Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Knuckleheads like Vigilante, econchick, survivalists, and whateveralists --- the great majority know that the reactionary far right are not playing with a full deck mentally and emotionally. Your day is over, it's not coming back, accept it and get over it. Despite The2ndAmendment's great delusion, there will be no Second American Revolution.
You are going to have to deal with or be crushed by the realities of the 21st century.
Knuckleheads like Vigilante, econchick, survivalists, and whateveralists --- the great majority know that the reactionary far right are not playing with a full deck mentally and emotionally. Your day is over, it's not coming back, accept it and get over it. Despite The2ndAmendment's great delusion, there will be no Second American Revolution.
You are going to have to deal with or be crushed by the realities of the 21st century.
Since you have no facts, you have no points, and you lack any strong arguments, if all you're good at is personal attacks.....please at least show some competence instead of the half-assed job you're doing even at that.
Knuckleheads like Vigilante, econchick, survivalists, and whateveralists --- the great majority know that the reactionary far right are not playing with a full deck mentally and emotionally. Your day is over, it's not coming back, accept it and get over it. Despite The2ndAmendment's great delusion, there will be no Second American Revolution.
You are going to have to deal with or be crushed by the realities of the 21st century.
Knuckleheads like Vigilante, econchick, survivalists, and whateveralists --- the great majority know that the reactionary far right are not playing with a full deck mentally and emotionally. Your day is over, it's not coming back, accept it and get over it. Despite The2ndAmendment's great delusion, there will be no Second American Revolution.
You are going to have to deal with or be crushed by the realities of the 21st century.
Since you have no facts, you have no points, and you lack any strong arguments, if all you're good at is personal attacks.....please at least show some competence instead of the half-assed job you're doing even at that.
Jake doesn't do facts.
QWB and EC can say whatever they want, but they don't have the facts.
Until they do, all that needs to be done is point that fact out. No requirement to rebut information.
QWB, the legislative intent was clear, that subsidies would available at the national site as well as the state co-ops. Are you trying to say that isn't so?
QWB, the legislative intent was clear, that subsidies would available at the national site as well as the state co-ops. Are you trying to say that isn't so?
QWB, the legislative intent was clear, that subsidies would available at the national site as well as the state co-ops. Are you trying to say that isn't so?
The legislative intent was to force states to open exchanges. Feel free to prove me wrong by linking to anyone that said otherwise before Burwell was filed.
QWB, the legislative intent was clear, that subsidies would available at the national site as well as the state co-ops. Are you trying to say that isn't so?
The legislative intent was to force states to open exchanges. Feel free to prove me wrong by linking to anyone that said otherwise before Burwell was filed.
Don't need a link when we have a court that said 3 to 0 that it was so?
An appellate court with a 9 to 5 Dem advantage that will overturn the 2-1 tper vote in DC?
A SCOTUS that has made it clear that it preserves legislative intent?
You are wrong. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it, the far right just likes to yell and smell when it gets the chance.
QWB, the legislative intent was clear, that subsidies would available at the national site as well as the state co-ops. Are you trying to say that isn't so?
The legislative intent was to force states to open exchanges. Feel free to prove me wrong by linking to anyone that said otherwise before Burwell was filed.
Don't need a link when we have a court that said 3 to 0 that it was so?
An appellate court with a 9 to 5 Dem advantage that will overturn the 2-1 tper vote in DC?
A SCOTUS that has made it clear that it preserves legislative intent?
You are wrong. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it, the far right just likes to yell and smell when it gets the chance.
The legislative intent was to force states to open exchanges just so the Republican Governors could refuse to open said exchanges and show the people of their state what death panels really are, and how much more the state was paying at the peoples expense vs states that had exchanges ..
it costs more to die if your state has an elected Republican calling the plays.
The legislative intent was to force states to open exchanges. Feel free to prove me wrong by linking to anyone that said otherwise before Burwell was filed.
Don't need a link when we have a court that said 3 to 0 that it was so?
An appellate court with a 9 to 5 Dem advantage that will overturn the 2-1 tper vote in DC?
A SCOTUS that has made it clear that it preserves legislative intent?
You are wrong. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it, the far right just likes to yell and smell when it gets the chance.
Thanks for admitting DEMOCRATS are lawless, and simply will subvert the law AS WRITTEN!.... Nice play there Rep Frog Boy II! Fucking idiot!:
Don't need a link when we have a court that said 3 to 0 that it was so?
An appellate court with a 9 to 5 Dem advantage that will overturn the 2-1 tper vote in DC?
A SCOTUS that has made it clear that it preserves legislative intent?
You are wrong. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it, the far right just likes to yell and smell when it gets the chance.
Thanks for admitting DEMOCRATS are lawless, and simply will subvert the law AS WRITTEN!.... Nice play there Rep Frog Boy II! Fucking idiot!:
You are still around? OK. You wrote that, I did not. I wrote that the courts are backing ACA and you guys have one court's ruling that will be overturned.
You folks have nothing.
Since it was obvious even before the law passed that some states were going to use the federal program, don't you think there would be well written, precise and complete funding detail to insure no misunderstandings? A very important part to be sure, yet we are left to imply these details? No, simply a legal oversight of Obama's crew and potentially unconstitutional.
