[Scoutmaster]

The story line was her friend of a friend could not get them because Georgetown would not provide them, but that was the reddest of red herrings because they would have if the prescribing Doctor simply diagnosed her with the condition.

No, the story was about her friend and the physician had verified the illness with the insurance company (according to Fluke).

From the testimony:

" For my friend, and 20% of women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription, despite verification of her illness from her doctor. Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy."

That's the story I said was a medical coverage issue, not a contraceptive coverage issue. Fluke's ridiculous statements on contraceptives included this doozy:

"You might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s not true."

[Cyber Liberty]

Your details are more accurate than mine, but not my point anyway. I wonder: How would things be different had she been properly vetted and under oath? Rush Limbaugh’s part in all this really isn’t as major as some would like to make it out to be, because the rest of the press was willing to jump in and repeat the falsehoods she spewed anyway.

[Cyber Liberty]

BTW, as you correctly point out, it wasn’t a “contraception story,” it was a “medical story” being dishonestly reported as a story about contraception. As I pointed out, a red herring, which is why she would never have been allowed to testify in a real hearing.