digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Oprah Says Michael Moore’s Sicko is the One Movie You MUST SEE This Summer

slashfilm.com — We just received word that Michael Moore will appear on Oprah on Tuesday June 5th where he will present scenes from his new film, Sicko. And get this — the theme of Oprah’s show is “The one film you must see this this summer”. Apparently, Oprah loved Michael’s film and wants to make health care for all one of her main missions this year.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • leontes, on 10/11/2007, -22/+110I think it's incredible that there is this media force called Oprah that I have no exposure to whatsover. She speaks to a demographic that is different than me, I've never so much seen her show for a moment on television. It seems a little odd to post this to Digg, as I imagine others feel simliarly.

    I'll be seeing Sicko, however, I hear Moore has his style less out there, more accesible.
    • crankycookie, on 10/11/2007, -36/+10She gave me a new car...

      And a drug resistant form of tuberculosis.
    • rosefu, on 10/11/2007, -22/+31Whether or not you watch Oprah (I'm sure most people here do not) is irrelevant. She is better than the vast majority of talking heads out there in the media, has set up charities and networks to help others, and has an opinion of her own rather than having spokespeople speak for her.

      I was going to see this movie anyway. This doesn't change anything, so why worry about it?
    • pagancollective, on 10/11/2007, -63/+25I wanted to see the movie up until I read a review where it discussed one of Moore's antics:

      Apparently, one of the runners of an anti-Moore website was stepping down because of his wife's illness, and he couldn't pay the bills. Moore himself donated anonymously the money needed, and then revealed this to the man on camera.

      I think Moore often raises great points, but these types of stunts are manipulative and end up leaving a bad taste in my mouth. They overshadow the important issues he raises.
    • SpectralSounds, on 10/11/2007, -23/+16Maybe you havent seen it because you've been busy. At work. Usually the people who watch Oprah are the ones with too much time on their hands. They have nothing better to do, so they usually get involved in her damn book club, or her other pet causes.

      My ex-girlfriend loved Oprah and her damn books. She didnt have a job. Go figure. I hate that bitch. My ex that is, Oprah I dont care about.
    • nblsavage, on 10/11/2007, -10/+71@pagancollective, the guy who ran the anti-moore site actually found out it was Moore who donated the money and decided to be a jackass about it. It was already well known before the movie came out.
    • havokzero, on 10/11/2007, -15/+9Oprah Winfrey is good friends with Barack Obama. She is probably promoting the movie, in part, to make Obama's universal health care plan more popular.

      Now if only Oprah would have Ron Paul on...
    • esotericguy, on 10/11/2007, -11/+6http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cLrV6XV13Y


      had to be done
    • Jagdwulfe, on 10/11/2007, -33/+10Michael Moore is a lying deceitful *****. I wonder what crap he will be spewing this time.
    • mattxb, on 10/11/2007, -22/+57Personally I think Michael Moore deserves a lot more respect than he gets. His critics say he does what he does because he wants to put himself in the limelight, but I'm sure the fame hes received as a documentary filmmaker surprises him as much as anyone. Its unprecedented really.
    • ts8lemonade, on 10/11/2007, -27/+13A bit off topic maybe but ***** universal health care.
    • cr4ft, on 10/11/2007, -11/+5Oprah says a lot of things...I definitely agree with her here
    • tmyprod, on 10/11/2007, -27/+14I don't give a ***** what Oprah or anyone else says, Michael Moore is a raving idiot. I'm almost ashamed to have many similar political stances.
    • TheCash, on 10/11/2007, -24/+32@ mattxb
      If you honestly think that, you should attend one of his university lectures sometime (which he gets paid a buttload for)
      The man is a shameless attention whore, and he does not even try to hide the fact. I doubt he honestly cares anymore, assuming he ever did.

      I have no problem with Moore or Oprah pushing for 'healthcare for all.'

      As long as they plan on footing the bill, what do I care?

      It's easy to be generous when you take from the pockets of others I guess.

      People complain about the high cost of healthcare, yet they call for a government run Health insurance program in the same breath. Seeing how most people balk at the '$10k hammer, and $30k toilet seat,' you'd think the average tax payer would be wary of the potential $60k bandaid, or $100k bedpan. Then again, the only people I've noticed pushing 'government healthcare for all' are either those who are so well off they don't even know what they filed on their tax returns for the last decade, or those who don't even pay taxes to begin with. Or politicians trying solicit votes from both.

      I can't help but feel sick anytime I hear Edwards talk about how expensive healthcare is, seeing how a good portion of his fortune was made from litigating class action lawsuits that in the end did little to improve the industry, but directly lead to massive increases in costs, especially in the pre and neo-natal fields. You'd think he'd be against this sort of thing, seeing how it's a lot harder to sue the government then private hospitals and insurance companies.

      The sad part is, the high costs and poor service people tend to complain about over the last few years were directly a result of the actions and policies of HMO's, but HMO's are as close as the private sector can get to government run healthcare yet still be private sector. If any of you are really curious about the quality of care a government run program offers, maybe you should talk to a anyone who's been to a VA hospital lately, or relies on medicade. Actually, please do that before deciding how much of my hard work you plan on 'donating' to the cause of universally inadequate and pathetic healthcare.
    • swordedge, on 10/11/2007, -19/+13Two extreme liberals that don't get it.
    • xGORDOx, on 10/11/2007, -23/+21Sicko is about the health care system in Cuba.
      Castro had to fly in surgeons from Spain to fix what the Cuban surgeons botched during his surgery.
      I'll stick with the American system, sometimes, "you get what you pay for" is the way to go.
    • EmperorAwesome, on 10/11/2007, -13/+11Oprah? Suggesting people see a Michael Moore movie? What? Get out. Seriously? C'mon...
      Next you'll be telling me Rosie O'Donnel is backing Hilary Clinton.
    • scotticus, on 10/11/2007, -8/+10Kevin a Mac Fanboy? The words "Oprah Says..." in the front page of digg?

      Methinks I need to find a new place to surf...
    • JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Oprah has a lot of pop psychologists, gurus, and psychics on her show.

      I think she has a good heart, but I wonder if she does as much harm as good.
    • gamebittk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2Wooho OPRAH!
    • cliffzdude, on 10/11/2007, -13/+8Universal health care = Hospitals for all, with the ***** care our (should be) honored veterans have been receiving. If you think Universal health care is the end all solution, then take a look at the VA health care system. Really, it makes me want to cry to know how ***** our own are treated.

      Universal health care = huge money grab, more corruption than you can even imagine, and more taxes for the rich. Oh, but be aware the "rich" are basically the average working couples in America. Funny how politicians like to claim that program "x" will be paid for taxing the rich, then I'm declared to be "rich". Take a basic computer geek in his 30's, his wife works. He brings home a modest (for a computer geek) $50k. She is a professional who brings in a more modest $30k. $80k household may sound rich to a college whipper-snapper, but believe me its not. However *less* than $80k has been called "rich" by our beloved politicians. Nice how they hide behind words, when in all reality the intended definition doesn't equal the fluff.

      I'm in no way against the idea of covering those who can't afford coverage, but nobody has proposed a system that takes care of the flaws I see inherent in such a plan. The government doesn't supply good health care anywhere today, make the program(s) bigger and you'll have more ***** health care. Better than none? Maybe, but lets remember that many who are covered by employee plans today will soon be dropped and left to the government supplied health care system. Smaller employers that don't have to offer health care will drop it like a hot potato. The problem is we're talking about universal health care in a country where the private sector can and does better than the government. Its how we work in the USA, its our M.O. if you will. So we'll just pay the premiums for those who can't afford it you say? Sound great, but in reality medicare/medicaid patients are already treated differently than those privately insured, imagine the poor person's government funded program. Uugh, it makes me shiver. This isn't nearly as simple a subject as many would lead you to believe. Don't believe the simple answer pundits,they're full of *****.

      Now imagine if we could design and implement such a program, now the Digg community COULD do that. How about we come up with a government funded system for the poor, a sliding scale decides how much you pay. If you make more, you pay more of the premium. Now if you can afford cable TV, then we deduct what you pay for cable TV and charge you that amount. Cell phones? Same thing, a pre-paid emergency plan would be exempt. ...and so on... Small companies are a problem, how do we solve that quandary? Perhaps a government sponsored co-op for small businesses, that works like a large group. The entire system should be a government allocated but private corporation, like the USPS. Give the ***** a carrot for being good, and include quality of care in that equation. Now you KNOW my suggestions here are kind of like what you probably think of when you say you are for universal health care. But lets get a grip, my suggestions here couldn't be further from what would be implemented.

    • themastersb, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4If the US were to get health care they would need major military cuts....... yeah..... not happening any time soon.....
    • Seidoger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18"And now free healthcare for all the audience today!"
    • robz0r, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Health care works up here in Canada, sometimes the wait time for a procedure is a bit execissive(my grandmother waited 3 months for hip surgery), but going into the Hospital 3 days after Xmas this past year, I got accurately diagnosed in under an 30 minutes and went to the drug store to grab my meds.
      My grandfather also has to constantly get blood work, if he had to pay for this, i would be paying for it.

      I love my country and for the most part my governing bodies.
    • brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7@thecash and several others
      Universal health care is definitely a tricky concept. The government tends to add in zero value cost and red tape. It seems like every time there's a major issue a new committee needs to be formed and a new department is setup that spends millions and millions (or billions) of dollars.

      Health care IS different though. Right now the US spends more per capita on health care than any country in the world (look I found this page with great graphs: http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/spend.php). We don't just spend a little more, we spend a LOT more! Yet our life expectancy is WELL down in the rankings. You think universal health care is expensive? Well you're already paying more than anywhere else in the world and you're still not living as long.

      The waste due to the current insurance system is out of control. Business (even huge companies) have trouble paying for insurance. People who are unemployed or self employed can barely afford any health coverage or can't afford it at all. Insurance companies make immense sums of money and have powerful lobbiests who have too much control of health care procedures and requirements. Your health costs you and this country an immense sum of money. Much of that money goes to health insurance companies and only a fraction actually goes to keeping you healthy.

      If (and that's an enormous "f") a reasonably efficient universal health care system could be set up it would cut out the middle men (health insurance companies) which are just siphoning off money and steering regulations towards less effective care. Yes the burden of expense would be distributed differently. Instead of my employer footing most of the bill and giving me a lower salary I would pay more out of my paycheck towards the universal health care system but would expect higher wages. Right now benefits are a huge factor in employee compensation. The problem is that those benefits filter through companies that know they're going to make a killing because they've run all the numbers.

      Can a universal health care system exist that is cheaper overall and allows me to get good health care AND a larger after tax income? Yes. Do I think our government is capable of setting up such a system? ...I have doubts.
    • ramiro, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Since when the fashion leftist teenagers on digg follow Oprah?
    • BradMW, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3How can someone who's diet consists of eighteen donuts and five gallons of ***** a day be allowed to make a movie about healthcare?
    • y0smokey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2How can anyone take advice from this morbidly obese dude? He is pushing for universal heath care so we can pay for all the medicine he will need pumped into his fat ***** waste of space body in the near future.

      Honestly...we cannot provide health care to the masses due to the fact that the masses are fat, out of shape, pieces of ***** that are going to need billions of dollars to keep alive. I don't want any of the taxes I pay to take care of some fat bastard that didn't do ***** to help himself.
    • brufleth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@A whole bunch of you

      You're already paying for everyone else's health care. You pay insurance rates which reflect the cost of not just you but everyone with a similar policy. If your employer has a group plan, the company pays huge sums to cover everyone equally. So while you might take no medication, never need a doctor, etc your wages and/or cost of insurance reflect the cost of covering Sick Guy.

      The kicker is that insurance companies also take in HUGE profits which reflect the excess money they siphon out of your wealth. The real debate is if a government run health care system could do things as effectively with less over head.

      Also: See my post above.
    • johngr, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1IN A FUNCTIONING SOCIETY, OPRAH WINFREY AND MICHAEL MOORE WOULD BE FED TO TIGER SHARKS ON PAY PER VIEW.
    • greenback1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The problem with the US health care cannot be solved with a socialized medical system. Creating yet another incredibly large government agency (perhaps it would be the largest) is not the solution. The solution would be simply to remove the health care industry executives from writing policies in DC which enable run away costs and profits in an industry which should be leaning more towards non-profit. If that problem were resolved we all could afford decent health care and continue the American way, which is different from every country in the world. Here, the government is supposed to stay out of your private life, unlike some of the countries Michael Moore visited in his film (sorry if my American pride and patriotic ideology is troubling to you). If Michael Moore wants an idea for his next documentary why doesn't he tackle the biggest problem in the US: Media. If the citizens in the US were ever to get the straight story about all things important, we are more than capable of figuring out solutions on our own without the assistance of the government. So, Mike, with all due respect, why don't you ask Bill Clinton why he signed the Telecommunications act in 1996 which paved the way for five corporations with multinational interests to monopolize the media and dictate what information Americans can and cannot learn about. After all, if Americans were more informed about the Medical Insurance and Pharmaceutical Industries take over of US domestic health care policy in the first place we would have been able to prevent such SICKO heartbreak from occurring. Your film's heart is in the right place but the thinking is a bit skewed. America first!
  • Nekko17, on 10/11/2007, -25/+9I'm agnostic. She doesn't exist to me.
    • meatmcguffin, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Surely that implies she's a god? But then, for her to not exist you would be believing the concept of deities which would render you not agnostic.

      Whoa.
    • doddilus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2"Surely that implies she's a god? But then, for her to not exist you would be believing the concept of deities which would render you not agnostic."
      partially right
      he would be an atheist for not believing
      but not believing in something doesn't mean it has to exist for you to not believe in it
    • jmonty1000, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0You comment about someone who doesn't exist to you? So what are your thoughts on Santa Claus?
  • mikefitz2, on 10/11/2007, -5/+64oh boy, oprah enjoyed the film.
    • Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3I hope Mingey and Gary come back. Great character acting.
    • LocDawg, on 10/11/2007, -22/+4@Plinkotic

      Dugg up because i digg it!

      ░░░░░░░░█▀▀▀█▄░░░░█▀▀▀█
      ░░░░░░░░█░░░░█░▄▄▄█░░░█
      ░░░░░█▀▀▀░░░░▀▀▀░░░░░░█
      ░░░░░█░░░░░▄▄░░░▄▄░░░░█░░░░█
      ░░░░░█▄░░▄██▀░░░▀██▄░░█░░░▀██▀
      ░░░░░░█░██▀▄▄░░░▄▄▀██░█░░░░██
      ░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█▄▄▄██
      ░░▄▄▄▄█░░░░▄▄▄▄▄▄▄░░░░░░█▀▀▀▀
      ▄██▀█░░░░░░▀▀▀▀▀▀▀░░░░░░█
      ██░░█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
      ██░░█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░█
      ░░░░█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
      ░░░░░░░▄▄▄▄██░░░██▄▄▄
      ░░░░░░░▀▀▀▀▀▀░░░▀▀▀▀▀
  • cbdgr, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5wonder how much it took to make here say that, oh wait that was Martha Stewart never mind
  • invisible777, on 10/11/2007, -31/+17Oprah is as fake as a Michael Moore's intentions.
    • reed311, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15How can you have fake intentions? What possibly would be his "true" intentions? Let me guess, to make this country a communist, atheist state, right?
    • timothybryce, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4"Let me guess, to make this country a communist, atheist state, right?"

      I'd replace "communist" with "hardcore socialist" but yeah, pretty much. I would disagree with the original poster; he doesn't really hide his intentions.
  • MrZaiko, on 10/11/2007, -16/+63HOLY *****!!! if Oprah says it IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!!!
    • Ayatollah, on 10/11/2007, -7/+33that's not far from the truth in the minds of most housewives
    • TheProtested, on 10/11/2007, -14/+8any man who listens to Oprah loses penis rights.

      this law will be enforced.
    • idonthack, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3@theprotested
      But how will I open jars?
  • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/11/2007, -3/+75Maybe someone from The Secret will come by and say that if you don't have healthcare, then obviously you don't want it badly enough.
  • Jesse, on 10/11/2007, -11/+20I make up my own mind, I'll watch it.

    I love the high standards for documentaries in internet forums, where they rip on Michael Moore's docs and then praise "Loose Change".
    • break99, on 10/11/2007, -11/+6documentary? my poor naive friend...
    • Hunley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Exactly, here is a new and radical idea, go see the film, then make a judgment. For all the Michael Moore haters I hear he doesn't even appear in the film until around 50 minutes into it. Having a guy tell you that he had to choose which of his fingers to reattach based on cost is powerful enough without Moore or anyone providing commentary.

      I'm not a Dr. or health care expert but IMO the system needs some significant changes and that is the suggestion I get from Sicko . . to keep talking about how to improve things.
  • esotericguy, on 10/11/2007, -21/+10http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cLrV6XV13Y


    had to be done
    • johnhummel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13You already did it. You didn't need to do it twice. I'm not even checking out what "had to be done" just because of that.
  • IVIrMP3, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3It's receiving hype? What is it even about?
  • TyroPyro, on 10/11/2007, -8/+10Obey the Oprah!
  • bigpete591, on 10/11/2007, -16/+10***** Oprah.
    • Magunwarrior, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1I don't like hair in my mouth.

      /t-pain
  • neodorian, on 10/11/2007, -8/+17Damn. So confused. I'd like to see this movie but I hate Oprah...What do I do?
    • nymphetamine, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3There's only one thing to do: we must kill Oprah.
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -12/+6I don't mind Oprah but I hate michael moore and I'm pretty sure that I'll be yelling at michael's false claims while watching the movie (either on cable or rented from the library, that ***** doesn't deserve my money).
    • nblsavage, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21How about using just making up your own mind? Do you really give a ***** who endorses it?
    • TornSack, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6"Capitalism doesn't work for airline security, fire departments, or police departments and it doesn't work for health care either."

      And communism does?
    • piwy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10@TornSack (#7021062)
      Communism works for two things: health care and education.
    • neodorian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1nblsavage: I was joking.
  • apollomurga, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3Hello Profits.
  • cybermort, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5that bitch needs to stop ruining things that i might enjoy by making them "her selection" before i get a to see it my self.
    • Ayatollah, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19so some "bitch" liking something you would like automatically makes it uncool?
    • s1mph0ny, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0So make your own media outlet, call it oprahsucksballs.com, and put your stamp on it before she does.

      What do you know, it's available...
  • Funman1, on 10/11/2007, -51/+7Take that Communist crap elsewhere!
    You want health care, GET A JOB!! (And Stop suing everyone in the industry so the total cost will go down for everyone else.)
    • rosefu, on 10/11/2007, -3/+45This must come as a shock to you, but many people (not illegal immigrants) work 40 hour weeks and don't make a living wage. And they sure as hell can't afford health care.
    • GoneSouth, on 10/11/2007, -6/+32Stop spewing that mindless drivel and use your brain for a change.

      The US spends the most money per capita on health care of any first world country and has the one of the poorest health care records in terms of life expectancy, infant mortality, etc. Canada, France, the UK, etc all spend less on health care and get more bang for their buck. Fully 1/3 of working Americans are not adequately covered by health insurance. Health care costs are the #1 cause of bankrupty in the US.

      Capitalism doesn't work for airline security, fire departments, or police departments and it doesn't work for health care either.
    • pogfreak, on 10/11/2007, -16/+2People who think health care is some god given right are lol.
    • timothybryce, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4"This must come as a shock to you, but many people (not illegal immigrants) work 40 hour weeks and don't make a living wage."

      Suggestion: work more than 40 hours a week. 60 hours a week at the minimum wage (7 to 7 on weekdays and no work on weekends) gets you to $22,620. If you're having trouble making ends meet on $22k a year, might I suggest moving to a cheaper area, canceling your cable, etc. before making other people pay for your luxuries.
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7"Capitalism doesn't work for airline security, fire departments, or police departments and it doesn't work for health care either."

      Capitalism did work for healthcare in the USA. Ron Paul, a guy who I don't agree with on a lot of things, articulates it perfectly here

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul339.html
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5@timothybryce

      My grandparents, WW2 generation, worked their asses off and saved. Long days at the mills, jobs on the side, gardening, bartering schemes with neighbors for goods, etc. They lived through the 1950s that so many people today who weren't around then think of as a "golden age of prosperity". At the time it was... but we're living in a much better time to be alive in America. Back then things such as cars, washing machines, and TVs were considered "luxuries". Today the middle class goes on exotic cruises and cross-Atlantic flights like it's not that big of a deal. We're coddled.. and people who don't have all the luxuries that are being taken for granted today think the cards are stacked against them.

      All you have to do is work, save, and build your skillset. It's easier to complain than it is to actually do something with yourself and you can live a decent life making what most of us consider "next to nothing" regardless of what society says, and therein lies the problem.
    • Aokami, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3As soon as machinists and other hard laborers are offered the same insurance policy buying rights and privileges as your average office worker I will pack my red shirt and sickle and send it off to Cuba. Until then, and until people who are doing the work this nation requires to exist on a basic level are covered I think we are entitled to complain. The more at risk you are the less likely you are adequately covered, and that is just inhumane. I pay my taxes and vote in this system under the promise that the country will look out for my best interests and not let the insurance industry thrive over the misfortune and incompetence of unchecked capitalist interests. If the system were not broken so many would not be begging for it to be fixed.
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2@aokami

      Unskilled laborers aren't worth a whole lot. Why give the workers everything when any idiot can do what they're doing? If we were to put the workers first we would be rewarding being a mindless worker in the system rather than rewarding education and innovation. If you're not all that bright, join the marketing or sales team. There's good money there, too.

      http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/031110_taiwan/

      "GERSH: Innovation and marketing, these high-profit, value-added sweet spots, are in the corners of the graph. Manufacturing is at the bottom."
    • GoneSouth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4@jcm267

      I am a big fan of private enterprise. We have seen how private enterprise dramatically outperforms government run agencies in most industries, e.g. the recent private space flight boom. It just so happens, that health care is not one of those industries. Ron Paul's view on health care ("The lesson is clear: when government and other third parties get involved, health care costs spiral.") runs exactly contrary to facts that anybody can research on the internet.

      Canada, France, and the UK (and every other G8 nation except the US) all have government run health care. Their health care programs cover a larger percent of their population (100% vs. 85%), result in longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality, and nobody has to file for bankruptcy due to unexpected illness or injury. All that, AND their government run health care still cost less per capita than US health care. The facts are quite clear: government run health care provides, on average, better service, to more people, for less money.

  • xshaisu, on 10/11/2007, -17/+7"health care for all one of her main missions this year."

    Because we all know the Welfare system encourages welfare recipients to get jobs.

    My taxes are high enough, thank you very much.
    • dreicher, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Barack Obama just released his "National Health Care" plan a couple of days ago...coincidence?
  • PrometheuZ, on 10/11/2007, -9/+16Forget Oprah, just watch it for what Michael Moore has to say...is that so terribly difficult or painful??
    • doddilus, on 10/11/2007, -13/+7judging by his last few movies, yes
      you will need a few days of research to see what parts of the movie were correct and what parts were pure bs
    • doddilus, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4oh come on
      name one of his films that isn't at least half bs
    • TheG2, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Your in anti-government, industry is the devil, anarchy land. Don't expect reason and common sense. :(
  • FearMEiDEA, on 10/11/2007, -14/+7I think it's a good step in the right direction for Oprah to support this movie. Not much good I can say about her, but I do support Michael Moore, so more power to her!
  • Moriya, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1"our base was attacked by a giant socialist weasel"
  • MissinSoCal, on 10/11/2007, -8/+0Oh thank god I will finally be able to go to the doctor. You know how loyal her fans are! All hail Oooooopra.
  • LordSkywalker, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Well, if Oprah says so...
  • kore64, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3What a ridiculous proposal! You can die laughing at how ridiculous it is and the health care system won't have to deal with you.
  • kelpee, on 10/11/2007, -18/+10Oprah...meh. She's a non issue to me.
    Michael Moore on the other hand I loathe. His "documentaries" are nothing more but him cashing in on the pain and problems that face Americans.
    • Azio, on 10/11/2007, -14/+33"Michael Moore on the other hand I loathe. His "documentaries" are nothing more but him cashing in on the pain and problems that face Americans."
      And the health care industry isn't?
    • derekbill, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2I hate it when people cash in on other people's problems. That's why I have long believed we should round up all the doctors, lawyers, clergymen, morticians, firemen, policemen, and soldiers, and exile them, or put them in prison. We'll have less suffering in the world when people can no longer make a profit from it. It's the invisible hand, you know.
    • Glynth, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2Moore gets his points across with exploitive stunts based on lies. See my post below: "Sicko is supposed to be about..."
    • spidoman, on 10/11/2007, -8/+11He doesn't make documentaries, he makes propaganda films. He never seriously addresses both sides, I'll stick to PBS for my documentaries.
  • orangenomad, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Oprah says a lot of things...
  • FearFactory, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7Whos gonna eat who???
  • imdeanlabouty, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Then it is so!
  • gforce85, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5move to Canada, it's sweet here
  • Stormwysper, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4What if I don't see it? She gonna eat me?
  • ButterBuddha, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1I like boobs
  • john95127, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1So....
  • FikusErectus, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4Oprah is an poop head. I always pass on anything that fat blimp recommends.
  • ragley, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3WTF is an Oprah?
  • Error601, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4I guess if you're into fiction. Why do people give this shameless "get rich on hype" piece of ***** free publicity?
  • Glynth, on 10/11/2007, -10/+8Sicko is supposed to be about how great socialized medicine is... and Moore "proves" it by using multi-tier health care system of Cuba - using the top tier normally reserved for only the most wealthy supporters of "The Party." The average Cuban deals with an incredibly horrible health care system. Moore is a despicable liar. Facts and THE *actual* TRUTH aren't nearly as important to him as his version of "the truth."
    • Glynth, on 10/11/2007, -12/+6Surprise, surprise - getting dugg down already. The truth stings, doesn't it? To any who digg me down: Look it up yourself. The above is 100% fact. If anything, it's understated. If you digg me down for political reasons, you are a despicable person as well. :)
    • geekee, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4I think Moore was in Cuba showing that Guantanamo prisoners get better health care than 9/11 workers. Standard Moore stunt.
  • Gman311, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Awesome!
  • Elen, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1And here I thought this article was about Oprah calling Moore a sicko
  • baby4mommy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17Michael Moore anonymously sent Jim Kenefick (owner of MooreWatch.com) a check for $12,000 after Kenefick issued a a notice on his website warning readers it could be shut down because of the rising cost of his wife's bills.

    Jim Kenefick talks about it on his website. There was no set up and no camera reveal. Just Mr. Kenefick's assumption that the gift could not be genuine and speculation that it must have been a trick or set up

    Kenefick later posted on his website that, Moore left a voicemail message notifying Kenefick he was the anonymous donor. Moore's message was "normal and gracious
    • Glynth, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4ANONYMOUS gift? The "anonymous" gift that Moore later bragged about openly, turning it into a publicity stunt to promote his film? Sure, it was anonymous... until the bait was taken.

      http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/bitchin_camaro_douchebag_columnist/
      (Link not directly about that but it's mentioned - I don't have time right now to search for something more specific.)

      Forgive me for being cynical, but it's apparent that this was no simple "anonymous" act of charity or kindness.
    • bovox, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Man, you don't know what you're talking about. That gift was sent to him anonymously and graciously. Michael Moore didn't use it for publicity--HENCE the anonyminity. This Moorewatch guy is a total ungrateful douchebag. His ungracious action just show how much of a paranoid schizophrenic whacko the typical right-wing republican is.
  • booga1134, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5Give me a lortab and Rush Limbaugh anyday over Okra. When I hear Okra or Michael Moore all I can think of is LIB LIB LIB LIB LIB. I don't know how Okra hypnotized millions of upper class white women but Im glad Im not married to one of them, they'd STILL be searching for her body.
  • bitemegates, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3This ensures I will *not* be wasting time on this movie. I don't much care for Michael Moore to start with. Talk about bias.

    /shakes head

    Dugg for the warning.
  • jamesallen74, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9These message boards bring out the immaturity in so many people. Gone are the days of substance, the days of solid debate. Will there ever be a day when we don't open our mouths unless we have something solid to say?

  • jimbojones1977, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Who gives a ***** what Oprah thinks? It may be a good movie, but why is an Oprah endorsement news?
    • glasgowm, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Because it means the movie is going to be a success. Everything Opera endorses turns to gold as all her viewers eat it up
  • Spandia, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6Oprah, shut up. thank you
  • CaptWalker, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Next Oprah says "Hell ya i want some Cheezy Poofs!"
  • geekee, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3I'd no sooner watch this movie than read a book written by Bill O'Reilly. What's wrong with the film industry? Can't we have real documentaries that present all the facts and let the viewers make up their minds? I've seen 3 Moore movies so far and they were all liberal sermons.
    • glasgowm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Everyone has a bias. I don't think hes obliged to present a non-biased view. He isn't forcing you to believe anything.
    • geekee, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5"Everyone has a bias. I don't think hes obliged to present a non-biased view. He isn't forcing you to believe anything."

      When I watch a report on 60 Minutes, the reporters go through a lot of effort to tell both sides. That's a reporter's job. Michael Moore only presents the facts that he wants you to see to make his case. It's like being on a jury and only hearing one attorney's questioning of witnesses and summary. Maybe you think presenting propaganda as fact is ok. I think it dumbs down people's understanding of the world. He can say whatever he wants, but calling it a documentary and giving it an Oscar shows how pathetic Hollywood is at trying to imitate journalism.
    • MrVisible, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Well, gee, the poor health care industry. It's too bad they don't have any money with which to distribute information that supports their point of view in this debate.

      Well, I'm off to go watch the half an hour of drug company PR and commercials that used to be called the news.
    • UrielSynthesis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Digg's 3rd Law of the Internet:

      The longer a political argument continues, the more likely someone will use the term "ad hominem" while pushing up their glasses in smug self-admiration.

      See Also: "Strawman"
    • mcdaddy1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0"I'd no sooner watch this movie than read a book written by Bill O'Reilly. What's wrong with the film industry? Can't we have real documentaries that present all the facts and let the viewers make up their minds? I've seen 3 Moore movies so far and they were all liberal sermons."
      Most American's just don't want to deal with such issues. Many lack the interest or mental capacity. If you try to portray all the details of the health care crises in an objective manner, no one would watch it.
  • dannyapplesauce, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4If Oprah says it, it must be true. Maybe there's some books I should read also; Oprah has a list of them too, you don't say!

    dodgy

    Bleh ...
  • Dalrimple, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Orcah is good at separating money from men via her army of housewives.
  • shibbyo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I think the point of this article is this: Oprah talks, and a whole lot of people listen. This movie isn't going to just be swept under the rug, and healthcare is going to be a big issue once it comes out. Oprah is a cultural tsunami whether we care or not.

    Oprah Oprah Etc.
  • aadyss, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2O.K. Valley Girls. The latest news is that Moore and Oprah are teaming together to produce a combined autobiography called "Whacko". Oh............my.................God!
  • archer75, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1I don't think you can say Michael Moore and "must see" in the same sentence.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.