Monday, November 18, 2013

Elizabeth Hasselbeck blames Obamacare for keeping elderly pregnant women from being able to see the doctor of their choice. Wait, what?

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

In a segment titled “Who’s Ruining the Economy Now?” Fox Business host Stuart Varney announced that the president was not going to be able to keep the promise that people could keep their doctors because “United Healthcare has just dropped — we don’t know exactly how many — but thousands of doctors have been dropped from United Heathcare’s Medicare Advantage program.” 

Conservative media outlets like The Washington Times have blamed United Healthcare’s decision on the Affordable Care Act. 

“That leaves hundreds of thousands of patients without the doctor that they’ve had for many many years,” Varney added. “We don’t know how many thousands have been dropped, but thousands have been dropped. What about their patients? What about the people who used to have this doctor who now no longer have this doctor? Broken promise.” 

“And many of those people are women who are expecting babies and who may just have a real relationship with their physician and want to see the same doctor deliver possibly their second child,” Hasselbeck opined. “And they are now left in the dark in a time that they feeling quite vulnerable.” 

“Most of them are elderly,” Varney pointed out. 

Medicare Advantage is a type of Medicare offered by private companies to people over 65 years of age. Medicare Advantage covers traditional Medicare plus additional services, but customers must pay a premium.

"Most of them are elderly."

Hasselbeck is really onto something here. Just imagine all of those poor 65 or older pregnant women who cannot see the same doctor who once delivered their other now forty something children.

Oh the humanity.

Wow! Hasselbeck really raised the old IQ on that Fox and Friends couch didn't she?

P.S. By the way for a more balanced report on what United Healthcare is doing, and why, you can visit the Wall Street Journal.

25 comments:

  1. Anonymous12:39 PM

    I was said to be Advanced Maternal age at 42 I wonder what would 65 be called. lol

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cracklin Charlie12:43 PM

    I think Elizabeth's too-short, too-tight skirt is cutting off the circulation to her brain.

    Damn-nation, what an idiot!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous12:47 PM

    Well in the Bible, women were having babies in their 90's right?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Olivia12:56 PM

    "Most of them are elderly"
    WRONG!
    ALL of them are elderly. You have to be over 65 to get Medicare Advantage.
    BTW, United Healthcare is one of the worst culprits selling garbage insurance plans to people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous1:20 PM

    Yeah, like Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is going to be "fair and balanced."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well trust me it's better than this BS.

      Delete
  6. Anonymous1:28 PM

    Looks like there's a big feud happening in the Cheney family. Seems Liz is blowing it bigtime with her sis and the parents feel the need to step in. Liz is a dick, just like her father.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/us/politics/in-cheneys-gay-marriage-feud-parents-defend-liz.html?nl=us&emc=edit_cn_20131118&_r=0

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous2:16 PM

    On an episode of The Golden Girls (The End of the Curse) Sophia related a story about how her cousin didn't get her period for 20 years and then at 72 got pregnant. Just to cheer Blanche up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sharon2:52 PM

    Well we all knew Elisabeth was a perfect fit for the stupid liars on Fox, they hit the jackpot with her. Yeah, pregnant medicare women...that goes along with Rushbo's understanding you need birth control pills with every sex act...sheer genius, you couldnt make this stuff up. United Healthcare is engineering all this and our fabulous media is promoting the lies and blaming it all on Obama. I swear MSNBC is even doing it....WTF, it is crazy. Comparing Iraq and Katrina with the ACA??? I just can't handle it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous2:57 PM

    The WSJ is blocking me from reading the article as I don't have an account with them.

    But I do have personal experience with both private and employer-provided plans through United Healthcare. I’ve also had employer-provided plans with several other health insurance companies. Dropping doctors from a plan is business-as-usual. You're always free to stay with your preferred doctor but the share of costs you pay changes.

    I'm okay with the media covering real Obamacare glitches but they sure as hell should get educated on how this country’s health insurance (private and employer-provided) works before blaming regular industry practices on the ACA.

    Are the GOP and media complainers implying they want the government to increase regulations on private health insurance companies? Or do they want the ultimate fix, true socialized medicine with doctors employed and paid salaries by the federal government?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hedgewytch8:17 AM

      Here's what so interesting about this "conversation" going on. The more that the Republicans scream and try to break the ACA - with no "plan" of their own to "replace" it - the more likely that we WILL end up with single payer.

      Delete
  10. Anonymous2:59 PM

    Elizabeth is truly in her element at Faux Entertainment, unlike the mismatch at The View.

    BTW - Caribou Barbie posted photos at the EIB studio - she got to meet her hero! Blech!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Some serious education lacking in the US - this isn't even funny - it is just sad that anyone would make such a biologically impossible statement.

    Rabid hatred of health care for all people makes the brain soft.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What is happening is the ACA is eliminating the Medicare supplemental insurance that is redundant and a rip off. They have been scamming senior citizens for years. So, yea they are losing their policies because they are having to have the government protect them due to not being able to read and comprehend, which is of course why they are all so outraged now. The government is at fault for not making it know far and wide due to protecting these corporations from bad publicity. Health Care corporations also don't like the ACA due to the part that directs the DOJ to go after them for the fraud that has been stealing money from programs for decades. How will they afford huge bonuses for the CEO?

    ReplyDelete
  13. No to defend Ms. Hasselbeck, but "elderly" in obstetric terms doesn't mean the same as "elderly" in geriatric terms. An "elderly primapara," for example, is a woman over the age of thirty giving birth for the first time. I have no idea if Ms. Hasselbeck was using the term in this way, but I just thought I'd throw that out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hasselbeck did not use the term elderly, because she did not realize that this decision ONLY affected people over 65.

      She did not know what the hell she was talking about. That is the point of this post.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous5:53 PM

      Exactly Gryph.

      Hello????? Medicare is for people over 65.

      That's the problem. This nitwit is supposed to be informing the public. Gahhhh. It is so disgusting. Why aren't democrats driving the narrative and EXPLAINING in "simple" terms that the government is actually trying to HELP YOU???

      Delete
    3. Varney said "most of them are elderly". he should have said "ALL of them are elderly" - it is a program for those over 65 - and Varney was trying to protect Hasselbeck from the absolute stupid that she is.

      No wonder Hasselbeck is a Palin fan - they speak the same language of stupid

      Delete
    4. Anonymous7:32 PM

      I worked in one of the best hospitals in the USA and never heard the term "elderly", I have heard the term advanced age, high risk age factor, never elderly.

      Delete
    5. I was just going by what I saw on my own records--I was listed as an "elderly primapara" because I had my first child in my thirties. Just re-read the post, and I concur--I conflated Varney and Hasselbeck's remarks. My bad.

      Delete
  14. Anita Winecooler5:52 PM

    One would think a woman, any woman who's been sitting next to a Journalistic Icon for ten years would have learned something, anything about simple things like Medicare Advantage Programs and the main criteria for joining such a plan is that a) one is above the age of 65 and/ or b) one is permanently disabled and that by far the number of aged must be more (baby boomers)..

    I'm sure ABC was sad to see her go to the lowest bidder.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So glad that Hasselbeck joined the Fatuous Fellowship of F&F -- "Dumb and Dumber" desperately needed their Dumberer.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous5:28 AM

    We want an ApoloGEEE!

    ReplyDelete
  17. hedgewytch8:12 AM

    So that's what all that Viagra is for - its so those Mature people can finish their duty to God in raising a quiver-full of children for Christ. Right? Only whose going to raise them when their parents keel over or are drooling on themselves in a nursing home?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous2:36 PM

    Hate to disappoint ya folks, but technically she and her guest are right ... the majority of Medicare patients are over 65 BUT if you get on disability then you can get on Medicare. Of course, there's a 2 year waiting period in between those... talk about your pre-existing condition! I see these people all the time in my medical practice.
    So in theory, you could have a disabled woman of child bearing age on Medicare, and she could get pregnant. But I sincerely doubt that Elizabeth was aware of this aspect of Medicare when she made her comments, so I agree, she's either A) an idiot or B) trying to use her atrophied conservative compassion to empathize with those poor Medicare patients based on the only medical experiences she's had, i.e., getting knocked up several times.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.