Here's the smilie I should have placed on that first comment :)

pissed off patricia @ 1:

The girl from the audience looked like a plant to me and once she said her little piece, she was confused and lame as hell.

If she was a "plant" somebody needs to get their money back---LOL----

ticktock, I didn't say she was a good plant. When was the last time you saw anyone representing the right who could make a good strong argument for their cause? They can't because their causes are so damned weak.

patricia, it's not so much that their causes are so weak, but that they don't bother to study the issue to the point that they're willing to be wrong.

Mr. Moore a class act..

at a funeral last week i was discussing SICKO with a republican friend of mine and he just came unglued even having me just mention M. Moores name ,

What are they afraid of?

I don't know if there is footage of it in this clip, but on Mike's site, there is footage of him EATING a smarmy little chickenhawk college republican.

[Deleted. Puerile attempt at flamebait-Sitemonitor]

She was such an amateur. What was with all this "letting people speak" crap? Don't you know you're supposed to shout your face off constantly, and demand that your counterpart tell you whether or not they hate America and if they want the terrorists to win?

[Deleted. Puerile attempt at flamebait-Sitemonitor]

AARRRGGGHH I hate this false boogey man issue that scares more privileged Americans by suggesting that they would not continue to have the best health care because they might have to "share" with the less fortunate -- even Michael Moore in this clip makes this mistake!!

There is absolutely NO REASON why a National Health program could not cover everyone to a certain standard of health care, and still allow those who have the means (or even those who may not be wealthier, but have different priorities) to pay extra or even take out supplemental insurance to cover such things as private rooms, cosmetic surgery, etc. It's kind of like having dependable mass transit for everyone, but if extra speed, or comfort, or just crass elitism is your thing, you can always buy yourself a Rolls.

The thing about that girl is...

She said WE shouldn't have socialized medicine, but the truth is, SHE doesn't want to help pay for it. I'm sure she knows deep down, it would be the right thing to do to IF WE ALL kicked in and help - but SHE HERSELF DOES NOT WANT TO.

She won't come out and say that, that would make her look bad. She can not simply say "I personally do not want to help the rest of the world. I want to keep my good health insurance and not share it, because I don't care about you. Instead, she tries to make a case that we just shouldn't in general.

She never gave one solid reason WHY no one should kick in. Either she said things needed to be reformed, shed say she just didn't know much about it to comment, or she would just said "No, not a good idea".

Get a REAL republican/conservative to debate Moore, not this wide-eyed conservo-lite person with the 'I dunno' and 'I'll have to know the details'.

Either way, a win appearance for Michael! Go get 'em!

she might have been right if we actually had an actual free enterprise system in place. unfortunately we'll likely never know since corporations wield far too much power.

a little sad to see supposedly "informed" people make such horrible arguments. you have to wonder if she's even given topic a moment of thought before showing up at this taping. sounded like she just regurgitated what she's been told to think.

I am a saddo..
WOOWEEE..
yo sure is a smart one ..
mebbie they'll keep you for propgation purposes

[Name changed of quoted poster-Sitemonitor]

I am a saddo @ 18:

What our Health Care System really is is DISEASE MANAGEMENT.
For profit of course.

[Deleted post by banned poster-Sitemonitor]

Yes the Best Democracy and Health Care money can buy.

#18

If you had actually bothered to see Moore's film, you would have found out that the wait time in Canada is no longer, if not less, than it is in the United States. My wife had to wait five months before she saw a doctor. Again, that is not five days or even five weeks but five months before she was able to see a physician. As Moore's trips to other countries in Sicko pointed out, one can see a doctor in a lot less time than that. Also, your attacking Moore because of his weight is a classic case of shooting the messenger while ignoring the message. Not a very effective way to win an argument.

poor thing, she didn't know what hit her. She was against it before she new what IT was...

I hate to put somebody down, but this girl is DUMB! She is quick with the Rush Limbaugh talking points but when asked to back up her opinion with thoughtful analysis, you can almost see her two brain cells just shutting down. Hey conservatives! I don't mind that you have a position, debate is good, but is it too much to ask to be able to give well-thought out reasons why you feel the way you do?

Please lets not turn this into a Moore versus a Little Ignorant Girl.

Moore is trying to get people to wake up and ACT.

Ha, so ... Republican girl is against socialized medicine. Except for the military. And the Congress. And old people. And poor babies. But if just any schmuck can get it, look out! We become Soviet Russia overnight.

A few observations:

a. The little Republican girl doesn't do the best job of representing those, who are not thinking. Well, on the other hand, she does.
b. Frequently I've seen those who are not thinking, compare Michael Moore with Ann Coulter. You probably know what I mean. Ann Coulter is one of those hate-spewing, extremists from the right, whereas Michael Moore is allegedly one of those hate-spewing, extremists from the left. That's what those, who don't think, think, if you know what I mean.
c. I've now seen Matthews interview both Moore and Coulter. When Michael Moore conversed with someone, who disagreed with him, he was respectful or her, and was overall decent. Has Ann Coulter ever been respectful of and decent towards those who disagree with her?

Conclusion: Michael Moore = muckraker, but overall a decent person. Ann Coulter = human trash. And what's up with Matthews? In the interview with Moore, tweety didn't look all that bad. In his interview with Coulter, tweety looked like quite the twit.

Why didn't Moore or Matthews simply ask her if she had health insurance...and if she did, who was paying for it.

When she said "my parents," then they could've said, "Did it ever occur to you, Pumpkin, that not everybody's mommy and daddy can afford healthcare for themselves, let alone their kids? And do you know that one day YOU may find yourself without it...then what will you do when you need some creme for that awful rash you catch from Biff after that ski trip to Aspen!?"

...oh, and the truth.

It is simple most republicans are dump. I mean very dump. They talk before they think and very often they do the same wrong things many times in a day. With this girl she doesnot even know how to support her views. She heard about socialise medicine from Rush and just decided to carry it around like her diaper. Republican pharasees of modern christianity.

I am a saddo @ 47:

dont worry about it asshole you aint got to pick up his bill!

[Deleted post by banned poster-Sitemonitor]

we do even simple minded poor asslicking repukes like you!

Speaking of Hardball.

Newt called Matthews an utterly irrelevant, shallow television celebrity in this article.

http://www.examiner.com/a-842080~Newt_Gingrich_goes_nuclear__May_enter_r...

A Richard Head @ 25:

Anyone else see the peice on Unity 08? A bi-partisan(sure they are) group intent on getting a 3rd party canidate on the ballot. I visited their website and I'll tell you now, all they are is pissed off wingnuts who want their old party back. Any group that calls Lamar Alexander (R-TN) "Alexander the Great" and quotes Joe Liberman as an example of bi-partisan politics are not "Independent" by any means.
The only comment about a Democrat was misleading, in an attempt to begin the attacks in my opinion. Bi-partisan my ASS. Hopefully this group can be exposed before they gain any ground, because along with the wingnuts it's 2 against 1 to keep Progressive Dems. from winning in 08'.

Sorry about the thread jack but this is of the utmost importance. Thanks.

Dude, that's called "splitting the vote". It's a good thing. If say 50% of the country is disposed towards voting towards a douchebag and there are two douchebag candidates, they will, most simplistically both get 25% (half each of the douchebag inclined voters), while the non douchebag takes up 50% winning.

V V

Perhaps the most despicible people who asked Moore questions were those two young libertarians. One quoted the U.S. Constitution-life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness-while ignoring the fact that one cannot pursue happiness if one's life is imperiled by illness. Libertarians also conveniently ignore the Preamble to the Constitution which states that "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, ...promote the general Welfare..." which can be certainly interpreted to mean that the government shall ensure that its citizens' health is taken care of in this country.

As Chris Matthews pointed out, those healthy individuals only care about themselves and to hell with those whose health has been ruined because of exorbitant insurance bills [half of all bankrupticies in this country happen because people are unable to pay their insurance companies].

ticktock @ 4:

pissed off patricia @ 1:

The girl from the audience looked like a plant to me and once she said her little piece, she was confused and lame as hell.

If she was a "plant" somebody needs to get their money back---LOL----

If she was a plant the GOP could have done better than her with a potted plant!

Did you catch what that horrid little bitch said about Medicare for old people? She said that taking it away would be hard because they already have it. Translation: She would gladly grab the heart medication from your grandma's hands, but it just doesn't look politically feasible.

I hope she loses her job, then catches a long-term, disabling disease. Personal misfortune is how a self-indulgent conservative magically transforms into a socialist liberal. Works every time, guaranteed.

Required reading:

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/%7Ealtemey/

I'm about halfway through. It explains so much about wingnuts

tboy @ 55:

Brendan @ 40:

Ha, so ... Republican girl is against socialized medicine. Except for the military. And the Congress. And old people. And poor babies. But if just any schmuck can get it, look out! We become Soviet Russia overnight.

The only thing we have to fear is fear it self. There is socialised medicine in Britain , France and Germany today. Are these nations like the soviet Union Brendan? The answer is no. They take care of their people. Think before you talk again.

Wow, you have a really bad sense of irony.

r€nato @ 57:

Dear Chris Matthews:

If you are going to ask a guest a question, kindly shut the fuck up and let them answer.

Sincerely...

Thank you for saying this. Matthews talks like he had about 8 shots of espresso. How incredibly rude of him to talk over people---but in reality, you need to tell these people to shut up and let ME talk rather then let them walk over you. A little well timed assertiveness never hurt anyone.

Rasputin @ 51:

I am a saddo @ 18:

What our Health Care System really is is DISEASE MANAGEMENT.
For profit of course.

[Deleted post by banned poster-Sitemonitor]

Only for elective procedures and by the way... after contacting every major surgical group in the New York to Philadelphia corridor for a hip replacement, I had to wait two and a half months to get an appointment and two and a half months to get on the surgical schedule.
The idea that we don't have to wait is bullshit and Businessweek wrote an article to that effect:

The Doctor Will See You—In Three Months
The health-care reform debate is in full roar with the arrival of Michael Moore's documentary Sicko, which compares the U.S. system unfavorably with single-payer systems around the world. Critics of the film are quick to trot out a common defense of the American way: For all its problems, they say, U.S. patients at least don't have to endure the endless waits for medical care endemic to government-run systems. The lobbying group America's Health Insurance Plans spells it out in a rebuttal to Sicko: "The American people do not support a government takeover of the entire health-care system because they know that means long waits for rationed care."
In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems. Take Susan M., a 54-year-old human resources executive in New York City. She faithfully makes an appointment for a mammogram every April, knowing the wait will be at least six weeks. She went in for her routine screening at the end of May, then had another because the first wasn't clear. That second X-ray showed an abnormality, and the doctor wanted to perform a needle biopsy, an outpatient procedure. His first available date: mid-August. "I completely freaked out," Susan says. "I couldn't imagine spending the summer with this hanging over my head." After many calls to five different facilities, she found a clinic that agreed to read her existing mammograms on June 25 and promised to schedule a follow-up MRI and biopsy if needed within 10 days. A full month had passed since the first suspicious X-rays. Ultimately, she was told the abnormality was nothing to worry about, but she should have another mammogram in six months. Taking no chances, she made an appointment on the spot. "The system is clearly broken," she laments.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042072.htm

I had an MRI a few weeks ago. I waited 3 weeks. No problem, as it was not an emergency. If I had need it for a cancer diagnosis or for severe pain, I would have got in sooner.
Several years ago, I had orthopedic surgery. I waited 3 months. Again, not a problem, as I was not in pain.
Emergency surgery in Canada happens within days. Where there are waiting lines, they are no worse than US HMOs.
And there is no such thing here as a pre-existing condition that excludes you from insurance, or retroactive changes to coverage because your illness is too expensive to cover, or other such bullshit. Everybody is in the same risk pool. Everybody is covered. Period. There is no need for an expensive insurance bureaucracy to exclude sick people or ration coverage, because there is no profit to protect.
In Canada, the idea that you would have to call up an insurance adjuster to argue about payment for a treatment is absurd. You deal with your doctor, period.
It's so simple, I can't believe some Americans don't understand the inherent efficiency of single-payer insurance. The US medical insurance business is a vast, Soviet-style bureaucracy, designed to deny treatment wherever possible in order to preserve profit. It's a textbook example of market failure - it adds 25% to the cost of every medical procedure. Why don't people get this?

She was so eager to scream against "socialized" health care but when asked to defend it her only defense was "I haven't read enough about it". These are conservatives. So eager to toe the party line when they don't know what that line is. Poor, poor naive children. This is what's scary about politics. They are told to believe this or that regardless of the consequences because the party said so, yet they are clueless about this or that.

Our young republicans at work.

(just to be fair, she WAS pulled out of the audience and didn't have a chance to prepare) Just like most of us.

If she was a “plant” somebody needs to get their money back—LOL—-

Vegetables are plants too, you know.

Annoyed Canuck @ 68:

Rasputin @ 51:

I am a saddo @ 18:

What our Health Care System really is is DISEASE MANAGEMENT.
For profit of course.

[Deleted post by banned poster-Sitemonitor]

Only for elective procedures and by the way... after contacting every major surgical group in the New York to Philadelphia corridor for a hip replacement, I had to wait two and a half months to get an appointment and two and a half months to get on the surgical schedule.
The idea that we don't have to wait is bullshit and Businessweek wrote an article to that effect:

The Doctor Will See You—In Three Months
The health-care reform debate is in full roar with the arrival of Michael Moore's documentary Sicko, which compares the U.S. system unfavorably with single-payer systems around the world. Critics of the film are quick to trot out a common defense of the American way: For all its problems, they say, U.S. patients at least don't have to endure the endless waits for medical care endemic to government-run systems. The lobbying group America's Health Insurance Plans spells it out in a rebuttal to Sicko: "The American people do not support a government takeover of the entire health-care system because they know that means long waits for rationed care."
In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems. Take Susan M., a 54-year-old human resources executive in New York City. She faithfully makes an appointment for a mammogram every April, knowing the wait will be at least six weeks. She went in for her routine screening at the end of May, then had another because the first wasn't clear. That second X-ray showed an abnormality, and the doctor wanted to perform a needle biopsy, an outpatient procedure. His first available date: mid-August. "I completely freaked out," Susan says. "I couldn't imagine spending the summer with this hanging over my head." After many calls to five different facilities, she found a clinic that agreed to read her existing mammograms on June 25 and promised to schedule a follow-up MRI and biopsy if needed within 10 days. A full month had passed since the first suspicious X-rays. Ultimately, she was told the abnormality was nothing to worry about, but she should have another mammogram in six months. Taking no chances, she made an appointment on the spot. "The system is clearly broken," she laments.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042072.htm

I had an MRI a few weeks ago. I waited 3 weeks. No problem, as it was not an emergency. If I had need it for a cancer diagnosis or for severe pain, I would have got in sooner.
Several years ago, I had orthopedic surgery. I waited 3 months. Again, not a problem, as I was not in pain.
Emergency surgery in Canada happens within days. Where there are waiting lines, they are no worse than US HMOs.
And there is no such thing here as a pre-existing condition that excludes you from insurance, or retroactive changes to coverage because your illness is too expensive to cover, or other such bullshit. Everybody is in the same risk pool. Everybody is covered. Period. There is no need for an expensive insurance bureaucracy to exclude sick people or ration coverage, because there is no profit to protect.
In Canada, the idea that you would have to call up an insurance adjuster to argue about payment for a treatment is absurd. You deal with your doctor, period.
It's so simple, I can't believe some Americans don't understand the inherent efficiency of single-payer insurance. The US medical insurance business is a vast, Soviet-style bureaucracy, designed to deny treatment wherever possible in order to preserve profit. It's a textbook example of market failure - it adds 25% to the cost of every medical procedure. Why don't people get this?

Actually it adds more than 25% to a procedure... it actually doubles the costs!
Americans presently are paying approximately $7,000 dollars per capita for their health care. Canadians presently are paying about $3,000 dollars per capita, yet the most comprehensive studies show that they receive health care as good or better than in the US and they out live us on average of three to five years.
Meanwhile, south of the Canadian border... every year over 400,000 American families are forced into bankruptcy due to a medical crisis in the family. As the Harvard and Ohio State University study goes on to show... 75% of those families had health insurance!
Those costs have doubled in the last six years and are projected to double again in the next ten years. If we are stupid enough to believe the BS from the riechwingers and not hold our representatives feet to the fire on this... then we deserve what we get. Of course I will be moving to Canada where they don't worry about going broke when they get sick!

Like I said....don't sweat this. A wingnut running indy would split the right leaning vote....and we are set up to cream them any way that you slice it.

V V

and her ideology crumbles when faced with reality....just like so many hypocrite
republicans. she should have walked the walk, and told them "fuck the poor".

Gort @ 73:

Greg @ 70:

...

(just to be fair, she WAS pulled out of the audience and didn't have a chance to prepare) Just like most of us.

Just to be fair, I noticed she also had the lobotomy scars on both her temples - one of the signs of a Chimp follower.

Be nice. This mindset works both ways. Our handlers tell us what to think and regardless of the facts we eat it up. We all, on the left and right, need to get educated before we vote. All politicians have this attitude that because they are a politician their position is the right one because they are smarter than us. I'm smarter than 90% of politicians. When an issue is raised, I do a little looking. I don't let them tell me what to think about this issue because they will only give me one side....Their's. And like this girl, she took for granted what her side said. She looked to be 19, 20 21 years old. Chances are her daddy is a Republican and this is what she grew up with...Clinton evil, Kennedy got what he deserved. I just think it's a novel idea for ALL OF US to look into the issues and not base an opinion on what a "candidate" says about one like she did. Give this girl like many others a project. Ask them to actually look into what they stand for instead of what we are told to stand for and write us a little report. The biggest challenge for us is to find a nonpartisan reference.

She sounded like a "typical conservative." She didn't like the "sound" of the label of socialized medicine but can't tell her head from her ass on the topic.

What a good little conservative.

I'll start out by saying this; Michael Moore is an extraordinary person. But it just occurred to me that Michael Moore isn't what we say he is. We (and Michael himself) say he is a film maker. Now that's for sure but....watching this clip I'm thinking "I'd vote for this guy". "he's against war, he is a staunch supporter of progressive or dare I say 'socialist' ideals." M.M. is a politician in film-makers clothing. He'd never get elected because he is unwilling to give up being a schlub. A real schlub at that. We don't like cellulite. Political stereotypes like Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Bill Clinton-- they're sleek and we Americans, we like sleek. (I don't think there is anything wrong with sleek. I'm not though.) The last time we had a schlub in political power, the Dems were in control and the Speaker of the house was Tip O'Neill. I'm serious, M.M. is a politician and I say "come out of the schlub's closet Michael Moore."

Anyone else painfully aware of how different Chris Matthews attitude is towards Morre v. toward Coulter?

But on anohter tip,
If anyone out there reading this works in GE's personnel department, try this:
Let Matthews wake up someday "without" insurance. Make him pay up frotn, out of paocket for treatment. Have all payments for his medication returned for lack of coverage. On and On.... and time how long till tweety sings diffrent tune.

Can't wait till he gets canned.

Vitam Vas Like I said….don’t sweat this. A wingnut running indy would split the right leaning vote….and we are set up to cream them any way that you slice it.

True, but the way I see it is another Ralph Nader 00'. Without that asshole the 2000' elections would've been different.

The way the wingnuts see it, this is just insurance in case Nader doesn't make the ballot. I agree with a third party, but a true bipartisan party. Not these assholes.

/would still vote Democrat
//progressive

She likes the "idea" of free enterprise, but only because shes does not understand the reality. We are not talking about making horseshoes. We are talking about a small cartel of insurance companies writing their own tickets in DC and figuring out better and better ways of denying coverage. A democratic government is simply a corporation where the voters are the shareholders. What have now are rogue CEOs that are spinning off parts of it to their cronies in order to gouge the public. There are many ways to build healthy competition into the system, but the private corporations running the show now are ANTI COMPETITIVE.

#88-A Richard Head Says

I think that you are way off base in claiming that Nader cost Gore the election. Please point out to us where it states in the U.S. Constitution that Nader and other third party candidates are not allowed to run for president. No one forced anyone to vote for Nader. Could Nader have received votes because people actually believed that Nader was a better choice than Gore or Bush? You would have a much stronger case if you cited the fact that approximately 60,000 African Americans became disenfranchised in the 2000 election because of voter fraud perpetrated by the Republicans.

FreeDUMB @ 90:

She likes the "idea" of free enterprise, but only because shes does not understand the reality. We are not talking about making horseshoes. We are talking about a small cartel of insurance companies writing their own tickets in DC and figuring out better and better ways of denying coverage. A democratic government is simply a corporation where the voters are the shareholders. What have now are rogue CEOs that are spinning off parts of it to their cronies in order to gouge the public. There are many ways to build healthy competition into the system, but the private corporations running the show now are ANTI COMPETITIVE.

"Free" enterprise is not. Not when the elites make the rules and own the means of production. And, like you said, we aren't talking about a company selling waterbeds. Health care is a basic human need.

btw… i think some of you are way too harsh with that girl who’s obviously too young and naive to know that she’s just mindlessly regurgitating her spoon-fed propaganda…

Well then a little public embarrassment should be good for her, straighten her out. She is old enough to know that if you can't support your arguments then you probably shouldn't be so certain about them in the first place.

pissed off patricia @ 1:

The girl from the audience looked like a plant to me and once she said her little piece, she was confused and lame as hell.

She made about as much sense as a plant...a potted plant.

Single party payor health insurance, which is really what Hillary et al advocate is not Socialized Medicine--it's Government sponsored insurance, cutting out for profit 3rd party payors. This is what Medicare is--true Socialized Medicine isn't practical, because MD's won't all become govt. employees. Single party payor plans will work here.

How can you not want healthcare for everyone. If you don't you really are a Richard.

Go figure...another conservative who has her mind made up but when asked simple and basic real-world questions she says "I don't know, I haven't read enough about it." She doesn't know and hasn't read up on the simple facts of what is happening around her...yet she is confident that she's a conservative and that national healthcare is bad.

What does that say about conservatives, because it seems to be the rule more than the exception?

I find it interesting to note that I can't remember a Canadian complaining about how long they had to wait in line to get medical treatment. First off, I have never had to wait more than 2 weeks to see the general practitioner of my choice. If he/she thinks I need further expertise, they will refer me on to a specialist. If my doctor is concerned that this may be serious, I will probably see a specialist within the month. If he knows it is a serious situation that requires a specialist, I will probably see the specialist within a week and start any testing that is needed that same day. If I am diagnosed with a serious condition such as cancer, I will have surgery within a month or sooner and will start any therapies such as chemo or radiation within a very acceptable period of time that will not compromise my ability to fight the cancer. I will have all necessary backup testing and aftercare including at home nursing care provided for me. I will probably have to share a hospital room while I am being treated in the hospital, but I will be able to return home relatively quickly and will not have to worry about receiving professional after care at home. It will be ordered by my doctor and provided. If I develop complications, I can go to any emergency room and be treated and if necessary re-hospitalized until the problem is resolved.

I recently had cancer surgery. I went in for an unrelated procedure (it only took 6 weeks from seeing my family doctor to having this procedure performed by a specialist BTW) and it was discovered that I had cancer of the appendix. The specialist notified me the minute that she had the results of the biopsy and I was sitting in her office a half hour later. While I was in her office and she was explaining what was in the biopsy, my cell phone rang and it was the hospital calling to see if I could come in the next day for an MRI that was ordered by the surgical specialist that would be taking over. The next day I had all the pre op blood work, MRI and cardiograms that would be necessary for the major surgery that I was about to have. The day after that I met the surgeon that would be performing my surgery and had ordered the testing. The surgery was performed 10 days later. I lost half of my large intestine. I was hospitalized for 5 days. I went home and within 5 days at home, I was back to walking my dogs and pretty well back to normal. It will be 2 years in December since I have had this surgery. I have very regular appointments with my family doctor and my oncologist. I am cancer free and expect to remain cancer free. I am also debt free.

Now the other side of the coin is the pesky mole that I had under my arm. It was not cancerous, just in an annoying spot. I had to wait 8 weeks to get it removed. I usually have to wait 2 months for my annual mammogram. If I need to see a shrink, I will have to wait longer...usually 2 to 6 months, but I could get a psychologist or a psychotherapist within a month and if I was in crisis I could go to any emergency room and see a shrink. I'm sure there are other areas of medicine that have long waits as well. Also I live in a large city, so my waits are less and I don't have to travel far to get world class treatment.

I think Canadians have a different perspective to waiting in line for medical treatment. I know that I'm happy to be at the end of the line because in Canada, it means that my condition isn't serious. When you are first in line here, you have some major troubles ahead of you. But no matter whether the medical issue is routine or unusual, large or small, it will be looked after and no one in this country will ever have to declare bankruptcy to live a healthy life. I guess that's why you don't hear us complaining about waiting in line.

The politicians in this country are very careful about messing with our health care system. The fastest way to get your ass kicked out of office here is to suggest that we follow the US example of private insurance health care. WE DON'T WANT IT!

BTW, I saw SICKO on opening day and my reaction was a very strong urge to kiss the Canadian ground I was walking on and to thank my ancestors who had either the good common sense or the very bad sense of direction to end up at the port of Halifax Nova Scotia instead of New York.

moore did indeed rock. chrissie could not help his lecherous self and he had to pick a young blond, regardless of how ignorant she was. she IS old enough to think. if college age is not old enough then her parents raised a parrot on purpose. she was pathetic and moore was not mean to her, thankfully. she proves that 'education' ain't what you get in school these days. It's indoctrination.

cell @ 97:

americans have grown such huge ego's that they can't grasp that somebody (everybody) found a better way - It helps that they sem to actually care about one another. Even faced with overwhealming (sp) evidence many americans are so brainwashed by family and church that they won't accept the obvious.

neither the Civil war nor the Cold War has ever ended in the minds of the right.
manifest destiny is still an unfulfilled goal.
privilege is inherent.

10 weeks waiting time to see a neuromuscular specialist...

The young lady from the audience who opposed universal health coverage had no ideas. In short, she had formed an opinion without actually bothering to learn a darn thing about the topic. Lovely. Is she actually in college?!

"I think it’s somewhat inaccurate to make the implication that the 40 million people in this country who do not have health care are necessarily prevented from health care services."

Whoops. I meant to say the 40 million people in this country who do not have health care insurance. Does that include government sponsored programs?

You guys should give the girl a break. She is just a normal person. How many normal people would sound less than eloquent when put on the spot on national television.

Josh @ 116:

You guys should give the girl a break. She is just a normal person. How many normal people would sound less than eloquent when put on the spot on national television.

Why? She's a selfish asshole with some Ayn Randian free market bullshit shit she's just learned about under her belt.

She stepped in it-she deserves what she gets. And she's lucky only being publicly humiliated by being a dumbshit, all by herself, and not having some uninsured major illness calamity over which she has no control.

miss_kitty @ 118:

Josh @ 116:

You guys should give the girl a break. She is just a normal person. How many normal people would sound less than eloquent when put on the spot on national television.

Why? She's a selfish asshole with some Ayn Randian free market bullshit shit she's just learned about under her belt.

She stepped in it-she deserves what she gets. And she's lucky only being publicly humiliated by being a dumbshit, all by herself, and not having some uninsured major illness calamity over which she has no control.

Yeah, I'd say your description is just about right. I hope she gives some thought to how her position amounts to condemning the "less fortunate" to death because they can't get health care.

What it really just came down to for her was that she didn't think she should pay to help other citizens. However, when she hits thirty and her doctor finds a lump, and her health care provider dumps her, she may very well remember this little interview.

What moron still believes that the 'free enterprise' system can cure the problems of health care in America? Providing insurance to those without isn't the answer, its a boon to the industry that created the problem.
Insurance is no longer shared risk. It is a shell game. We look for the medical care we need, they hide it under deductbles, co-pays, pre-existing conditions, elegibility requirements, approved providers, non-approved medications, limited hospital stays, and double billing.
Insurance case workers aren't there to help their insured, but to deny claims and limit coverage.
So how can placing 100% of America in the jaws of this monster help?

Does Matthews ever allow anybody to finish a sentence?

"icrophone on?" - Firesign Theatre

CuriousJ @ 13:

Moore gave a bad example about US socialized medicine, i.e. medical coverage for the army. Walter Reid is an example of what can happen when poor gov't management and lack of oversight occurs.

No, that's what happens, when you let privatization run amok in a formerly perfectly good system. Remember on who's watch it happened.

Oswald Says…

Since you’ve asked for help with the facts with the math, I’m happy to oblige. I would like to clear up some other of your misconceptions before I start in on the subject of costs

“I think it's somewhat inaccurate to make the implication that the 40 million people in this country who do not have health care are necessarily prevented from health care services. Many choose not to receive coverage and every provider I've ever partnered with had always budgeted for a certain amount of charity work. That's just the nature of the business. Patients with acute needs are always taken care of.”
---Oswald Claims

I would be interested to know what capacity you partner with physicians, but your statement that “Patients with acute needs are always taken care of” is misleading to the extreme.

Patients without insurance primarily use the emergency rooms as their primary access to health care, but they wait until their conditions become acute before they go to the ER and by then far too many of them have passed into a critical phase of their illness. That finding led the Institute of Medicine to conclude:

According to the Institute of Medicine, "lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States. Although America leads the world in spending on health care, it is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage." Insuring America's Health: Principles and Recommendations, Institute of Medicine, January 2004.

http://www.iom.edu/?id=19175

Many Americans believe that people who lack health insurance somehow get the care they really need. Care Without Coverage: Too Little, Too Late, the second report in a series of six from the Institiute of Medicine's Committee on the Consequences of Uninsurance, examines the real consequences for adults who lack health insurance. The study presents findings in the areas of prevention and screening, cancer, chronic illness, hospital-based care, and general health status.

The main findings of the report are that working-age Americans without health insurance are more likely to receive too little medical care and receive it too late; be sicker and die sooner; and receive poorer care when they are in the hospital, even for acute situations like a motor vehicle crash.

http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3809/4660/4333.aspx

As to your assertion that "many choose not to have health care" is also falacious, while it is true that some do gamble and choose to be unisured, the vast amjority of the uninsured either lack the funds or have been turned down for pre-existing conditons.

The LA Times ran a series on the problem and the insurance experts that they consulted put the number of people turned down by insurance companies for pre-existing conditions ranged from 24% to 40%. These were people who had the money but were rejected for conditions as simple as a childhood bout with asthma or skin rashes. No other US industry has a rejection rate that high for applicants wishing to buy a service.

BBC World News TV has a report today on the first 8 American medical students who graduated after finishing their studies in Cuba. There are 80 more Americans who are still studying medicine in Cuba. Their studies are paid for by Cuba with the condition that they go to work in deprived areas of their country.

A few years ago, the Bush Regime wanted to force them to leave Cuba, but then Secretary of State Colin Powell, under pressure from Black Congressmen, stopped the move. I wonder if CNN, MSNBC, or Fox will report on this.

D-Man 42, "Ann Coulter = human trash. And what’s up with Matthews?"

Coulter is really "inhuman trash".

Matthews is an ignorant dishonest twit. Dictators from former British and French colonies most often go to those countries for top-notch treatment. But Matthews does no research and just gives his preconceived notions, you can't really call them ideas.

Oswald says…

As I said, I’ll be glad to help you with the math and correct some of the fallacies in your arguments. Lets look at what you said:

“I think it's somewhat disingenuous of Moore to advocate a systems where people "don't have to pay anything" for health care. Of course we all will have to pay. It just won't be at the point of service. It's not like health care will suddenly become free. If taxes are enacted to support universal health care. And if we wish to maintain a system where we spend over $7k per citizen per year- and I don;t think that admin costs will drop dramatically, because private insurance companies would most likely have already identified such efficiencies, and if we operate off of the assumption that the bottom 50% of the income bracket does not currently pay takes, then we can look at enormous tax increases to maintain such a standard. $7k multiplied by 300,000,000 people is $2.1 trillion dollars per year. I'm not certain as to how many people in the U.S. are paying taxes, but if it's 100 million, that equates to a tax bill of about $21,000 per taxpayer per year. Can someone shed some light on that math?”
---Oswald Claims

First off, let me ask you a question, why would anyone want to maintain a system that costs $7,000+ per capita for health insurance? That is double the rate of any other nation on the planet and sadly it doesn’t translate in to higher quality either.

The 14,000 physician who have joined the Physicians for a National Health care Plan certainly don’t agree with you and drew on the most recent study by Harvard University and quote its findings in their mission statement:

The U.S. spends twice as much as other industrialized nations on health care, $7,129 per capita. Yet our system performs poorly in comparison and still leaves 46 million without health coverage and millions more inadequately covered.

This is because private insurance bureaucracy and paperwork consume one-third (31 percent) of every health care dollar. Streamlining payment though a single nonprofit payer would save more than $350 billion per year, enough to provide comprehensive, high-quality coverage for all Americans.

http://www.pnhp.org/

There is already enough money in the system to provide everyone in the US with High quality health care if we stop paying for the administrative costs that the 1500 “for profit” insurance companies require. These findings were also supported by independent studies done by the Congressional Budget Office and the GAO.

What tax increases may arise from instituting a “single payer” universal health care system like the one in Canada, will be offset by the disappearance of exorbitant health insurance premiums.

In terms of quality of care the most comprehensive comparative study was done jointly by Harvard and McMasters University. It looked at almost five thousand studies and weeded them down to the 38 definitive studies and found:

Their research appears in the inaugural issue of the new online medical journal, Online Medicine, which was officially launched today. (Wednesday, April 18)

Leading a team of 17 Canadian and American researchers, the McMaster researchers discovered that American patients don’t enjoy better health outcomes even though the United States for-profit health care system spends more than double per capita on health care - $7,129 per capita in the U.S. versus $2,956 (American dollars) in Canada.

Sifting from an initial 4,923 studies, the researchers analyzed 38 studies which met two specific criteria: The studies compared patients with identical diagnoses (cancer, heart attacks, chronic medical illnesses and surgical procedures) in Canada and the United States as well as health outcomes between patients in the two countries.

“The study shows in general that for most conditions Canadians are actually doing better in terms of health outcomes compared to Americans with the same diagnosis, even though we are spending half the money,” said Dr. P. J. Devereaux, an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine and in the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster. Dr. Devereaux is co-author of the study.

http://www.fhs.mcmaster.ca/pubrel/health_cost_study.htm

The Harvard co-author noted:

Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard and a study co-author commented: “Americans pay inflated prices for inferior care. The extra $4000 each American spends annually isn’t buying us better quality. Most of it is pure waste, going for paperwork and insurance and drug company profits. National health insurance would maintain or even improve quality for those who now have coverage, cover the uninsured and still cost less than we’re now spending.”

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2007/may/quality_of_healthcar.php

I find Americans a constant source of fascination.

The idea of socialised health care isn't what Chris Matthews implied at all. There isn't a ceiling. You can always go up, you can always get the best medicine if you can afford it. What it DOES provide is a safety net at the bottom, so you don't fall by the wayside. It is, in fact, the best of both worlds.

=my2c
BC

How about Matthews stopped rambling on like he was on speed or something so the guests actually could finish what they're trying to say. Jeez. Moore had no problems defending his corner, that's what happens when you have the facts right. Well done that man.

oswald @ 113:

Big on opinions, low on analysis.

'free enterprise' is equally ideological as democracy, communism and freedom.
Free enterprise would work if there were no mega-corps that have close ties to the goverment who change the rules to fit their friends liking.

I for one would also not compare the US to 1930's Germany but to ancient Rome.
A republic turning into a dictatorship.
Both also seem to have similar bases.
Both grew out of smaller states.
Both have a kindergarden type state where the state only gets involved when it needs to and otherwise lets the people do what they want in fear of the people being unhappy.
Both had their games and the people were fixated with them.
Huge armies that allowed the powers to do what they wanted.
Multi-class system although only one really had power.

willyloman @ 122:

What it really just came down to for her was that she didn't think she should pay to help other citizens. However, when she hits thirty and her doctor finds a lump, and her health care provider dumps her, she may very well remember this little interview.

Well someone paid for her to get that education she's wasting to republican ideology.
Free education is something the republicans do not want to see either.
But you do not hear them republicans wanting to pay back for their education do you?

To your question:
She will blame the illegal immigrants, minorities, gays and the poor for everything, including her lump.

And why is she going to the doctors anyway?
They want creation to replace evolution so why not wait until her god fixes her?

Yay! @ 149:

This clip is incredibly important for the simple reason that Michael, Chris and the young lady demonstrate how people of varying ideological backgrounds can ACTUALLY COMMUNICATE SOME FUCKING IDEAS in a rational, respectful dialogue.

Thank you, and thank you Michael for the film. It may just have convinced me.

I live in Europe now, clean, beautiful, peaceful, prosperous. Everything the US used to be before GW. Well, we don't have to worry about the NRA arming all the convicts with weapons, but close.

I think Sicko really undersold the European systems. I've been using them for years without any problems whatsoever. The people in them actually like their jobs. They don't worry about HMO's or lawers suing them for doing what the patient needs done. I've never had to wait more than a week for a non emergency appointment. I have never waited more than 30 minutes for an emergency procedure.

I pay almost exactly the same percentage of taxes that I did in the US. Nobody thinks about the local, state, property taxes and usage fees when they think of taxes. All that money goes to your government. After adding up all the taxed I paid in the US and estimating the sales taxes, they all add up to the same I pay here.

Americans are being lied to, robbed, and denied what the rest of the world considers an inalienable right of humans.

The next time some gubby illiterate red neck tells you to shut your commie mouth and "Luv it or leave it", seriously consider it. Nothing ever got better in the 38 years I was in the US, and I don't see it changing any time soon.