First, here’s a link to the interview in question. It’s labeled “Huckabee Rips Moore.”

This is my response to that video:

I wanted to make a complaint regarding the way in which Mike Huckabee was interviewed regarding his mention of Michael Moore’s weight.

Although the first point made by Miles ____ regarding the former Gov.’s identity as a minister and whether or not making a comment about a guy’s weight is appropriate for him to do was worth stating.

However, the segment was five minutes long and the interviewer went nowhere else with the line of questioning even when the former Gov. gave him openings about facts and policy which could be challenged.

How long do the Canadians actually wait for health care? Elective procedures? What is the Gov.’s source of information.

Gov. Huckabee said, “The French pay more for their health care because they pay a LOT more in taxes.” Is this true? How MUCH more do they pay for the services they get? Give me a menu to compare services so I can see which system is better for me as a consumer! And, again, what source does the Gov. go to for his information?

These are the questions that need to be answered. It’s great to have “Sicko” presented to us, but it’s a lost opportunity of the media is unwilling to take up the questions that are out there and ask them of the people who are lining their pockets with insurance dollars and HMOs are making huge profits if the system is left unaltered. How much do THEY spend each year on PR?

Thanks for your time,
rationalpsychic.wordpress.net

I welcome any comments or ideas about what I addressed regarding the video and what things I could have addressed but which you think that I missed. I am thinking health care is going to rise as a larger issue if we just push a little. Yes, the Iraq war looms huge, but so does the need to provide health care for our returning veterans. I think the fate of their health care is tied to the fortunes of the subject of providing health care to the rest of the public.

I went to a sneak preview of “Sicko” at the Lagoon theater in Minneapolis on Saturday night. I had watched “Roger and Me” when it came out on DVD and saw “Bowling for Columbine” just two nights before going to see “Sicko.” I’ve always viewed documentaries as being like good medicine: I’ll take them when necessary, but the taste doesn’t keep me coming back for more.

I do think that Michael Moore serves a purpose as a filmmaker and as someone contributing to public debate. For the first time since I was in college and listening to The Clash, I feel like it’s (maybe) OK to mention “socialism” as a valid form of managing a nation’s resources.

I feel that this view is closer to the center than I ever would have thought before. Yesterday on the internet I caught an outdoor segment of Chris Matthews’ “Hardball” in which he was talking to Ann Coulter. She was surrounded by about fifty of her fans on this outdoor set. Let me ask you, if Rush Limbaugh’s fans are called “dittoheads” are Ann Coulter’s fans called “sawdust skulls”?

The reason I bring her up is that she mentioned FDR as having been good on foreign policy for “crushing the Nazi war machine” but had been terrible on domestic policy. Why? Because he had saddled us with socialist ideals which she said we are still struggling to get rid of. I wonder what she’s referring to: Social Security or the minimum wage?

In “Sicko” Moore takes a smart tack in that he doesn’t say that we are in terrible shape because of the number of people in the U.S. who do not have medical insurance. That could lead a lot of us to think to ourselves, “Hey, I step over the homeless every day on my way to work, what does this have to do with me?”

Instead, he asks the rest of us who do have health insurance, “What do you really have and what is it costing you?” And the point it, once you factor in deductibles, co-pays and the fact that you are unsteady ground any time you have something that needs really serious treatment, you’re left wondering why more of us aren’t bankrupt over medical bills and why we aren’t carrying signs in the street?

Moore gives us lots of reasons why we should look to other nations for an example of what can be done well and use the best from each. He examines the Canadians, the British, and the French as examples. From what I can find on the internet, the United Kingdom charges rates from 10-40% (those making over $4,460, between $4,461 and $69,200, and above $69,201) and has a number of deductions allowable. France appears to go from 10-48% while Canada levies from 7-29%. VAT taxes also apply which are considerably higher than most state sales tax rates. Canada has the lowest VAT at 7%.

Some of the more humorous moments come when Michael Moore is trying to get the Canadians to understand the predicament their southern cousins are in. One Canadian fellow (we’ll call him “Bob”) describes having sawn off four of his fingers with a power saw and shows he has decent use of them after they were reattached in a Canadian hospital. Moore then tells him about an American who cut off his middle and ring fingers and goes to the hospital to have them reattached. Since he has no insurance, he is given a choice of having the middle finger reattached for $60,000 or the ring finger for $12,000. Because he’s so sentimental, the fellow chooses the ring finger. Bob, the Canadian whose every doctor’s bill is paid by the government, has a confused look on his face.

After the movie, I felt somewhat ashamed. Ashamed that I wasn’t in the streets with a bullhorn shouting my anger and demanding better treatment for myself and my neighbors. I’ve never done this before. But the stakes keep getting higher.

Next year’s Republican National Convention is being held in the Twin Cities. In one way or another I plan to be there. It’s a matter of organizing under a political banner I can work for and that my conscience will agree with.

My dear one and I are going to see “Sicko,” Michael Moore’s new movie about America’s trouble taking care of its citizens medically. It’s playing tonight at the Lagoon Theater in Minneapolis. I hope it’s something worth writing a blog about.

Last night she and I watched “Bowling for Columbine” together. She had seen it before but I hadn’t. I was surprised that this movie was controversial to any great extent. I thought he showed flexibility, rather than a dogmatic lockstep, in pointing out the disconnect between gun ownership and violent media since these factors don’t appear to bring about the same gun violence in other countries as is found in the U.S.

The connection I’ve never heard mentioned before, and that very fact seems to make it worth greater consideration, is that gun violence in America is connected with our long history of slavery, racism and hatred of all things foreign.

I found what I thought to be a balanced defense of “Bowling for Columbine” written by a fellow, Erik Möller at his site, Kuro5hin.

If Moore can give me as many new ways to think about the U.S. healthcare system in “Sicko” as he gave me ways to think about gun violence in “Bowling” I’ll be pleased.