How does the "right" of 700,000 mentally ill people to go to the bathroom where they want trump the right of 150,000,000 women and girls not to go to the bathroom with a dude?
Obama: “The rugged individualism that defines America has always been bound by a set of shared values; an enduring sense that we are in this together,”
If we're all in this together, why didn't he pay his 15 Parking Tickets?
--The rugged individualism that defines America has always been bound by a set of shared values...--
What a casually authoritarian phrase.
The shared values, none of which he shares, fostered and encouraged individualism rather than bound it.
That is one of the things that made America exceptional and one of the things he, and every other collectivist, despises about it.
" an enduring sense that we are in this together,”
in order to enable Obummer to do as he pleases. As Ignatz has taught us, this is SOP for a clinical narcissist such as Obummer.
Broadcaster Peter Boyles interviewed anti-Obama-birther, pro-Cruz-birther, Ann Coulter on Friday and told her that Barack Obama could not pass the federal government's E-Verify and he couldn't produce the documents.
Obummer and DD using God and Jesus about King v Burwell. It really does sound as if the Prog SCOTUS clerks have told them the result, and they are making a pitch to working poor to 'save' the Exchange. Hysterical.
CBS,ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC have said they will dedicate a large portion of their airtime to people who die as a result of the GOP strategy to dismantle Obamacare.
I mean....I'M THE DUMB ONE HERE, I get that but....but..you can't have it all ways...you can't want to take away health security from 6 million people then plead innocent when a large portion of those people start dying.....am I missing something????????
When I was growing up, McKinney was a one-exit town out on 75 that was far enough out not to really be considered part of Dallas. Things have, um, changed a wee bit there in McKinney, huh?
"I see the trolls are out in force the last couple of days. I guess the monthly Soros checks came through"
I am a troll and as a troll I'm having a difficult time with this concept......please help me:For the last 4 years the GOP has been trying to make sure that 9,000,000 Americans lose their health care coverage and now that you/they may be successful you..........this is the part i'm having difficulty with.....they/youwant to blame the people who provided that coverage in the first place????????????????
Thune took the argument out for a spin and got laughed out of the playground.Prepare top get decimated with the documentaries dedicated to the deaths of innocent Americans that you....the Republican party fought for.
You just fucked Reagans party in the ass so hard it's impossible to see it's recovery.
The Senate Repub fix when the Federal Exchange is shut down (God willing) is OK public policy ... at minimum it is a huge improvement on ObummerCare... and it is great politics that helps Repubs in Fla, Pa, Ohio, Mich, Ia, and Wisc. That means it really hurt Hilligula. That's why the checks went out to the trolls.
I think "panic" is an exaggeration, but there is no doubt that Bush's campaign is not the juggernaut they promised, and I am dead certain there is nervousness in their ranks.
"The Senate Repub fix when the Federal Exchange is shut down (God willing) is OK public policy ... "
Please look at the above poster's ruminations.Take a moment the way one would take a pause to consider a great work of art...look at it.....think about it....that is who you,the Republican party.Right there.
when they mentioned danny diaz? as campaign manager, it turns out he was one of the stragglers from Maverick's campaign, probably blamed the huntress for the loss, to swap him out for Kochel, who worked with walker, doesn't seem like a cunning cunning plan,
"KIEV, June 9 - RIA Novosti. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk during the global forum of the American Jewish Committee in the framework of his working visit to Washington, said that Kiev would return under his rule the territory under the control of militias in the Donbass, and establish control over the Crimea.
"We believe that the return control of the Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea. And we will control our territory", - quotes Yatseniuk's press service of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. He stressed the importance of "the unity of all the EU Member
NK: You have brought up COBRA several times as a 'fix' (temporary) should the SC rule for the plaintiffs, but I don't see how it does anything. Can you explain your thinking?
COBRA, IIRC, requires an employer to offer to a new former employee the option of continuing enrollment in the employer-sponsored group insurance plan - at up to 102% of real cost (i.e. without employer subsidies plus up to 2% added administrative costs). It currently has nothing to do with individual plans. The purpose of it was to protect the newly unemployed from a lapse in insurance, which would have negative impact on the affordability of gaining new coverage - an issue that ACA eliminated, by the way, by removing any authority of insurers to base plan prices on anything other than age, community, and smoking. (No more "pre existing condition" risk measurement permitted.)
If subsidies for Federal-exchange individual policies are ruled illegal, the policies themselves should not be affected. That is, the former policy holder is still a current policy holder and can retain the current policy just by paying for it - no application of a COBRA rule is necessary for that. They can also just buy a different policy either on the exchange or through a broker or directly during open enrollment.
The issue, of course, is that the full price is unaffordable to most (and, frankly, is higher than pre-ACA prices were - I've seen estimates of an average of around 250%).
Eliminating the Ind. Mandate allows a current policy holder a new penalty-free option to go without insurance, but there is still nothing addressing the ACA-imposed lack of actual affordable options because ACA made all those non-QHP choices illegal. (That's fixable but not immediately).)
In short... I just don't see what you think COBRA addresses or answers here.
I am one of the drunkest, dumbest human beings on the face of the planet.
But come on...you didn't get a tiny chill after Thune got decimated by the intelligentsia with that moronic logic????Even a little iddy biddy "Oh shit"???
I have exactly zero faith in Roberts to do the right thing. I have even less faith than that in the R's to not screw up and throw the Dems a lifeline if the decision does go the correct way.
Well SCOTUS was designed to operate without regard to political
/electoral popularity. However the worry is assuaged because they have abandoned that edifice.
david morrell, the rambo guy, has branched out into
victorian mysteries, with de Quincey as the protagonist, and this latest one concerns the Crimean War,
I anticipate that Roberts, in his infinite wisdom, may invoke The Rule in Shelley's Case to uphold the Obama interpretation. Thus, preserving the dignity of the Court.
If Roberts/Kennedy do the right thing, I will admit I was wrong, this time.
The thing is, they have such a long list of wrongs that doing the right thing in King v Burwell is just step one on a thousand mile journey of restoring trust in them.
I don't think Sasse is correct, though. Specifically:
If the justices prohibit the Treasury Department from granting subsidies to patients living in states without state-run exchanges, then the Machiavellian fine-print that regulators wrote to protect their bedfellows means that big insurers will be allowed to dump ObamaCare patients midyear.
Other than non-payment or fraud, I don't believe insurers CAN drop a policy holder "midyear". His actual proposal is just retaining subsidies - the COBRA bit is a red herring, pretending to provide "protection" for a consequence that doesn't exist.
He's doing the politician abuse-of-language thing here - that is, "big insurers" will not be "dumping" Obamacare patients midyear; but without subsidies, Obamacare patients will be dumping insurers.
I'm having a hard time seeing SCOTUS ruling for the federal exchange subsidies, especially as the contemporaneous discussion by Gruber shows intent (at least by some), and they wrote it that way.
But I'd also be surprised if the "fix" isn't a simple change of the language to what the Dems now claim they meant. ISTM the alternative is to rewrite the law, and that's not happening.
Roberts invoked a more than century old doctrine in declining to invalidate Congressional statutes when they can be 'saved' by other constitutional means. The Court should sparingly use constitutional grounds to invalidate democratically enacted law. When SCOTUS finds equal protection rights for gay marriage it will be doing so after a 60 year cultural campaign to normalize homosexuality. The Left put in decades of work to get that done; it was not rational to expect Roberts to invalidate ACA on the grounds that the idiot Dems based it on the wrong constitutional authority peg. Personally, I find it much sweeter when the Federal Exchange subsidies are revoked because it is what the Dems themselves did to pass the thing, and Obummer used extra legal means to change the damn thing. Assuming of course that Roberts/Kennedy do the right thing, and issue a ruling consistent with their own statutory construction decisions. If they don't? they can be called out for their craven cowardice.
I still don't understand why we can't say "everything is now the way it was prior to Obamacare passing."
Then everyone could go back to their own doctors and prior insurance. To protect people, insurers would be prohibited from refusing prior customers that they were glad to get rid of. For those without insurance in this scenario, set up an assistance fund or some other mechanism.
For people with prior conditions who would have had trouble getting insured or who had been kicked off (like having childhood cancer patients) set up some sort of funding through a combination of taxpayer help and insurance company assistance.
Tell people who want free birth control to lobby George Soros for funding. Tell kids over 18 to get their own policies.
CecilT-- if the battleground and DC Repubs 'simply' change the law to allow the Federal Exchange subsidy? For me that's game over. That would be capitulating for their personal political skins, to a bastard law that was fraudulently enacted, is unpopular and is failing. There would be no purpose to a Repub Party at that point.
MissM-- that would be a repeal of ObummerCare en mass, and enacting a sensible replacement. That won't happen from the King decision. But personally, after King I do hope the Repubs 'fix' the Exchange by a complete repeal and common sense replacement. That's the best policy and politics.
--...this is why we Liberals continually win the White house--
In the last 35 years the GOP has been in the WH 20 years with 3 different presidents while the Dems have occupied it 14 1/2 years with first a somatic narcissist and now a "cerebral" one.
Yet Obama's transactional offer — campaign help in exchange for a "yes" vote — begs a broader question: Will Democrats even want Obama campaigning for them in 2016?
Obama introduced himself to the nation as the son of black and white parents. He has gone back and forth between Christianity and Islam like a philanderer in a bar.
I'm surprised how much people hate having free stuff discontinued.
Exactly the problem (even though there is no such thing as "free" stuff; and government inefficiency ensures those paying will pay more than it's worth, even when the administrators aren't funneling a wee bit into their own coffers--which they inevitably do). But those most affected are the ones who suddenly find their insurance unaffordable: and who are they going to blame, the idiots who wrote an unworkable policy, or the GOP who isn't giving 'em access to OPM?
I'd like to think it'd cause meaningful reform, but I'm betting on a cave-ex.
henry-- many did; if you are Medicaid eligible, the Exchanges enroll you there instead of giving a policy.the net 'gain' of people with BigGov INDIVIDUAL insurance policies is about 7 million. About 10-12 million TOTAL have BigGov insurance WITH subsidy, I am not sure for a fact how many of those are in the Federal exchange; 5-7 M is my approximation.
I want to put in a plug again for answering "Carly Fiorina" if you are polled for who you support.
I am not asking that you really support her. My interest is in getting her into the Top 10 for that debate, and also keeping Huckabee and Santorum OUT.
Also Trump, if he's foolish enough to announce.
Anyway, please consider this. Her presence will elevate the debate skills of the others.
I'll do it, Miss Marple. I'd also like to see her on that debate stage.
How unsurprising that Preznit has been huffing all along. If it comes up and some lib friend of yours says "so what?" ask them what else the media lies to us about.
They catch those 2 killers yet?
Posted by: Peter | June 09, 2015 at 10:11 AM
Seems like a good way to start a thread;
Can you propel yourself through space by farting?
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 10:14 AM
this is the problem, no one asks zippy any questions
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/08/how-the-16-state-exchanges-are-faring-under-obamacare/
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 10:19 AM
Federal agency OSHA decides a "best practice" is for employers to allow transgender employees to use the bathroom of the sex they identify with.
JATFI
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 10:22 AM
How does the "right" of 700,000 mentally ill people to go to the bathroom where they want trump the right of 150,000,000 women and girls not to go to the bathroom with a dude?
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 10:25 AM
and the kangaroo courts come with pouches:
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 10:31 AM
Obama: “The rugged individualism that defines America has always been bound by a set of shared values; an enduring sense that we are in this together,”
If we're all in this together, why didn't he pay his 15 Parking Tickets?
Posted by: daddy | June 09, 2015 at 10:35 AM
but the speedboat, squirrel:
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2015/06/ny-times-goes-after-rubios-finances.html
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 10:38 AM
daddy:
If we're all in this together, why didn't he pay his 15 Parking Tickets?
We were supposed to all pitch in and pay them for him.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | June 09, 2015 at 10:41 AM
Ben's domestic policy to be tried in Spain as the communists take over every Spanish municipality.
When they inevitably crash and burn we will find once again, they weren't truly communists either and yet again it is has never really been tried.
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 10:48 AM
hohum, it's just their nimbleness, I guess:
http://therightscoop.com/confirmed-isis-captures-another-86-christians-in-libya-and-will-probably-kill-them-all/
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 10:53 AM
You guys are getting ready to fix Obamacare should the bought and paid for Republican Supremes try to murder 16,000 thousand Americans?
You're going to fix it,right?
Coz Jesus is looking at you.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 10:55 AM
--The rugged individualism that defines America has always been bound by a set of shared values...--
What a casually authoritarian phrase.
The shared values, none of which he shares, fostered and encouraged individualism rather than bound it.
That is one of the things that made America exceptional and one of the things he, and every other collectivist, despises about it.
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 10:57 AM
" an enduring sense that we are in this together,”
in order to enable Obummer to do as he pleases. As Ignatz has taught us, this is SOP for a clinical narcissist such as Obummer.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 10:57 AM
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/06/broadcaster-to-ann-coulter-obama.html?m=1
Posted by: Threadkiller | June 09, 2015 at 11:02 AM
other squirrels loosed from their cages:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/06/video-analysis-mckinney-brawl-another-rush-to-misjudgment/
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 11:05 AM
Obummer and DD using God and Jesus about King v Burwell. It really does sound as if the Prog SCOTUS clerks have told them the result, and they are making a pitch to working poor to 'save' the Exchange. Hysterical.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 11:07 AM
"other squirrels loosed from their cages"
I live in McKinney and am so sick that this "Black Lives Matter" mob has come to our town.
Posted by: Texas Liberty Gal | June 09, 2015 at 11:09 AM
CBS,ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC have said they will dedicate a large portion of their airtime to people who die as a result of the GOP strategy to dismantle Obamacare.
I mean....I'M THE DUMB ONE HERE, I get that but....but..you can't have it all ways...you can't want to take away health security from 6 million people then plead innocent when a large portion of those people start dying.....am I missing something????????
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:19 AM
Hi TLG. My sis lives in McKinney too.
When I was growing up, McKinney was a one-exit town out on 75 that was far enough out not to really be considered part of Dallas. Things have, um, changed a wee bit there in McKinney, huh?
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | June 09, 2015 at 11:21 AM
"Obummer and DD using God and Jesus"
Jesus is ALWAYS watching you in everything you think and do.
The final judgement on where you spend eternity is based solely on how you spent your time here on earth.
If you voted to intentionally kill God's children then that's something you'll have to contend with.
If you think i'm lying then maybe you don't believe in the lord.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:22 AM
Here's the real story of what happened in McKinney!!!
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/06/08/the-full-story-of-the-mckinney-texas-pool-mob-inside-the-craig-ranch-subdivision/
Posted by: Texas Liberty Gal | June 09, 2015 at 11:22 AM
I see the trolls are out in force the last couple of days. I guess the monthly Soros checks came through.
Posted by: James D. | June 09, 2015 at 11:25 AM
The 'FIX' is COBRA (heh) or sunsetting subsidies (heh, heh) so gradual the little people won't notice, like carbon-mnoxide poisoning.
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 11:27 AM
research agency troll, sigh,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 11:30 AM
"I see the trolls are out in force the last couple of days. I guess the monthly Soros checks came through"
I am a troll and as a troll I'm having a difficult time with this concept......please help me:For the last 4 years the GOP has been trying to make sure that 9,000,000 Americans lose their health care coverage and now that you/they may be successful you..........this is the part i'm having difficulty with.....they/youwant to blame the people who provided that coverage in the first place????????????????
Thune took the argument out for a spin and got laughed out of the playground.Prepare top get decimated with the documentaries dedicated to the deaths of innocent Americans that you....the Republican party fought for.
You just fucked Reagans party in the ass so hard it's impossible to see it's recovery.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:34 AM
ok, DD got the Soros check.... and immediately got drunk.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 11:37 AM
well this didn't work out,
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/jason-amerine-army-whistleblower-testimony-bowe-bergdahl-118588.html
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 11:38 AM
The Senate Repub fix when the Federal Exchange is shut down (God willing) is OK public policy ... at minimum it is a huge improvement on ObummerCare... and it is great politics that helps Repubs in Fla, Pa, Ohio, Mich, Ia, and Wisc. That means it really hurt Hilligula. That's why the checks went out to the trolls.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 11:41 AM
Brought over from end of last thread.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/09/jeb-bush-panicking-to-discover-voters-ju?utm_content=buffer1715b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I think "panic" is an exaggeration, but there is no doubt that Bush's campaign is not the juggernaut they promised, and I am dead certain there is nervousness in their ranks.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 11:44 AM
"The Senate Repub fix when the Federal Exchange is shut down (God willing) is OK public policy ... "
Please look at the above poster's ruminations.Take a moment the way one would take a pause to consider a great work of art...look at it.....think about it....that is who you,the Republican party.Right there.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:45 AM
sorry...who you are
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:46 AM
he's definitely drunk.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 11:46 AM
That Conservative Treehouse post is very good re: McKinney.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 09, 2015 at 11:50 AM
when they mentioned danny diaz? as campaign manager, it turns out he was one of the stragglers from Maverick's campaign, probably blamed the huntress for the loss, to swap him out for Kochel, who worked with walker, doesn't seem like a cunning cunning plan,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 11:50 AM
alright he did work for Martinez's campaign, but as long as Mike 'Iceberg' Murphy, is steering, I say
game over
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 11:52 AM
Interesting he made the statement to AJC..
"KIEV, June 9 - RIA Novosti. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk during the global forum of the American Jewish Committee in the framework of his working visit to Washington, said that Kiev would return under his rule the territory under the control of militias in the Donbass, and establish control over the Crimea.
2015 © AFP / Andrey Borodulin
In Ukraine, approved the procedure for crossing the border with the Donbas and Crimea
On the eve of Yatsenyuk and Minister of Finance of Ukraine Natalia Yaresko went on a working visit in the United States, where it is expected to meet with the leadership of the country and the International Monetary Fund.
"We believe that the return control of the Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea. And we will control our territory", - quotes Yatseniuk's press service of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. He stressed the importance of "the unity of all the EU Member
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fz5h64q92x9.net%2Fproxy_u%2Fru-en.en%2Fria.ru%2Fworld%2F20150609%2F1068958041.html&edit-text=
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 11:54 AM
NK: You have brought up COBRA several times as a 'fix' (temporary) should the SC rule for the plaintiffs, but I don't see how it does anything. Can you explain your thinking?
COBRA, IIRC, requires an employer to offer to a new former employee the option of continuing enrollment in the employer-sponsored group insurance plan - at up to 102% of real cost (i.e. without employer subsidies plus up to 2% added administrative costs). It currently has nothing to do with individual plans. The purpose of it was to protect the newly unemployed from a lapse in insurance, which would have negative impact on the affordability of gaining new coverage - an issue that ACA eliminated, by the way, by removing any authority of insurers to base plan prices on anything other than age, community, and smoking. (No more "pre existing condition" risk measurement permitted.)
If subsidies for Federal-exchange individual policies are ruled illegal, the policies themselves should not be affected. That is, the former policy holder is still a current policy holder and can retain the current policy just by paying for it - no application of a COBRA rule is necessary for that. They can also just buy a different policy either on the exchange or through a broker or directly during open enrollment.
The issue, of course, is that the full price is unaffordable to most (and, frankly, is higher than pre-ACA prices were - I've seen estimates of an average of around 250%).
Eliminating the Ind. Mandate allows a current policy holder a new penalty-free option to go without insurance, but there is still nothing addressing the ACA-imposed lack of actual affordable options because ACA made all those non-QHP choices illegal. (That's fixable but not immediately).)
In short... I just don't see what you think COBRA addresses or answers here.
Posted by: AliceH | June 09, 2015 at 11:54 AM
"he's definitely drunk"
I am one of the drunkest, dumbest human beings on the face of the planet.
But come on...you didn't get a tiny chill after Thune got decimated by the intelligentsia with that moronic logic????Even a little iddy biddy "Oh shit"???
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:55 AM
They seem worried about this supreme court case.
Posted by: Extraneus | June 09, 2015 at 11:55 AM
Ext, I'm worried about the case.
I have exactly zero faith in Roberts to do the right thing. I have even less faith than that in the R's to not screw up and throw the Dems a lifeline if the decision does go the correct way.
Posted by: James D. | June 09, 2015 at 11:58 AM
"They seem worried about this supreme court case"
For anyone who studies Politics.....look at above comment...this is why we Liberals continually win the White house.
Honestly,everything you need to know why we win the Presidency is right in there.Look at it.Look at it again and again.
That's why.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 11:59 AM
Well SCOTUS was designed to operate without regard to political
/electoral popularity. However the worry is assuaged because they have abandoned that edifice.
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 12:00 PM
david morrell, the rambo guy, has branched out into
victorian mysteries, with de Quincey as the protagonist, and this latest one concerns the Crimean War,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:00 PM
Agree, James D.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 09, 2015 at 12:02 PM
Nicholas 1, the czar in that era, was much like Volodya, and it was the weak British and French response to his incursions that led to that conflict,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:05 PM
here's a link to Ben Sasse's proposal to amend COBRA to cover the Federal exchange policy holders WITH subsidy (what 5M people--maybee) until ObummerCare is fully replaced. Ron Johnson has a separate subsidy proposal. They are both political winners: http://www.wsj.com/articles/ben-sasse-a-first-step-on-the-way-out-of-obamacare-1424908814
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:09 PM
JamesD:
1. we will know in 10 days or so;
2. See Sens Sasse and Johnson for how this will play out if the Exchange is shutdown.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:11 PM
the Court abandons it's obligations, at least once a year, Boumedienne, NFIB, Perry, (DOMA) so why would it be any different this time,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:11 PM
If Roberts/Kennedy do the right thing in King v Burwell, I assume good manners will dictate that sincere apologies are made.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:13 PM
when even morning joke. . .
http://freebeacon.com/politics/morning-joe-flummoxed-by-hillary-clintons-vague-minimum-wage-stance/
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:18 PM
atlhouse allows for some imput:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6329595&postID=6261546166117968556
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:20 PM
I anticipate that Roberts, in his infinite wisdom, may invoke The Rule in Shelley's Case to uphold the Obama interpretation. Thus, preserving the dignity of the Court.
Posted by: MarkO | June 09, 2015 at 12:25 PM
If Roberts/Kennedy do the right thing, I will admit I was wrong, this time.
The thing is, they have such a long list of wrongs that doing the right thing in King v Burwell is just step one on a thousand mile journey of restoring trust in them.
Posted by: James D. | June 09, 2015 at 12:25 PM
agreed, it's just that expecting a scooby snack, for doing your job, is a little exasperating,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:27 PM
Thanks, NK.
I don't think Sasse is correct, though. Specifically:
Other than non-payment or fraud, I don't believe insurers CAN drop a policy holder "midyear". His actual proposal is just retaining subsidies - the COBRA bit is a red herring, pretending to provide "protection" for a consequence that doesn't exist.
He's doing the politician abuse-of-language thing here - that is, "big insurers" will not be "dumping" Obamacare patients midyear; but without subsidies, Obamacare patients will be dumping insurers.
Posted by: AliceH | June 09, 2015 at 12:30 PM
I'm having a hard time seeing SCOTUS ruling for the federal exchange subsidies, especially as the contemporaneous discussion by Gruber shows intent (at least by some), and they wrote it that way.
But I'd also be surprised if the "fix" isn't a simple change of the language to what the Dems now claim they meant. ISTM the alternative is to rewrite the law, and that's not happening.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | June 09, 2015 at 12:38 PM
just BS.
Roberts invoked a more than century old doctrine in declining to invalidate Congressional statutes when they can be 'saved' by other constitutional means. The Court should sparingly use constitutional grounds to invalidate democratically enacted law. When SCOTUS finds equal protection rights for gay marriage it will be doing so after a 60 year cultural campaign to normalize homosexuality. The Left put in decades of work to get that done; it was not rational to expect Roberts to invalidate ACA on the grounds that the idiot Dems based it on the wrong constitutional authority peg. Personally, I find it much sweeter when the Federal Exchange subsidies are revoked because it is what the Dems themselves did to pass the thing, and Obummer used extra legal means to change the damn thing. Assuming of course that Roberts/Kennedy do the right thing, and issue a ruling consistent with their own statutory construction decisions. If they don't? they can be called out for their craven cowardice.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:38 PM
the rest of the story,
http://pamelageller.com/2015/06/the-rampaging-hollywood-reporter.html/
about what you suspected.
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:39 PM
I still don't understand why we can't say "everything is now the way it was prior to Obamacare passing."
Then everyone could go back to their own doctors and prior insurance. To protect people, insurers would be prohibited from refusing prior customers that they were glad to get rid of. For those without insurance in this scenario, set up an assistance fund or some other mechanism.
For people with prior conditions who would have had trouble getting insured or who had been kicked off (like having childhood cancer patients) set up some sort of funding through a combination of taxpayer help and insurance company assistance.
Tell people who want free birth control to lobby George Soros for funding. Tell kids over 18 to get their own policies.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 12:40 PM
Commemorating the USS Liberty.
http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/americas/2015/06/israel-uss-liberty-attack-150608204015123.html
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 12:43 PM
CecilT-- if the battleground and DC Repubs 'simply' change the law to allow the Federal Exchange subsidy? For me that's game over. That would be capitulating for their personal political skins, to a bastard law that was fraudulently enacted, is unpopular and is failing. There would be no purpose to a Repub Party at that point.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:43 PM
MissM-- that would be a repeal of ObummerCare en mass, and enacting a sensible replacement. That won't happen from the King decision. But personally, after King I do hope the Repubs 'fix' the Exchange by a complete repeal and common sense replacement. That's the best policy and politics.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 12:47 PM
The USS Liberty Veterans Report.
http://www.usslibertyveterans.org/files/War%20Crimes%20Report.pdf
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 12:47 PM
dialing down to 12:
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=357231
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:48 PM
It's amazing how many polls show dislike for Obamacare while loving ACA.
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 12:48 PM
As a Liberal it's great seeing Republicans tear themselves apart on King v Burwell.
Posted by: DublinDave | June 09, 2015 at 12:49 PM
--...this is why we Liberals continually win the White house--
In the last 35 years the GOP has been in the WH 20 years with 3 different presidents while the Dems have occupied it 14 1/2 years with first a somatic narcissist and now a "cerebral" one.
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 12:49 PM
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/244369-gop-fears-it-will-win-obamacare-court-battle
Typical dem/media bullshit spin. And the GOPe falls for it every time.
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 12:52 PM
now mind you Taibbi's even more clueless, you would need a plasma rifle, to cut through it,
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419469/broken-windows-policing-does-work-heather-mac-donald
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:55 PM
I think that the horrendous deductible on 0care should be the cry of progs but you won't hear a peep out of them.
Talk about slavery.
Ben and Dudu are asleep at the wheel.
Posted by: glasater | June 09, 2015 at 12:57 PM
There are no more Liberals left in the Democrat Party.
Posted by: Some Guy | June 09, 2015 at 12:57 PM
narciso | June 09, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Awww... the triceratops is taking a nap. So cute!
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | June 09, 2015 at 12:58 PM
I'm surprised how much people hate having free stuff discontinued.
Posted by: danoso | June 09, 2015 at 01:01 PM
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150609/us--obama-trade_politics-af1035808e.html
He was such a big help to them last year...
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 01:02 PM
Sultan Knish:
Great line.
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 01:09 PM
I'm surprised how much people hate having free stuff discontinued.
Exactly the problem (even though there is no such thing as "free" stuff; and government inefficiency ensures those paying will pay more than it's worth, even when the administrators aren't funneling a wee bit into their own coffers--which they inevitably do). But those most affected are the ones who suddenly find their insurance unaffordable: and who are they going to blame, the idiots who wrote an unworkable policy, or the GOP who isn't giving 'em access to OPM?
I'd like to think it'd cause meaningful reform, but I'm betting on a cave-ex.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | June 09, 2015 at 01:10 PM
Hey. How about a little respect for the 34 dead sailors?
Posted by: Ben | June 09, 2015 at 01:17 PM
there is lies the problem, the 6 million were the net policy transitions, of course the research agents would be dishonest about that,
Posted by: narciso | June 09, 2015 at 01:21 PM
I though most of the signups went on Medicaid.
Posted by: henry | June 09, 2015 at 01:26 PM
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2015/06/09/reagan_and_thatcher_would_mock_todays_pessimists_101699.html
Thoughts?
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 01:35 PM
Link to photos taken at the G7 Summit showing Obama on a balcony apparently taking a cigarette out of a pack:
https://instagram.com/p/3odwJJEe6D/embed/captioned/?v=4
I don't care if he smokes. I care that he LIES about it and puts onerous regulations on the rest of us who do.
So I am glad to help publicize his lying.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 01:36 PM
Also, heard on radio that the Homeland Security hearings were interrupted because they had to evacuate the building due to a security threat.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 01:38 PM
henry-- many did; if you are Medicaid eligible, the Exchanges enroll you there instead of giving a policy.the net 'gain' of people with BigGov INDIVIDUAL insurance policies is about 7 million. About 10-12 million TOTAL have BigGov insurance WITH subsidy, I am not sure for a fact how many of those are in the Federal exchange; 5-7 M is my approximation.
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 01:47 PM
MissM-- definitely a pack. Maybe it's pot or hash cigs. That's better.. right?
Posted by: NKonChrome | June 09, 2015 at 01:49 PM
NK,
I didn't thnk of it being pot, which as we have been told is beneficial and legal.
(You can insert my eyeroll here.)
If I were elected president I would start a health campaign against people who eat tofu. Let THEM see what it's like to be called names.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 01:51 PM
Looks like he's switched to Marlboro Lights. Those are good for you, I think...
Posted by: Beasts of England | June 09, 2015 at 02:01 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/world/middleeast/us-raid-in-syria-uncovers-details-on-isis-leadership-and-finances.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
If it's printed in that rag, I doubt it's anything more than WH propaganda.
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 02:02 PM
I'm not sure how Ohio will benefit after Preacher Kasich has embraced the sacrament of Medicaid.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | June 09, 2015 at 02:02 PM
So, is he paying for those out of taxpayer money?
Or does someone from an Indian reservation smuggle cheap cigs to him?
Or is Sharpton bringing them in when he does all those visits?
Does he smoke on AF1, unlike the rest of us peons?
Could we please see his medical records?
I don't know why, but that picture just infuriated me.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 02:03 PM
I want to put in a plug again for answering "Carly Fiorina" if you are polled for who you support.
I am not asking that you really support her. My interest is in getting her into the Top 10 for that debate, and also keeping Huckabee and Santorum OUT.
Also Trump, if he's foolish enough to announce.
Anyway, please consider this. Her presence will elevate the debate skills of the others.
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 02:08 PM
Check this out:
http://www.oilandgas360.com/opec-breakeven-costs-by-country/?utm_source=Closing%20Bell%20Report&utm_campaign=719d5f061b-Closing_Bell_Campaign6_8_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a32a355444-719d5f061b-26414525
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 02:11 PM
Can we just answer 'Carly'? ;)
Posted by: Beasts of England | June 09, 2015 at 02:11 PM
So CNN, not content with producing 24 hour a day commercials for progs, proles and the criminal enterprise known as the Dem party, will begin creating half hour shows designed to look like news but actually sponsored spots and links for their paying clients.
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 02:13 PM
Beast:
Touche!
LOL!
Posted by: Miss Marple | June 09, 2015 at 02:14 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/09/let-president-obama-have-a-cigarette-already/
Behold the courtier on his knees before his King.
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 02:15 PM
I'll do it, Miss Marple. I'd also like to see her on that debate stage.
How unsurprising that Preznit has been huffing all along. If it comes up and some lib friend of yours says "so what?" ask them what else the media lies to us about.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 09, 2015 at 02:15 PM
Huffing?
Did he have a cig or a tube of model glue?
Posted by: Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz | June 09, 2015 at 02:19 PM
Dont' miss the comments in that 2:15
Posted by: lyle | June 09, 2015 at 02:19 PM
Looks like the claim is that it's a pack of gum. Right, you step out on the balcony to have your gum.
Are those weasel words or what?
Posted by: Porchlight | June 09, 2015 at 02:20 PM