Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Michael Moore - not quite the truth....      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 26
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....Page 2 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
Montréal Guy - Moore's point is that Canada has tough gun laws - then he implies that he was able to, in essence, circumvent those laws. Moore has been challenged on this by the Canadian Firearms Centre and has, as best as I've been able to determine, not answered them. See CBC news at cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2002/11/14/Arts/mooreguns141102.html
That article states : "In one scene, Moore buys ammunition at an Ontario Wal-Mart without showing any identification. But a spokesperson for the firearms centre says anyone buying ammunition in Canada has to present proper identification."
So clearly, Moore has misled viewers in this scene and the fact that he won't respond to authorities about it is rather telling, isn't it? That's called lying.
How about the entire Charlton Heston sequence, where he says to the mayor: " "Don't come here? We're already here!" and makes it seem as if he's ignoring the mayor's proper concerns over the killings. What Heston actually said was as follows:
"NRA members are in city hall, Fort Carson, NORAD, the Air Force Academy and the Olympic Training Center. And yes, NRA members are surely among the police and fire and SWAT team heroes who risked their lives to rescue the students at Columbine.
Don't come here? We're already here. This community is our home. Every community in America is our home. We are a 128-year-old fixture of mainstream America. The Second Amendment ethic of lawful, responsible firearm ownership spans the broadest cross section of American life imaginable.
So, we have the same right as all other citizens to be here. To help shoulder the grief and share our sorrow and to offer our respectful, reassured voice to the national discourse that has erupted around this tragedy."
"NRA members are, above all, Americans. That means that whatever our differences, we are respectful of one another and we stand united, especially in adversity."

That, Montréal Guy, is a great deal different than what was presented in Columbine and it is intentionally misleading to the viewers, the great majority of whom would not bother to look up the actual speech - preferring instead to accept Moore's RENDITION - I use that word deliberately - of the truth. It may not be a lie, but it is most certainly not the truth and it is very definitely not what a documentary is supposed to be.
Again, I ask - how can you (or anyone here), as a individual who obviously thinks in some depth, accept deliberate distortions which are presented as the truth? How can you say that isn't a lie? And by the way, that doesn't even begin to look at the fact that much of what Moore did was to piece together events and statements made at very different times and places. To bring the example home, imagine if you were arrested for saying, I'm going to kill my neighbour - when what you said Tuesday was, I'm going to kill the rat's in the garage....then two weeks later, said 'I'm going to visit my neighbour' - and then someone who had video of both events pieced them together and edited out the innocent bits. Because that is exactly what Moore did, according to published reports. You can deny this if you wish, but the proofs are there.
Ok, it isn't a lie - but it sure as heck isn't the truth, is it?
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 27
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:05:11 PM
In the Times article I quoted, he is essentially accused of lying about the British hospital and the NHS (National Health Service) which he so lauds in 'sicko'. And he's accused by people who would know. I say that is indefensible, if what you are purporting to do is to present a documentary - which by definition is supposed to be apolitical and truthful.


The person attacking him is an opponent of the system, which means he has his own bias. Any system (your or ours) has it's problems. Those do not negate the overall system. I've never heard anyone complain here (direct personal experience) about how "bad " our health care is.

Does it have some problems ?

Uh-huh.

Those problems are not with the actual concept (which worked very well in the past) , but with the way it's managed. Overall, it's a good thing, and could be made even better.

What Moore does is to focus on that overall general picture, and force the audience to see it , and especially an AMERICAN audience to see it.

His basic premise is right, and he's using his abilities to push for change.

It's like that famous scene that everyone likes to reference in BFC, when he gets the rifle in the bank.

Was there a lot of effort involved in getting it ?

Sure, and that went on behind the scenes, and wasn't shown.

I watched BFC with a few friends, who weren't very "political " people. When that scene came on EVERYONE (and I've heard the same from Europeans) burst out into laughter and amazement. I have to admit, I did too.

The point that Moore is making in it is "Hey, I just got a BANK to give me a gun, and here I am standing in one with it. "

Americans, especially gun owners, will NEVER see how outlandish that very idea is to almost every single person outside of America - because of the "gun myth" there.

The power of that scene would have been diminished had he portrayed the effort needed to get it. Again, like that Canadian Wal-Mart scene, the point was to to quickly show a vastly different reality in a manner that opens the viewers eyes to those cultural filters.

The Wal-MArt scene was essentially correct, in it's tone. With the proper ID and paperwork, you can buy all the ammo you want here - even as an American.

That's no lie.

That opens a discussion, if done right.

A scholarly tome would not produce the amount of attention Moore has - as evidenced by threads like this. That's good for everyone.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 28
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:19:01 PM
"But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history as some first thought."
The contention here by Montréal Guy is that this is a setup, which it may well be. However, the information on font styles and proportional spacing isn't all that hard to come by. My office manager at my newspaper went back as far as 'hot lead' type and could have discerned the differences, as could have I, withmy experience dating from the early 80s. They are really quite apparent. If one were motivated enough, I'm sure it would have been possible to contact a newspaper and speak to one of the old timers and learn what was going on. Perhaps this is what MacDougal did - I doubt we'll ever know for sure at this late date.
Fact is however, Rather did NOT vet the material and, with an apparent wish to score political points, rushed on air with unsubstantiated material. That's a no-no in journalism. It's almost but not quite in the same league as Jayson Blair of the NY Times. And it's certainly on a par with Moore's deceptions. The truth is the truth - anything less is not.

p.s. I find it intriguing that MacDougal's work led to Clinton's disbarment for lying in the Paula Jones case. Strikes me that the man is competent and, since his contentions about Clinton were accepted by a court of law, believable. It certainly doesn't hurt his credibility regarding the Rather documents.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 29
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:24:03 PM
"He picks a topic, and then finds facts to justify his viewpoint. "
abomb - that's my whole point. He isn't finding facts. He's distorting them, or outright lying. And the proof is there - check the site I noted to Montréal Guy. Or read my originating post, where Moore is accused of dishonesty by the admin of the hospital in Britain.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 30
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:24:22 PM
Rather did NOT vet the material and, with an apparent wish to score political points, rushed on air with unsubstantiated material. That's a no-no in journalism. It's almost but not quite in the same league as Jayson Blair of the NY Times. And it's certainly on a par with Moore's deceptions. The truth is the truth - anything less is not.


And the people that set him up knew Dan's ego and target fixation would blind him, especially if they dropped that little present in his lap JUST as a deadline approached. Rather was stupid enough to fall for it, and it negated his voice - and eliminated one of the great threats to Bush, from him, and from others.

Just in time too, quite conveniently.

Nice job, if I say so myself.

About that lawyers abilities, even a forensic expert (especially watching a low res image) would have needed more than four hours to examine all the details and post an intelligent and factual response on a website.

It's a smoking gun....



As for Moore, I see his presentation a bit in the same way old Zen masters used to educate their students.

One would come up to some old master, and respectfully say "Can you show me the face of the Buddha ? "

The monk would respectfully nod, and then hit said student on the head with his staff.

"Want to see it again ? "

The important part is getting their attention. :-)

Far better than that old monk sitting there for twenty minutes droning on about the details.

We can discuss those later.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 31
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:30:15 PM
It's a smoking gun....
True Montréal Guy, and I don't deny that, it was a nice job....still, you gotta admire anyone who can set it up that well and pull it off, IF that is what happened. On the flip side, had Rather not let his ego take charge - and presumably his dislike of Bush - we might still have him around.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 32
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 6:38:16 PM
'The person attacking him is an opponent of the system, which means he has his own bias."
That person is an EMPLOYEE of the British system, one of its supporters - he is attacking Moore because Moore lied - not because of his own bias. In effect, you've just said to me that you haven't read - or re-read - the original post before making that comment.
For the record, I happen to believe that the answer to the health care problems in the US and Canada lie in a blending of the two systems - let's cherry pick the best from both. Let's eliminate obscene profits from American health care and the excessive beauracracy from the Canadian model at a minimum. I'm not a fan of either, although, in a worst case scenario, I'd hope to be rich as Croesus if I got sick, rather than wait on the Canadian system to help. People here, as you know, have died because of that.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 33
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 7:45:33 PM
A bad choice of words, please correct those to "she has her own bias" (ie , the original source that quoted him.)

Again, it's designed to give the viewer that "knock on the head" , and to focus his attention on the matter at hand afterwards, through the discussion it opens.

It's the same type of principle (albeit slight less "dry" ) that's used in "An Inconvenient Truth", and the success in drawing attention to the issue is the primary concern.

I'd love to see more Americans focusing this type of attention in regards to the deceptions and lies by this administration and the American "liberal" media complicity in that, rather than on people like Moore and Gore.

The former seems to get away with murder, and the latter are hooked up to electron microscopes and colonoscopes , and challenged with with glee.

Wonder why that is ?
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 34
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 8:05:12 PM
Moore's films are primarily designed for American audiences. Think of them a bit like a tourist film, in visiting other ways of doing things.

Now I could show you a wonderful film about Montreal, with glowing pictures taken at the perfect time of day, by professional photographers - all computer enhanced, and beautiful.

Now, if I show the same thing to Montrealers , they'd sit here going...."Hmmm....it does RAIN some times, and how come they didn't show any SNOW ? "

Show THAT picture to anyone, and the interest in coming here isn't the same.

There was a film done at about the same time as Fahrenheit 9/11, on the same topic. From what I read it was VERY well done, but it wasn't....entertaining. It pretty much vanished off the screens into relative obscurity quickly afterwards.

The American audience is geared towards "infotainment" from it's media. That's the "lingua franca" of modern America mass media. To get the point across , one has to realize that, and account for that. It's designed for a young audience, primarily, and to do that it has to move quickly. If you do that, people (especially young people) start to get the message, and start discussing it.

Jon Stewart and Colbert accomplish the same type of things, following the same idea, on a regular basis. Some old guy in a tweed jacket with elbow patches from Harvard reading from a text book with thousands of footnotes just isn't going to do it for an American audience in the time we live in today. It has to be fun, quickly paced, and direct.

The attention span just isn't there, as much as I wish it was.

Just take a look at something like Bill Moyer's excellent documentary on American media complicity in the war "Buying The War".

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html

VERY well done, exceptionally informative and revealing, and.....totally off the radar for many Americans - as are many great PBS shows.

Again, a Ken Burns's version of any of these films would never have touched off the firestorm of debate that Moore has - as was his intended goal.

THAT'S what it's all about.

I've even been critiqued here by Americans because my posts on a certain topic, and quoted references, are TOO LONG.

( places paper bag over head)
 exodusi1
Joined: 8/19/2006
Msg: 36
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/1/2007 9:30:35 PM
Gottobeme;

Just a quick note, you and I don't agree, but you have presented yourself well in this thread. I wish conservatives like you would reclaim the republican Party!
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 37
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 7:52:28 AM
"Now, if I show the same thing to Montrealers , they'd sit here going...."Hmmm....it does RAIN some times, and how come they didn't show any SNOW ? "

Understood, except that anyone contemplating a visit to Montréal (recommeded to anyone with any sense of culture, style and verve, it's one of Canada's greatest cities) realizes that the film is a promo for a certain point of view, that it isn't all sunshine and laughter and 'quelques arpents de neige'.
You've picked up my essential point here - most people don't have an inkling of what is actually going on, they don't keep up with events, with varied media reports and other sources of information. It may be that they even NEED to be hit over the head with that 2 x 4. But presenting them with falsified information goes beyond the 2 x 4 approach. It establishes a false foundation for any ensuing discussion. The subjects Moore deals with are complex enough - gun control, American health care - there are enough things wrong there that have existed through both republican and democratic administrations that it is simply wrong to point the finger at one - or the other for that matter.
The truth is compelling enough and I posit to you that if Moore can't make a movie about these subjects without lying and misleading, then he doesn't have the talent he's credited with. It's either that, or the audience mentality is in far worse shape than I care to contemplate (at least before I've had a cup of coffee this morning).
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 38
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 8:09:51 AM
"please correct those to "she has her own bias" - Montréal Guy, I was referring to the admin here, not the author of the piece.
Puck, I read the rebuttal page and it doesn't cut it with me. It's cute and folksy and clearly fails to address a number of legitimate concerns that have been raised. As for not making fallacies, hey, the Canadian government has even called him out on this movie. Have you taken a look at the page I posted which notes the discrepancies in BFC? I don't see where Moore has addressed more than a couple of those.
What do you call it when someone takes part of a statement made in one context today, part of another made days or weeks later, then strings them together using digital imaging techniques to make it seem as if they were a contiguous statement which a) states something the speaker never said and b) contradicts the actual statements and c) presents a distorted view of the actual situation. That it paints his targets in a very unflattering light is his goal - not, in my opinion, to present the truth. In print journalism, this sort of thing is called yellow journalism. The reason Moore has gotten away with it is, I suspect, that the law allows a certain amount of 'artistic license' - were Moore called to account in a court of law, he'd likely claim the movie was fiction, based on factual events. And so it is, but he's presented it as the 'truth' - and it is most certainly not that, even if it does, as MG noted, get the discussion going.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 39
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 8:19:47 AM
Unicycle, I tried to open that link - there's nothing there, if you could repost it perhaps. A point here - so far, we've managed to keep this thread free of personal attacks - how about we keep that level of discourse?
You note the author's comment about Moore being fat - she did have a point there and although it was rather crudely put, you should perhaps know that British print media are a lot less gentle than North American - over there, that comment wasn't out of line.
Exodus - thanks for the compliment - there are a lot of conservatives like me, but it's the more raucous ones who get the attention - kind of like the Michael Moores on your side, lol. The thing is, we all want the best possible world, we just don't always agree on how to get there - for my part, state provided health care, without the profits of the American system or the beauracracies of the Canadian and British systems - in other words, a system dedicated to people's health, not empire building and ego stroking, is what is needed. Maybe that's why I object to Moore's presentation of the situation - he's not been honest and what is needed here is honesty, not more pointed fingers.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 40
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 8:44:24 AM
Puck - plain and simple - if I were to ascribe to someone in one of the newspapers I used to own, words that had been strung together in a fashion which distorted or altered their meaning and presented the speaker to ridicule - as Moore has done in BFC with Heston - the paper would be sued for libel. The reason it hasn't happened with Moore is, I suspect, the 'artistic license' issue I referred to earlier.
I'll digress here, but it may make the point: a man by the name of Robin Sharpe, in British Columbia was up on charges of possession of child porn some years back - over 7000 images of little boys on his computer and loads of other vile stuff, including his own little 'stories' he'd written. He got off of the charges using the 'artistic merit' defence and as a result of it, kiddie porn was actually legal in BC for a brief while, until legislators dealt with the situation. That's just how strongly the courts view issues like 'art' in our culture. And in the US, the defence would be even stronger, as they have their First Amendment.
Just because some, most or even all of Moore's facts check out doesn't mean that the movie is honest. To quote Unicycle: "So, when did you stop beating your wife?" See what I mean? To anyone who hears that question asked of you, without benefit of the context or the true facts behind the situation, the only conclusion is that you did, indeed, beat your wife - even if you deny it.
And it is exactly that sort of thing that Moore excels at - and it's deceptive to say the least.
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 41
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:03:06 AM
I gotta say....when I first saw Bowling for Columbine, I was hooked. Then I decided to take the critics claims a look.....and I felt hugely betrayed ever since. I even own that book he sold that basically is the transcript of Fahrenheit 9/11 with sources included...and even then, not everything was explained and honest......

Frankly, the way I see it is Michael Moore does not respect his audience enough to give them the truth- he edits things to a point where it is manipulative as to what really happened, and while I did share his views both before and after watching his films, that betrayal really pushed me away in disgust from the Liberal ideology.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 42
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:07:41 AM
The only thing Moore could be accused of is only showing one side.
Puck, therein lies my whole argument. A documentary is a format designed to examine a question fully - not to propagandize in favour of one side or the other. Sicko - or BFC and Moore's other works are not documentaries - and it is dishonest in the extreme to present them as ' the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth' when in fact, they clearly are not. Not a single soul in this thread has claimed that yet.
As for the facts - I'm sure you remember the saying: Statistics don't lie, but liars use statistics. If you cherry pick amongst the numbers, it isn't very hard to prove whatever your point is. One example: according to Health and Welfare Canada, in 2002, 87% of all AIDs victims were homosexual males. Were I a homophobe, I could make a lot of use of that statistic. However, it conveniently ignores the growing number of women suffering with HIV, the precursor to AIDs. (that the figures show that these women largely contracted HIV from bisexual males or needle drug use is another topic)
You see what I mean? Selective use of facts only serves to obscure the problems. The fact is, every single individual is entitled to proper (and timely) health care. That is the issue - not how it's provided. Despite its failings, the US health care system is improving, in response to the demands of the American people. Is it perfect? No. Will it ever be? I doubt it. Will it get better? Count on it.
But people like Moore, who sensationalize and distort the facts aren't, in my opinion, helping. The issue was already clear on the radar screen, and has been for years.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 43
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:09:12 AM
Frankly, the way I see it is Michael Moore does not respect his audience enough to give them the truth- he edits things to a point where it is manipulative as to what really happened....


Where's your disgust at your government and media ? Why are the same people that attack Moore not speaking out on far worse examples of this type of mentality ?

How many people died , 'cause Moore lied ?


.when I first saw Bowling for Columbine, I was hooked.

while I did share his views both before and after watching his films


(Puts on flight suit ...stands on aircraft carrier deck)

" Mission Accomplished ! "
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 44
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:24:23 AM
Montréal Guy - in defense of Jiperly, we aren't discussing government here, so any failure by her to address those issues isn't open to criticism. That's another thread. In my own career, I've been rebuked by both Chretien and Mulroney for my published point of view - I calls 'em the way I see's 'em, irrespective of liberal or conservative ideology - I just happen to lean more to the ideals of the right. I suspect Jiperly has views on both sides of the proverbial fence too.
Keep in mind - Jiperly still holds her views on the issue - but has lost her respect for the way in which Moore (and liberal ideology) have presented the issue. That's a pretty telling statement - the left has lost one of their own, because of one of their own.
People who view issues honestly, as Jiperly seems to, (and I've found myself disagreeing with some of her posts elsewhere), resent being lied to. More to the point, there are a lot of Republicans angry with the Bush administration for that very reason - just as a lot of democrats were angry at Clinton for his lies. (whoa everyone, let's not go there - this thread is not about that!)
Why is truth so 'unsexy' these days? Why do we need a Michael Moore to distort the truth to excite the masses about an issue? Something is wrong here.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 46
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 9:55:39 AM
we aren't discussing government here


Ultimately, we are. That's the thing that's being challenged, and it's as American as the insurgents that created the USA.

To use your own analogy, when Jefferson and the boys sat down and wrote the Declaration Of Independence, someone should have stood up in Independence Hall and said :


"Wait a minute. You've got all your facts wrong here. The British have been protecting us since we started. They've never made us pay taxes other than on imports and exports. The King has got into a war against the French, and those same French troop threaten us from the north. He's simply asking for us to help pay for our defense, through that Stamp Act.

You rebels have never wanted to be part of the British parliament , and yet you now claim taxation without representation ? Why do you mislead and lie ?

May I remind you that Britain's debt due to this war , kind sir, has risen from 72 million pounds before the war to 132 million pounds now ? That we have traded with the French West Indies, an illegal act, and profited from it ?

How much have these colonies profited from this, and from the money spent by the British here among us all ?

British citizens, in the home country, are forced to pay great taxes at every turn on land and traded goods. They pay four million POUNDS a year in interest alone , on this debt.

And yet we sit here tonight , protected from harm by the noble British, who simply want us to pay our fair share of costs, and you argue that WE are oppressed ?

The start of this "rebellion" that you ruffians support was done to protect the people's interests as BRITISH citizens, and we should not forget that.

Now suddenly , you claim that the best form of democratic government in the world is WRONG ? You claim that this "Republic" is better, and yet you have NO experience in government ?

You , kind sirs, are deceptive and liars - and traitors to the cause of truth. "




Never happened.

Why ? Because Americans saw the cause as just - even if the details didn't support it (in exactly the same type of way you are arguing that Moore's details are deceptive).

Shall we now all go over to the Smithsonian, and tear up the Declaration of Independence - since it was all based on misdirection and twisted logic ?
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 47
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 10:24:59 AM
Hoop, it seems you're right about Jiperly....Jiperly, my apologies. I saw the photo and presumed you were the blonde who's front and center in it. Now that's a Moore technique - allowing people to presume, to see something and by not bringing out all the facts, let an untruth be the result. On the other hand, maybe I was just being dumb!
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 48
view profile
History
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 10:33:17 AM

On the other hand, maybe I was just being dumb!


Not dumb, just male. (stop snickering, ladies).

Got ?

Don't tell anyone this, but for a while I'd assumed the same thing , for the same reason you did. Our little secret, OK ?
- Monty
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 49
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 10:33:56 AM
Montréal Guy, that would make a fascinating discussion, esp as many of the first Americans fled Britain to avoid religious tyranny - I'm not sure they came to America looking to be protected or to remain under British protection.
I do know that the end result of all of that is that it is damn near impossible to get a decent cup of tea in the US!
Ultimately yes, we are discussing the government, but I'd like to keep us focused on the issue of truth - in that vein, it's been a contention of mine for years now that if students were required to take a couple of years of economics and political science as part of their curriculum, the resultant understanding of how our societies work would make it far more difficult for both polititicians - and people like Moore - to pull the wool over our eyes. And again, that's a topic for yet another thread.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 50
Michael Moore - not quite the truth....
Posted: 11/2/2007 10:45:26 AM
Sly, I think you're on to something here, I'd like to pursue it. The 'fleetingness' we see - the flavour of the day mentality, both in society and in the media - are a major part of the problem, the question is, how to solve it?
There are SO many problems we face today - health care, wars, injustice of all sorts. Ultimately, and this could probably go pretty deep in the philosophical sense, I see the problem as a lack of honesty, of people opting for their own benefit rather than that of the community, etc. Sure, we all see how to get to what is 'best' in a different way - but I think we largely agree on what is best. In this case, the provision of proper - adequate? - health care for all. What we're discussing is the failure of one system (or here in Canada, the other system) to provide that. What we need to do is set the end goal - adequate health care for all - and then take steps towards that, steps that work. I'll say it again - I think a melding of the strengths of the two systems is the way to go. (Canada is trending this way now, it will be interesting to see what the end result is).
I also think that way too much 'ego' gets invested in the decisions, too much lusting for power. It's a disease our society suffers from and mass media is to blame for it - and I really don't, short of a major change in focus by our nations, see any hope of change. It's a human condition, but I wonder, does it really have to be that way?
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Michael Moore - not quite the truth....