July 10, 2007 9:52 AM
PETA blasts Michael Moore for obesity
More liberal hypocrisy - like mega-consumer Al Gore holding energy-unfriendly concerts to whip up guilt over global warming (if people don't believe in God, they have to believe in something!): Michael Moore lectures us on the the state of American health and health care while looking like this:
Bravo for PETA's statement:
Congratulations from PETA on the reviews for SiCKO. Although we think that your film could actually help reform America’s sorely inadequate health care system, there’s an elephant in the room, and it is you. With all due respect, no one can help but notice that a weighty health issue is affecting you personally. We’d like to help you fix that. Going vegetarian is an easy and life-saving step that people of all economic backgrounds can take in order to become less reliant on the government’s shoddy healthcare system, and it’s something that you and all Americans can benefit from personally. Vegetarians weigh, on average, up to 20 percent less than their meat-eating counterparts—meaning less weight-related problems like heart attacks and strokes—and live about eight years longer. I’m sure that your fans would appreciate having you around longer!
Evidently, Michael has handled media questions about this very defensively, deflecting everything to his old Blame Bush for the War rants. Hunh?
And, btw - in answer to the pseudonymous commenter who said "So you Christians are agreeing with PETA now? You all are shameless." Obviously I don't speak for all Chrsitians, so how my opinion can be attributed to "all Christians," I have no idea. I don't agree with PETA on much other than this: that if you're going to rail against healthcare, you ought to get yourself in shape first. And it's fine for me to say so. Just as if I said something against Falwell, for instance, you would use that as grist for your mill.
I'll tell ya, these libs need to take a basic logic course. And it's hard to take people seriously who are so cowardly they make up phony email addresses for their comments.
Posted in Current Affairs | Permalink
Comments
I heard this guy and his anti-Bush rants once and I was totally put off by it; I'm of the opinion that if you want to communicate something to me, you should come at me with valid points, not acting like a brat in a playground. So I decided never to give him another minute of my time to listen to what he had to say.
The other day however, while flipping thru channels, I stopped at something that sounded interesting; it took me awhile to realize it was his documentary "Bowling for Columbine". What I was seeing was interesting, so I changed my mind and watched the rest of the story (about 30 min.). I have to say, he does have many good points, too bad his message gets lost in the middle of his anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-gun rants.
My mother-in-law was telling me about the "sicko" movie, in part because she doesn't have medical insurance; she has totally bought into his philosophy and now she sounds all anti-government. Everything is the government's fault. Never mind that she is a heavy smoker, lives a sedentary life, is overweight, not to mention all the drugs and alcohol she has used in her life. With that kind of life one should expect to have a few medical problems.
But as always, when things don't turn the way we think they should, we look for someone to blame.
Don't get me wrong, I do believe that our government has gotten too BIG and that many things could/should be different, but I also believe in personal responsibility and making choices that will enhance the quality of my life. Some people have a hard time grabbing that concept.
In regards to Moore, I think I should see his so-called documentaries, just so I am better informed when someone throws their anti-everything rants at me based on Moore's opinion. I just have a hard time getting to it; somehow it still feels like a waste of my time. And he still comes across like the bratty child at the playground. No doubt fist impressions are very powerful, and that was my fist impression of him. Perhaps it will change after I get to hear his message as a whole.
Who knows.
Posted by: LadyLovas | July 10, 2007 12:08 PM
I really quite dislike both him and his disingenuous "documentary" style, but I've seen a couple trailers for "Sicko" and the points made in those, at least, don't seem to be invalidated by any lack of consideration he may have for his own health.
I think there _are_ serious problems with the delivery of healthcare in the US, many of which have little to do with the amount of personal responsibility one takes for one's own health. Nevertheless, any implementation of universal healthcare -- government single-payer or no -- is going to have its own flaws, and nobody publicly pulling for universal coverage seems to acknowledge that.
Posted by: persimmon | July 10, 2007 6:21 PM
LL - I did see Moore's 1989 film, Roger & Me, in which he takes on General Motors and other American corporations for their greed and disregard for workers. I enjoyed it - I hate corporate and any other kind of greed myself. But I do think he tends to oversimplify problems and film is too powerful a medium to use for one-sided propaganda.
My point in this post though was not to argue the merits of his politics, but the fact that he IS indeed a poor spokesman for this cause.
persimmon - Since I've lost 80 pounds, my blood pressure has dropped from 180/130 to 120/80 - with no meds. Many little quirky physical problems I had have completely disappeared. When I noticed at my checkup that the waiting room was filled with overweight people - as it always is - I asked my doctor what percentage of his patients had problems related to overweight and he said he would guess 90%.
I think one of the biggest contributors to the health care problem in this country is the forces of consumerism. They market more and more choices of food, better food, bigger portions. Then they market drugs to deal with all the problems caused by overeating - from diet pills to antacids to cholesterol, blood pressure, and diabetes medication. So companies actually have a stake inour unhealthy habits.
As a conservative, I believe in personal responsibility. I deeply regret the years I spent overweight and have done my best to have more integrity in this area. From this vantage point I can say that overweight people clog up the medical system with their problems - and that drives up costs for insurance for us all.
is people
Posted by: barbara | July 10, 2007 10:15 PM
Personal responsibility is huge in prevention and management of a whole slew of obesity-related and other health problems, no doubt--but that's true over the long haul. In an emergent situation, no matter what led to it, it's unethical to withold care and ill-advised to not seek it. And from a public health standpoint, whatever the origin of a condition, people still have it and it still has to be dealt with. It's deeply frustrating to everyone in healthcare.
Companies also have a stake in our health, due to disability claims, plain old lost-work days and (particularly) the fact that in the US, health insurance is generally provided by employers. Clearly, though, employee-health programs are losing to the forces of consumerism you outlined.
And ignoring obesity for the moment, a HUGE problem is the inappropriate use of emergency rooms--something eminently within the control of the individual, but flagrantly abused because the patient/consumer usually does not see the final cost of the ER visit.
Posted by: persimmon | July 10, 2007 10:47 PM
Ouch.
I am overweight, but that doesn't mean I can't see the inadequacies of our health care system.
I am certainly no Michael Moore fan, but I don't understand PETA's ad hominem attack on his movie. If the movie stinks, say that. If it's worthwhile, let us know. But let's not pretend to review the movie by calling him fat.
That being said, I don't agree with PETA or Michael Moore's politics, so it's ironic to see them facing off.
~Leslie
Posted by: My Twenty Cents Keeps Moving | July 11, 2007 1:40 AM
My Twenty Cents -
This isn't really an ad hominem attack. It's a serious questioning of Moore's character and whether he carries the full credibility he could if he would tend to his own backyard. You know, the Bible verse about before attempting to remove the splinter in your neighbor's eye removing the beam from your own? That doesn't mean we can't attempt to remove the splinter from our neighbor's eye - it clearly says we just have to prepare and purify ourselves first. Moore clearly lacks self-control and self-government and yet he's made a career out of railing against others for the same thing.
PETA's blunt but not-unkind appeal to Moore to do something about his own physical health was not an ad hominem attack on the movie at all - I'm sure they liked it - but an appeal to the man to lift himself out of his miserable condition and appearance.
Posted by: barbara | July 11, 2007 7:05 AM
I guess I just don't understand why the government is supposed to take care of our health care. Why is that the government's job? Furthermore, considering how badly the government handles many of its other responsibilities, I am forced to wonder why anyone thinks that the government would do a good job in this area.
Do you really want hospitals to operate with the "smooth efficiency" of the Department of Motor Vehicles?
Posted by: Naaman | July 11, 2007 9:08 AM
Hilarious! I can't stand Michael Moore and his hypocrisy. Love this post!
Posted by: Janet T. | July 11, 2007 12:02 PM
ROTFL! You go, girl!
Posted by: Carol | July 12, 2007 6:03 PM
