New World Order
See other New World Order Articles
Title: BREAKING: SCOTUS 6-3 Upholds Obamacare Subsidies
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 25, 2015
Author: cranko
Post Date: 2015-06-25 10:10:40 by cranko
Keywords: None
Views: 5001
Comments: 55
SCOTUS = POS
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: cranko (#0)
(Edited)
Anyone surprised? Sure glad we got all those "conservatives" on the Court /sarc
Thomas, Scalia and Alito were appointed by Republicans. Show me one good one that the rat party has nominated. They haven't. There are some good Republicans. There are only evil POS democrats that all should swing.
I think six of them should get AIDS and die a horrible painful death.
I purchased the best Obamacare policy available for my wife. It had a $2,000 deductible, and was $440 per month. The coverage was lousy.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Did the court answer the question of why that language was put in there to begin with? Why make the differentiation between states that set up exchanges and states that didn't?
Prior to Obamacare, I had a high deductible plan for my family with a $10,000 deductible. It cost $680 a month. Now, I have a Obamacare "Bronze Plan". The deductible is higher ($12,500), the copay is higher, and the coinsurance is higher. And it cost $1,183 a month. No one is angrier about Obamacare than I am.
BS Only the ones who don't hold real power. If you can't see that NOW, then you never will
The Court claims that the language was ambiguous. Apparently, there is an established precedent that defers the interpretation of ambiguous language to the government agency in charge (the IRS). I just don't see how the word "States" is ambiguous.
Language smalanguage. Why does it even matter? We live under the whims of the moment - not a Constitution. We are officially lawless The powers that be have dictated we shall have Zero-care - and Zero-care we shall have.
Your brain isn't working. Thomas and Scalia are the bad guys right? You sound like a democrat operative.
The intent was obvious. Set up an exchange and be rewarded. Don't, and be punished. And I suppose the word "penalty" was ambiguous, too. Roberts concluded Congress didn't mean "penalty" when they wrote "penalty". They meant "tax". The reason being, Obamacare was unconstitutional if it imposed a penalty. So the Democrats passed legislation claiming they didn't raise taxes one penny (merely a "penalty" for those who chose not to participate), and the court changed it to a "tax" to make it constitutional. A real tag team.
Next headline will be: "SCOTUS votes 6-2 homosexual 'marriage' now mandatory." Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
You'll need to keep the (D)'s out of presidential office to cure this. Even a RINO like Scumbag McStain would put a better, more conservative minded justice in that the most conservative minded (D) president. "In his dissent Justice Antonin Scalia said, "We should start calling this law SCOTUScare." AT LEAST ONE DISSENTING JUSTICE WAS NOMINATED BY ONE OF THOSE LESSOR EVIL's, a BUSH. Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
Another magnificent decision by another fcking Bush judge.
Roberts and Kennedy were appointed by Republicans. So was Earl Warren who ran the most leftist court in American history.
Here are some excerpts from the statements from the SCOTUS justices. Roberts comments are quite telling: “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.” Roberts continued, “In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.” In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice Antonin Scalia said, “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.” Using the acronym for the Supreme Court, Scalia said his colleagues have twice stepped in to save the law from what Scalia considered worthy challenges. “The Court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says ‘Exchange established by the State’ it means ‘Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.’ That is of course quite absurd, and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so,” Scalia wrote. Scalia added, “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’ It is hard to come up with a clearer way to limit tax credits to state Exchanges than to use the words ‘established by the State.’ And it is hard to come up with a reason to include the words ‘by the State’ other than the purpose of limiting credits to state Exchanges.” Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas joined the dissent, as they did in 2012. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
I'll read the decsion later ;but the short answer is probably not . SCOTUS doesn't believe in the plain language of the Constitution .Why would they concern themselves with the plain language of a law ? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Exactly. So why didn't Congress simply write "exchanges", period, if there's no difference? Why make the distinction if there wasn't any? This is as bad as Roe v Wade.
The court ignored the actual wording. Then the court ignored the intent of the wording. Instead, the court addressed the intent of the overall legislation and the court determined the best way to accomplish it. Given the court's decision, there's no benefit now for a state to run an exchange. And what if the feds can't afford to run them and Obamacare goes bust? Oops. I guess that what happens when the court tries to write legislation instead of simply ruling on it.
You'll need to keep the (D)'s out of presidential office to cure this Conservative justices were put on the Court for just such a time as this. They failed. It matters not whether we put Ds, Rs, or even communists in the WH - because we are not under the rule of law, but instead under the rule of men or, more accurately, the rule of the ruling class. Obviously not many see this, as there are still those who think D or R makes a difference.
I sure am not ! Si vis pacem, para bellum
Obviously not many see this, as there are still those who think D or R makes a difference. " Rule of the ruling class ! Very well phrased! Si vis pacem, para bellum
Who needs the old Earl Warren when there's a new Earl Warren in town? My guess is Roberts will switch-hit with Kennedy with Roberts upholding SCOTUSCare and Kennedy upholding sodomy marriage.
I don't disagree... but the (R) and (D) parties each have a political PLATFORM.... and when nominating a Justice, they usually try to nominate one that will rule along the lines of that platform... and nowhere is there a guarantee they will 100% of the time. Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
Bringing us that much closer to single payer ;which has been the goal of the statists all along. I expect Obamacare will be a big issue during the elections because the individual penalty increases .....ooops I mean tax ... and the employer mandate kicks in . Watch the Dem chorus sing "it's settled law" . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Don't forget those "penumbras" and "emanations". Justice Roberts has joined with the living Constitution crowd who think of language like Humpty Dumpty did. What the emperor decrees is the law ,is the law. “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.” Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
True. Already we have Medicaid, Expanded Medicaid, Medicare, the VA and federal employees under federal authority. Not far to go. Keep forcing the premiums higher in the private sector and people will demand single-payer.
Watch for articles now in the NY Times and other ruling class media along the lines of how much Roberts and Kennedy have "grown" - from right wing to centrist. Ain't it grand?
Another reasoned decision pulled out of his ass. Of course he had to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase........who wouldn't. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
In my best Abbot and Costello impersonation: "Switch-hitting?....Who's pitching and catching?!" But really, given what's (he's on second) coming out of DC these days it's like finding out 3B which is "I don't know." Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.” Heh was thinking of the same thing... Notice Humpty Dumpty is sitting on the wall. This is before the fall of course:) Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Another reasoned decision pulled out of his ass. Of course he had to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase........who wouldn't. Let's compare Robert's approach: Roberts to the sheeple: "“In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.” The Serpent to Eve: "“You will not surely die." Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
I wonder how the statists will address the sure-to-come doctor and provider shortage that will surely come with single payer. Med Skools R Us? MDs by Mail? Nursing by 'net? It's a Brave New World. (glad I'm old and won't live much longer to see it)
Already happening. I am military retired so can see 'it' happening in the TRICARE and VA health systems. Here's what happens now. I mainly see a civilian 'health care provider' who is a nurse practitioner. If you are lucky you get a Physcian assistant...No MDs to be found unless you go to an ER or have a referral to see an MD specialist of some kind. The doctors are pretty much out of the picture for primary care unless someone has a real need. For example, if someone is a cancer patient, in addition to seeing their oncologist they may be assigned an MD for their other than cancer primary health care. That's how it happened for me (when I was going through chemo) and what we fought to get for my son when he was going through chemo and got after a long fight. So basically primary care providers are nurses, some PAs who will have to refer you to an MD specialist if they cannot prescribe some drug for you to solve your medical problem. They are good at prescribing drugs, giving shots and the minor aches and pains and cold and flu stuff. I have yet to find one who can actually read a lab report/radiology/xray better than I can, but I had quite a few years of looking at those myself:) So the nurse practitioner(NP) can handle boo boos and minor things, and are the health care system's 'screening net' for referrals. Here's an example. I had an appointment for pain in my side (real bad) and I had a kidney stone episode about 4 years ago with pain in the same side (not as bad this time). I told the NP all about it and he said "if it gets worse go to the ER and tell them and they will do a CT scan and xray." I asked him why he could not order a CT scan and xray and then review the results with an MD. He said 'it's so much easier in the ER.' Quite amazing. I finally twisted his arm to put in the CT order. Now I have to wait for a real doctor to look at them. Why? Because the NPs and PAs just read what the radiologist puts on the report. They don't know what they are looking at themselves. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Supply and demand is such a simple concept - but seemingly impossible for statists to understand. If the gov't were to suddenly start "giving away" free steak dinners at a 5 star restaurant (increasing demand), but not increase the number of 5 star restaurants (static supply), isn't it logical to think there would be a mile long or more line at the only 5 star restaurant in town? Same with "free" health care. Except with that particular freebie, there will be deadly consequences.
Then taxes will be raised and debt will be issued and money will be printed to pay for it.
I was a multiple lines insurance agent for 42 years, and I sold lots of health insurance. I was amazed when I went trough the Obamacare policy. The policy is trash!
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Along with a long list from the House, the Senate, and the Executive Branch. I really wonder what they are holding over Roberts head? Some may disagree with me, but I really think he is being blackmailed. I truly wish I were wrong, but I do not think our nation will survive much longer. I think it will go like the Titanic. Satan is in full control of our nation! And there is absolutely nothing we can do about it!! Si vis pacem, para bellum
They do not even have to do that. Now, it is just digital entries. Simply a few keystrokes. Si vis pacem, para bellum
The Republican Supreme Court does it again. Roe, Casey, Kelo, SCOTUSCare 1, SCOTUSCare II, and soon Boof-a-rama. The legacy of the Republican Court rolls on and on. But it's the Democrats, always the Democrats fault. Control the Court? Doesn't MATTER, there's a Democrat minority on it (that RELIABLY votes it's party's line), so if Republicans are feckless that's the Democrats' fault. And when Nixon and Ford lose Vietnam, it's the Democrats' fault because they controlled Congress. But when Clinton does thus and so, it's the Democrats' fault even though the Republicans controlled Congress. And when the Republicans control the White House AND the Supreme Court AND both Houses of Congress AND 3/5ths of the state houses and state legislatures, as they did under W? And everything goes to worms in foreign policy, domestic policy and the economy? Democrats' fault anyway. For existing. For being there as a minority. For standing for what THEY believe in. Republican politicians don't stand for what they believe in, so it's all the Democrats' fault for actually always doing what they say they're going to do. Or maybe what the Republicans do really IS what they - the Republican politicians - really believe in, and they just lie to the Republican electorate to get their votes. Either way, trying to build policy on the foundation of the GOP is building on the sand.
Comments (41 - 55) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Rufus T Firefly (#1)
#3. To: cranko (#0)
#4. To: cranko (#0)
#5. To: cranko (#0)
#6. To: GarySpFC (#4)
I purchased the best Obamacare policy available for my wife. It had a $2,000 deductible, and was $440 per month. The coverage was lousy.
#7. To: A K A Stone (#2)
There are some good Republicans.
#8. To: misterwhite (#5)
Did the court answer the question of why that language was put in there to begin with? Why make the differentiation between states that set up exchanges and states that didn't?
#9. To: misterwhite (#5)
Did the court answer the question of why that language was put in there to begin with? Why make the differentiation between states that set up exchanges and states that didn't?
#10. To: Rufus T Firefly (#7)
Only the ones who don't hold real power.
#11. To: cranko (#8)
"The Court claims that the language was ambiguous."
#12. To: cranko, liberator, TooConservative, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, CZ82 (#0)
#13. To: Rufus T Firefly (#1)
(Edited)
Sure glad we got all those "conservatives" on the Court /sarc
#14. To: cranko (#0)
#15. To: GrandIsland (#13)
You'll need to keep the (D)'s out of presidential office to cure this
#16. To: cranko, TooConservative, liberator, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, CZ82, BobCeleste (#0)
#17. To: misterwhite (#5)
Did the court answer the question of why that language was put in there to begin with?
#18. To: redleghunter (#16)
‘Exchange established by the State’ it means ‘Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.’
#19. To: tomder55 (#17)
#20. To: GrandIsland (#13)
Sure glad we got all those "conservatives" on the Court /sarc
#21. To: Rufus T Firefly (#1)
" Anyone surprised? "
#22. To: Rufus T Firefly (#20)
" we are not under the rule of law, but instead under the rule of men or, more accurately, the rule of the ruling class.
#23. To: cranko, redleghunter (#15)
So was Earl Warren who ran the most leftist court in American history.
#24. To: Rufus T Firefly (#20)
It matters not whether we put Ds, Rs, or even communists in the WH - because we are not under the rule of law, but instead under the rule of men or, more accurately, the rule of the ruling class.
#25. To: misterwhite, redleghunter (#19)
Given the court's decision, there's no benefit now for a state to run an exchange. And what if the feds can't afford to run them and Obamacare goes bust? Oops. I guess that what happens when the court tries to write legislation instead of simply ruling on it.
#26. To: redleghunter (#16)
(Edited)
Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’
#27. To: tomder55 (#25)
"Bringing us that much closer to single payer ;which has been the goal of the statists all along."
#28. To: All (#20)
#29. To: redleghunter, All (#16)
Roberts continued, “In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.”
#30. To: TooConservative, CZ82, GarySpFc, SOSO, liberator, Vicomte13 (#23)
My guess is Roberts will switch-hit with Kennedy with Roberts upholding SCOTUSCare and Kennedy upholding sodomy marriage.
#31. To: tomder55 (#26)
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
#32. To: SOSO (#29)
Roberts continued, “In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.”
#33. To: tomder55 (#25)
Bringing us that much closer to single payer ;which has been the goal of the statists all along.
#34. To: Rufus T Firefly, tomder55 (#33)
Med Skools R Us? MDs by Mail? Nursing by 'net?
#35. To: redleghunter (#34)
#36. To: misterwhite (#19)
And what if the feds can't afford to run them and Obamacare goes bust?
#37. To: cranko', ALL (#6)
#38. To: A K A Stone (#3)
" I think six of them should get AIDS and die a horrible painful death. "
#39. To: Vicomte13 (#36)
" and money will be printed to pay for it "
#40. To: cranko (#0)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]