In Defense of Michael Moore

I agree with you, but add the question of why it's ok for CNN to be "nitpicking on every single word" Moore has uttered? They've basically now called him out twice - once on Larry King and now in this thing - for (for instance) using 2004 Cuba data and 2006 US data and "creating controversy where none exists".

Moore says Medicaid is a decent model to build off of, Sanjay says Medicaid is going bankrupt (which is a vastly different word than "deficit", which Moore uses) in less than 20 years (i.e. probably not a good model), Moore says "but the whole nation is going to go bankrupt given the rate of increase in private insurance rates", and then CNN responds with "we never disagreed" - which they clearly did (and if they didn't they would have said "we agree that ..." rather than the undefined "there is no controversy").

The reason (I think) they are so pissed is because they see themselves as the arbiters of reality and truth; Moore in contrast is a political actor who - how dare he - doesn't kiss the ground they walk on and accept them as the last word. More importantly, the publicity surrounding his response socially challenged their position as the last word. I guarantee that were he to write another response, they would
have an even more furious and petty rejoinder.

At the end of the day, the reason all this matters is because there is still a vibrant and democratic civil society in the US. If people with low levels of political engagement (and there was an op-ed about this today in the Post) only exposure to the health care debate is CNN and Sanjay saying "Medicaid is going bankrupt" (and I guarantee there are MILLIONS who fall into that category) the process around (and consequently outcome of) health care reform will be vastly different
than if their one point of contact were "Medicaid is the most efficient health care provider in the US".

I still agree with Sajay for Pres!!