Isn't it awesome to be ruled over?

[gipper]

That is not how things are supposed to work Lil' Joe. You likely know nothing about the Constitution and your post appears to prove it, but again you are not alone.

Seems to me it worked just the way it was supposed to. A law got passed with a certain intent. The court upheld the law as it was intended.

You want to yank health insurance from 10 million people, then go ahead and run a candidate who promises to do that. See how far you get.

I can only imagine your utter and complete disdain for any law passed by an R Congress and Potus, without any D votes. How would you respond to that?

 

[JoeB131]

If that be there reasoning then they were wrong, besides I thought you just told me they ruled on the intent of the law. Which is it, were the 3 liberal judges really trying to protect the Republicans? Really?

Actually, it was four liberal justices, and they were voting to preserve the law because it is the right thing to do.

Here's the real problem. Eventually, we are going to go to Single Payer like every other industrialized country has. Going to happen. Even the Rich realize this.

So this is all theater to keep profits rolling into big insurance until we figure out the government can run it without nearly as much overhead.

A couple of ways to look at this. One of the most important aspects of the bill was written very poorly if what it says is not their intent. Of all things in the bill one would think funding and expenditures would get a lot of scrutiny. Then there is a self professed architect of the bill saying that the intent was EXACTLY what was written in the law and he said it more then once. OR the intent changed which is really what did happen when Gruber's plan to force the states to set up exchanges didn't work and they were stuck with what they had written. So instead of getting it amended, as per process, they decided to let the SCOTUS change the law, which isn't suppose to happen.

The States should have set up the exchanges like they were supposed to, and they didn't because they were pandering to the stupid shits like you. So again, you had Roberts saving them from themselves.

What I think would have taken balls is to let it go to the SCOTUS with the very clear wording and Gruber's statements on why it was stated that way. But I am also thinking they knew that the SCOTUS was going to do their duty they would save SCOTUSCARE.

Yes, of course they knew it. But you'll keep voting for these guys as they keep doing the giveaways to big business.

Because you're stupid.

 

[Freewill]

Guy the referendum was in 2014 where Obama lost bigger then any president before. I

No, it wasn't. 2014 wasn't a "national" election. there were only nine senate seats and 30 house seats that were in play. and 2014 had the lowest voter turnout since 1942. So the winner in 2014 was "Apathy".

I would like to say America won but in reality there is little difference. You know, after the law was actually implemented.

Actually, because you are kind of fucking stupid, you don't get this.

THE RICH WANT OBAMACARE!!!

I want to explain this to you again, because you Republican Shitheads never seem to get this-

THE RICH WANT OBAMACARE!!!

The rich want to stop paying for poor people showing up at the emergency room for sniffles.

The rich know that private insurance is unsustainable without a major government subsidy.

The rich had no problem with ObamaCare under its original title, "RomneyCare".

But they also know the only way to keep stupid people like you voting against your own economic interests is to play on your racism. So they put on this big show for your benefit about how they are going to stop ObamaCare because the Black Guy Did It.

But push came to shove, REPUBLICAN appointees saved ObamaCare.

Not that any of this will sink in with you... you'll just mutter... "but, but, but, we won Senate races in flyover country!"

And you 'll mutter when these same Republicans went ahead and helped shove through another bullshit trade deal that is going to give away your jobs.

When I read clear stupid shit like you just puked out it is no wonder that this country is becoming Constitutionally dysfunctional.

So what I get out of your idiotic diatribe is that YOU, being for SCOTUSCARE, are supporting the rich. If you have not noticed heath care insurance stocks are skyrocketing. I should have called my Financial adviser last week and bought stocks in health care, stupid me we all should have. And since you obviously support what the rich want you missed out too.

I have gained NOTHING in any way shape or form because of SCOTUSCARE. Matter of fact I have had my healthcare canceled and it is now costing me a whole lot more.

YOU even admit that the justices saved SCOTUSCARE and yet you deny it how in the hell can anyone have a discussion with such two faced logic?

The question here isn't your politics or mine, the question here is would you be happy if the SCOTUS took a 2nd amendment challenge and said that the intent of the writers of the COTUS intent was that every person owned an assault rifle?

 

[JoeB131]

I can only imagine your utter and complete disdain for any law passed by an R Congress and Potus, without any D votes. How would you respond to that?

Can you name an example of one?

Here's my problem with Republican attitudes towards ObamaCare.

They had NO PROBLEM WITH IT when it was called "RomneyCare". They had no problem with it when it was offered as the conservative alternative to HillaryCare in the 1990's.

They had a problem with it when Obama did what they kept talking about for decades and could never accomplish.

What the Democrats SHOULD Have done was create a single payer system like Canada has when they had the votes to do so. To be implemented immediately.

They instead tried to play it your way.

I think ObamaCare has a lot of flaws becaue it is built on this corrupt system of private insurance companies. I'll admit, having been fucked over by an insurance company, I have little sympathy for them.

Big insurance got what it wanted. Not understanding why you guys are upset.

 

[JoeB131]

When I read clear stupid shit like you just puked out it is no wonder that this country is becoming Constitutionally dysfunctional.

So what I get out of your idiotic diatribe is that YOU, being for SCOTUSCARE, are supporting the rich. If you have not noticed heath care insurance stocks are skyrocketing. I should have called my Financial adviser last week and bought stocks in health care, stupid me we all should have. And since you obviously support what the rich want you missed out too.

My insurance costs less than it did before ObamaCare, so you don't know what you are talking about. IN fact, insurance rate increases have SLOWED because of the ACA.

I have gained NOTHING in any way shape or form because of SCOTUSCARE. Matter of fact I have had my healthcare canceled and it is now costing me a whole lot more.

How come it's only the "Conservatives" who claim to have lost insurance. Because I never encounter any of you people in real life. I knoew a few people who have ObamaCare and actually are paying less now.

YOU even admit that the justices saved SCOTUSCARE and yet you deny it how in the hell can anyone have a discussion with such two faced logic?

The question here isn't your politics or mind, the question here is would you be happy if the SCOTUS took a 2nd amendment challenge and said that the intent of the writers of the COTUS intent was that every person owned an assault rifle?

I think that would be a bizarre interpretation.

This ruling isn't that far off the mark, given that the intent was to have exchanges.

 

[Freewill]

If that be there reasoning then they were wrong, besides I thought you just told me they ruled on the intent of the law. Which is it, were the 3 liberal judges really trying to protect the Republicans? Really?

Actually, it was four liberal justices, and they were voting to preserve the law because it is the right thing to do.

Here's the real problem. Eventually, we are going to go to Single Payer like every other industrialized country has. Going to happen. Even the Rich realize this.

So this is all theater to keep profits rolling into big insurance until we figure out the government can run it without nearly as much overhead.

A couple of ways to look at this. One of the most important aspects of the bill was written very poorly if what it says is not their intent. Of all things in the bill one would think funding and expenditures would get a lot of scrutiny. Then there is a self professed architect of the bill saying that the intent was EXACTLY what was written in the law and he said it more then once. OR the intent changed which is really what did happen when Gruber's plan to force the states to set up exchanges didn't work and they were stuck with what they had written. So instead of getting it amended, as per process, they decided to let the SCOTUS change the law, which isn't suppose to happen.

The States should have set up the exchanges like they were supposed to, and they didn't because they were pandering to the stupid shits like you. So again, you had Roberts saving them from themselves.

What I think would have taken balls is to let it go to the SCOTUS with the very clear wording and Gruber's statements on why it was stated that way. But I am also thinking they knew that the SCOTUS was going to do their duty they would save SCOTUSCARE.

Yes, of course they knew it. But you'll keep voting for these guys as they keep doing the giveaways to big business.

Because you're stupid.

So you freely admit the court acted as an activist court and ruled not on the letter of the law but some bogus claim of intent. The intent of the law when passed was that the states set up exchanges or suffer monetary loss JUST AS YOU SAID. If the situation were reversed you would be swallowing your tongue in outrage. If they rule against gay marriage, don't worry they won't, I am quite sure your view of the SCOTUS will change quickly.

And I am not sure why my suggested solution you so fight. I don't think that the whole law needed to sink or swim on this one well worded section. It should have been put on hold for say 100 days, sent back to congress, and let them decide the intent and what it should really say with TODAY'S intent.

But you don't like that because it means it would be the will of the govern deciding and if you can't force people to your will it just ain't as much fun.

 

[Freewill]

When I read clear stupid shit like you just puked out it is no wonder that this country is becoming Constitutionally dysfunctional.

So what I get out of your idiotic diatribe is that YOU, being for SCOTUSCARE, are supporting the rich. If you have not noticed heath care insurance stocks are skyrocketing. I should have called my Financial adviser last week and bought stocks in health care, stupid me we all should have. And since you obviously support what the rich want you missed out too.

My insurance costs less than it did before ObamaCare, so you don't know what you are talking about. IN fact, insurance rate increases have SLOWED because of the ACA.

I have gained NOTHING in any way shape or form because of SCOTUSCARE. Matter of fact I have had my healthcare canceled and it is now costing me a whole lot more.

How come it's only the "Conservatives" who claim to have lost insurance. Because I never encounter any of you people in real life. I knoew a few people who have ObamaCare and actually are paying less now.

YOU even admit that the justices saved SCOTUSCARE and yet you deny it how in the hell can anyone have a discussion with such two faced logic?

The question here isn't your politics or mind, the question here is would you be happy if the SCOTUS took a 2nd amendment challenge and said that the intent of the writers of the COTUS intent was that every person owned an assault rifle?

I think that would be a bizarre interpretation.

This ruling isn't that far off the mark, given that the intent was to have exchanges.

Weather or not you are making out with the tax credits or not is immaterial to what the law said. It could have easily been fixed by Congress especially when your despot buddies the democrats were in power.

 

[Nosmo King]

Where were the constantly irritated Conservatives when the Citizens United decision came down?

 

[Freewill]

Where were the constantly irritated Conservatives when the Citizens United decision came down?

You agree with the decision in CU or in this latest decision? I am not sure of your point. What difference does any other bill make on whether or not the SCOTUS acted wrongly in this decision?

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is democracy, Mr. OP. You are pissed that the 20% of America, which is crazy far right, can't tell the rest of us what to do. Tough to be you.

 

[Freewill]

Here is the latest I could find:

The slope has hardly changed.

 

[Freewill]

This is democracy, Mr. OP. You are pissed that the 20% of America, which is crazy far right, can't tell the rest of us what to do. Tough to be you.

Maybe he is pissed that apparently 6 can.

 

[Katzndogz]

In 2012 there was hope that obamacare would work. It was before Gruber told them how stupid they were for thinking that.

 

[BlueGin]

Of course, you are being factious. But you are right about the USA being controlled by a small elite/oligarchy.

We might as well get rid of Congress and the Supreme Court and just allow a dictator to dictate, since they are meaningless anyway.

The Land of the Free...has become the Land of the Serf.

Funny thing is many Americans are so clueless they don't know they are serfs.

Yep. Save the tax payers money for their salaries.

 

[Freewill]

Contrary to goals, ER visits rise under Obamacare

The rich must be pissed that their hospitals are raking in all this money.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is democracy, Mr. OP. You are pissed that the 20% of America, which is crazy far right, can't tell the rest of us what to do. Tough to be you.

Maybe he is pissed that apparently 6 can.

Tough. They are nominated and ratified to make those decisions. You don't like it. I get that, and I don't care you have trouble with American democracy.

 

[Freewill]

This is democracy, Mr. OP. You are pissed that the 20% of America, which is crazy far right, can't tell the rest of us what to do. Tough to be you.

Maybe he is pissed that apparently 6 can.

Tough. They are nominated and ratified to make those decisions. You don't like it. I get that, and I don't care you have trouble with American democracy.

I don't but apparently you like the usurping of democracy that has happened. I want the will of the govern to make law not the will of 6 old men and women.

They wrote law and no true right winger can be happy with any court doing so, they ruled on intent, TODAY, not the law when written, they were wrong and you support them being wrong. If they would have kicked it back to congress to fix the outcome would have been the same but the bichin' would have been that Congress didn't vote correctly not that the SCOTUS usurped the power of Congress.

I wish, but they won't, that they vote to make gay marriage a state issue then the crying would be from the left.

You like an activist court great for you.

 

[Wildman]

In the wake of Thursday’s King v. Burwell Supreme Court decision upholding Obamacare, at least one attorney who has argued cases before the court is calling for the justices who filed the majority opinion to be impeached
All six of them need to go, says Larry Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch.


Read more at Watchdog lawyer says 6 supremes must be impeached
**********************

i agree, get rid of those fucking traitors who aparently have no understanding of the rule of Constitutional Law.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There are many in America who would be fine with being "ruled".

There is a lefty poster here who admits that he'd like to see a "benevolent dictator". Which, of course, seems like a fairly obvious contradiction in terms.

Not in the slightest, you were raised by one, who set the rules and spanked you when you broke them...

 

[Idadunno]

Wouldn't it be easier just to nominate people who can make up rules for as they go? This way we won't have to mess with that sticky quagmire thing known as democracy. In democracy people have control over their government and that is a bad thing because the masses are to stupid to know how to run something as complicated as a country. We should only let the select run it without any regards for the people's opinion. These people will get replaced but wait....hold on...the replacement process itseldpf will become tainted with the people's input. We should just have their heirs inherit their position of power so that their genius will live on. I know this sounds like a monarchy but it's not...oh...who am I kidding...we should just be ruled forever by the oligarchy. As long as we have good kings who don't infringe on our liberties to much then I am ok with that. I will bow and show them that I have elevated their social status by addressing them with titles because it is their right to subjugate me in every way. I don't know who gave them that right but if it is their right then so be it. I don't mind being someone else's surf anyways.

You really should have added a sarcasm alert for the sarcastically impaired.