Michael Moore's Sicko-- A Good Portrayal

hey i recently watched sicko and am wondering about ur guys thoughts on the movie and if the information is true?

I thought it was good. Definitely take it with a grain of salt, but I don't know how anyone can really defend the American health care system against the rest of the industrialized world's. To be a bit topical, keep in mind that what is being proposed by the liberals in the form of a public option is not near anything they offer, and conservatives are still rallying against it. At the very least, we need to have the choice to buy into a public option. Personally, I like Thom Hartman's idea of buying into medicare, but I also would support a single-payer system if it had any chance at all of passing.

Well, its Moore...so take it with a grain of salt.

As for the truthiness of it, I am sure the things he says are technically true, but he also omits A.) a lot of other factors, and B.) the opposing side's view of the issue.

But thats OK, most of the people that see his movies are not conservative or even moderate for that matter.

I have not seen the movie ,but I have seen and read many of his other works (back in my college-know-it-all hippy days, ugh) and I really do not like his style.

If you want to see how a proper, fair, and objective documentary is done, go watch Bigger, Stronger, Faster.

He makes some valid points, but he also distorts the truth. He presents one guy whose insurance denies him a bone marrow transplant for a certain type of cancer because they consider it experimental. However, Moore fails to mention that the procedure is considered experimental in almost every country he touts with nationalized health care. Those countries wouldnt have covered it either.

he makes some good points, but he always makes America sound like Nazi Germany in his movies

He makes some valid points, but he also distorts the truth. He presents one guy whose insurance denies him a bone marrow transplant for a certain type of cancer because they consider it experimental. However, Moore fails to mention that the procedure is considered experimental in almost every country he touts with nationalized health care. Those countries wouldnt have covered it either.

sonicare

exactly, he only tells as much truth as needed to try to get you on his side.

If you went solely by his information, youre gonna get owned in any debate you have with someone representiong the other side.

He makes some valid points, but he also distorts the truth. He presents one guy whose insurance denies him a bone marrow transplant for a certain type of cancer because they consider it experimental. However, Moore fails to mention that the procedure is considered experimental in almost every country he touts with nationalized health care. Those countries wouldnt have covered it either.

sonicare

I take him about as seriously as I take rush limbaugh and everyone else trying to push their agenda and make some money along the way. Plus he's distorted the truth in the past with his other "documentaries".

Well, its Moore...so take it with a grain of salt.

As for the truthiness of it, I am sure the things he says are technically true, but he also omits A.) a lot of other factors, and B.) the opposing side's view of the issue.

But thats OK, most of the people that see his movies are not conservative or even moderate for that matter.

I have not seen the movie ,but I have seen and read many of his other works (back in my college-know-it-all hippy days, ugh) and I really do not like his style.

If you want to see how a proper, fair, and objective documentary is done, go watch Bigger, Stronger, Faster.

mrbojangles25