I agree with your critique of Moore. He is a propagandist, above all, but I think he serves an important purpose, particularly in a society without much intelligent discourse in the media* (not to suggest that he represents particularly intelligent discourse, but because he, in his pushy and propagandist way, challenges the media orthodoxy).
The fact is that the piece that appeared was a smear piece. He is Michael Moore. He 'fudges' facts, says everyone. Whatever. By that criteria, CNN fudges facts every day. The point is that CNN (in that piece and on Larry King the next day) was too caught up in picking on numbers (and defending the ever-glorious Gupta) to engage with the real issues (i.e. the media and health care). It's not really that far off from being FOX News. At least Fox News admits to and celebrates its ideological bent. I am not suggesting that CNN has a clear ideological bent. I am suggesting that the mainstream media is UNCRITICAL (except in the places where they are expected to be critical, i.e. Michael Moore films).
Something is wrong with the American health care system. Moore shoves 'socialized' health care as THE answer. While I think he is right, I recognize your point. BUT, the problem is that Michael Moore is Michael Moore. He takes a stance and shoves it down your throat. That *shouldn't* be CNN's job. Instead of framing the debate in a critical, exploratory way (i.e. the American health care system needs fixed; some things work, some don't; the socialized countries, according to Moore, offer a potential model; they have marked successes but clear problems; a mixed system a la Australia or Germany offers an example, as well; Michael, we have some questions about your argument...) rather than framing it as 'The system has problems, but Michael Moore is a blind, fact-fudging demagogue. Despite its problems, U.S.A., U.S.A., U.S.A.!'
* with exceptions of course