Blogistan's Controversy du jour

Atrios has covered the controversy three times in two days. He got it from Whiskey Fire, where Thers is still debating those who would debate the topic of even allowing the Graemes to speak in public. Apparently Atrios linking to Thers upped the latter's traffic by 30,000+. Which displays no small amount of interest in left blogistan.

Now it's at Firedoglake, and everyone is quoting the same facts from Think Progress:

1) Graeme has a scholarship to a private school. The school costs $15K a year, but the family only pays $500 a year.

2) His sister Gemma attends another private school to help her with the brain injuries that occurred due to her accident. The school costs $23,000 a year, but the state pays the entire cost.

3) They bought their “lavish house” sixteen years ago for $55,000 at a time when the neighborhood was less than safe.

4) Last year, the Frost’s made $45,000 combined. Over the past few years they have made no more than $50,000 combined.

5) The state of Maryland has found them eligible to participate in the CHIP program.

We're even down to the point (via ScoutPrime at First Draft) of knowing there is no asset requirement for aid in Maryland, only an income requirement. And still the "Mighty Wurlitzer" whirls on. And why are we surprised?

How many times has that blog post been repeated stating the facts of the financial situation of this family. And that is relevant because? Well, because Malkin and the right-wing bloggers started it, that's why, and their facts MUST BE REFUTED!

And does Malkin & Co care that you are refuting their facts? No. They only care that you respond. They only care that you spell their names right. They only care that you dance when they pull the strings.

This is trolling raised to an art form.

When do we finally stop feeding the trolls, and take the conversation back to the subject of health care? Scout Prime raises the most salient point of all: we have been able, in the past, to decide that people shouldn't have to bankrupt themselves in order to have health care. So some states (at least) did not take asset value into account (after all, the greatest value of a home is that you can live in it) when determining need for health care. Why have we decided to abandon that? Have we decided to abandon that?

Yes, stories about people are "red meat" which inspire all manner of invective and passion and interest, and yes, the tactics of Malkin & Co. are despicable, especially in this case. But why do we keep arguing with them on their terms?

Why do we keep feeding the trolls, and then wondering why the Democrats in Congress don't ignore the Bush White House and do the right thing? Is it that pesky speck in their eye, log in our own, again?