http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tseb0t7CEoA

Good, fuck those cheerleading bastards.

Wait. Wait wait wait. Did he bitch about bias in the beginning? REALLY? REALLY?

"You haven't had me on in 3 years!"
...
"We invited you several times"
...
"Well...yeah...but it wasn't to APOLOGIZE!!!"


...
*something about 9-11*

...
"I was right about the war! That neurosurgeon was wrong and didn't do his job!"
"But he saved the lives of men while performing surgery when he didn't have to"
"But he was still wrong about the war!"

"See you in 3 years! *salute*"

The end

I fucking hate him.

Eh, he only really blew up in the first half. In the second half of part one and in all of part two, he calms down and makes his points pretty effectively.

It's hilarious because in the second part of the interview (separate video clip in the related links), Wolf becomes Moore's bitch.

He makes documentaries, he's not the news. He's allowed bias.

Comparing universal healthcare to 9/11?

fail...

Fuck Guptay. Bastard has the chance to reveal to the world the outright FRAUD that is the private health insurance industry but he chooses not to because CNN receives big checks (and takes big dicks up the ass) from Big Pharma.

I have a feeling you haven't actually seen his report.

Okay, FUCK. I am very worried at this point about America.

Sanjay Gupta's report wasn't biased in the least. If it was, it was biased WAY towards the left. It was just a report that pointed out two or three mistakes that Moore made according to Sanjay's sources, and suddenly he's a shill for Bush and Big Medicine? WHAT. Did every person who's criticized his report miss the fact that Gupta is a known left winger and a proponent of socialized health care? Sanjay also admitted that he had one of his own stats messed up and when he comes clean about it, it's taken as some sort of victory for liberals. This makes no sense. On the other hand, Sanjay asks a question to Michael Moore about having several different numbers for a statistic and Michael Moore responds with "No no no no no no blah blah blah blah I'm not going to listen."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bf3bp72G3Y
"Sanjay Gupta admits he lied"? WHAT. Someone's definition of a lie is a little skewed.

A guy makes a genuine mistake stemming from a typo and he's the devil, yet when Michael Moore purposely ignores half of a source but uses the other half to illustrate a point, he's some kind of hero. I think the second type of "lie" is much, much more dangerous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjvlGRfozss
Watch this video all the way through, but pay particular attention to it around 5:40. Moore is presented with evidence that he might be wrong and just pulls a "nu uh" defense.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpKoN40K7mA

Look at this video at 12:35. Moore's response is utterly baffling, and the fact that it seems like most liberals are letting him get away with saying that is a little offensive.

Blitzer: What do you say to Mayor Giuliani?
Moore: So he's saying he hates medicare?

That's practically a Bushism, let me rephrase.

Orange: I'm not sure if the PATRIOT Act is a good idea.
Bush: So you're saying you hate America?

Orange: I'm not sure I think drugs are a good idea.
Green Party: So you hate freedom?


I don't want an egomaniac like this guy representing me and I'm a little disturbed by how he goes about making his arguments.

I still can't believe anyone can support this socialized medicine bullshit

yeah, who wants the poor to have equal access to procedures and prescriptions and shit. fuck the poor.

I mean totally, instead of letting those with insurance get proceedures within a few weeks everyone should just wait close to a fucking year to get it. I mean, whenever people in the United States need important operations done, they fly out to Canada and the Uk and....oh....wait...

They don't pay taxes in those countries, so they aren't eligible for their health care. I imagine if any country gave their socialized health care to anyone, people WOULD go there for medical treatment.

I guess that went right over your head

Yeah I wish had something like a Free Clinic here.

I have a feeling you should shut the fuck up and realize I am talking about his track record. I could not care less about this single crappy report.

Not to mention the irony in his report being factually inaccurate, something he actually went on to apologize for..

Jesus, haven't you learned by now? I've had better arguments with brick walls. Although I suppose the heavy inebriation had a part to play in that...

man have you ever been to a free clinic? theones here are a complete joke.

Holy shit, that's basically what I was going to post. When put under the spotlight, Sanjay seems pretty much to the left, but his actions show that he doesn't give a fuck about socialized medicine, since doctors would receive a healthy salary cap like $150,000 like they do in Canada.

I've been watching Sanjay Gupta for several years and he has no "track record." You can say that's what you're speaking about, but I kind of doubt it considering that he's very tight-lipped about his personal politics and does not report on politics, what track record are you talking about? Writing a report agreeing with Michael Moore's conclusions and pointing out two of Moore's errors? That's not really the type of track record that would point towards him being any sort of shill. And once again: Gupta made a factual error, as opposed to Michael Moore who intentionally manipulates facts. Gupta realizes he made an error and apologizes for it, this is a GOOD thing. Moore simply denies he's hidden the facts when it's clear he has. This is a BAD thing.

And chill out, I was simply stating that your post revealed that you weren't aware of what Sanjay actually he said, which seems to be true. He agrees on Moore with most subjects when it comes to health care, so what's your issue with the guy? Sanjay Gupta is a liberal that realizes that sometimes it's okay to criticize people who believe the same things as you if they're going about it in a way that could be counter-productive. That's a GOOD thing.

This is joke yes?

That's what I'm doing if I get serious health problems. Everybody deserves healthcare.

Everyone can get healthcare

DING DING DING! There goes the bullshit machine again!

I'm gonna break the news to you now: if you have a serious medical problem that requires surgery or hell, even prescription drugs, and you don't have insurance or the money in your pocket to pay for the procedure, the health car eindustry does not give a flying FUCK about you. Nobody is going to hand you the healthcare you need unless they get what they need back from you...namely, your cash. Free clinics can't do shit for any serious medical problem, and they can barely even treat the minor ones adequately.

EDIT: Also, I'm split on this issue. On the one hand, I agree with Sanjay that Moore should state all of the facts instead of cherry picking numbers to support his own view. On the other hand, Moore is a documentary maker, and everybody knows he has a STRONG left-wing bias. It's his reputation...he's the Limbaugh of the left. Anyone that truly cares enough about the issue will do their own research after watching one of Moore's movies, I know I always do. It's good that Sanjay pointed out his mistake and apologized, but the fact is that Moore DID get more of his facts right than Sanjay, and Sanjay did slander Moore.

I guess it did, you wanna break your point down for me? The way I saw it, your point was that people would leave the country if for free health care if they wanted to. What was your point if that wasn't it?

Yeah I actually have. I don't know where you live but the clinic I attended was well run and clean. I'm aware it's not like that in a lot of cities but it's not like it's Utopia in other countries. The countries that do have respectable free clinics are either drowning in taxes or receive cuts from their paycheck. If you hate the state of free clinics here then either donate money or encourage others to do so because that's the only way they will get better.

Not everyone believes that people have the right to get healthcare regardless of their ability to pay for it.

No, but I do and really can't see how someone could be so heartless as to believe otherwise.

"Well, the tests show that you have lung cancer. Unfortunately, your insurance doesn't cover the radiation, and you don't have the money to pay for it yourself, so.....GTFO."

"Well, the tests show that you have lung cancer. It says here that it's covered in your insurance, so step right on this way."

I don't mind government assistance with healthcare, as long as you are at least attempting to keep or find a job. I think that if you don't care enough to help yourself then you shouldn't get help. If you don't have a job but can prove that you're at least trying to find work or better yourself then you should be able to get the help you need. If you're just sucking off the system and the taxpayers who actually contribute, why should you get help?

DING DING DING PEOPLE ARE STILL ABLE TO GET HEALTH CARE

Insurance or not you show me on person who's got shot or just had a heart attack or had whatever the hell happen to him and got sent to the hospital here in the US and the hospital refused to treat him, citizen or not, and I'll show you someone who doesn't exist. Being 20 years old and having having 2 full forms of health insurance and a 3rd partial form of health insurance, I don't think the the problem is what they make of it. It's a free country (unlike alot of other places) and if you really want health insurance, there are ways to get it. And if your some schmuck who doesn't want to work but rather sit at home doing drugs all day and have 20 kids, you aren't my problem and should be not be a drain on everyone else. We don't have to destroy health care for the masses to cater to the few, thats not how democracy works folks

And for the "no one cares about you" bullshit, which makes you look like you haven't the foggiest what you are talking about, there is help in the form of private charities. Just because people don't want to see the government take all their fucking money and redistribute it, doesn't mean that there aren't private charities and that they don't work - take if from someone who's family member has received a shit load of free surgeries from the Ronald McDonald house (we're talking 100k + worth).

I do however, absolutely love the argument that if you don't want a 50% tax rate and see the feds take all your money and distribute it however the fuck they please, you have no heart, hate sunshine and small children and want to see the poor suffer. Do you honestly think that giving the government, who can't run medicare or social security, total control of your health is a good idea? Seriously, sit down and think about it for a minute.

Then again, it could be fun to watch hospital food become an election issue like in certain nations that border us.





All legal citizens of a great, few nation like the United States have means of accessing health insurance. Anyone in this nation can acquire health insurance if they do try, regardless of what they believe in, who they marry, or where they are from, that's what freedom is all about, and your laughing shows your total ignorance on the subject.



Despite the bullshit that Moore would bring up, like ranking our health care as like 80th in the world, it is without a shadow of a doubt, #1. When people from wherever in the world have a serious problem that their socialist health care system frankly doesn't give a fuck about, and they are fortunate enough to have enough money left over after the ungodly amount their government takes, they come here for health care. Not vice versa. And as for your statement about how if you don't pay taxes you aren't entitled to the health care, thats not how it works here wheres there's an estimated 12 million who don't pay taxes living off of our tax money, and where states efforts to stop this comes in violation of none other than, surprise surprise, the 14th amendment.

Motion to move topic to ID

Well, I don't really see how anyone can honestly believe it's ok to force other people to pay for someone's healthcare, so obviously this argument isn't really going to go anywhere.

"You have lung cancer. Unfortunately, you don't have a job or any money, but don't worry, everyone who does will be paying for you."

Everyone can have sex, too. Doesn't mean everyone will. And not out of lazyness, either. The fact is, NOT EVERYONE GETS FUCKING HEALTHCARE.

Also, Michael Moore looks like a fat Austin Powers.

LOL, we should just have the government hire squads of hookers to service everyone too. If they won't, they won't, it's not my or my money's problem

Michale Moore doesn't rank our health care, his sources do. Maybe you need to take issue with the World health Organization or the UN.

Your argument about wealthy people coming here is a little skewed, for a few reasons. The fact that wealthy people can come here and get health care is part of the problem, it means non-citizens with a lot of money are getting better health care than American tax payers who aren't wealthy. All this is means is that while our doctors may offer different services than other governments, our system is still completely fucked up.

I also question the fact that wealthy people from other countries come here for health care. There are some, but the more likely route would be to get health care in their countries from people outside of the government. Supplemental services exist that cost extra. If they can afford afford to fly to America for non-government approved operations, they can certainly afford to stay in their own country for non-government approved operations. It's not rare to hear about Ecuadorians or Slovakians coming here for health care, but saying that our health care beats theirs' is not an accomplishment at all. I rarely hear anything about people from developed nations coming here for health care.


And as for your statement about how if you don't pay taxes you aren't entitled to the health care, thats not how it works here wheres there's an estimated 12 million who don't pay taxes living off of our tax money, and where states efforts to stop this comes in violation of none other than, surprise surprise, the 14th amendment.

I don't really get what you're saying here. What I meant to get across was that if I was an American who went to, for example, France for health care I would get denied, which is why most Americans don't have the choice to go to other countries. I don't know what people who don't pay tax in America has to do with the subject at all, their tax status has nothing to do with the health care they would get.

People who don't pay taxes here still get hosptial coverage here and other public services

People who want operations come here becuase we have the best doctors and facilities in the world, desptie wheter or not they could pay extra there. Go to a major hospital in the US, try right here in NJ for instance, and see what you run into

IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT (or they're a senior). People in America without insurance don't get any health care, except in the case of emergencies. And even in that situation, there are entirely too many stories of people being turned away because they didn't have insurance, or worse, the right insurance. I don't know if you're someone who's always had insurance or what, but saying that Americans health care without insurance or lots of money...that's just ridiculous, I'm sorry.

Are you saying they don't? A co-worker of mine had to fly to Mexico to get a root canal because it was like 50 bucks or something like that over there whereas here he'd have to pay like a grand.

On the other hand, my grandfather was left without insurance for a few months and coincidentally got skin cancer. He still got an operation, insurance or not, even though they 'charged' him about 300 grand for the whole thing. I use quotes because I don't think my grandparents paid a penny of it yet and I don't think they're going to. It was a huge operation, 14 hours, several surgeons (the cancer was in his ear, and spread around his cheek, pretty complicated places to operate to say the least). They actually refused him at several hospitals before he found a doctor that decided to do it.

I'm not going to say much, but I will say that everyone CAN get healthcare, but that not everyone can get the healthcare they need. There are way too many uninsured and underinsured people who could back me up on this.

I'll also say that we don't have the best health care in the world, and if you're complaining about long waits in Canada, then you should have watched Moore on CNN. He said that if all of the uninsured Americans were suddenly covered, we'd have waits just as long. Instead, we weed out all of the poor, and only help those who can afford it, and the fewer people there are to help, the faster shit gets done. I don't think anyone in this topic is uninformed enough to agree with your bullshit posts.

For me, the argument for or against UHC all hangs on how much taxes would realistically increase in order to do this, and do it right. If it isn't a crazy amount, I don't have a problem with it. If it is something like where everyone is giving up 50% of their paycheck, fuck that.

So far I haven't seen anyone on either side give a realistic number on that, or do any realistic research on how UHC would/wouldn't work in the U.S. Comparing other countries to ours is stupid because of the differences not only in population, but general heath as well.

But instead of real, prominant, far reaching research we get people for UHC calling people against it heartless (if they aren't making propaganda films tugging at people's heart strings with no real information about how UHC would work in the U.S.) and people against it calling people for it socialists and talking about how the gov't wants to take all their money away and give it to a 17 crack head with 20 kids and no job.

Also, I think if the U.S. does go with UHC, it should be restricted to people who are working, have worked but were injured severely enough so that they can't work anymore, or the retired. Anything else would just be bullshit.

You do realise that isn't much different in practice from the system you have right? I think trying to judge a system like that would cost more than just giving everyone the health care. All the trying to work out who is allowed and who isn't would be lost in a morass of paperwork.

I can't argue on this though. To me health care is a right. My country treat first and ask questions later. If you are in an accident it doesn't matter who the hell you are you will get the emergency treatment. I can't accept a system that is any other way and if my government even tries to suggest it then there will be trouble. It shocks me that a country so supposedly developed as America would still have a pay for care system like people had in Victorian times.

No, tell me one hospital that's turned down someone with a life threatning emergency, citizen or not, insured or not. One. Any American has the ability and potential to obtain health care, and/or "the healthcare they need."



Um....you get what you pay for. I don't know what the standards are for doctors in Mexico, but persoanlly, I wouldn't go to Mexico for an operation, not even at bargain basement prices. And if we socialized medicine, it would cost us more, not less, you'd just pay for it in a different way.




there used to be a time, not too long ago, where doctors were required to do a certain number of free cases in order to work at a hospital. Anyways, it's a well known fact they overcharge those who can afford it to cover for those who can't.



We weed out the poor? What? Even if everyone suddenly became covered, socializing it would still increase the costs and the waiting time. People go to the fucking hospital in canada for headaches because it's "free"...people use "free" stuff more than anything else, and overusing health care becuae it's free would increase the costs. I don't understand how giving the goverment 50% of your paycheck and getting them invovled where they shouldn't be is any different than paying alot for health insurance. But then, if you don't think the government should have control over your health you obviously hate the poor and wish to see them suffer.



It shocks me how many more people are killed by socialized medicine than by the healthcare here

Sorry but that strikes me as a singularly silly statement.

It seems like you all seem to think that universal health care somehow takes away from everyone rather than gives. Yet here we have healthcare for all that is a baseline. There is private healthcare also. It isn't like there is no choice about what you want. You have the money you can of course change the health provisions you receive. I don't have a problem with that. You can have it any damn way you please and there is a level of health that works as prevention rather than searching for a cure. It works as an investment in a nations future. Nothing in America's system makes much plan for that. We have universal free contraception, prenatal and post natal care and a comprehensive vaccination scheme just as standard. Everyone should be valued for more than what they have already given. Decent government care is a belief in the value of what people can also give to their nation in the future.

As an aside, from what I have been told we all receive much the same cash in real terms in employment on both sides of the pond. We pay taxes and you have to contribute to your healthcare. So what is the difference?

I for one don't contribute a cent to my health care. I'm sure we do make the same amount of money though, which is why most of the people with money in the world tend to move here to keep more of it. Medical research and advancement has been stagnant in Europe, and I wonder why. People have less access to advanced drugs and cures in socialized nations, and while I can't find the link at the moment, I was reading how things with around a 17% fatality rate here like certain forms of cancer have a 50% + fatality rate across the pond. I'm also sure after your taxes are paid you have an easy time affording the get private healthcare though, right?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/news/tm_...-name_page.html

The system is not perfect, none is. Do you have equivalent stats for America? (bearing mind that the percentages will only be those who actually get treated) And no country listed in that article had a really low figure I note. That can be blamed on diagnosis that isn't really anything to do with the level of funding and who it comes from. Pneumonia and heart attacks from what I understand are easily masked by other symptoms. (The Daily Record is a pretty awful tabloid I am afraid. Don't believe any 'facts' you see in it) I think the Roslin Institute would be a bit peeved at your accusation that they are stagnating.

To be honest the only person I know who has moved to America is Knobby. And I suspect it was more for Jess than anything else. I do however know quite a few Americans who have moved here though.

I just still can't agree with a system that judges on whether people are worthy to receive healthcare on the basis of their income.

Care to explain to me how they'd enforce that without massive delays in the system to the point of uselessness? Maybe if a person already had a job, it would be easy...they could just show some form of work ID. But how the hell are you supposed to prove you're unemployed but are trying to find work? "Here's a copy of my application to McDonalds, may I please have healthcare now?" And what's the bar? Is there to be a minimum number of applications required before the person can truly be considered to be "trying to find work?" The system you're proposing would only delay healthcare to the type of people you're talkign about...those who are trying to contribute but are just down on their luck and need healthcare. You think the government has never mulled an idea like this over in their head for purposes of welfare, or social security? It's been considered, but it can't be done because all it would do is create more roadblocks for the people who are actually trying. Plus, as Dei already said, it would cost more to do it that way than it would to just cover the supposed "freeloaders" as well.

Also, you should receive healthcare because you're a human being, not based on how much you contribute to some arbitrary system. It's easy for you to say how things should be, you probably either have a job with insurance or are still young enough to be living at home under your parents insurance. But if you're living in a poor area where the only job opportunities are minimum wage jobs, it's not so easy to pay for insurance with the right benefits.



"But at least you won't die because some people are too miserly to help save human lives."



Oh, they'll treat them if it's an emergency, (most of the time) but they can't stay there afterwards to get the treatment they need to prevent it from happening again (the heart attack, at least, not so much the getting shot.) If you get shot or had a heart attack, they'll remove the bullet or get your heart beating again, but if you need any kind of rehab, well, that sucks.



Let me rephrase this: "I'm young, have alays had insurance, and still have pretty comprehensive insurance. Not knoing what it's like to be ithout it, I really don't see the problem."

BAH! Why do bad tags only happen to me when I post on ID?

Mod Experimental Edit:


Where are these people that you conservatives always talk about that never look for work, yet someho constantly have the money to both feed themselves and their family AND buy expensive drugs on the meager paycheck that the government doles out for welfare? I'm sure they have to exist somewhere, but I'm also sure they're a pretty small minority as compared to the homeless people with no family that can barely afford to buy drugs and eat out of the trash and to the people who have a home and some family who may or may not do drugs and are actually looking for work.

Also, you're right, democracy doesn't work that way, because democracy has nothing to do with economics at all. Maybe you meant to say "that's not how capitalism works, folks?"



For every case like your family member, there are two who don't receive the help they need from private charities because the charity doesn't have enough money to treat them. I'm not bashing private charities...I think they're a great thing, but they'll never be rich enough to help everybody that needs their help.



That's right...of course. Because if we have universal health care, there's no chance of our tax rate being any lower than 50%, right? I mean, it's just not possible.

Also, Mr. Democracy, I have some news for you...the kind of democracy we have in America allows you to elect the people you want to serve you who will spend your tax dollars in the way that you think they should be spent, rather than "however the fuck they please." Maybe if elections focused on that rather than gay marriage and abortion every election year, more people would realize that.



You're right, it's not about what you believe in, who you marry, or where you're from. It's about where you work, how highly ranked you are there, and how big your paycheck is. Your futile belief in an American dream that died decades ago shows your total ignorance on the subject.



Actually, it's 37th, and like orange already brought up, it's not Moore who ranked them, it's authorites who know what they're talking about like the World Health Organization that did. #1 would actually be France. Sorry to burst your bubble...just because you want America to be the best doesn't make it true.



Anything I have to say about this paragraph would just be rephrasing orange's rebuttal, so I'll go ahead and leave it alone.



My girlfriend had a problem with underinsurance. It wasn't anything nearly as bad as skin cancer, though. She's on her dad's insurance. He works at a unionized autoworkers factory, and his job provides he and his family insurance...sort of. She needed to get her wisdom teeth pulled because, as is often the case with widom teeth, her mouth is too small to hold them but they grew in anyway, which obviously causes pain. When they ent to the dentist they found out that their insurance covers the operation, but they would have to pay for the anesthesia, which would cost them $3000.00 Long story short, they didn't have that kind of money and my girlfriend still has her wisdom teeth.

Could try dividing it between your two posts and see if that works better.

*dusts hands off* There we go.