English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It's like calling Moore anti-American because he points out problems. It's weird. I'm not American, but if someone pointed out problems in my country I wouldn't think it was meant to degrade my nation.. particularly if it was a person from my country. So why do so many people take it as a personal insult when Americans and non-Americans criticize the Iraq War, foreign policy, and health care system?

2007-06-30 06:42:13 · 17 answers · asked by MattH 6 in Politics & Government Politics

No I don't criticize America. Just the foreign policy. Personally I don't care about your health care system, do whatever you want it's none of my business anyways. Just don't push it.

2007-06-30 06:46:30 · update #1

Why so much hatred towards Moore? Is it any different than other journalists or film makers pushing for a cause. That's his job people lol.

2007-06-30 06:47:25 · update #2

No your founding fathers fought a war to avoid paying taxes and to expand past the Appalachains. Not to be free of socialism. That's what Reagan fought for.

2007-06-30 06:48:18 · update #3

17 answers

This is what happens especially people who think they know what the word patriot means. It does not mean that you should agree wholesale with what the government says. I agree with what he highlights in Sicko because I have been down that road. I have seen people crushed by the weight of not having insurance and being forced to pay medical bills on their own, falling behind on everthing else, credit ruined and forced to file bankruptcy and now with the tightened bankruptcy laws, unable to get out from under the medical debt.
I can understand why he highlights what he does because I know what it is like not to be covered and to wonder how, if my son becomes ill, would a visit to the emergency room be paid. Forget about me. It happened and a 4 hour stay in the pediatric emergency room cost $1,029 and that was in 2004.
For a person like me whose company does not provide insurance and I have a child, i have to get it on my own without going on welfare to qualify to get Medicaid. I make too much to qualify for it anyway. if I want low insurance payments, I have to have an astronomical deductible which defeats the purpose of having insurance. Wellness checkups for him are part of the deductible and having to pay $175.00/ visit, if he is ill and needs to see his pediatrician is tough.
If you want a low decutible, you have to pay through the nose for insurance. So in my case for my son and myself, my monthly payments are $480.00/mth and that's carrying a $1,500 deductible. If I had wanted a lower payment of say $280.00 I would have to carry a deductible of $2,500 and forget a pregnancy rider, which is an additional cost of 180.00/mth so all told my monthly payments just in case I get pregnant ( although i am not planning to at this moment) would be $660.00/mth which is 1/2 of what i pay in rent and it would make sense for a woman to carry the rider if she is of child bearing age because private insurance companies will NOT cover visits to an OB or for delivery whether by midwife or OB in a hospital or home setting IF you don't have the rider. From my own experience, when I gave birth at the hospital in 2003, that 48 hour stay was to the tune of $15,500.00. At least at that time I had insurance but I had watched my premium go from $180.00/mth Feb 2003 to $680.00/mth by Aug 2003
It is sad that for supposedly the most powerful industrial nation in the world, we rank 37th in terms of healthcare. Compare that to a 3rd world country on which we have had a 48 year embargo blocking medicines etc, and that country ranked 39th.
So based on a persons' point of reference unless there is the experience of what it is like not to have insurance and/or trying to pay for it on your own, his movie might come across as bunkum to some. I guess the 43 million estimated uninsured will probably say he is the voice of the people.

I guess since is not in lockstep with this administration and its rhetoric, he is a traitor and anti- American. He is in good company then, because based on that yard stick all these other people are also anti American

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it".~ Edward R Murrow
"Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive."~ Henry Steele Commager
"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."~ James Baldwin
"The government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them."~ Mark Twain
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. (May 1918)"~ President Theodore Roosevelt
"True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else. "~ Clarence Darrow

2007-06-30 07:02:18 · answer #1 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 1 1

Basically, the answer is that they are not very well versed in basic logic. If someone criticizes Japan, it becomes Japan bashing. It is a sophomoric tactic to blame the criticizer for "bad thinking", when (in reality) the criticism is true.

If the accused cannot adequately answer the accusation, then they reply with a sound-byte. You might look up an "ad homonym" attack.

Also, it is quick, clean and surgical, and generally ends debate because the TIME necessary to properly respond leaves the responder out in the woods because people stop listening.

But Moore is special because he does not JUST point out problems, he also exaggerates and presents untrue claims. Again, it is difficult to respond to a documentary because it has no time offered for counter-views.

Moore presents a biased view, and is not subject to rebuttal because people do not have the hours to respond that he had in his presentation.

It is actually very simple, and Moore has the art-form down pat - attack some in a two-hour documentary, and opponents have no forum in which to respond. The republicans used to be very good at this, but the "art" has now shifted to Moore, since Bush came into power.

Interesting discussion for a poli-sci class.... Have fun.

Ron.

2007-06-30 07:00:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

When they're criticize. It's not that the American's take it as anti american. It's that they know what the country has done wrong. And some people think it's ok to think everything is anti american. Shoot every time you turn around here, (where I live) someone is protesting something.)

2007-06-30 06:51:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I am a conservative, but I like how Moore is criticizing the phony conservative Bush the way he is. Bush is a corporate puppet and other non-Americans can criticize him all they want. He does not represent what this country is for and his 20% approval rating reflects that. Our health care and foreign policy is crappy.

2007-06-30 07:09:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

I get irritated about people who will make up any off the wall thing and post it as fact. If you make something up about your country, it's leaders, or it's citizens that is meant to degrade it then you are anti-(insert your country here) As far as Micheal Moore goes I couldn't care less...he is a man who makes movies for profit...nothing wrong with that...but the left has a way of shoving him in the rights face as though he were an all knowing entity instead of a man giving an opinion, so the right take him apart and expose his lack of facts. What we have ended up with is an entire party (with few exceptions) that have gotten so frustrated about their lack of real support (Liberals) who are now actually rooting for America to fail at EVERYTHING so long as Bush is leading it. They fairly foam at the mouth if they can post even the most trivial spot of bad news...it's sickening.

2007-06-30 06:56:28 · answer #5 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 0 2

Some or I should say alot of people have interest in protecting there milk cow and they don't want change. Its like the girl who found out that petroleum was a dirty product and the products made from it created most of our pollution and that we needed alternatives for fuel and plastics and most anything made from petroleum and that we would need to close down the oil wells and clean it all up, and she said, will we have to close down my daddy's oil wells? and they said yes dear those also, and she said, hell no! Who is gonna pay for all these clothes and shoes when daddy doesn't have the oil checks coming in. So you see its that way, we want a clean enviroment until you are going to cut the money off and then its piss on you time.

2007-06-30 06:56:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The prohibition of dissent is fundamentally ant-democratic. I'm amazed at the flurry of neo-con respondents who attack freedom of speech. The worst was the fascistic comment by 'army angel'.
The double talk by right wing hypocrites is amazing, pretending to uphold the 'founding fathers' while revealing their police state mentality toward criticism of the state.

2007-06-30 07:46:28 · answer #7 · answered by Iain G 3 · 2 0

You're dead on, asker, as the first two charming little dupes who answered prove. This kneejerk name-calling and intolerance of differing opinion is the most dangerous and disgusting aspect of political life in America today. to answer your question about their reactions to criticism:
1. When dealing in complex policy issues way above most of their heads, it's easier to respond with cheap personal attacks that attempt to discredit the critcs, rather than come up with intelligent counter-arguments. This is lazy and counterproductive, but it has become the norm.

2. An inability to think independently. When you let institutions, media organizations, and freakin' POLITICIANS do all your hard thinking for you, their ideas rattle around and form a sacred DOGMA in your head. when someone dares pierce the fragile rational shell of that dogma, it is often perceived as a personal affront.

We need to stop the name-calling, respect others' opinions, and THINK FOR OUR DAMN SELVES.

2007-06-30 06:52:58 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 4 2

not all americans respond this way--but typically, the american education system coupled with the dominant entertainment based learning culture cultivates a short view of history and reactionary responses.

2007-06-30 06:54:52 · answer #9 · answered by quiet 3 · 3 0

It's funny how you have a better understanding of what FREEDOM in America means than some Americans.

2007-06-30 06:56:38 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers