Star One Smart Blog's

Whenever a decidedly Left-Leaning Institution undertakes a project that just might make some sense, and actually has a few valid points to offer, whatever good points he (or she) is trying to make are viewed through the lens created by the spectacles of any earlier offerings. We know that Moore's 'Bowling for Columbine' and 'Farenheit 9/11' are nothing less than grand left-wing hit pieces on our 2nd Amendment and on George Bush. 'Farenheit 9/11', if it didn't start the thing, actually fueled the Liberal's widespread Bush Derangement Syndrome, that falsely accuses our President and his top-level Administration officials of treason, profiteering, and murder.

Michael Moore definitely is a tool of the Left-Wing, a talented tool, slick and marketable, but fortunately he's made mistakes that allow him to be easily refuted. No matter how slick his offerings, they have flaws, and those flaws are obvious to even some Left-Wing publications. Here's Christopher Hitchens in Slate Magazine, in a piece subtitled "The Lies of Michael Moore", on Farenheit 9/11:

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

Fair enough. Moore's been put down for that film, and few people discuss those tired lines of reasoning anymore, except those who haven't the sense to know better. And those who have that chronic BDS thing wrapped around their heads, like an overtight turban.

So, we now see SiCKO coming out SoON, and already some of that movie's threads are unraveling. From AP Writers Kevin Freking and Linda Johnson, "Moore's 'Sicko' gives accused little say". Reading that article, we see some numbers that don't exactly add up:

Moore: 50 Million without Health Care Insurance CDC:43.6 Million; Cencus Bureau: 44.8 Million. America's Health Insurance Plans put the number of Insured at 217 Million, so the glass is well over half full.

Moore: 18K People Die each year from lack of Insurance. Institute of Medicine's Actual 2004 Report: Those 18,000 Uninsured are More Likely to Die prematurely. They don't definitely die, as Moore insinuates. But, everyone will eventually die, so get used to it.

Moore: Pharmaceutical Industry and Health Insurance Industry will get $800B from Taxpayers for the Prescription Drug Benefit pushed and passed by Congress and Bush. He cites the first 10 years' projected costs. Medicare Officials say that cost is $729B, not $800B. Only $70B off, but we could buy a few new planes and Carriers with that extra money...

Moore: Some of the Elderly in the Medicare Part D program will pay more for their prescriptions. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says most people on the plan, on average, save about $1,200 per year.

Moore: Makes a big deal about the US being ranked # 37 in the world, in health care. The 2000 Report, from the UN's World Health Organization (those folks love the US, and everything they say is always so much in the US's favor, isn't it?) ranks Cuba (Moore's adopted Health Care Provider) at #39. France (the world's Socialist Heaven) is #1; the UK, 18th; and Canada (always considered by Liberals as the Model North American Country) is 30th. That particular UN report looks also at 'social fairness', rather than limiting itself to the Quality of Health Care, and is considered flawed by some health analysts. Good enough for Moore's piece, though...after all, Social Fairness issues are staunch Liberal and Communist themes that have to be considered in any US system under scrutiny by Democrat Activists.

Moore: Belabors the March 2006 'homeless Dumping incident' in Los Angeles, that found an elderly homeless lady taxied to Skid Row and set out to wander in her skivvies. Bad move, that, on the part of Kaiser Permanente Bellflower Medical Center, but Los Angeles prosecutors already put a stop to that in May of this year. Moore doesn't mention that. And, while we're on the subject, where should hospitals discharge Homeless patients, to? Are they supposed to keep them Forever? When the patient is treated, the bed must be freed for another sick individual. I'll be interested in seeing where these Homeless patients, who have recieved free treatment, go after treatment is over. John Kerry's or John Edward's mansions, maybe?

Moore: Health Care CEO's make too much money; Humana's Michael McCallister is cited at $5.9M, Aetna's Ronald Williams at $30.9M. AP's Analysis of Fortune 500 Companies finds that half of those fortunate 500 CEO's made over $8.3M per year. I guess McCallister is somewhat underpaid...

Moore: Uses Star Wars-style grandiosity listing preconditions that Insurance Companies use to turn people away. America's Health Insurance Plans' (a trade group) CEO Karen Ignagni (I wonder what her salary is...) said that whatever plan Moore cites isn't typical, and furtherMoore, it's not Insurance Companies that impose these precondition cutoffs, but Health Plan Sponsers...the employers, usually. Karen's figures put the number of Insured Americans at 217 Million, comprised of Group and Individual plans. "If that [preconditions exclusions] list were true, none of those people would be getting health insurance," Ignagni said.

Moore: Says the notion that Universal Health Care leads to longer wait times in Hospital Emergency Rooms is Wrong. Moore makes the rounds in Canada and gets some wait-time numbers from patients, ranging from 20 minutes to immediate care. Commonwealth Fund reports that wait times in the US are shorter than in Canada:

"24 percent of Canadians waited four hours or longer to be seen in the emergency room versus 12 percent in the U.S. The difference was more acute when it came time to see a specialist. Fifty-seven percent of Canadians waited four weeks or longer to see a specialist versus 23 percent in the U.S."

In Britain, "There was a big difference when it came time to see a specialist - 60 percent in Britain waited four weeks or longer." That's a long time before you can get help with, say, a torn Gastroc, my friend. My wait time was only 3 days...

Then, the famous 'All-expenses paid trip to Cuba, where 9/11 Firefighters get the Help they Need from the loving arms of Fidel Castro'....

"The film concludes with a trip to Cuba where Moore seeks care for a group of workers who have experienced health problems after responding to 2001 terrorist attacks. They are greeted with open arms at a hospital in Havana and given what appears to be top-notch care that they could not get in the U.S. The question left for viewers to ponder is whether Cubans are given such red carpet treatment, too."

Indeed. But, the Cubans can keep those '55 Chevys running, and look at Castro! He's practically immortal.

Maybe, instead of looking to Cuba for Health Care Instructions, we should re-investigate whether Cuba's hiding that Fountain of Youth thing...

h/t SondraK