McCain on Viagra being more important than birth control

[ryberg]

[Probably should have worded that title more carefully, like "the importance of Viagra v birth control" or something, but I can't edit it now, I see. Please just check out the point and don't crucify me for a title I've just acknolwedged is less than perfect. ]

Yikes!

Can't help but wonder what the women of the forum think about this!

Thought it was too interesting to leave just in the presidential politics discussion (as interesting as that discussion has been to a small number of us, at least)...

Ben Smith notes in his blog entry on the ad:

McCain voted against an amendment that would have compelled insurance companies to match Viagra coverage with birth control coverage, arguing that it's the kind of mandate that makes health care more expensive.

Steve

[melliedee]

Sounds like a Daily Show clip in the making.

The availability of inexpensive birth control options for women should not be the issue of one party over the other, imo.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Sounds like a Daily Show clip in the making.

Ha -- turns out it already is!

(Skip ahead to about minute 5 if you want to get right to it.)

Steve

[horizon200]

What point are you reaching for here?

You would rather him give an off the cuff answer rather than be honest and say he doesn't know enough about it?

Personally I would rather here that than a politician try to answer the questions and 1) spin it into how their health care proposal will solve all the woes 2) sound like a complete idiot when they try to bluff their way through or 3) give an answer that is not even remotely related tot he question.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by horizon200

What point are you reaching for here?

You would rather him give an off the cuff answer rather than be honest and say he doesn't know enough about it?

Personally I would rather here that than a politician try to answer the questions and 1) spin it into how their health care proposal will solve all the woes 2) sound like a complete idiot when they try to bluff their way through or 3) give an answer that is not even remotely related tot he question.

I don't enjoy seeing anyone caught off guard by a question, then having that response used against them in an ad. On the other hand, I find it a bit alarming that he "doesn't know" about an issue that he clearly voted against.

[horizon200]

I don't know enough about his voting record on this topic. But that is not covered in the original post at all. This ranks up therer with the move on ad and the spin on Phil Gramms words or Obama's All kids should speak Spanish clips.

Just a sound bite that is used to stir up emotions and controversy (looks like it's working BTW).

After doing some research to see that he did in fact vote against the legislation, then I would expect a better response. Even if he said he voted agsainst it because of legislation that was attached to the bill and that he would have to review that bill would be better than to side step it completely.

But again, just to take the ad at face value without including background is just spin.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by horizon200

I don't know enough about his voting record on this topic. But that is not covered in the original post at all. This ranks up therer with the move on ad and the spin on Phil Gramms words or Obama's All kids should speak Spanish clips.

Just a sound bite that is used to stir up emotions and controversy (looks like it's working BTW).

After doing some research to see that he did in fact vote against the legislation, then I would expect a better response. Even if he said he voted agsainst it because of legislation that was attached to the bill and that he would have to review that bill would be better than to side step it completely.

But again, just to take the ad at face value without including background is just spin.

The original post does include a statement about him voting against birth control coverage. I do not know the circumstance of the bill, and what may have been attached to it.

But the comments don't mesh with McCain's record on the issue. Twice in the last decade -- in 2003 and 2005 -- the Arizona senator has voted against legislation requiring insurance plans that cover prescription drugs to also cover birth control. Confronted with Fiorina's sentiments, McCain was stuck: If he replied that it is, indeed, unfair that contraceptives are not covered, then he flip-flops on his earlier votes; if he answered no, then he risks alienating women voters. Instead, he punted.

"I don't recall the vote," McCain said. "I've cast thousands of votes in the Senate."

McCain's Birth Control Dodge - The Washington Independent - U.S. news and politics - washingtonindependent.com

[ryberg]

The original post includes not only mention of McCain's voting record but also mention of a brief justification of that vote on other grounds.

I'm not "reaching" for anything, in part because I don't know what one would reach for in this case, it seems so rather clear just in what you see already...

Anyway, the main question is whether it makes much sense to consider covering Viagra but not birth control isn't it?

Steve

[MaripositaII]

Originally Posted by ryberg

The original post includes not only mention of McCain's voting record but also mention of a brief justification of that vote on other grounds.

I'm not "reaching" for anything, in part because I don't know what one would reach for in this case, it seems so rather clear just in what you see already...

Anyway, the main question is whether it makes much sense to consider covering Viagra but not birth control isn't it?

Steve

The guy knows what is more important to him Steve (at his age anyway)

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by ryberg

The original post includes not only mention of McCain's voting record but also mention of a brief justification of that vote on other grounds.

I'm not "reaching" for anything, in part because I don't know what one would reach for in this case, it seems so rather clear just in what you see already...

Anyway, the main question is whether it makes much sense to consider covering Viagra but not birth control isn't it?

Steve

I believe the main question is why McCain voted against the bill. There were likely other things in the bill Republicans mostly don't like. You know, health care for impoverished children and that sort of thing.

[Babaloo]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

I believe the main question is why McCain voted against the bill. There were likely other things in the bill Republicans mostly don't like. You know, health care for impoverished children and that sort of thing.

or maybe building a bridge to nowhere...or something else that no rational citizen would want...i'm just sayin' cuz i have no idea what was tacked on to that bill - do you?

[sctx]

if you were 72 freakin years old, viagra would be pretty damn important now wouldn't it???

[ryberg]

The question isn't about any particular bill or any particular measure that was included or excluded or covered or whatever in any particular bill. The question was put to him by the questioner, who noted that his own surrogate, Carly Fiorina, had recently complained that it seemed unfair to her that insurance companies would cover Viagra but not birth control. The question was if McCain had any comment on that, not on the specifics of HR 1234 or whatever.

Clearly McCain doesn't have an answer. If the question had been on the specifics of HR 1234 or whatever, then saying "I'm not sufficiently informed on that to comment" might make sense. But the question was just whether he had any view on the idea that insurance companies covering Viagra but not covering birth control might not be unfair.

Of course opinions vary, but the implication is that the question is rather basic and one does not need to go and do a lot of research or read through HR 1234 in its entirety 5 times to be able to comment on that question. One can safely assume that J Sidney McCain is aware of both Viagra and birth control and their purposes, and of health insurance in general and of the nature of our society in general.

So, is that situation fair?

Steve

[Babaloo]

Originally Posted by sctx

if you were 72 freakin years old, viagra would be pretty damn important now wouldn't it???

Any man that votes for Viagra has my vote

[sctx]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

Any man that votes for Viagra has my vote

I've heard tequila has a similar effect on women... not that I've ever experienced that