Michael More New Film

[Ghent12]

Re: Michael More New Film

What's wrong with a point or a profit?

There's nothing wrong with those things ostensibly. However, when they are taken in a vacuum as information, rather than entertainment or an extraneous point of view, then they cause distortion in public perception. This guise of "insightful information" is reinforced further when Mr. Moore wins or is nominated for awards in the "Best Documentary" category.

The sad thing is, I might even agree with a lot of what he puts in his new movie. However, I can presume he desires a small set of possible end-states, such as a single-payer system. I don't believe he is willing to entertain ideas that seem so contrary to his premise, like how the current health insurance companies do not resemble the free market, or how health insurance as it is used now is actually the cause of the cost crisis.

[sunskyfan]

Re: Michael More New Film

People who sell guns never be confronted with some of the effects of that act. (Trust me parents are all the time).

I love Nader but he clearly cost Gore Florida and the election so Bush won.

You can't be morally obliged to provide a prisoner health-care and not a citizen.

These seem like pretty simple points that are hard to refute ... that is what makes you uncomfortable.

I understand you are wanting nuance and balance but that is Moore's point: nuance and balance have become tools to hide the obvious absurdities that invalidate the feel-good narrative we tend to favor in our daily lives. He is much more sophisticated that you give him credit for.

[kartius919]

Re: Michael More New Film

Gun control is a very large hot button issue. Especially right after Columbine. The issue of parenting is never discussed beyond the, if it was me I would never let it happen cooler talk. Nader did not "clearly" cost Gore Florida. It is an excuse to cover up the bigger issue of voter fraud. Blame Nader, not the corrupt results. There is a cost difference between keeping a few thousand hostages alive after you tortured and mutilated them and the entire us population. Morally? I think it makes people more pissed off that we are providing health care to "terrorists" rather than pissed off that there is no universal health care. Subtle difference, but a major difference.

The problem with emotional appeal is that you can excite an ape, but he still won't do what you want. People act irrationally when emotional. Nothing good comes from tapping into people's anger and emotions.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Michael More New Film

You can't be morally obliged to provide a prisoner health-care and not a citizen.

Au contraire, one can be quite obligated to care for a prisoner but not a citizen.

Should the government be morally obligated to feed and clothe you or I? Of course not, for we are free and able to tend to our own needs.

Should the government be morally obligated to feed its prisoners. Of course! It has deprived those prisoners of the means or freedom to attend to their own needs, so must do so for them. Anything less would be starving the prisoner to death, plain and simple.

The same applies to basic medical needs.

This is however within some fuzzy limits of cost and impact. Just as the government is not obligated to feed fine lobster to its prisoners, but only ordinary life sustaining grub, similarly it is not obligated, in my view, to provide every possible medical procedure, regardless of expense or impact on the prisoners life.

[zmas28]

Re: Michael More New Film

I think Michael Moore's faults are mainly that he is very partisan, and doesn't care who knows it. Even so, with all his faults, I think he does go a significant step beyond the mainstream media, in exposing real problems to the American public. Better to attack the mainstream media than to pile on against him, as far as I'm concerned.

[Ghent12]

Re: Michael More New Film

Au contraire, one can be quite obligated to care for a prisoner but not a citizen.

Should the government be morally obligated to feed and clothe you or I? Of course not, for we are free and able to tend to our own needs.

Should the government be morally obligated to feed its prisoners. Of course! It has deprived those prisoners of the means or freedom to attend to their own needs, so must do so for them. Anything less would be starving the prisoner to death, plain and simple.

The same applies to basic medical needs.

This is however within some fuzzy limits of cost and impact. Just as the government is not obligated to feed fine lobster to its prisoners, but only ordinary life sustaining grub, similarly it is not obligated, in my view, to provide every possible medical procedure, regardless of expense or impact on the prisoners life.

I'm pretty sure in Japan they don't feed prisoners. Maybe it's Singapore. Anywho, in some countries it is your family that must provide you with food if you are in prison. Maybe if family were important in America, it would be the same way.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Michael More New Film

I'm pretty sure in Japan they don't feed prisoners. Maybe it's Singapore. Anywho, in some countries it is your family that must provide you with food if you are in prison. Maybe if family were important in America, it would be the same way.

Well, if Japan or Singapore is letting prisoners starve to death if they lack family or friends to feed them, that doesn't change my point that they have (in my view) a moral obligation to feed their prisoners. It just means that they aren't living up to all my moral expectations.

Do you really think they (whomever they be) simply let unbefriended prisoners die of starvation? That's sad.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Michael More New Film

To the best of my knowledge, both Singapore and Japan feed their prisoners rather than relying on family to do so.

But I have been to a few places in the Pacific Region where without family support prisoners run a reasonable chance of leaving prison only via dirt nap...up close and in person it's kinda nasty.

My understanding of Japan and Singapore law enforcement and punishment is that they can be QUITE harsh when necessary.

But I guess if you put enough of us human rats in too small a cage ORDER trumps everything.

My Mom got interviewed in Singapore by local media about 15 or so years ago when an American kid got pinched for theft and vandalism.

In the US the kid would have been slapped on the wrist...in Singapore, he got ass whipped with a rattan cane.

My Mom said," Your country, your rules."

zmas28 I think nails it.......rather than whinge at Mike Moore, whinge at mass media for failing to do their frickin' job.

Getting angry at Michael Moore is a bit like getting angry at a Hyena....what they do is their nature.

[Ghent12]

Re: Michael More New Film

To the best of my knowledge, both Singapore and Japan feed their prisoners rather than relying on family to do so.

But I have been to a few places in the Pacific Region where without family support prisoners run a reasonable chance of leaving prison only via dirt nap...up close and in person it's kinda nasty.

My understanding of Japan and Singapore law enforcement and punishment is that they can be QUITE harsh when necessary.

But I guess if you put enough of us human rats in too small a cage ORDER trumps everything.

My Mom got interviewed in Singapore by local media about 15 or so years ago when an American kid got pinched for theft and vandalism.

In the US the kid would have been slapped on the wrist...in Singapore, he got ass whipped with a rattan cane.

My Mom said," Your country, your rules."

zmas28 I think nails it.......rather than whinge at Mike Moore, whinge at mass media for failing to do their frickin' job.

Getting angry at Michael Moore is a bit like getting angry at a Hyena....what they do is their nature.

I like your entire post. I want to hug it.

I apologize for getting the countries wrong. I only found out as a warning from one of the port call briefs, and I probably confused it with the other half-dozen countries we visited during our CARAT cruise. Other countries up for consideration are Malaysia, Thailand, The Philippines, and Brunei.

Also, I do agree that if the state incarcerates you, they should at least keep you alive long enough to carry out your sentence.

[kartius919]

Re: Michael More New Film

The problem again is that he distorts the true discussion. By being sensational, he is easily marginalized. In order to effect change you must approach the rational side of man. This is the difference between Dr. King and Malcolm X. Dr King brought to light the social oppressions of our society through civil protest and rational discussions. Malcolm X tapped into the anger and resentment. The difference in result is clear night and day, even though Dr King's message has been sterilized and perverted since his death.

[MulaMan]

Re: Michael More New Film

What's wrong with a point or a profit?

I agree, Michael Moore is a frickin American hero capitalist patriot if there ever was one, takes on all mafias, takes on corrupt politicians, takes them all on, simplifys and sensationalizes for the retard republican crowd in an attempt to get them out of the cult, his approach is to go to Glenn Beck level head on, and makes and ton of money doing it!

The Fox New watching, brain washed crowd follows the Michael Moore talking points that he is a "profiteer" - yet they claim this film "attacks capitalism" LOL.

Same people follow the Obama is socialist or even Hitler talking points

Same people follow the socalized medicine will increase costs talking points.

Just turn on Fox News, write down the talking points, and then go online see viral marketing at work - it truely is a disease.

Yet the same people cannot see how capitalism is losing or has already lost and they are the fools, yet will still vote for Jeb Bush in 2012. LOL

Who knows how many or few cult members Michael Moore has converted or borderline cases he has stopped from joining the cult - but he is doing it, more than the rest of us, and doing it through pure capitalism.