Comments on: Could a Smart Retort on Maternity Care Help Build Support for Comprehensive Health Care Reform?

By: Miriam

Miriam — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:19:39 +0000

Bill, I believe in “health for all” — and that “all”, you see, includes women, men, children, old people. How dare you make a decision on what 50% of the population gets to get just because you don’t care? I am willing to pay a little more to include cancer care, for example, even if I don’t know a single person that has had cancer. I’m willing to do it because I have compassion and understanding for others, perhaps you or your family. But you apparently don’t have that capacity nor do you have any understanding of raising the level of wellbeing of everybody through collective efforts because that makes ALL of us better. How terribly sad.

By: Bill G

Bill G — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:01:44 +0000

Kyl is right. Why require this in EVERY plan? Won’t that just raise costs? Men don’t need it, working feminist women who don’t have children certainly don’t either.

Also, let’s not give Stabenow that much credit, her aide whispered the joke to her and told her to say it.

By: Christine C.

Christine C. — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:47:46 +0000

Robin, thanks for the link! I’ll move it up to the post.

Emilie — totally agree. With a capital “P” for privilege.

And Eric, I did see it on some mainstream news blogs, like the NYT Prescriptions. But it would have been nice to see the exchange blasted everywhere, like “You lie!”

By: Robin at NWLC

Robin at NWLC — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:51:15 +0000

Thanks for posting about this. Wonder what Senator Kyl’s wife and daughter would have to say about his logic…

At NWLC we’re asking people to send the Senator Kyl baby photos and show him the reason why women know that maternity coverage is basic health care for all: http://action.nwlc.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Send_Senator_Kyl_Your_Baby_Picture

By: eric

eric — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:34:08 +0000

What I find surprising is how little coverage Kyl’s incredibly inane and insensitive remark received in the mainstream media. Kyl not so subtly was exclaiming that he had no interest in requiring health insurance that “only” affects women and their babies. The media should have been all over this story as another prime example of the real beliefs of the “family values party”.

By: Emilie

Emilie — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:49:57 +0000

I heard David Brooks say last week that conservatives in the healthcare debate are tapping into good old-fashioned American populism. And I thought — what a bunch of garbage!

As Kyl’s comments exemplify, this is about good old-fashioned American selfishness and self-absorption. While conservatives might cloak their opposition in this power-to-the-people rhetoric, it really comes down to a hypocritical unwillingness to put themselves in others’ shoes.

Whether it’s a rejection of the lives of women, the poor or immigrants, it really about maintaining that old-fashioned privileged order.