General Discussion

pnwmom

(110,261 posts)

89. They didn't care what it was as long as there was a mandate. n/t

Reply to TheKentuckian (Reply #86)

Mon Nov 10, 2014, 11:22 PM

Nov 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Paul Krugman: Is the Supreme Court going to f*ck us again? [View all] Cyrano Nov 2014 OP

"What they are, instead, is corrupt, willing to pervert the law to serve political masters" NRaleighLiberal Nov 2014 #1

Isn't that the motto of the GOP? valerief Nov 2014 #36

that's my view, for sure. NRaleighLiberal Nov 2014 #40

I think it's, historylovr Nov 2014 #58

A lot of court cases are lost or won based on a typeo yeoman6987 Nov 2014 #2

Yes, that's much more important than geek tragedy Nov 2014 #4

but courts don't just say hah! there's a typo, throw it all out -- unblock Nov 2014 #6

Roberts will do exactly that! Helen Borg Nov 2014 #12

+100000! Agree totally. He may even take aim at the scope of the Commerce Clause while he's at it. RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #20

what was the intent? alc Nov 2014 #91

i don't have the answer. some cases require an a hearing and careful weighing of competing facts unblock Nov 2014 #92

As I've been arguing in another thread, it looks pretty simple Rstrstx Nov 2014 #95

Many times it's not a typo. Big business literally WRITES our legislation. nt stillwaiting Nov 2014 #7

Lawmakers do not write legislation. former9thward Nov 2014 #23

Congress needs an... ReRe Nov 2014 #39

Is it a typeo, type or typo? (The irony in your reply) LeftInTX Nov 2014 #38

Such a contribution to the discussion yeoman6987 Nov 2014 #53

I thought maybe you had done it on purpose to illustrate a point. LeftInTX Nov 2014 #59

No, don't most rules of the ct say clerical error is an excuse for the error? lonestarnot Nov 2014 #41

There wasn't even a typo safeinOhio Nov 2014 #3

Money = Speech ---- Duh StevePaulson Nov 2014 #37

Dear Professor... meaculpa2011 Nov 2014 #5

a) At the time that the law was written, states were obliged to set up exchanges and offer medicaid. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #19

I agree. Even this Court can't, or will not, contort this into something that guts ACA. Hoyt Nov 2014 #30

DC was defined as a state for this law. So that doesn't help. Yo_Mama Nov 2014 #56

The very fact that the Court accepted this case Cyrano Nov 2014 #8

Leaving no Congressional fingerprints on the body... Orsino Nov 2014 #10

Obama will probably tell states that they can... Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #34

Or they just want to settle the matter because of the extreme disruption involved. Yo_Mama Nov 2014 #47

Yes, I remember when these same a-holes killed the ACA when they ruled against the hughee99 Nov 2014 #49

That's the key isn't it... Blanks Nov 2014 #68

Thanks for all the replies! yeoman6987 Nov 2014 #9

Should they overturn the ACA on this technicality Gman Nov 2014 #11

I'm not especially worried. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #13

This all obama's fault djnicadress Nov 2014 #14

Obama is rich enough. L0oniX Nov 2014 #18

reply djnicadress Nov 2014 #22

This is 2014 not the late 1930's. L0oniX Nov 2014 #24

you need read up on history if you think there is a big difference between 1930s and today djnicadress Nov 2014 #27

LMFAO L0oniX Nov 2014 #28

It's as much your fault pnwmom Nov 2014 #42

Shit, if they followed intent the mandate would be gone but Roberts re imagined it into a tax TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #80

The intent was to have a mandate. pnwmom Nov 2014 #84

Are you really trying to claim they were not swearing up and down that it wasn't a tax? TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #86

They didn't care what it was as long as there was a mandate. n/t pnwmom Nov 2014 #89

And, there it is! The "It's all Obama's fault".. detailing the insidious cluelessness of the ODSers Cha Nov 2014 #90

Evil RW intent heaven05 Nov 2014 #15

If this comes about it may be the wake up call that changes everything NoMoreRepugs Nov 2014 #16

Republican governors screwing people out of Medicaid expansion didn't hurt them. Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #35

Ain't nothing ...like being rat fucked by the SCOTUS. L0oniX Nov 2014 #17

I especially like how they made George W Bush pretzeldent. Octafish Nov 2014 #26

RTFD - Read the Fucking Document joeglow3 Nov 2014 #21

Your documents at work aren't subject to Supreme Court interpretation. pnwmom Nov 2014 #43

Actually, in a prior life, a client had a contract that was over 25,000 pages joeglow3 Nov 2014 #50

That might be true, if this SCOTUS truebluegreen Nov 2014 #74

Well given that they did not hesitate to help buy the election with Citizens United....... jwirr Nov 2014 #25

obama need flat out say if aca gets struck down i will have no choice but push for medicare for all. djnicadress Nov 2014 #29

That wouldn't be a threat. They don't care if he "pushes" for Medicare because pnwmom Nov 2014 #44

in future they might djnicadress Nov 2014 #66

There will be no time in the remainder of his Presidency that he will be able to do shit about TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #85

The Five Terrorist Dictators... SoapBox Nov 2014 #31

If they mess with health care, at least Dems will will show up in 2014. zonkers Nov 2014 #32

Less than a typo. Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #33

I misunderstood you at first. pnwmom Nov 2014 #45

My post was a paraphrase of a court opinion upholding subsidies. They made the pizza analogy. NT Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #52

One court that was dominated by Rethugs. Most other rulings have taken the opposite position. n/t pnwmom Nov 2014 #55

The pizza analogy is pro Obamacare analysis by an Obama appointed judge. Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #61

And that pizza analogy makes complete sense. pnwmom Nov 2014 #70

Great analogy. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #65

The Supreme Court Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #69

I suspect Krug underestimates Pantagruelsmember Nov 2014 #46

Why they won't change it. ^^ harun Nov 2014 #64

The easy, short answer... 3catwoman3 Nov 2014 #48

The short answer is yes. The Repubs will get their own bite at the apple. badtoworse Nov 2014 #51

Repubs Won't Fix It, They Can Just Blame the Democrats for the Mess AndyTiedye Nov 2014 #93

When you adopt RW laws this is what you get. Puzzledtraveller Nov 2014 #54

The ACA passed without a single Republican vote. badtoworse Nov 2014 #57

I think the poster was referring to the fact that the ACA was originally a Heritage Foundation idea Wella Nov 2014 #60

Maybe, but if so, he's leaving a lot open to speculation. badtoworse Nov 2014 #62

I notice that people don't back up assertions here Wella Nov 2014 #63

They are. They'd be to the right of about any governing party in the west. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #87

K&R! napkinz Nov 2014 #67

The people voted against affordable health care. I'm still B Calm Nov 2014 #71

Democrats will still represent more people in the Senate Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #75

Even Scalia beleives that typos or obvious misspeaking should be ignored. Vattel Nov 2014 #72

It isn't literally a typo. Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #77

So it doesn't say that tax subsidies are available ONLY on state exchanges? Vattel Nov 2014 #78

This is the section which Republicans seized on Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #81

Thx for the info. Vattel Nov 2014 #82

You're welcome. NT Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #83

So if a state in the federal exchange sets up their own, they keep the subsidy? roamer65 Nov 2014 #73

Or a state could post a link to the Obamacare website Eric J in MN Nov 2014 #76

They don't fail to have exchanges because they can't locate a developer TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #88

yes because they now totally can all of the time....geeeze of course. glinda Nov 2014 #79

Good fucking question, Paul Krugman Cha Nov 2014 #94

kick napkinz Nov 2014 #96