6-30-07 Sicko Rebuttals

Much as I like Michael Moore and the work he's doing, I find the level of factual reporting that he does in his documentaries to be lacking. You'd think that the places Michael Moore went to in order to show his viewers how healthcare SHOULD be would be populated by people who are overhwhelmingly satisfied with the single payer healthcare systems in their countries.

But read this review of "Sicko" from a Canadian movie critic, and tell me that Moore gave that healthcare system an unbiased presentation. It simply didn't happen.

Like all of his films, "Sicko" is not a documentary but a well-crafted work of propaganda. I would be the last one to say, however, that this sort of propaganda isn't needed in our current society. After all, the propaganda wars that are waged on just about every issue these days is sadly lacking in this level of slickness and popularity from the left.

What I find mildly repellant in Moore's work is the positioning he tends to favor, wherein he is merely exposing "the truth," that he is on moral high ground in his work, and that his films are straightforward "documentaries." I find this objectionable because it masks the very real problems we face on the various issues he's addressed. The films are polarizing, basically, and make things more contentious.

Basically, he's just preaching to the choir.

I feel that issues such as healthcare need people to view BOTH sides of these propaganda wars with a jaundiced eye. But people will polarize themselves into a final decision with as little inspection of the facts as simply going to watch a freakin' MOVIE... and that's it. For those who do that, and have concluded that healthcare is much better in Canada, for instance, take a gander at this little six minute movie on YouTube.