Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to FedUpWithPols's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

The White House is backing President Trump's unsupported claim that up to five million people voted illegally in November, and that's why he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by about 2.9 million. The White House isn't sharing the "evidence" on which the president is basing his claim of voter fraud. Nancy Cordes reports.

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

More than 70 rural hospitals have closed since 2010 -- and many more may be headed down the same path.

Rural hospitals are facing a myriad of financial challenges, and those in states that have not expanded Medicaid are feeling the most financial pressure. Sixty-three percent of hospitals vulnerable to closure are in states that have not expanded Medicaid, according to a report from iVantage Health Analytics, a firm that compiles a hospital strength index based on data about financial stability, patients and quality indicators.

Thursday, January 05, 2017

U.S. Republican President-elect Donald Trump kept up his attacks on Democrats and Obamacare on Thursday while calling for a bipartisan congressional effort to come up with a healthcare alternative that would lower costs and improve care.

In a series of tweets, Trump, who takes office on Jan. 20, blasted Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer and his fellow Democrats, who have vowed to preserve President Barack Obama's legacy-defining healthcare law even as Republicans move ahead with their long-running bid to scrap it. read more


Yes!!! Looks like Napolitano is MIA.


Hopefully they are looking for a replacement for Hannity!

a lot of MAGA people ruining their kids and their family lives by being in denial on how bad they were had, and how they are going to suffer most from Trump policy.

My emotion regarding rural Trump supporters ranges from sympathy to contempt. Sympathy because their lives have been disrupted by changes in our society. Contemp because they don't recognize the common cause they share with the poor that live in urban communities. In fact, its been reported that many in those rural communities believe that they live in the real world; implying that others (including the poor that live in urban communities) do not. And, as a result of living in the real world, they are somehow more deserving of aid than those not living in the real world.

Much is being made (and rightly so) about the opiod crisis affecting America; especially rural America. The poor in urban America has been affected by an opiod crisis for generations. However, when the urban poor suffered, the causes of their suffering were often attributed to defects in character or culture. They were criminals, thugs, low lifes and undeserving of America's sympathy and certainly not deserving of its resources to help solve the problem. Non that the demographics and geographics of opiod addicts have changed, the causes of addiction are not attributed to defects within the individual or culture. It's the fault of someone or something else i.e. doctors and/or drug distribution companies and/or big Pharma. To little attention is paid to the despair that ruins the lives of people trapped in poverty; irrespective of their demographic make up.

What happens when the feds send out the refundable tax credits, people spend the money, people don't buy health insurance, people get sick, people go to the hospital? Does the hospital deny them service? I would think that the hospital association would be up in arms against this GOP proposal. At least with the ACA, there was a greater likelihood that the patient had insurance (Medicaid or an exchange policy) that could eventually be billed against. With the GOP plan, the hospital is stuck with the bill. And, if the hospital is stuck with the bill, they will eventually get bailed out with tax payer money.

From the article:

Ms. Brawley in Monroe, N.C., said she and her husband could barely afford their current premiums, and her deductible of $3,500 a year is far too high. Still, she added, "it's better than owing $20,000 or $30,000."

"This is my second year with the Obama insurance," she continued, "but before then, I didn't have any and didn't go to the doctor."

She and her husband voted for Mr. Trump -- the first time she had voted in her life -- she said, because "I thought he would make it better."

Let's see if I've got this right: prior to the ACA, she had no insurance and didn't go to the doctor. With the ACA, she pays $260/mo for health insurance, got a $724/month subsidy, she was able to go to the doctor who determined that she had an autoimmune liver disease. However, she is bitching about the deductible and voted for Trump because she thought he was going to make it better?

I believe that there are millions of people like her and her husband that bought into Trump's lies and those of republicans that bad mouthed the ACA. What this article and others that I have read fails to follow thru with is whether or not they would change their vote if given a second chance.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable