Today, my wife and I go to see 'Sicko' with our friend Nancy who is a recipient of health care (physical therapy) almost daily due to a stroke she had when she was 41. The audience was not exactly full of flaming progressives, but more of your elder-after-church set and a few of us 40- to-50 somethings. Was I surprised when the closing credits rolled to hear people applauding the movie with the same enthusiasm one usually hears after the National Anthem is played at the ballpark.
And it deserves it, despite its small flaws (like Michael Moore giving a self-serving, sharp jab to a guy who runs an anti-Michael Moore website who needed help paying the bills after his wife became very ill. Mike makes a big deal about how he helped by sending a check "anonymously" to his detractor).
The fact is we do not give health care the importance it deserves as a nation.
Moore points out that his film isn't about the 47-50 million without health insurance, it is about those of us who do and how the insurance industry does it utmost to keep us from getting what we think we are paying for (not even "deserve"--just what is owed us). The horror stories are exactly that and the walls that we are up against are not only that industry, but also the people who supposedly guard our interests in Congress.
Moore shows us Canada, France, and England's versions of universal health care and dispels the often dispensed myths about the long waits, the lack of equipment, and so on. Then he shows us Cuba, poor Marxist, Cuba. Somehow, despite the lack of wealth, they manage to provide universal health care which, while overall is ranked 2 spots below the US, does allow for less infant mortality and a population that outlives us on the average.
Now do I believe that Moore cherry-picks data? Yep--but it doesn't matter. For all the hoopla over "the facts", Moore (whose facts are accurate, that is they are attributable to real sources, but not always in an apples-to-apples way that research people appreciate) asks a very important question: Given the wealth of this nation (and we are the seventh wealthiest country based on per capita GDP), shouldn't everyone have access to the best medical care (or even the 7th best medical care, if you want to be a stickler--we are 37th right now)?
If countries like Afghanistan*, Argentina, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Cuba, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iraq*, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Oman, Portugal, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Ukraine and the United Kingdom can all have universal health care, why can't we?.
*Universal health coverage provided by United States war funding
