The mainstream media follows the New York Times' lead in deciding what is and isn't news. Hardly an editor or news director anywhere in the country lacks a subscription to the Gray Lady. So, when the Times practiced omerta about the downsides of Obamacare for most people, the media followed its lead, quite willingly. However, now that Obama is safely re-elected and the disaster is apparent to all who will see, the Times is informing its readers that the middle class is taking a hit.  Katie Thomas, Reed Abelson and Jo Craven Mcginty report:

An analysis by The New York Times shows the cost of premiums for people who just miss qualifying for subsidies varies widely across the country and rises rapidly for people in their 50s and 60s. In some places, prices can quickly approach 20 percent of a person's income.

Experts consider health insurance unaffordable once it exceeds 10 percent of annual income. By that measure, a 50-year-old making $50,000 a year, or just above the qualifying limit for assistance, would find the cheapest available plan to be unaffordable in more than 170 counties around the country, ranging from Anchorage to Jackson, Miss. (snip)

Many of the biggest provisions of the Affordable Care Act are aimed squarely at the poorest of Americans. Under the law, states have the option of expanding Medicaid to a larger pool of people with the lowest incomes. To those earning more, the law provides subsidies to people earning up to four times the federal poverty level, or $45,960 for an individual and $62,040 for a couple.

There are going to be a lot of people asking why the media didn't let them know what was in store for them with Obamacare. The Times is just covering its butt.

Hat tip: Ed Lasky