Woah. Check out the statement at 12:03 and what CNN follows it up with. It's exactly the same stat that moore quotes just before 8:40!

Though at times at the interview I think Michael got a bit too passionate (I usually dislike it when there's 2 people talking over each other), it was nice to see someone go off on the media like that. Even though it wasn't about the Iraq War it was nice to see them get put under some pressure.

I do wonder about some of those statistics. I think I'm going to go look some of this stuff up. Though I would have liked to hear about Cuba's lower position from Michael.

On a side note, that last guy... what a douche. Just straight up. "More leftist than Hugo Chavez"? Incredibly mature from the media. This is why I hate CNN.

Wow, that was almost reminiscent of Jon Stewart on Crossfire. Good stuff.

Also, here's the address of Michael Moore's response to Gupta's bit before the interview: http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article_10017.php.

CNN gets served again!

well, we've already got one "wow" and one "whoa", so what am i gonna say?

daaaaaaaaamn. you go, michael. that was totally kick ass.

and norm, i hope you'll do a follow up on those contested stats. moore seemed pretty sure of himself.

worth posting again and again... http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article_10017.php.

I can't stand how so many reporters seem stuck in some weird quest to find a 'middle ground' to everthing... as if facts are not just facts...

Come on, all Moore did was shoot himself in the foot. He had the opportunity to calmly and convincingly rebut Gupta's analysis and he largely blew it.

I'm 100% for universal healthcare, but Moore's fit of histrionics only serves to preach to the converted and enflame his enemies. I doubt he changed anyone's mind with that tirade.

jb,

Follow the link the facts.

I believe he's going to be on Larry King Live tonight with Gupta, and also another segment with Wolf Blitzer. I've go the Tivo set and will post any relevant clips.

P.S. Lou Dobbs is a jackass. His casually fascist opinions on immigration transmitted through his (seemingly) authoritative baritone are nothing short of chilling.

Personally, I enjoy seeing someone wake up from the hang dog, mousey liberal punching bag.

Wingers go through any liberal assertions with a fine tooth comb while their fascist fear mongering bullshit passes without question.

Michael should do a doc about the media!

One word of caution: To call a single payer system "free" is asking to get smacked down by the reich. It is NOT free. It's sane, rteasonable, humane, progressive and compassionate but NOT FREE.

Thanks.

I just sent the following to Larry King... I hope he picks my questions :P

Mr. Moore: I consider your work to be a well documented opinion piece, rather than an objective documentary. I think the title 'documentary' gives people the wrong impression and makes them focus on the wrong elements of your film. Do you feel your film is a documentary? If so why? If not, what would you call it?

Mr. Gupta: I saw your piece on SiCO fact checking. It did not seem to be a fact check in any sense of the word. Fact checking is when you ask for the sources used, confirm that it contains the facts offered, and then evaluate the quality of that source. You did nothing of the kind. Have you been to Mr. Moore’s website? Have you asked him for his list of sources? Have you read his response to your story? http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article_10017.php.

Thank you.

Is this about health care or about Michael Moore? The line between Moore's moral outrage and his having an infantile tantrum is very thin. How can he be mad when he's laying the groundwork for something that has so much reward for him?

The template to celebrity success is that you have to yank the chain of the machine so that everything you say or do is an event.

Just wanted to add --not to be a constant nay-sayer-- Moore's "Day with Dr. Death, Jack Kevorkian" on his TV Nation series was one of the most brilliant bits of broadcasting ever.

So working towards having universal health = more left wing than Hugo Chavez?

sigh..

The fact sheet has a lot of good information. Here is a good point made:

One way America is able to achieve decent waiting times is that it leaves 47 million people out of the health care system entirely, unlike any other Western country. When you remove 47 million people from the line, your wait should be shorter. So why is the U.S. second to last in wait times?

I love Mr. Moore wants to be this benevolent guy, yet he's turning a profit from his movies.

If he really wanted to make a change, he should put up his latest movie on the internet for free, and pay to have it broadcast on television.

Michael should do a doc about the media!

that would be a helluva gutsy move and i for one would love to see it. i'd really like to see the line where michael moore stops and "the media" starts laid out in bright pink vivisection.

sorry, that first line in my post was a quote from frank. it should have had one of those groovy grey boxes around it.

"If he really wanted to make a change, he should put up his latest movie on the internet for free"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg8fAMHzUz4&eurl=

Come on, all Moore did was shoot himself in the foot.

Though at times at the interview I think Michael got a bit too passionate

Hitchens is a drunk, Michael Moore yells and gets passionate, Dawkins is Snooty, Tucker Carlson "sucks dick". (sigh)

Anyway, the comment about the pharm. ads was priceless. That's exactly how i feel about the 24 hour news channels, every single one of em, and how they are handling this. One quick question (i don't have cable) has Olbermann talked about SiCKO at all? Was it a favorable mention, or is he just ignoring it so he doesn't get in trouble?

"Hitchens is a drunk, Michael Moore yells and gets passionate, Dawkins is Snooty, Tucker Carlson "sucks dick".

Um, if Moore were half a even-keeled as Dawkins or Hitchens usually are, he'd likely win a lot more fans. He's not beyond criticism. And are you really suggesting that he convinced anyone with that display who disagreed with him? Or are you lust happy to see him lay into Wolf Blitzer?

Is it really about educating people? Or just a yelling match?

thanks for the link, kali yuga. i have to say, the grateful dead had all this stuff figured out years before the internet. lets hear it for lsd!

which, i think, should be offered as part of a comprehensive health care plan. :)

If you want a testament to the power of the corporate media's influence, just take a look at the criticisms of Michael Moore from those on the "left."

"Michael Moore is too angry. It's upsetting to my delicate, progressive sensibilities that he is so uncivil as to display emotion. Why can't he be more like that nice Alan Colmes?"

"Where's the balance? How dare Michael Moore give voice to my (and most Americans') interests without acknowledging that the corpo-fascist point-of-view is equally legitimate. He needs to be more fair and balanced."

Somewhere Frank Luntz is laughing his ass off that these so-called "liberal" critics have so thoroughly internalized the winger talking points.

Those are all straw man arguments kali.

The point is not that he should be like Alan Colmes, the point is he just went ballistic and didn't use the time to give thorough, trenchant analysis of why Gupta was wrong.

If the current idea of progressing an argument is mad baying at the moon, then I hope you're in the minority.

As I pointed above Dawkins is hardly like Alan Colmes in his delivery and he's more effective than Moore mid-rant (Moore can be effective when he wants to be).

Additionally, if you incapable of brooking any criticism of your heroes, you might consider that you may have something in common with all those knee-jerk Bush supporters.

Just because it makes you happy to see Blitzer get blitzed doesn't mean its progress.

"if you incapable of brooking any criticism of your heroes"

I don't have heroes. Make a criticism that consists of something other than a winger talking point and I'm all ears.

kali: Maybe I'm reading those comments with the wrong inflection, but they all seem heavily sarcastic.

Lou Dobbs: "Wolf, are you having fun with Michael Moore?"

Read: " Wolf, are you a communist sympathizer? Have you forgotten which side your Bentley is fueled on? How dare you have anyone come on who actually speaks truth to power!"

So Moore expresses his views with anger and passion and all you little whiners kvetch about this as if it invalidates his arguments? He was 100% correct about the media being a bunch of gutless toadies bowing to their corporate masters at the expense of the Americn citizenry. Is he not right that the meda failed to ask the hard questions prior to invasion of Iraq?

Moore's combative nature is not only entertaining, it's also fairly justified when attacking corporate media stiffs like Wolf Blitzer and the other cheesedicks on CNN. His style is in the tradition of Eugene V. Debs and the muckrakers, populists, and other radicals from the turn of the last century who were tremendous agents for change in this country, change that benefitted us all today.

Moore is a populist and a rabble-rousing muckraker. Passion and histrionics come with the territory. If he profits from his work, so what, at least what he promotes has substantive value to those of us for whom he fights. And if his style is just an act, once again, so what, as long as his act is working to affect change where it is needed. Politeness is for sheep and cowards.

At what point are we supposed to get angry, folks, if not now? After six years of our country being run by criminals and charlatans, and being mired in a war with no end, plus of course all the other social ills that plague our nation, what are supposed to do, sit politely and wait our turn like good little sheep?

My grandmother refuses to watch CNN because she says that "they're too LIB-ER-AL". Maybe I can convince her that the enemy (Moore) of her enemy (CNN) is her friend.

Robert S. I agree completely. It is frustrating that he just continually interrupted rather than calmly convincing. He seemed like a likable guy up until this interview.

i'm with you, varun. moore's critics spend too much time in front of the tee vee - their comments reflect the vapid msm. who, but a bell-pepper brain, would bite that 'profit' worm. moore makes a good living doing what he does so well. like james clay fuller quoted mp benn, fear and debt is what keeps the sheeple in line

oh, and ... Lou Dobbs, haven't you worn out those corporate knee-pads by now for crying-out-loud?

A poem...

Fuck,fuck,fuck,fuck,fuck LOU DOBS

When Moore and CNN attack each other, it's really hard to tell who to root for. Moore plays extremely fast and loose with the facts, and splices and edits footage to basically manufacture events. He's comfortable with character assassination, too: for example, he happily implied that Charleton Heston is a racist, and that the NRA is a racist organization -- when, in fact, both have long histories of taking stands for minorities. To hear him cry that he's being misrepresented is bad comedy.

Healthcare is an issue that desperately needs to be seriously addressed. It's good that Moore is publicizing the issue -- assuming he doesn't delegitimize it -- but I wouldn't trust a single claim he makes. I wouldn't even trust a single scene.

"Make a criticism that consists of something other than a winger talking point and I'm all ears."

Now, you're just making stuff up. I already said twice that I find Dawkins effective - and he can hardly be said to be spineless in his delivery. If you can't even respond to an argument honestly, no wonder you prefer Moore in rave mode.

The whole point is that the reaction is ineffectual and you've said nothing to prove otherwise.

For what it's worth, Moore's far more effective in the second half of the interview when he calmed down and quit being all offended about the reaction to his movie about 9/11. His anger at CNN's coverage of the war is understandable, but that was only part of his babbling diatribe. Furthermore, I enjoyed John Stewart's outburst on Crossfire because it was entirely honest, unlike Moore's which was mixture of good points, but also freighted with ego.

Now, where do you find right-wing talking points in there?

As for other folks comments: who ever said Moore doesn't have a right to profit from his work? Or to be a muckraker? Not me. Let's just not pretend he's at all effective when he's in full verbal diahrrea mode.

Finally, I saw Sicko and I enjoyed it. It made me very, very angry - as it should have. And despite whatever inaccuracies it may have in it, I wish every American would watch it. I also hope we see more detailed documentaries about the travesty of the American healthcare system by folks like, say, the directors of The Corporation.

So ... you know what you can do with your insipid inferences that I'm resorting to "winger talking points."

"I already said twice that I find Dawkins effective - and he can hardly be said to be spineless in his delivery."

So your complaint is that Michael Moore isn't Richard Dawkins? That's a pretty bizarre criticism. Maybe if Dawkins were introduced by CNN as someone who is intellectually dishonest, maybe he'd get a little pissed off too. Unless he happens to be a gutless Democrat, then maybe not.

"For what it's worth, Moore's far more effective in the second half of the interview when he calmed down and quit being all offended about the reaction to his movie"

He should be offended. He should be pissed off. He should defend his work. They introduce him by declaring that he lied in his film, even though the piece itself shows that Moore holds up under scrutiny better than any wingnut guest would. Oh, that's right, wingnuts aren't held to the same standard-- in fact, they're not held to ANY standard-- by Shitzer, CNN, and the rest of the whore media.

Sanjay GOOpta! Hahah

He's comfortable with character assassination, too: for example, he happily implied that Charleton Heston is a racist...

i was uncomfortable with that scene in "bowling" too. i wish heston had stood up for himself the way moore does here ("you piece of shit! i invite you into my home...etc.) but moore probabaly would have edited it out anyway. in any case i don't think anyone thinks moore is a saint.

I saw Sicko last night and I loved it but I just want to say: Lou Dobbs is a Jack-Ass! He’s a complete embarrassment! How can such a xenophobe have his own news show? For one thing, he’s incapable of talking about China with out referring to them as “Communist China”. Now, I know some of you will say; “China IS a communist country”. Well, Lou Dobbs is a fat, jack-ass prick but CNN doesn’t say: “and now here’s Fat Jack-Ass Prick Lou Dobbs”.

I know those (twin) towers. And work in their basement meant toiling for Blue Cross.

Reality.

Warner Center. Just off the 101.

Hell. What a Sick Sick Sicko memory. What a Sicko Amoral Atmosphere. And to think I could have risen up through the rungs of a sort of mirror image of Dante's Hell.

Hello!

Sicko!

I like Mike.

I like Hugo.

Carlos too. Hugo Wolf, Hugo Chavez, Carlos Chavez.

We are in no danger from too much "perfection".

Fahrenheit, heated passion. I'm no liberal, I don't believe in warm fuzzy, forgiveness. I can understand the Khmer Rouge, the execution of the Russian Royals, I know how they felt now. I do. A liberal would not want to take out all the "conservatives" in this Country (Cunt-ry) and shoot them, like I do.

Gupta in bed with the troops? I believe it, you all are (you "conservatives,", cunts, pussy-holes). No innocents. No innocence.

Oh, sorry, I forgot to put on my backward mask.

Sorry!

Moore can giggle, hee hee hee.

He can do it.

Viva la revolucion!

Viva!

Viva Hugo Wolf ("Lopez". Donner und Blitzen, Thor's wrath to Blitzer! Blitzkrieg to sanjay!

Sieg Heil?

Right,

Seek Health, you're going to need it, way, way...okay, enough.

Cunt-ry

Not to pick on you, cause I like your point of view. And all kinds of people who I like and agree with use terms such as dick and cunt in a derogatory way.

And not to be "politically correct"

But on behalf of all "cunts", I object :)

And on behalf of the "dicks", I object :)

And somewhere here on some thread that I can't find theotherone (erroneously addressed as "theo") also finds that sucking and cunts and our erogenous zones are used for curse words in a manner that is incomprehensible.

Oh well... never mind... I'll never understand this...

Cunt-ry

Not to pick on you, cause I like your point of view. And all kinds of people who I like and agree with use terms such as dick and cunt in a derogatory way.

And not to be "politically correct"

But on behalf of all "cunts", I object :)

And on behalf of the "dicks", I object :)

And somewhere here on some thread that I can't find theotherone (erroneously addressed as "theo") also finds that sucking and cunts and our erogenous zones are used for curse words in a manner that is incomprehensible.

Oh well... never mind... I'll never understand this...

oops...

And here I thought that those who posted twice were idiots..

Now I know how it happens..

Ol' Uncle "Unc" Unconsiously conflating Winnetka with "Wet _". No doubt.

(And it's really between Canoga and DeSoto.)

MY unhappy 'appylogywodgies, again...

Way worse than I thought: it was a Michael Richards Momentum, and going downhill from there. If I hadn't belatedly discovered how belatedly I was discovering how late I was, I would have previewed it before I let it go. Not Unconscious even. Sorry to Winnetka, Kennewickt, Pericu, Baja, (and Alta). Great Country, County, State(s), just way too many people OF ALL KINDS. (Sexes too.)

At least I'm not famous. :{.

;) Satwiwa under the sun too long for.. too long, period.

.