No, your mistake was hoping no one would actually look up the link you offer up as proof of liberal perfidy. Well, I finally did, and I was not surprised to find it reveals just the opposite, that you're the one cooking the books with your usual unnatural selection. The TB Protocol, as always, consists of mining every obscure corporate shill and Neocon scandal rag for dubious data, while cavalierly dismissing anything that might even potentially contradict it as obvious liberal conspiracy propaganda to be totally ignored by all true right-thinking patriots.

You sly devil, even a brief glance at the tables shows why you picked United Health as your example of a poor, abused corporate criminal: It is only the scrawniest offender in a scary lineup of musclebound delinquent thugs. At 21%, it had the lowest "percent increase in first quarter net income, 2009-2010". You cleverly neglect to point out the total (I presume they mean some kind of weighted average) of the five companies listed is 31%, with WellPoint coming in at an obscene 51% in profit increase. And bear in mind, these are QUARTERLY figures. Can you imagine the YEARLY totals?

You pull the same scam in the next graph, where your corporate poster boy, United Health, is next to last at 28% "change in profit, 2008-2009". (Aetna brings up the rear at -8%, but that only means a modest drop in profits, not an unprofitable year, by any stretch of the imagination.) But the total for all five outfits is an outrageous 56%, with Cigna topping the list at a grotesque 346%!

So far from UH being a helpless misunderstood and maligned little entrepreneurial player, a closer look at the data reveals it is merely the weakest performer in an industry characterized by shameful and systematically predatory exploitation of its customers. No wonder you jumped through so many hoops to try and discredit this report before anyone actually read it, and it is clear why you attacked a single confusing statistical variable while distracting us from the text, conveniently ignoring its devastating arguments and conclusions.

Still, I'm glad you brought it to our attention, like most of your famous documentary "evidence", it unravels under close scrutiny. The rest of us can read it and make up our minds without the benefit of your enlightened analysis. Don't take my word for it boys and girls, Tom gave you the link:

http://hcfan.3cdn.net/d605c2281191ac1f04_kam6bn3ga.pdf

read it for yourself, the entire article, not just the graphs I've briefly discussed here. While you're at it, check out the other graphs and charts, too. Believe me, I've just scratched the surface.

Eri was right, you owe her an apology.