Hot Air: NY Times editorial distorts, misleads, and lies to readers on HHS Mandate
With many political debates, I try to give opponents the benefit of the doubt on intentions. Sure, raising taxes is a bad thing, but some politicians and pundits believe higher taxes will benefit society. Some people think we need to spend more, and others really fear climate change.USA Today: Obamacare shackles religious freedom
When it comes to the HHS abortifacient/contraception/sterilization mandate, however, I've almost stopped being that generous with the left’s media and thought leaders. This New York Times Magazine editorial is a prime example as to why. Almost from start to finish, the piece misleads and misdirects readers about the mandate, its opponents, and religious freedom.
Here are several examples:
First, the editorial says “for-profit corporations will ask the Supreme Court to take a radical turn and allow them to impose their religious views on their employees” by not providing contraception coverage as required by the mandate. This is a falsehood for at least two reasons: For one, the individual insurance market is an option for coverage, and colleges, high schools, Wal-Marts, and many other organizations provide birth control for free or very low prices. . .
The Hill: High court to weigh limits of religious liberty in ObamaCare case
Two days later, conservatives and liberal continue to spar over whether Matt Drudge was "fair" in his tweet that he was already obeying the Obamacare individual mandate by paying estimate taxes based on it.
Yahoo News: Drudge Report author caught in debate over Obamacare penalty claims
Washington Times: Media wrongly attack Drudge after he admits paying Obamacare penalty
More old ground recovered. . .
and you knew it had to be made: Hitler Finds Out He Can't Keep His Doctor
Post a Comment