Then it hit me: They don't have to learn, because the media will keep covering up for them, like they did in keeping this story quiet:
Cancer patient defends ObamaCare criticism after Dem goes after ad
A Michigan cancer patient is fighting back after her critical claims about ObamaCare were called into question by a Democratic congressman, who went so far as to threaten Michigan television stations running her ad.The Democratic congressman went to far as to threaten to sic the FCC on the Michigan TV stations that aired that ad on the basis of false claims. Because, you see, when someone makes a claim using (you claim) massaged numbers, why that's worth attacking the media through which they broadcast their message. Unless, of course, you're a member of the Church of ClimateChangeology, in which case THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED, DENIER.
Julie Boonstra, who was diagnosed five years ago with leukemia, was featured in an ad last week by the conservative Americans for Prosperity. In it, she said her insurance plan was canceled because of the Affordable Care Act, and claimed her out-of-pocket costs are now "so high it's unaffordable."
Now, there are conflicting reports about the overall costs of the plan compared to what's covered. It's conceivable that a new plan might cost what Boonstra's old plan cost - of course, what's left out are the costs that aren't mentioned. Chemotherapy drugs, hospital stays, etc. - these costs haven't been figured into the treatment figure, and no one has been able to say whether the final cost - close to what Boonstra would have paid under the old system - would indeed rise as her treatment progressed.
So, naturally, the caring and compassionate thing to do would be to sic the FCC on the TV station airing the ads, which is basically calling the cancer victim a liar on the national stage. I recently received an e-mail from a reader who stated he couldn't continue reading my site because I was getting too political, and I guess this is the kind of thing he meant. But it's not the politics here that bother me - it's the media's treatment of the political reaction.
Sandra Fluke claimed $3K worth of contraceptives over the course of law school - some $1,000 a year - and when Rush Limbaugh questioned that figure as being rather high ($83/month compared to $10 for birth control pills), he was derided for questioning her (in all fairness, he did call her a slut, which is uncalled for; however it is also worth noting that he is a TV personality, not a congressman). *He* was the one who the media went after. Yet here we have a congressman threatening to use the power of the federal government to silence political speech and there are crickets.
Some animals really are more equal than others, I guess...
That is all.
Another dispatch from...
(image courtesy of Robb Allen)