it's 45 million. 45% would be about 135 million people.