Hiding behind an "old kiddie shield"

Michelle Malkin’s lead story on March 12, 2010 was titled, “Harry Reid hides behind 11-year-old kiddie shield Marcelas Owens.” The article goes into detail about Harry Reid’s objective in having President Obama’s healthcare reform passed, and his obvious desperation in doing so by using an 11-year-old to be the face of his crusade. Malkin’s intended audience is that of the anti-healthcare reform, also known as, the Republicans; appealing only to those who are opposed to the reform. While looking at this specific story, Harry Reid uses Marcelas Owens to share his story to gain sympathy votes on why the healthcare reform should be passed. Owens explains that his mother, a manager at Jack in the Box, got sick and after missing so many days of work, was terminated from her job. Losing her job resulted in termination of healthcare benefits, and “this is why Owens’ mother passed away.” The author of this article brings to your attention the questions that should be asked about why Marcelas’ mother died, and not so much the fact that, “she lost her job, therefore lost her benefits, which resulted in her dying.” The author asks, “why didn’t Marcelas’ mother enroll for unemployed workers’ benefits?” Or the fact that, “by the time she lost her coverage through her employer, she was apparently already in dire health straits.” This article is a prime example of how one sad story can change the views of so many, causing them to vote for something they have no knowledge about. Marcelas’ story can easily be viewed as irresponsible on his mothers’ part, or more to blame by the actual employer versus the insurance company who was no longer able to provide healthcare for her. I not only agree with this editorial’s viewpoint; I enjoy reading a realistic, conservative, perspective on this matter.