Indicative, Not Exceptional
An article in Reason, on a subject completely unrelated to Moore or healthcare, contains the following line.
This would seem to be Shalit’s modus operandi: Choose an unusually sexually progressive pocket of American culture, declare it indicative rather than exceptional, and launch a heroically irrelevant crusade for change.
I can’t think of a better description of Michael Moore’s tactics. I mean, you guys should read some of the hate mail we get from foreigners whose impressions of the US healthcare system are coming solely from Moore’s film. Here’s one example.
i recently saw michael moore’s SICKO. and was really shocked as to the state of your dictatorship insurance health care system. as i live in the UK. which has its problems health care wise. my father passed away 3 years ago due to MEDICAL PROBLEMS. but i have to say americas health care is now hot topic worldwide. THANKS TO MOORE. i was aware of your site way back when. you have some valid points some of the time. yes michael does skirt some issues. but if you’ve ever noticed, its usually for the greater good. and the fact is that his three features were right. GUNS WRONG, BUSH A LIAR, AND CRIMINAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.
Here you go. Someone who has probably never set foot in this country has declared our healthcare system to be a criminal dictatorship, all because of the way it is portrayed in Moore’s film. And why? Because Moore chose the worst examples he could find of the flaws in our system, portrayed them as indicative rather than exceptional, and then launched his crusade. Interestingly he did the inverse with Europe: he portrayed all the positives, did not mention a single negative, and then portrayed Cuba as a healthcare paradise where all drugs cost five cents.
Remember this, gentle reader: Nobody floats on an inner tube through shark infested waters to get away from 5¢ medication.
Comments
This Eurothink made me laugh so hard:
“My father died, but I have a new hero who has proven again that its beyond horrible in the US.”
Ah, well, death to us all over here, any which old way.
This is exactly the kind of thing that makes me angry about Moore’s tactics. The crap misinformation he broadcasts to the rest of the world, and the fact that they believe it. I can’t believe people ask why we watch Moore.
RSS (Subscribe)
Oh indeed, that he did! Remember the girl at the car wash? Did Moore bother to ask her if she appealed the charge? People should be aware this is often done. It’s called a grievance. And if the insurance company still says no, then one can file a complaint with the State Insurance Commission. And how many times is the person still denied the claim after following these procedures? Very few . . . if the claim is legit, there is a remedy. Government has the final say in the matter, but only if you make them aware of the denial.
Watch the film again . . . there were a couple of grievances . . . but see if Moore mentioned where any of those people denied claims went to the State Insurance Commission. Not a one! Sorta makes me wonder why Moore left this out.
(I’m not saying this is desirable, but mistakes are made. Getting them fixed is sometimes difficult, but it can be done. And Moore offers no real proof of his premise . . . that insurance companies deny a huge number of claims so they can make obscene profits. Where’s the backup Mike . . . where’s the proof?)