« Live Streaming Video of Senate Health Care Reform Debate And Vote
Obama’s China Trip Announces a ‘World Without Leadership’: Financial Times Deutschland, Germany »
Sexual Politics in Health Care
As Harry Reid pressures holiday-homebound Democrats to vote for a start of the Senate health care debate, Republican resisters have found a new weapon to use against the bill–a sudden deep concern about how it might threaten women’s bodies.
Seizing on a quasi-government task force’s report this week recommending that annual mammograms start at 50 rather than 40, the GOP has gone into full outrage mode.
“This is how rationing begins,” warns Rep. Marsha Blackburn. “This is the little toe in the edge of the water. This is when you start getting a bureaucrat between you and your physician.”
Never mind that Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius immediately made it clear that the US Preventive Services Task Force “is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations” and who neither “set federal policy” nor “determine what services are covered by the federal government.”
“The task force has presented some new evidence for consideration,” she noted, “but our policies remain unchanged. Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.”
In fact, the recommendation has provided a starting point, as it was intended to do, for debate of the issue, rather than a mandate, and has met heavy resistance from physicians and patients as well as the American Cancer Society.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
17 Responses to “Sexual Politics in Health Care”
“This is how rationing begins”
As usual, you missed the point, though Blackburn didn't. I'm not surprised to see this fact exploited by the critics, and wondered days ago how long it would be until Blackburn (who moved to do this days earlier) was joined by, say, Bachmann and Palin.
(“Proceeding” backward to rely on the likes of parrot-placeholder-bureaucrat Sebelius hardly helps.)
So democrats tried to play the gender card, but they forgot to inform the administration, and got burned, when the Obama administration tried to tell women to wait to 50 for preventative mammograms. That whole, paint the GOP as hostile to women's health issues just went flying out the window.
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/4499/3978734…
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TMV, Lauolefiso Stibbie. Lauolefiso Stibbie said: Sexual Politics in Health Care http://bit.ly/8I19Zz [...]
How fascinating that the first two TMV regulars to jump onto this topic are the ones who have demonstrated again and again their disdain for women through their very words here on this forum.
We've seen their true feelings on the subject–and they certainly don't demonstrate any sympathy toward the concerns or problems women face in our society.
Honestly, this report almost strikes me as a distraction on the part of the Obama administration– and a good one. The one thing that they aren't talking about are the things that are actually in the bill (or not in the bill). So the Dems can focus on passing the bill they want while the GOP is busy being outraged at language that doesn't exist. They could even pass an amendment requiring screening at 40 or 35, which you won't see any real opposition to from either party, and meanwhile none of the real things that the Dems want are really touched.
If in fact, that's what they're doing, I'd say it's a brilliant strategy. Have a group that isn't exactly making policy come out with the looniest statement they possibly can that is just close enough to being believable, and then let the opposition latch onto that.
“democrats tried to play the gender card, but they forgot to inform the administration, and got burned”
The findings are anti-feminist and anti-entitlement-mentality! Note the BS we're hearing from them (which resembles Vera's all-but-predictable pathetic lies and slander on this thread — awww [sniffle]).
“this report almost strikes me as a distraction on the part of the Obama administration”
I'm more struck by the sense of irony (see above, which also involves denial of care and rationing) as well as the once-likely-again clumsiness or ineptitude. Look at the out-of-touch elitists try to recover!
[...] Sexual Politics in Health Care (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
Apology demanded for your false remarks.
I'd go with nothing but pathetic.
LOL, fellas. LOL. Must have hit a nerve.
Vera, good to see you laugh off the reactions of the first two commenters, since that is exactly the sort reaction they deserve. In fact it's the sort of reaction DLS earns here on a regular basis with his continual barrage of adolescent insults and mischaracterizations, but I imagine you've discovered that by now. And Leon… “troll”??? Get a grip dude.
That was nothing but a personal attack, which contained no comment on the subject itself. I've come to expect better of the commenters here at TMV. If you have something to say on the subject, please do so, but the personal attacks don't advance the conversation.
Just a quick correction, this wasn't a pure Obama Administration report. I make the distinction since it's very easy to attribute this to President Obama or the HHS director. That's politics and I would expect nothing more from the opposition party.
But it's a disservice to all of us to play politics with this issue. Doctors and insurance DO NOT have to follow these guidelines. My wife (and ardent Obama supporter) pretty much summed it up:
“I'm going to keep doing breast self-exams regardless of guidelines. They are only guidelines.”
'Nuff said…
I would have expected better from you. I might not agree with your politics and opinions, but I would have defended you if someone had made a similar remark towards you, and I would call out any on the Conservative side as well for personal attacks, ask Kathy. Sorry you can't bring yourself to do the same, but would rather applaud them.
Fair enough. Thanks for the correction.
Leonidas, my reaction was tirggered by DLS (for his usual, ceaseless idiotic blather) and your use of the word “troll”. Sorry if it seemed as though I was lumping you in with him, but you did pile on and I'm pretty sure VTG was making a reference to anti-choice positioning with regard to the “disdain for women” comment. Btw, there is one person here who truly deserves and has earned the title, “troll”, and yet I've never seen you apply the term to him, presumably because he shares an ideology similar to your own.
Well, perhaps so, but after a series of such remarks from Vera with nothing to add but a personal attack on me for a reply it kinda seemed that way. If I get an apology from Vera, I'll withdraw the troll remark. I think thats fair.