Though Sublime would know best, I believe the Telegraph is a conservative newspaper.
I've no idea if The Telegraph is conservative or not. What I did note in reading it was there was nearly nothing that indicated the writer (or the papers') political position. Perhaps if I had a bit more personal, first-hand insight into British politics I could read more into it.
For the most part, it seemed to be merely reporting statistical facts and details on the Healthcare Commission report on the current NHS performance on the front lines of hospitalized patients. I've no idea of the "Commission", it's origin or political purpose, if any.
Conservative, liberal, independent or Martian - does it matter the origin if the facts are accurate, and presented with a minimum of personal bias? To discount something simply because it is of conservative origin is an assault on reason.
How many of his movies have you actually seen? I've heard the right wing continually complaining that his movies are lies and biased, but nobody on the right admits to seeing them. They just listen to Rush or watch O'Reilly and take their lead from those bozos. You wouldn't be doing that now, would you?
Since you ask, I've seen every movie from Moore except Sicko.
Whether I agreed with all his perceptions and views or not, I found all of them thought-provoking and felt that I had not wasted my time by watching them. It is nearly impossible to keep personal bias out of any report or documentary, although attempting to just cite facts is preferable. My problem with Moore's bias is that he has increasingly resorted to emotionalism, distortion and downright lies.
Oooooh! It's early afternoon here. I guess I shouldn't be doing this, but going to listen to Rush to get my marching orders. I listen to, and read, a multitude of sources on issues. Some I agree with, some I don't. But whatever I form as my viewpoint or belief, I try to base it as factually as possible.
The fact the right hates Michael Moore so much speaks volumes as to the validity of his charges. His documentaries are factual, albeit presented from a left wing point of view.
How in the world is that true? The reverse could be true also, then. The left hates, say, George Bush so much that it speaks volumes to the validity of his actions and policies. Hate is a strong word, and I don't hate Michael Moore. I've little use for him, and his hypocrisies and vitriol are sickening. What I do
hate is the fact that the left holds him up as a hero of the common man, when he is no such thing. I hate the fact that those on the left takes what he says on face value, with no attempt to look at whether the truth is in it. I hate that because of these two things many will be deceived.
I don't have to ask - I can see that that is