  |
 |
| |
|
|
|  Movie Review: Michael Moore’s “SiCKO”Posted on Jun 29, 2007
By Eunice Wong “SiCKO,” Michael Moore’s latest film, will probably make you laugh. It may make you cry. You should leave the theater outraged. It is a powerful and often humorous indictment of our health insurance industry, riddled with corruption and pitiless abuse of the sick by rapacious, profit-mad corporations. But it is propaganda. In “SiCKO,” as in all his films, Moore violates the contract between reporter and audience: to tell the truth. His inaccuracies and lack of nuance give his detractors a glaring target to strike, making it easy for them to dismiss his message. Michael Moore is an entertainer. He reduces complex issues to a vaudeville act with transparent villains and heroes. His goal is to amuse. Facts are malleable. He employs the techniques of advertising and propaganda, the same techniques that have corrupted our news and political campaigns. Truth and fiction blur at both ends of the political spectrum. You can believe what you want and discard what you don’t. This illusion of truth and knowledge is far more dangerous than ignorance. And although I happen to sympathize with Moore’s concerns, his methods only provoke the rupture of American society into two slogan-chanting camps. In the film, Moore takes three small boats of sick Americans, including 9/11 volunteer rescue workers, to Cuba. They receive, at no cost, the medical treatment they have been denied at home. It’s a triumph of the socialized state. “I asked [the Cuban doctors] to give us the same, exact care they give their fellow Cuban citizens. No more, no less. And that’s what they did,” Moore says. The sick Americans, in a montage underscored by swelling cellos and a pensive piano, receive MRIs, dental exams, lung assessments and ultrasounds. All Cubans, the film implies, receive this kind of care. This is not true. “The treatment Moore and the rescue workers receive in the film was done specifically for them, because they [the Cubans] knew it would make great propaganda,” Dr. Julio Cesar Alfonso, a Miami doctor who practiced medicine in Cuba for four years, said in a June 22 interview with The Miami Herald. “The medical centers in Cuba that treat tourists and government officials and VIPs are very different than the ones that treat the general population,” Alfonso said. “If you’re a Cuban citizen and need a prescription drug, most doctors either tell you to ask your relatives in the U.S. to ship it to you or recommend alternative herbal remedies. That’s the degree of scarcity on the island.” Life is not a Hollywood movie. A Cuban watching “SiCKO” would recognize this segment for what it is: agitprop. The United States has sunk to No. 37 on the World Health Organization’s ranking of health systems. Moore’s camera pans down the list to zero in on the shameful No. 37. It slides too quickly for most viewers to catch that Canada is No. 30, and the frame stops just short of No. 39: Cuba. There is, despite this distortion and omission of facts, much in “SiCKO” that is worthwhile. The film is strongest when Moore allows ordinary Americans to tell their heart-rending stories about the abuse they suffered in our profit-driven insurance industry. Julie Pierce, a middle-aged woman seated alone in her Kansas City living room, struggles to contain her emotions as she talks about her husband, who had kidney cancer. His brother was a perfect match for a bone marrow transplant. These transplants can halt and sometimes eradicate the disease. An insurance company, however, denied the transplant, claiming it was experimental. Her husband died. “He was my best friend, he was my soulmate, he was my son’s father. ... They took away everything that matters. ... You preach these visionary values, that we care for the sick, the dying, the poor, that we’re a healthcare that leaves no one behind. You left him behind. ... It was as if he was nothing. And I want them to have a conscience about it and I don’t think they do.”
Moore also interviews those within the monolith. Linda Peeno, a former medical reviewer for Humana, says: “The very definition of a good medical director was somebody who could save the company a lot of money. ... The doctor with the highest percentage of denial was actually going to get a bonus. Any payment for a claim is referred to as a medical loss. That’s the terminology the industry uses. When ... you deny their care ... you make a decision that brings in money ... it’s a savings to the company.”
“We get paid by what we do, so the better we do for our patients, the more we get paid,” he tells Moore in a hospital corridor. “If the most number of your patients have [desirably] low blood pressure, or if you get most of your patients to stop smoking, or you get most of your patients to have things like mental health reviews, or lower their cholesterol, then you get paid more.” But, like the nightly news, Moore never allows us to linger too long on catastrophe. It might depress us, and the point, of course, is to entertain. When a Michigan woman poses as a Canadian in Windsor, Ontario, to receive medical care, Moore deadpans: “Yes, what Adrian was doing was illegal. But we’re Americans. We go into other countries when we need to. It’s tricky. But it’s allowed.” This fragmentation reassures us, as it does on television. Tragedy is always followed by a good joke. This discontinuity, while it amuses and diverts, damages our sense that the world is a serious place. Moore’s manipulative use of music—“SiCKO” is almost entirely scored—provides the required emotional stimulation. The music imparts the pace, the mood, the energy of the film. Sometimes it is exciting and satirical. Heroic brass blares as the three intrepid little boats of Moore’s sick Americans, flying large American flags, streak southward to Guantanamo Bay, “the one place on American soil that still had free universal healthcare.” Suddenly canned elevator music and the seal of the Department of Homeland Security cut off the faux action movie. Sometimes the cue is maudlin, as when the sobbing violins of Barber’s Adagio for Strings underscore Linda Peeno’s harrowing 1996 testimony before Congress about the abuses of managed care. “In the spring of 1987, as a physician, I denied a man a necessary operation that would have saved his life, and thus caused his death. No person and no group has held me accountable for this, because in fact what I did was save a company half a million dollars. ... I had one primary duty, and that was to use my medical expertise for the financial benefit of the organization for which I worked.” The music inevitably frames Peeno’s words as courtroom drama. There is no soundtrack in real life. No violins were playing when Peeno made her testimony. The music, ostensibly used to enhance the gravity of the situation, only prevents the audience from realizing the full, unadorned weight of reality. Moore visits Canada, Britain, France and Cuba to compare the wreckage of the American healthcare system with these countries’ fairy tale dreams, in which “Everything is free!” He discovers that in a British hospital, money comes out of the cashier’s window rather than going in. Seated in a candle-lit bistro at a table of Americans living in Paris, he is overwhelmed, hands over his ears, by the incomprehensible lunacy of what they tell him of France: free healthcare, free child care, free college education, five weeks’ paid vacation, an extra paid week for your honeymoon, unlimited sick days, government-issued nannies, no, no, make it stop, make it stop!!! The other countries are painted with broad, rose-tinted strokes. All the Canadians, British and French interviewed have nothing but praise for their national healthcare. There are no dissenting viewpoints, no investigations into the economics that make these systems possible. There is an interview with a doctor in Cuba, Aleida Guevara, the pediatrician daughter of Ernesto “Che” Guevara, in which she wonders why an impoverished island nation is able to provide free healthcare for its citizens while the United States cannot. Cuba’s massive Soviet subsidies in the 1970s and ’80s of $4 billion to $6 billion annually, which kept the nation afloat and made this system possible, go unmentioned, as does Cuba’s subsequent decline once these subsidies ended with the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The star of Michael Moore’s films is always Michael Moore. “SiCKO” at first seems to be the exception. His aw-shucks-gee-whiz persona doesn’t shamble into view until halfway through the film. The first half of “SiCKO” is stronger for his physical absence, allowing us to focus on the personal suffering caused by our dysfunctional healthcare system. But Moore’s narcissism is given full vent at the end of “SiCKO.” He tells us, in a voice coy with false modesty, that he sent an anonymous $12,000 check to the man who runs “the biggest anti-Michael Moore website on the Internet” to pay his ailing wife’s astronomical insurance expenses. This allowed the man—whose insulting blog postings to Moore fill the screen—to keep the website going and “run [Moore] into the ground.” This would have been an admirable gesture if Moore had kept it anonymous. But if it were anonymous, it wouldn’t be admired. And Michael Moore’s films, however important their issues, are ultimately crafted to serve Michael Moore.
“SiCKO”
Eunice Wong is an actor based in New York City. She trained at the Juilliard School Drama Division and received the 2006 Helen Hayes Award for Outstanding Lead Actress.
SHARE THIS TRUTHDIG ARTICLE:
|
Confronting the Terrorist Within
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By Francesca, September 1, 2007 at 3:19 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bravo! Very brave stance against the abominably manipulative self-aggrandizing Moore propaganda machine. Remember what Orwell said about telling the truth and seeing what’s in front of our noses in a time of universal deceit?
I’ve noticed that the detracting commentators have said little more than basically how dare she attack Moore, peppered between ad hominem attacks ("She’s an actor! She’s Canadian!) The equivalent of basically the old leftist maneuver of putting hands over ears and singing “la la la corporate America, la la la.”
This film especially seemed transparent to me when even the token Republican on The View was for some reason plugging it. They were of course showing the most, typically Moore, emotionally manipulative scenes, but I never noticed the Schmalzy music. Good Job. (Notice Moore, good propagandist that he IS, never follows a consisitent thesis-interview him and he doesn’t know what his point is-instead he manipulates you emotionally. I really pity these Moore sycophants who won’t see this. I myself have been a hard Leftist like Moore, and I remember how tiring it is hiding from the truth and always setting others up because I didn’t have any real arguments.
Report thisBy John, August 15, 2007 at 11:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
As a Canadian I was amazed at the interviews in the emergency rooms resulted in people saying “ ive waited 25 minutes”, “15 minutes”, “45 minutes”. I have been into Canadian emergency rooms in Toronto, Hamilton, in Barrie and Belleville and the shortest I have ever waited is 5 hours. Typically ive waited 7 or 8 hours. My grandmother had to wait in pain for more than a year for her hip replacement and my mother more than 4 months to start cancer treatment. I know 5 people who have had to go to the United States for their cancer treatments because the wait times were too long here. My sister went to Buffalo, New York to get her MRI because they wanted her to wait 6 months in Ontario. The only reason Canada can afford our health care is because we have tons of oil in the West and tax that industry heavily and we still run it badly. Its not a terrible system, but Moore makes it seem like it is the ideal, even though we often need to use the U.S system because our sytem has long waiting lists.
Report thisBy Jaki, July 27, 2007 at 10:53 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sorry, Ernest. I did notice. I also noticed that my response was indirectly a response to nf. Time to quit. I am certainly enjoying the debate you are participating in on another topic on truthdig. I’ll put my energy there.
Report thisBy nf, July 26, 2007 at 7:14 pm #
Ernest, see the following link for a look at the bill introduced today by Brian Baird (D) Washington. It is a new approach to univeral health care.
Report thishttp://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/013289.html
By nf, July 26, 2007 at 7:02 pm #
Ernest, it looks like you have pre-judged me. I am in the insurance but I do not sell nor do I have anything to do with health insurance. I am strictly involved in property casualty insurance.
If the dems win next year it seems that the US is headed for a change in the way health care is administered and who pays for it. I am simply trying to point out what I perceive as the flaws with having it administered by the government. Either way you get what you want - why the insistance on a government agency to run it ? Certainly both you and I cannot know which way is better, we can only make a case for our favored method. That is all I am trying to do.
I am not trying to save my job, I can retire at any time and intend to do so soon. The vast majority of the people that I know in my profession treat our clients as I’m sure you treat your clients - fairly and respectful of their needs. There are surely exceptions in both professions. It is unfair to paint me with the cold, heartless brush - you don’t know me.
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 26, 2007 at 6:59 pm #
Jaki, in case you haven’t noticed, I have been ignoring nf for some time now, but when he finally came out and admitted his healthcare insurance industry ties, I couldn’t help but lay into him for his deception.
Report thisBy Jaki, July 26, 2007 at 6:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Ernest...You have joined the club. Congratulations.
You did err on the side of understatement, however, when you mentioned the NeoFucker “making a living,” in the insurance racket. He claims to have a “substantial legacy” to leave the 6 children he has contributed to the over-population of the planet. Those of us “making a living” can rarely make such claims.
And now we know...what we suspected all along…
Isn’t it time for those with any semblance of compassionate intelligence to ignore this jerk with no DIRECTED responses AT ALL?
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 26, 2007 at 5:45 pm #
Well, nf, the truth finally emerges. “Being a part of the insurance business...” Hmmm, now I can understand the level of your intellectual dishonesty. You haven’t seen Sicko! Yet you presume to offer a critique of Moore and his outstanding documentary. You speak in gushing terms, repeatedly advancing laissez faire ideology. You chose to ignore relevant facts that do not square with your ideological position. The reason, your job is on the line! Americans may be dying as a result of the most corrupt and expensive health care system, but you, nf, can’t let a little thing like that get in the way of your making a living now, can you?
Shame on you and all the other cold, heartless people in your profession. Respond if you want. As far as I am concerned, our discourse is done!
Report thisBy nf, July 26, 2007 at 12:40 pm #
rigo:
Report thisBy nf, July 26, 2007 at 11:44 am #
You say that the profit will be taken out of the system when the feds take over health care. Being a part of the insurance business it is my understanding that premiums collected by insurers are distributed as follows. For each dollar collected in premium, approximately 65 cents goes to claim payments, 30-35 cents for overhead (buildings, employees, etc). The profit is usually a result of the investment income from the use of the policyholders money (5 - 10 % ). The one class of employees that will be eliminated under government-run health care would be the underwriters (including sales reps) as no customer acceptance decisions will have to be made (everyone is covered). However, the underwriting employees are just a small cog in the insurance wheel. Besides them there are managers, claim processors, investigators and so on. Private insurers are constantly looking for ways to eliminate unnecessary overhead (it reduces profit), this results in efficient operations necessary to compete in the marketplace. I don’t think I have to point out that the government (as far as I know) never looks for efficiency in its operations, and almost never reduces staff. With this in mind, the government has an edge when it comes to the lack of need for underwriters but I believe this is minor when compared to the advantage private employers have in efficiency. This does not take into account the public relations factor, (does one want to deal with a government employee essentially fire-proof or an individual who actually has to answer to an entity that values its relationships with customers ?).
Your statement that those very few who profit are “killing the laborers” is a little over the top, isn’t it ?
I do agree that the transfer of wealth to succeeding generations is a controversial (if not philosophical) subject. It doesn’t seem fair. I intend to leave a substantial legacy to my 6 children but I would be willing to forgo that to even up the playing field if that’s what this country needs. The one balancing factor is that a substantial portion of wealth is donated either directly or through foundations to worthy causes (Bill Gates and Warren Buffet come to mind).
The current tax code I would argue is very fair to those families earning $35,000 or less. They pay very little in federal taxes and get back alot. Higher income people must pay approximately 40 % in taxes (not counting state levies). Isn’t that enough ?
Report thisBy rigo23, July 25, 2007 at 11:02 pm #
rigo,
I took your advice and read house bill HR676. It certainly is proposing a very comprehensive change to a universal health care system in the US.
*Not really. Just profit being taken out of the equation;).
There is however a serious problem - it relies for funding on (see page 18 lines 1-7) a dramatic increase in taxes not for everyone but for the top earners.
*Not true. There is nothing in here stating that the increase in taxes for the richest of us will be “dramatic”, unless you are referring to those rich folk who can afford the best accountants and lawyers to help them avoid taxation. I guess whatever this tax is would be a dramatic increase!
It amounts to nothing more than wealth transfer (income tax increase on top 5% wage earners, progressive payroll tax increase, new tax on stock and bond transactions). How can the left expect to sell this ?
*They don’t have to. It sells itself if people go to the polls and vote to protect their interests.
Why is it that the left constantly insists that those that have worked to attain a level of living that is desired by most Americans must then be faced with mandatory subsidy of those that for what ever reason failed to get there.
*This is a hollow argument. We have socialized medicine for the military, for our seniors, and for the very poor, and it’s way more efficiently managed than our for-profit system.
And hey, most wealth in this country is still transferred. Should the descendants of those who “earned” the original wealth, much of it through slave labor be entitled to the benefits of wealth transference? Why should those of us that work not reap the benefits those that don’t do?
But where does it stop ? Can the left successfully sell the socialist marxist concept from each according to his ability - to each according to her needs.
*We don’t discriminate when it comes to putting out fires, do we? Nf, not many people want everythign socialized, but I’d bet most folks would prefer a mixed system.
At what point does the majority, who certainly can control the burden of taxation, realize that continued and uncontrolled tax increases on the minority of taxpayers will eventually defeat the benefits (and object) of the free market system.
*And when will those very few who profit so very much realize they’re killing the laborers of this country?
Those that take risk and generate the innovative ideas that drive our economy will be stifled, resulting in the suffering of everyone. This group of citizens must get their rewards from the fruits of their endeavors. It is the incentive that drives them. Without it we all suffer.
*Without a healthy citizenry, we all suffer more. Period.
The proposers of this bill (hr 676) would do well to change the bill to fund it with a general national sales tax. This is not new to western democracies and would serve to spread the burden, as well as be fair and easily collectable with minimal fraud.
*Spoken like someone in the top 5% of income earners.
Report thisBy nf, July 21, 2007 at 2:10 pm #
rigo,
I took your advice and read house bill HR676. It certainly is proposing a very comprehensive change to a universal health care system in the US. There is however a serious problem - it relies for funding on (see page 18 lines 1-7) a dramatic increase in taxes not for everyone but for the top earners. It amounts to nothing more than wealth transfer (income tax increase on top 5% wage earners, progressive payroll tax increase, new tax on stock and bond transactions). How can the left expect to sell this ? Why is it that the left constantly insists that those that have worked to attain a level of living that is desired by most Americans must then be faced with mandatory subsidy of those that for what ever reason failed to get there. But where does it stop ? Can the left successfully sell the socialist marxist concept “from each according to his ability - to each according to her needs”. At what point does the majority, who certainly can control the burden of taxation, realize that continued and uncontrolled tax increases on the minority of taxpayers will eventually defeat the benefits (and object) of the free market system. Those that take risk and generate the innovative ideas that drive our economy will be stifled, resulting in the suffering of everyone. This group of citizens must get their rewards from the fruits of their endeavors. It is the incentive that drives them. Without it we all suffer.
The proposers of this bill (hr 676) would do well to change the bill to fund it with a general national sales tax. This is not new to western democracies and would serve to spread the burden, as well as be fair and easily collectable with minimal fraud.
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 20, 2007 at 5:07 pm #
Jaki, Peter Scheer is Robert Scheer’s son.
Report thisBy Jaki, July 20, 2007 at 2:58 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bru...you may be right. This has been one long discussion. I would expect (hope) we will all meet again soon with a new topic to toss about, share and learn. It has been great to hear all opinions, and I mean ALL, in spite of whatever aggravations have arisen. The world is a juicy place. In spite of our egos, we are indeed all one humanity.
Report thisBy nf, July 20, 2007 at 2:46 pm #
Well Ernest and Ardee, how did we arrive at this point ? I will take this opportunity to point out the following posts: Ernest: 83256,83692,83721,83956,86779,87412,87560,87694,88128 and Ardee: 83161,83738,83865,84009,86362,86383,86563,87132,87780
Report thisas examples of unprovoked personal attacks. Rather than have any interest in opposing points of view, both of you resort to childish attacks. Is it any wonder why very few listen to you extremists when you spout your propaganda. Look back, re-read, listen to yourselves, you’re not trying to sell anyone on your ideas you simply want to steamroll them. At 83926 I ask you to cut it out. But neither of you get it. Regrettably I strike back at rigo (87729) - perhaps undeserved. From that point on it is all downhill. It seems as though you both lack the skills necessary to sell your point of view. I promise not to get down to your level again. There are plenty of people who can discuss issues reasonably and respect other’s points of view no matter how opposed to one’s own.
By BruSays, July 20, 2007 at 2:05 pm #
Jaki,
Agreed: Preaching to the choir is not necessarily a bad thing. Even the simple act of contributing to this blog directs most of us to collect our thoughts, organize our positions, separate substance from slop, etc. etc.
But I feel that here, in this blog, we’re no longer sharing ideas and contributing to any real dialog. This blog was born of Michael Moore’s insight of our health care system, but now we’re left spinning our wheels replying - over and over and over again - to a single, clueless, blogger with way too much time on his hands. I’ve lost interest and I suspect I’m not alone.
Report thisBy nf, July 20, 2007 at 12:50 pm #
rigo,
Thank you for a very thoughtful post. I am truly very sorry for the loss of your dad. I’m sure he was very proud of you.
No, my employees don’t have anything to do with my posts. They’re all mine.
I too have an unfortunate situation, one of my grandsons is autistic. Although a beautiful child of 6 years old, he requires constant care - perhaps forever. There is no government help for autistic children to the best of my knowledge. My wife and I along with my son and his wife are encouraged by Bob and Suzanne Wright (chairman and CEO of NBC Universal) whose grandson is in a similar condition, for his family’s establishment of “autism speaks”. We are also thankful for Don Imus, a fervent supporter of this cause (we need him back on radio - a truly nice man).
I don’t know the expense ratios for medicare, although I tend to think your quoted 3 % cannot be right ( I am in the insurance business - no I don’t sell health insurance or have any interest in it in any way ).
A ghoulish me-first society ? Perhaps some truth here, but the capitalistic nature of the US promotes this, the goal here is to get rich (witness the number of people who buy lottery tickets with no idea of how to properly use the proceeds if they win). The majority of our people are enthralled with celebrities and their wealthy life style. How crass.
But yet capitalism got us to this point. The most productive nation on earth. Is there a lot to dislike ? You bet. Would you or I leave for any where else ? Maybe, but probably not.
Good luck rigo.
Report thisBy Jaki, July 20, 2007 at 12:15 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Rigo23--I think you and I have made the same mistake, crediting Robert Scheer, not Peter Scheer, with credit for Truthdig. Am I right, folks?
Robert Scheer, I believe, is the reporter who was fired by the LA Times in the recent shakeup (a long-time progressive journalist).
I don’t have a clue who Peter Scheer is. Are they related?
But I don’t think “you know who” was a plant. They are out there to be sure. It is a big planet and we are a very diverse country, full of fools who love to think they are the “enlightened ones.”
Report thisBy Jaki, July 20, 2007 at 11:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bru...Preaching to the choir is not a bad thing. The choir doesn’t know everything and by sharing knowledge on the important issues of our time, we learn more and are supported in what we do. It isn’t really preaching, but more a support system...as well as challenging idiots and assholes who interrupt or attempt to disrupt the conversation, not in good faith and without making any valuable contributions, other than giving us very good practice in handling their ilk.
Some people in the world are very confused about what “socialism” means. It is not the same as “communism”
(which doesn’t mean a denigration of either, but they are very different). “Socialism” can be democratic; communism is generally not. Socialism means that the wealth of the nation is distributed more equitably and fairly, and that the needs of ALL THE PEOPLE are paramount in deciding how to spend some of that wealth and use of resources, with the people participating fairly in those decisions (perhaps by representative government, but certainly with fair ways of electing them (NOT as in the U.S. today).
A Socialist System would encourage creative solutions where the individual can also receive recognition and rewards, like the doctors in England who get paid more when their patients get healthier, not when they use more pharmaceuticals to create kickbacks.
Such things as housing, education, health care, energy, clothing...you know, REAL NEEDS, SURVIVAL NEEDS, would be guaranteed in a democratic socialist system. Plus, not only do people get to THINK FOR THEMSELVES, they get to THINK (and DO) FOR EACH OTHER. You know, the “we” thing, as opposed to just the “me” thing.
Individualism of the kind that some have manifested on this site is exactly what is killing our planet.
Remember: Corporations have legally declared themselves to be individuals. And then there are those that identify with this crass, selfish way of
perceiving themselves in the world.
We need a re-thinking and a new conversation about the idea and practice of Democratic Socialism.
One might go back a few years (70s) and get a copy of Michael Lerner’s first book: The New Socialist Revolution (I think that was the title), as a primer.
And then there’s Chomsky, Zinn, Klein, Walker, and a whole host of other literaries,intellectuals, and artists currently writing on or around the topic. And, of course, there is Democracy Now! and Free Speech TV.
I’d really like to see an intelligent conversation on this or other venue about this topic--Democratic Socialism. There are some excellent minds here. We have established a thread that can easily be expanded, and, in general, we have good will and kind-hearted, humanitarian intentions.
(Interesting aside: my code word to submit is
Report this“children.") Hmmmmmmmm
By BruSays, July 20, 2007 at 10:42 am #
Despite this blog’s excellent, articulate and thought-provoking conversation (the one very sad exception well-noted by all) we’re preaching to the choir. See you all (again, with one very sad exception) on other blogs!
Report thisBy rigo23, July 20, 2007 at 8:44 am #
Sorry folks. Two corrections from the previous post:
1) ..."and that health insurance didnt cover anything” should be “and that health insurance didnt cover EVERYTHING”
2) “I can guarantee you hed still be around today, “ should be “I CAN’T guarantee you hed still be around today.”
(Corrections are capitalized.)
Report thisBy rigo23, July 20, 2007 at 8:40 am #
nf-
I hate to break this to you, but the medical care that is socialized in this country is actually a lot more efficient than that which is privately managed.
These private maintenance organizations currently waste 30% of every healthcare dollar on administrative costs, a model of inefficiency, while socialized healthcare programs like Medicare and Medicaid only spend 3%.
We have the money to extend this system for all, rich and poor, sick and healthy, and it’s high time we did it.
I know you’re in perfect health, nf, because you don’t have genetic, life-threatening ailments like sickle-cell anemia and you take care of yourself by not smoking or drinking, and you have perfect vision and are not at risk for repetitive stress because you have employees that read this blog for you and type away the responses, but consider for one moment a relative who has had health insurance and that health insurance didn’t cover anything, and maybe that relative had to choose between meds and food or maybe the relative just went bankrupt. I recently saw my own father get kicked out of a hospital rehab for his first stroke despite having health insurance he had been paying for decades. He subsequently had another stroke at home, this time hemmorhagic and suffered for another year before passing in May. I can guarantee you he’d still be around today. I’m not God. But I can bet there’s no way in hell he would have been denied much-needed rehabilitation therapies if the amount of care he was to receive wasn’t determined by shareholders and CEOs.
We live in a ghoulish, me-first, society, embodied by our profit over patient health care system, and if this republic is to survive, our health care system is the perfect place to affect the change we want to see around us.
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 20, 2007 at 7:33 am #
It seems, Ardee, that a high school education is not what it used to be.
Report thisBy nf, July 20, 2007 at 6:46 am #
Ernest, its time to feed Ardee the puppy, he’s barking again.
rigo, I hope you haven’t joined the kennel also, the church of socialism that Ernest preaches in is a dead end - like all other religions. Think for yourself - its refreshing.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 20, 2007 at 5:17 am #
I think nf’s work, like Eunice Wong’s, was planted by Robert Scheer to elicit the requisite impassioned responses to get the ball rolling on this issue. Nf may not be real, folks;).
Report thisBy ardee, July 20, 2007 at 4:49 am #
Ernest,
Past time to ignore the jackass...dontcha think?
Look at where this dialogue has gone and look at where it is on threads not inhabited by this insincere and apparently homophobic little excuse for a man.
He has wriggled and sidestepped every single time his posts have been turned to dust by literate and factual responses and now he thinks that calling you gay is an insult. It may be in a High School locker room, though even there kids are coming around.
Please join with Jaki and I in ignoring the little bastard until his high school opens in the fall......
Report thisBy Jaki, July 20, 2007 at 1:20 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
True Colors, la la la, I see your true colors...shining through...accusing all who disagree with you of calling you names in response to your innane diatribes, then, whadayaknow...you reveal homophobia and gay-baiting as part of your vast repertoire of reactionary fascist “debate” tactics.
Kudos, nf, you just can’t help yourself.
Ardee...I think imploding may be more descriptive than exploding, and, yes, it is mildly entertaining.
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 19, 2007 at 9:32 pm #
Poor nf, he’s been in the desert sun too long.
Report thisBy nf, July 19, 2007 at 8:53 pm #
Gee Ernest, you just can’t stay out of the mud. And judging by your most recent post, perhaps its because you have a such a hard time understanding what you read. Your only recourse is to idiotic remarks. I spend a great deal of time in the desert in California during the winter and consequently have encountered many gays. They seem to be a community of generally nice people that are thoughtful, intelligent and respectful. What happened to you ?
Report thisBy Jaki, July 19, 2007 at 8:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
OK, Ardee, I got it. And Bru, you are totally right: Moore’s film is one of the most important documentaries ever made for the People of the United States.
And, once again we have a “participant” (being a nice puppy to you, nf) discussing the content of a movie he refuses to see. Michael Moore makes a cogent and compelling case for governments (in other, more civilized, countries) efficiently, humanely, compassionately, and cost-effectively running the health care systems of their countries, with the people being very happy with the results.
Of course, the middle-men (GREEDY-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATE INSURANCE COMPANIES) will first need to be eliminated in this country. That is why we should call for Universal Health Care, NOT Universal access to Health Insurance. Listen carefully to the candidates on both sides of the fence on this issue. Kucinich is the ONLY one who calls for Universal Health Care.
nf: “At least private companies have a financial interest in keeping the system honest - profit -”
My first LOL today.
Oh, puleeeeeze...gimme more!
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 19, 2007 at 6:50 pm #
Hmmm, so nf didn’t bother watching Sicko before presenting us with his thoroughly uninformed opinion. Why am I not surprised? Elsewhere, this guy informed us that he regarded the former analyst from Faux News and now chief propagandist for the Bush regime, Tony Snow, as a reliable commentator. He doesn’t like Michael Moore or Keith Olbermann because they “irritate” him.
It is quite predictable that the wilfully ignorant would be irritated by anyone who speaks truth to power, since that truth threatens to pierce the disinformation bubble that surrounds their overly thick skulls. But I wouldn’t go so far as to call nf a “neocon fucker"--at least not to the extent to which I would apply that label to John Bolton. Bolton may be a couple of quarts short of a six pack, but at least that neocon bully knows that what he expouses is pure drivel.
Sadly, poor nf, lacks the intellectual capacity of a John Bolton or even a George W. Bush. His tiny mind is so filled with Orwellian propaganda that there is no room for the truth. While I admit I tired quickly of his idiotic posts, that doesn’t prevent a little empathy. I pity the fool.
Report thisBy ardee, July 19, 2007 at 6:06 pm #
#88052 by Jaki on 7/19 at 1:41 pm
(Unregistered commenter)
Hey Ernest, rigo, ardee Bru...This guy, NF (probably short for Neo Fucker)is yanking your strings, pulling your energy cord. The red flags have been obvious from the start. He plays the game of I really want to learn, but reveals himself to the contrary with so many attacks and status quo defenses he just cant help spewing out, maybe hoping SOMEONE out there will find him credible? Hard to say. Liberal? Laughable! Hes neocon to the core.
Jaki, If you have read my last couple of posts you will note that I am right there with you on this one. The only reason I still read this thread is because I am expecting a revelation when nf finally explodes. That and many of the rejoinders are dicing him to ribbons....Of course I skip any of his posts along the way, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Report thisBy nf, July 19, 2007 at 4:28 pm #
rigo23,
No, I haven’t seen the movie, but that’s not odd because I avoid theaters as much as possible, besides if Michael Moore is truly a populist doing us all a favor as so many posters have written, then why hasn’t he sought distribution through a broadcast or cable outlet (I’m thinking perhaps Cuban’s HDNET)? This is a documentary isn’t it ? What am I missing ?
Universal health care for american citizens is probably going to happen whether I like it or not. What makes it hard to accept is the idea of federal and/or state management of it. That scares the hell out of people like me. Private sector companies competing for the business will provide the service at the lowest cost. Think food stamps - recipients trading them for cash or other items for which they were not intended, medicare - doctors and other health care facilities scamming the system, welfare fraud, income tax cheats, social security disability cheats, and on and on. At least private companies have a financial interest in keeping the system honest - profit - , there is no motive for any government agency to make sure entitlements are administered in a legal and fair way. THE MONEY IS NOT THEIRS TO LOSE. Sure there are going to be mistakes in the management of the system - mistakes will be made by whoever manages it. But be honest, who would you rather have deliver your packages, UPS, FEDEX or the USPS. Just the lines at the post office or the DMV waiting for a clerk to acknowledge your existence is enough to make me vomit. (by the way they’re called public servants - is that an oxymoron ?). Do you want your doctors office run like that ?
Behave Jaki, maybe you’ll learn something, you do not have to suck up to Ernest, he already has one puppy.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 19, 2007 at 3:06 pm #
Even if nf is a neocon, that’s fine. Illnesses don’t fall along party lines, and hopefully nf can see this and understand the need for the medical landscape to change here...and fast. This has been the most important movie I’ve seen in my life, and perhaps nf, if he hasn’t seen it yet, will have the opportunity to do so.
Report thisBy Jaki, July 19, 2007 at 1:41 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hey Ernest, rigo, ardee Bru...This guy, NF (probably short for Neo Fucker)is yanking your strings, pulling your energy cord. The red flags have been obvious from the start. He plays the game of I really want to learn, but reveals himself to the contrary with so many attacks and status quo defenses he just can’t help spewing out, maybe hoping SOMEONE out there will find him credible? Hard to say. Liberal? Laughable! He’s neocon to the core.
I wonder how he dealt with your post (Ernest) on Chomsky, with words like “hegemony...structural analysis...militate...” Probably couldn’t get through it.
Anyway, even though the guy is a Giant Energy Suck, your willingness to indulge him is still educational and enlightening for the rest of us.
I guess that’s what blogging is all about. Carry on.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 19, 2007 at 11:14 am #
“Good post rigo23.
Why do you suggest that Moores message is dangerous ?
--> Nf, Moore’s greater message in ‘Sicko!’, that perhaps in this country we should be a little more ‘we-centric’ than ‘me-centric’ is dangerous only to those that think that rationing medical care in this country to maximize profits or to fulfill a bottom line is ok. This includes for profit and even not-for-profit health maintenance organizations, for even many of their CEOs are paid in excess of a million dollars per annum. This also includes pharmaceutical companies that want to act as middle men for these organizations and keep drug pricing out of the public sector, again, to maximize profit. To me, the new senior drug plan, which made their middlemenization so is akin to what Ernest explains about Enron and California. As a business owner that has to pay an energy bill every month, nf, wouldn’t you be a little bit upset if deregulation of these utilities just like that of prescription medications, got so out of control that they bankrupted the already heavily burdened small business owner?
“Although he certainly doesnt look like the money is doing him much good, or that he is seeking money, who knows what his motivation is. He may be entirely genuine. On the other hand, just the notoriety that goes with his pursuits must be somewhat intoxicating. Lets assume he is for real.”
--> At this point, it would be pretty hard to doubt Moore’s authenticity on this issue. He’s been riding the health care issue since his series “the Awful Truth”, where he even stages a funeral for a live patient denied a necessary transplant by his HMO.
Nf, just out of curiosity, have you actually seen “Sicko!” yet? If so, you’ll realize how off base Ms. Wong is in this review, and hypocritical, to be sure. If she wants to talk about using dramatic effects to appeal to an audience’s emotion, again, she could easily look to CNN and FOX for that sort of tactic 24/7. Michael Moore’s movie is a *public* service bankrolled by his own *private* money. Can you really say that about these corporatist media outlets? I think not. Contrast that with ‘Democracy Now!’ at http://democracynow.org, not sponsored by a dime of corporate money, and you’ll realize how absurd Wong’s arguments are.
“The other people you mention may also be genuine, after all can it be that they simply are anti everything that is good ? Are they all so disingenuous that you cant believe anything that they say ?”
->Hyperbolic man. Hyperbolic. It’s obviously not that one can’t believe *anything* the corporatist outlets say, but Moore does have a point, when he rides CNN and the other MSM outlets for their lack of real reporting on the run-up to war. They didn’t ask the right questions. They resorted to obfuscation and some of the same tactics people use when wanting to avoid a serious discussion of a vital issue. That’s why we’re in the mess we are in today.
“I am trying to sort this whole thing out. In an earlier post I suggested that from a selfish standpoint I should like the single payer system, and perhaps I will. It is very hard for me and Im sure alot of other people like me to support the feds taking on any more social programs. There is plenty of fault to find with the ones they now manage.”
--->I know what Ernest has recommended as reading material may be a lot, so why not start with reading the text of H.R. 676, the bill in congress that lays the groundwork for comprehensive health insurance coverage for all United States residents.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.00676:
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 3:03 pm #
Good post rigo23.
Why do you suggest that Moore’s message is dangerous ?
Although he certainly doesn’t look like the money is doing him much good, or that he is seeking money, who knows what his motivation is. He may be entirely genuine. On the other hand, just the notoriety that goes with his pursuits must be somewhat intoxicating. Let’s assume he is for real.
The other people you mention may also be genuine, after all can it be that they simply are anti everything that is good ? Are they all so disingenuous that you can’t believe anything that they say ?
I am trying to sort this whole thing out. In an earlier post I suggested that from a selfish standpoint I should like the single payer system, and perhaps I will. It is very hard for me and I’m sure alot of other people like me to support the feds taking on any more social programs. There is plenty of fault to find with the ones they now manage.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 2:11 pm #
Ardee,
Watch what you say about H L Mencken, he’s one of my heroes.
OK you finally addressed the litigation issue. Though by no means in depth.
Are you saying that under your single payer system we will not have to deal with the likes of John Edwards or his ilk suing the doctors and hospitals for sport (not to mention enormous personal gain) ?
Please Ardee, stick with it, maybe we’ll both learn something.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 18, 2007 at 2:09 pm #
“rigo23,
If you want Kucinich to really drop off the radar, just have Michael Moore endorse him. “
Good point. But why is that? It is necessarily because our conglomerated media knows how dangerous his message of “we” vs. “me” is. Therefore, they have to resort to personal attacks and obfuscation, rather than considering the worthiness of his arguments.
I mean, seriously, does Michael Moore looks like he loves or has been affected by money? He’s obviously “in it for the right reasons”. So who would you trust more, a real populist like Michael Moore or a faux populist like Lou Dobbs or Bill O’Reilly, bank rolled by an inherently undemocratic process? Would you trust Amy Goodman and the low-budget Democracy Now! to give you the straight scoop. (I swear I’ve never seen a Paris Hilton story on there...not once.) Or would you trust Sean Hannity...another faux populist?
These are serious questions that require you to look in the mirror and ask yourself simple questions like “who has the most to gain” by presenting what he or she presents as “news”.
Report thisBy ardee, July 18, 2007 at 1:40 pm #
#87729.... nf begins to crumble, well he actually has shown small signs in various posts but this displays the true colors , and in response to a brilliant redaction of his very own words...well done Rigo, well done.
I have come to doubt every single thing he posts as fact. He evades and avoids with such frequency that one can almost see the adipose jiggle with the effort.
Then in retrospect and probably in fear of this stupid game he plays ending because of his mask slippage he blathers about being a liberal ( I almost bust a gut laughing there....#87764).
Post more nf, please continue to prove the worth of every political opinion opposing the garbage you stand for, the increasingly childish rebuttals you make and the increasing awkwardness in avoiding the facts presented to you.
Here I give you all a perfect example:
“I suggest to Ardee that the stats on the wikipedia item dealing with health care arent enough. I tell him that I agree that we spend more than anyone else on health care. But what Im looking for is something deeper. The hidden costs. One example, litigation. Its a big one. Our health system pays an enormous price to insurance carriers and lawyers and the settlements that follow. How does that compare with Great Britain for example. “
Ardee:
The Health Care system in Great Britian doesnt refuse to diagnose or treat the variety of expensive ailments presented to it. Thus it needs no army of attorneys to protect it against those it actually insures from illness and disease.
It has already been noted that 50% of all bankruptcies in the USA are due to catastrophic health care issues. A full 70% of those bankruptcies were to people who thought themselves insured against such contingencies and then were refused diagnosis and treatment.To everyone not a pretentious braggadociac ( ok I made that word up but it fits):
Ive certainly had enough of this evasiveness, and beating ones head against the wall because it feels so good to stop is not my favorite pastime. NF has amply proved what it is he stands for and I refuse to waste further on him…
I would have loved seeing what Oscar Wilde might have done if presented with this guy....
“Imagination is a quality given to a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is.”
Of course old HLMenken would have been far, far less kind.......hater of hypocracy that he was.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 1:11 pm #
rigo23,
If you want Kucinich to really drop off the radar, just have Michael Moore endorse him.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 12:54 pm #
My deepest apologies rigo23, you’re absolutely right. I did engage in hyperbole. I lost my head. Its just the pressure of dealing with so many people that think that our government is the solution to all their problems.
Why is it that the ultra-liberals (I consider myself a liberal) seem to resort to denigrating remarks when discussing subjects with people they disagree with ? Its their way or nothing. Do they really want everyone to just agree with them with no dissent ? I don’t think the ultra left has a stranglehold on intelligence.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 18, 2007 at 12:08 pm #
Ernest, you wrote:
“There is only one presidential candidate who is calling for a repeal of NAFTA & the WTO. He just happens to be the only Democratic candidate who supports single-payer health care. If the American people do not awake to the fact that the so-called leading candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards) are corporatist charletons masquerading as Democrats, if they do not flock in droves to the Kucinich campaign, and right soon!”
You are spot on. And thank you Amy Goodman and Democracy Now! for reporting on Clinton and Edwards shamelessly conspiring to shut out the lesser-funded candidates. I’m definitely voting for Kucinich, the only real populist candidate out there. What is very curious to me, however, is how Michael Moore will not throw his support behind him, when he’s the one closest to his views and values. Something tells me he’s holding out hope that Hillary will revert to her earlier days before being bought by the pharmaceutical companies.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 18, 2007 at 11:31 am #
nf-
Why the ad hominem? I merely pointed out, line and verse your hypocrisy when claiming other people resort to hyperbolic arguments. So because you cannot defend your own hypocrisy, you only confirm it with more nonsensical personal attacks after getting upset about people and *their* ad hominem several days ago.
Not so good.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 11:17 am #
Must have hit a raw nerve, huh rigo. Maybe sis is a nun somewhere ? Daddy a prison doctor ? Perhaps you’re one of those teachers that baby sit the students all day ? Your union didn’t get the right pay increase or just didn’t get that promotion to chief filing clerk ? Did your partner get AIDS and you can’t afford the drug bills ? Good luck. Keep at it. Sooner or later you’ll find a way to increase the wealth transfer (taxes) to bail you out.
Report thisBy rigo23, July 18, 2007 at 9:47 am #
(Continued from previous post re: hyperbole.)
“Isnt Google great ? Which government agency invented it (sorry Al)”
Which government agency invented the Internet? Ever heard of ARPA?
“The US is a unique country, it is not like European or Latin American countries.”
Ah yes. Those cookie-cutter countries disgust me. They could never handle the sheer sophistication of a Britney Spears or pure eloquence of George Bush.
“It is my experience that government is composed largely of people who could not make it elsewhere, at any level, in any competitive environment. OK. This is anecdotal. But it is what I believe.”
Wow. Stephen Colbert was right. I guess there really are more nerve endings in your gut than in your brain.
“Remember, you cant fire (without a court battle) any government employee. Look at the problem we have with the public school systems (the granddaddy of cases justifying privatization).”
Oh really? Tell that to all those Gonzales-approved attorney firings that will never be reversed. Tell that to every military leader Bush fired who didn’t agree with him. Tell that to any public school teacher fired for touching a child in either self defense or to give the child the light but healthy dose of corporal discipline they should have received at home.
And as for privatization of our school system, you can’t bleed public schools or any public institution like FEMA and then blame their imminent failure on their public nature. That is the quintessential faux libertarian argument.
“By the way, Ardee, if you socialists...”
Any sentence that starts out like that is just not going to end well.
“Im not crazy about Bush, but I dont hate him like you do. I do know that hes the guy that runs the place for the next 18 months. Try to live with it and elect the socialist of your choice next year.”
Wow. Socialist of our choice? Surely you must mean corporatist of our choice.
Nf. I am eternally grateful for the laughs:).
Report thisBy rigo23, July 18, 2007 at 9:46 am #
Nf-
You wrote:
“Nothing that you have written presents a logical argument for your position. Your comments are loaded with hyperbole.”
Ahhh. The irony in that statement alone. But let’s have fun.
Hyperbole?
From the Nf hyperbole hall of fame:
“But perhaps unlike you, I understand that the federal government rarely gets anything right...”
That’s right. Raaaaarely.
“I believe that all classes in this country are doing better every year.”
So it’s just like Office Space.
Peter Gibbons: So I was sitting in my cubicle today, and I realized, ever since I started working, every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that’s on the worst day of my life.
Dr. Swanson: What about today? Is today the worst day of your life?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah.
Dr. Swanson: Wow, that’s messed up.
“Nothing Ive experienced in life disputes what Ive written.”
Nothing. Never....ever.
“The USA is not Europe. I believe that we face entirely different issues than they.”
Entirely different. We Superman. They Bizarro.
“You may not like Bush, but economic conditions have never been better for all classes in America.”
Especially for the poor and uninsured. Teeth aren’t even abcessing as badly as they used to.
“The great religions of the world (especially the Catholic Cult) collect money that supposedly is used for compassionate purposes. I dont believe it, I only see the expenditures for grander branch offices (churches) and other perks for the religious hierarchy including payments made to people injured by their pedophile branch managers (priests).”
Extra! Extra! Pedophilic priests gone wild!
“Believe it or not most doctors are doctors not because they want to cut someones toenails, look down their throats, pull out decayed teeth or cut someones bowel open. No, theyre there for the money.”
Ah yes. Those a-hole doctors who throw lavish organic chemistry, physics, and biology parties during their undergraduate years, with their pre-med groupies only to prepare for a twice offered a year, grueling eight-hour exam and then year(s)long application process to enter those whorehouse medical schools, where, if they’re admitted (two thirds aren’t), they live it up taking the equivalent of another 25-30 undergraduate credit hours for two years, partying through exam after exam, and then greedily move on two two years of vacation during clinical rotations only to then move on to more partying during their residency for 3 to x years, where they’re paid 5-6 bucks an hour for their greed, so then maybe when they finally leave this years-long-orgy, they can focus on paying off their 300,000 dollars in loans. Damn, they’re greedy.
“I believe that if you gave the underclass the cash to pay for health insurance, for the vast majority of them it would be the last purchase on their list, well behind coca cola, chips, cigarettes and whatever other vice that may afflict them.”
Whereas, ya see, if ya gave the upper class that cheddar, they’d know just how to spend it. They would never spend it on silly things like cocaine or draining our treasury to illegally invade other countries under false pretenses. They’re above that yo.
(To be continued.)
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 18, 2007 at 8:44 am #
nf, your question about living in “Chomsky world” is non-sensical. Chomsky is not Karl Marx. He is not advocating some new form of society. He is an astute linquist and one of this nation’s most powerful intellectuals. His writings are intended to accurately describe the world in which we live, especially as it pertains to the “elite consensus” of U.S. imperial hegemony. His conclusions about a “democracy deficit” flow from a structual analysis of how, through the corporate media, the U.S. electoral process has degenerated into a system where candidates, like products, are sold through deceptive advertising--a corporate media whose economic interests militate against a truthful assessment of where a candidate stands on issues that truly matter to the vast majority of the American people. Chomsky’s more extended work, “Manufacturing Consent,” which he co-authored with Prof. Edward S. Herman, provides a structural analysis demonstrating how the U.S. corporate media operates as a propaganda network.
I know I have been a bit short with you, but it is difficult to read posts of someone who can merely parrot what he has “learned” from the propaganda network without any appreciation for the extent to which he has been deceived.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 6:38 am #
Ernest,
You’re hurting my feelings again. It always hurts when someone as smart as you shows his lack of patience. I am trying real hard to get to your level, but it takes time Ernest, be patient.
By the way, I would still like to read your comments on what it would be like to live in a “Chomsky” world. Come on, just a little taste.
Report thisBy nf, July 18, 2007 at 6:29 am #
Brusays,
I don’t get it, your “rebuttals” agreed with what I wrote, it was only your point 5 where we disagree. Your comment does not make sense. Your use of terms like “deluded” accomplish nothing. Nothing that you have written presents a logical argument for your position. Your comments are loaded with hyperbole.
I have employees and I provide health insurance for them. I should be thrilled that people like you want the single payer system you support. But perhaps unlike you, I understand that the federal government rarely gets anything right and ultimately just throws money at problems and winds up with people like Mike Brown (the head of FEMA during Katrina) who are not up to the job. And please, don’t tell me that it was Bush’s fault. Both parties appoint these unqualified people who happen to be connected to their administration in some way.
Report thisBy cann4ing, July 17, 2007 at 6:07 pm #
nf, if you want to be taken seriously, don’t post until you have read up on “and understand” the list of materials I listed for you. There’s an old saw: No one will know how stupid you are until you open your mouth. That goes for posting as well.
Acquire knowledge, then let’s have an intelligible conversation. Spouting right-wing propaganda is not an intellectual discussion, and, frankly, it is beginning to get boring not only for me but for others like ardee. If I wanted to hear endless drivel, I’d simply turn into the Faux News at Fox.
Report thisBy BruSays, July 17, 2007 at 5:49 pm #
NF,
You’re not deluded because you don’t agree with me. You’re deluded because I can count about 30 feet of reasonable, substantiated, specific-case facts and references in this blog that either directly refute your “I believes” or “I feel” or “my street smarts tell me” positions.
What’s more, you’re all over the map on your positions, pulling from right field, left field, out of the blue, constantly digging for another angle, often countering with an “Oh yeah? Well how about...?”
And the latest: Tossing in 5 statements about our cheery economy and happy citizens only to turn around and agree with 4 of my