Talk:SiCKO

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Aschlafly - You have such a strong opinion on this film that is still being shown in previews. Have you even seen it? Guitarplayer 16:50, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

He may have. Its now available on the internet. Geo.Complain! 17:26, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
Michael Moore's films: garbage in, garbage out. How often does Sicko talk about rationing that results from government-controlled medicine???--Aschlafly 20:04, 29 June 2007 (EDT)

Contents

Front page news

I find it amusing that the front page tells people that Sicko was critically panned but the article itself only features a quote from a critic lauding the movie. I'd ask someone to change the front page if I could to reflect the actual article. Anyway, I've seen the movie. It makes a powerful case - not so much that other countries' healthcare systems are better but rather that our system's failings are much worse. The "Let's do something less bad than this" is a good argument, and the case is made well. --TraitortotheCause 15:30, 30 June 2007 (EDT)

Embargo Investigation

I've noticed that this article does not cover SiCKO's embargo violation investigation[1]. I've written a section on it:

The production of SiKO has brought about a controversy concerning Moore’s adherence to the United States broad trade embargo imposed against Cuba since 1962. A United States Treasury Department letter implied that Moore did not receive authorization before traveling to Cuba to film his documentary; this would be in direct conflict with the embargo’s rules[1]. Moore is now facing a U.S. government probe on the legality of the Cuba trip[2]. He has hired a Washington attorney, David Boies, to represent him in the matter, and states, "I have broken no laws, and I have nothing to hide.”[3]

Should it be added? --Tash 15:17, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

Good idea, and apparently well-supported. Please add. Thanks.--Aschlafly 09:42, 7 August 2007 (EDT)
Thanks Aschlafly, but since the page is locked to me I would appreciate if a sysop could add it to the article. Thanks again for the help,--Tash 19:21, 8 August 2007 (EDT)
I added it. Bohdan 19:23, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

Bias?

It's pretty sad when you call the film biased; when you're review is even more biased. Even if you didn't like, at least try to seem like you see both sides of the arguement.

Do you realize this is a conservative website? We are not going to have a NPOV. Of course, the film has a liberal bias, as does the filmmaker. You should not be surprised to see a conservative analysis here. --Crocoite 18:21, 10 August 2007 (EDT)

I agree with Crocoite, the only bias there is the liberal bias. Conservapedia has no responsibility to represent their falsehood. --BiancaW 18:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

NHS inaccuracy

"in fact NHS policies vary between the four constituent countries of the UK" -this is completely inaccurate, NHS policy is the same all over the UK.

Also for clarity prescription charges are a flat fee of £6.85 regardless of what the drug costs. NHS dentists are heavily subsidised and only a nominal fee is charged (although if you are unemployed or elderly you are not charged).


Cite error: <ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found
Personal tools