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.
How the hell do dems think we're going to pay for this monstrosity?
We'll be 20 trillion in debt by the time obama leaves office as it is.
Taxes are going to sky rocket for the middle class making it even more difficult to pay the ridiculous out of pocket expenses for medical care.
I expect a shitload of people to renounce their citizenship in the coming years and getting the fuck out of here with some of their savings intact.
I know I'm going to be one of them.
Bon Voyage!
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.Another loss for conservatives trying to take away peoples healthcare
.
When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
And like SS, it pays for itself.How about cons quit obstructing so that it gets written correctly?How about the people who write a law pay attention when doing it?
Exactly the same thing happened when Medicare was passed. The difference was that we didn't have an entire party intent on bringing down the country. The parties worked together and the result is that Medicare now works very well and within budget.
Same is true of health care insurance and all other kinds of insurance as well.
Medicare turns down more people than private insurance. Now that insurance has become more of a government agency, I suspect more will be turned down
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.Another loss for conservatives trying to take away peoples healthcare
.
When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
How the hell do dems think we're going to pay for this monstrosity?
We'll be 20 trillion in debt by the time obama leaves office as it is.
Taxes are going to sky rocket for the middle class making it even more difficult to pay the ridiculous out of pocket expenses for medical care.
I expect a shitload of people to renounce their citizenship in the coming years and getting the fuck out of here with some of their savings intact.
I know I'm going to be one of them.
Bon Voyage!
Be ready to repeat that continuously for years to come as the major tax payers bailout. You progressives have already ran off businesses with your high taxes,expect those who can afford it to leave as well.
You can expect good times paying for all those entitlements when half the country works for min wage.
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.Another loss for conservatives trying to take away peoples healthcare
.
When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
Gruber recanted his brain fart. He's a gadfly. You've got nothing.
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.Another loss for conservatives trying to take away peoples healthcare
.
When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
Gruber recanted his brain fart. He's a gadfly. You've got nothing.
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
Gruber recanted his brain fart. He's a gadfly. You've got nothing.
How the hell do you "recant" something that actually happened?
That didn't happen in any of the states that set up exchangesThis is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
Oh, just hogwash. The Democrats simply never dreamed that 34 states would refuse to set up exchanges. They thought that threat and carrot of federal subsidies would lead nearly all states, or all states, to set up exchanges. Presumably Democrats can read and write. The laws says in plain English that subsidies only go to states with exchanges. That was supposed to be carrot/stick that would get states to set up exchanges.
And you keep talking about "providing people with health care," but Obamacare has caused millions of people to lose their health care and many others to pay substantially higher premiums because they're forced to buy gold-plated policies.
States found out setting up the exchanges would bankrupt them. Big shock
Of the 3 dozen states that go through the fed... It is because if they didn't...They couldn't afford the low premiums offered to the public and would have to hike prices to compensate. Plus ...the millions to set up their own exchanges.
Actually, they were butthurt over Obamacare and were willing to punish their own constituents if it meant getting back at Obama
How the hell do dems think we're going to pay for this monstrosity?
We'll be 20 trillion in debt by the time obama leaves office as it is.
Taxes are going to sky rocket for the middle class making it even more difficult to pay the ridiculous out of pocket expenses for medical care.
I expect a shitload of people to renounce their citizenship in the coming years and getting the fuck out of here with some of their savings intact.
I know I'm going to be one of them.
Bon Voyage!
Be ready to repeat that continuously for years to come as the major tax payers bailout. You progressives have already ran off businesses with your high taxes,expect those who can afford it to leave as well.
You can expect good times paying for all those entitlements when half the country works for min wage.
As it stands with all the freebies. The poor make more money than the middle class as it is.
How the hell do dems think we're going to pay for this monstrosity?
We'll be 20 trillion in debt by the time obama leaves office as it is.
Taxes are going to sky rocket for the middle class making it even more difficult to pay the ridiculous out of pocket expenses for medical care.
I expect a shitload of people to renounce their citizenship in the coming years and getting the fuck out of here with some of their savings intact.
I know I'm going to be one of them.
Bon Voyage!
Be ready to repeat that continuously for years to come as the major tax payers bailout. You progressives have already ran off businesses with your high taxes,expect those who can afford it to leave as well.
You can expect good times paying for all those entitlements when half the country works for min wage.
Horse patoot. Such as? And no irrelevant gossip, please... Nothing to compare with Saddam's "mushroom clouds", how Barney caused Bush's world depression, death panels and ridiculous insurer proposals as facts, etc etc. Actually, just about everything they say...This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.When the court ignores black letter law, we're all in trouble.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
Gruber recanted his brain fart. He's a gadfly. You've got nothing.
Of course he did. The Progs are quite facile liars. Just look at Obama and the Clintons.
Horse patoot. Such as? And no irrelevant gossip, please... Nothing to compare with Saddam's "mushroom clouds", how Barney caused Bush's world depression, death panels and ridiculous insurer proposals as facts, etc etc. Actually, just about everything they say...This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that SCOTUS considers the intent of the law and not just the letter of law. It should be clear to everyone that Congress did not intent for people to be denied health insurance because they applied through a state exchange operating under federal guidance instead of a federal exchange as specified in the law. The intent of law was to provide additional healthcare coverage, not less.
Had SCOTUS ruled against subsidies for those on state exchanges, it would have created chaos in healthcare insurance as the federal exchange attempted add 26 states.
First you need to get your facts straight, subsidies were provided for State exchanges, one of the architects of the law (Gruber) admitted the federal exchange was intentionally left out of the subsidy scheme in order to force States to establish exchanges. The supremes ignored black letter law and one of the authors of the law verifying there was no oversight, to allow subsidies for the federal exchange. It was on its face, a bad political decision and a horrendous legal decision.
Yep. Exactly.
Gruber recanted his brain fart. He's a gadfly. You've got nothing.
Of course he did. The Progs are quite facile liars. Just look at Obama and the Clintons.
Is it my imagination...or do the true colors of righties always come out when the SCOTUS rules against them?
Of course they do on election night, when Obama won...
It's like "Romney by a landlside" all over again
Sad really
They loved the Supreme Court so much when they got Bush elected
It must be Armageddon! There is much wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth!
How the hell do dems think we're going to pay for this monstrosity?
We'll be 20 trillion in debt by the time obama leaves office as it is.
Taxes are going to sky rocket for the middle class making it even more difficult to pay the ridiculous out of pocket expenses for medical care.
I expect a shitload of people to renounce their citizenship in the coming years and getting the fuck out of here with some of their savings intact.
I know I'm going to be one of them.
Bon Voyage!
Be ready to repeat that continuously for years to come as the major tax payers bailout. You progressives have already ran off businesses with your high taxes,expect those who can afford it to leave as well.
You can expect good times paying for all those entitlements when half the country works for min wage.
Actually, you conservatives have been sending our jobs out of the country for decades. This is the only country that expects employers to pay 50% to 75% of the costs of employee health insurance. Ford has been paying more for health insurance per car produced than they pay for steel per car produced since 1977. This is the reason that a train runs up the Santa Cruse Valley every other night loaded with Fords assembled in Nogales, Mexico.
Good, they aren't necessary. Health Care is a national issue. You know, One Nation Under God right?It must be Armageddon! There is much wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth!
Any bets that the existing State exchanges will disappear within two years?
That didn't happen in any of the states that set up exchangesOh, just hogwash. The Democrats simply never dreamed that 34 states would refuse to set up exchanges. They thought that threat and carrot of federal subsidies would lead nearly all states, or all states, to set up exchanges. Presumably Democrats can read and write. The laws says in plain English that subsidies only go to states with exchanges. That was supposed to be carrot/stick that would get states to set up exchanges.
And you keep talking about "providing people with health care," but Obamacare has caused millions of people to lose their health care and many others to pay substantially higher premiums because they're forced to buy gold-plated policies.
States found out setting up the exchanges would bankrupt them. Big shock
Of the 3 dozen states that go through the fed... It is because if they didn't...They couldn't afford the low premiums offered to the public and would have to hike prices to compensate. Plus ...the millions to set up their own exchanges.
Actually, they were butthurt over Obamacare and were willing to punish their own constituents if it meant getting back at Obama
Must be why they were planning a 2 year extension on subsidies while they figured out a fix to the problem. Try again.
You do realize only 13 states have their own exchanges...yes?
