As you all know, Michael Moore’s latest screed is entitled “Sicko” and concerns the American healthcare system. Essentially, Moore ends up presenting anecdote after anecdote about Americans who have suffered either by not having insurance, or by having their claims denied by their insurer. Then he goes off to Canada, France, Britain and Cuba, and presents their healthcare systems as perfection incarnate.

Accordingly, you might have expected all the Canadian reviewers to praise “Sicko,” as most American critics have. However, there is at least one voice of dissention at the Toronto Star’s Peter Howell:

Sicko is . . . completely lacking in journalistic rigour, presenting only the negatives of for-profit U.S. health care and only the positives of the government-run Canadian, British, French and Cuban Medicare programs. As always, Moore makes unsupported assertions and uses out-of-context edits. The film is not a documentary, if that term is to mean anything more than unvarnished propaganda.

Moore’s many apologists, including journalists who should know better, give him a free pass under the “greater good” argument. Who cares if he’s careless about the details or ruthless about his accusations? He’s got a good heart! And he’s funny!

Exactly. He continues:

As violins wail on the soundtrack and Moore’s hushed voice drips sympathy, we gape in horror at travesties of corporate medicine. A bankrupt Denver couple, drained of their life savings by hospital bills, is forced to move into a daughter’s home. A car-accident victim, having been knocked unconscious, is refused compensation for an ambulance because she thoughtlessly neglected to get advance approval for the ride. A man with a severed finger chooses to lose the digit rather than pay the $60,000 it would cost to have it sewn back on.

These and many other sad and shocking stories are contrasted with scenes of the enlightened Utopias in other countries, where Medicare is “free” – if you ignore the fact, as Moore does, that high taxes and long wait times pay for that “free” care.

He once again presents Canadians as the cheery hobbits of North America, who live happily in the shire and look with fear upon the dark place below. Moore manages to find Canadians, including members of his extended family, who wait mere minutes for hospital treatments and surgeries, with no costs and few cares.

These would presumably be the same jolly Canucks he presented in Bowling for Columbine who don’t lock their front doors because there are no gun nuts north of the 49th parallel.

Moore goes golfing with an affluent Canadian who speaks movingly about Medicare and its founder Tommy Douglas. When a disingenuous Moore asks why wealthier taxpayers should pay for their poorer fellow citizens to be healthy, the golfer replies, “Somebody has to look after them.” The man then reveals himself to be a Conservative voter. Uncork the champagne in Ottawa!

No doubt Mr. Howell is himself a supporter of socialized medicine, but Canadians are painfully aware of the problems of their own system (after all, it is theoretically a single-tier system, but the fact is that American hospitals form a second tier for the Canadian wealthy). Moore’s portrayal of Canadian healthcare having low wait times is silly; high wait times for simple tests such as MRI scans are well-documented.

In short, Sicko is a deceptive piece of agitprop being praised by liberals who agree with Moore. They willfully overlook its flaws, which are difficult not to acknowledge, because Moore is (apparently) entertaining. At least a few critics have spoken out, but they are a very small minority.

One final note: Howell gave Sicko two-and-a-half stars, which is considered “thumbs down” on the Siskel & Ebert scale. However, RottenTomatoes.com rates this as a “positive” review in its compilation. Go figure.