The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again

The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Sanity -> The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 8:00:09 AM)
They passed it, now the superior leadership and craftsmanship that went into drafting this law is slowly being revealed (Thats sarcasm for those of you who are far left professors, or who live in Canada) Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal A potential death blow to Obamacare

mnottertail -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 8:16:56 AM)
L.O.L.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 8:47:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity They passed it, now the superior leadership and craftsmanship that went into drafting this law is slowly being revealed (Thats sarcasm for those of you who are far left professors, or who live in Canada) Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal A potential death blow to Obamacare No. There is an easy fix for that. If they have to, they'll pass something that includes a change to the language allowing subsidies to go to those who sign up for Federally run, or state run exchanges. You think the GOP won't go along with some popular bill that the amendment gets added to? This stuff isn't going anywhere.

Sanity -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 9:29:37 AM)
Yeah, you're right. The GOP wants nothing more than to jump on board the very popular Obamacare bandwagon (That's more sarcasm for you Professors & Canadians btw)

mnottertail -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 9:36:27 AM)
Well, your sarcasm falls flat, as usual, what with some 74% of republicans positively masturbatory over obamacare now.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 9:38:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Yeah, you're right. The GOP wants nothing more than to jump on board the very popular Obamacare bandwagon (That's more sarcasm for you Professors & Canadians btw) They'll voice opposition, no doubt. They won't really get crazy with it, though. Having an otherwise popular bill will give them cover with constituents, too. Sadly, establishment Republicans aren't about reducing the size and scope of the Federal government, overall. They just want to limit the size and scope of the Federal government for non-Republican ideas. Most Republicans didn't have as huge an issue with Bush 43's deficits as they do with Obama's. Even if they opposed the increased spending, they still toed the party line. When push comes to shove, they'll capitulate. And they'll still be chastised as obstructionists and non-compromisers.

mnottertail -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 9:58:30 AM)
http://www.motherjones.com/documents/1225667-king-usca4-20140722 Already struck down on appeal. The ONutsackers-in-ineptitude have been ridiculed for slobbering imbecility again!

Sanity -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 10:14:23 AM)
Mmm hmm Barack Obama can count on all the friends he has worked so hard to make on the right side of the aisle to pull his bloated Obamacare redistribution scheme out of the fire... I tell you what Because I like you I'm gonna do you a huge personnel favor How would you like to buy a solid gold bridge unbelievably cheap

Musicmystery -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 10:15:02 AM)
Wow. Sanity didn't even get to cum.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 10:55:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Mmm hmm Barack Obama can count on all the friends he has worked so hard to make on the right side of the aisle to pull his bloated Obamacare redistribution scheme out of the fire... I tell you what Because I like you I'm gonna do you a huge personnel favor How would you like to buy a solid gold bridge unbelievably cheap You have nothing to back your assertion, Sanity. What makes you think they won't pass the language correcting the issue?

Musicmystery -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 11:09:38 AM)
No need -- the ruling has already been overturned, so the language is fine.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 11:38:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery No need -- the ruling has already been overturned, so the language is fine. Unless it continues on to the SCOTUS and gets denied Constitutionality. Plus, the need won't be there until the final word is given, which may or may not be the case now.

stef -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 11:45:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Wow. Sanity didn't even get to cum. The gene pool can breathe a sigh of relief.

Lucylastic -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 11:59:21 AM)
Why is collarspaces own "bungler in chief" selling off his dental work?

Sanity -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 12:01:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You have nothing to back your assertion, Sanity. What makes you think they won't pass the language correcting the issue? You're the one making the insane claim that Republicans are willing and eager to save Obama's bungled legacy law. How many times have they voted to repeal it now?

DomKen -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 12:02:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity They passed it, now the superior leadership and craftsmanship that went into drafting this law is slowly being revealed (Thats sarcasm for those of you who are far left professors, or who live in Canada) Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal A potential death blow to Obamacare Shortly after this dumbass sure to be reversed ruling was issued the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the other way making it the third appeals court to rule that the federal exchanges were legal. http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/king_usca4_20140722.pdf

DomKen -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 12:05:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery No need -- the ruling has already been overturned, so the language is fine. No. that was a ruling by a different circuit on a different case.

Sanity -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 12:17:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery No need -- the ruling has already been overturned, so the language is fine. Unless it continues on to the SCOTUS and gets denied Constitutionality. Plus, the need won't be there until the final word is given, which may or may not be the case now. Considering the troll who you are replying to, are some pretty big words You'll need to break it down for him a lot better than that

SubtleMentor -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 12:22:24 PM)
Meanwhile there has been a net increase of 20m insured in the few short months the act as been in place. There would be a lot more if the Republican governors would snap out of their ideological haze. Even better, the shift from volume reimbursement to value reimbursement is already making health care in America much better.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Bungler-In-Chief Strikes Again (7/22/2014 1:34:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You have nothing to back your assertion, Sanity. What makes you think they won't pass the language correcting the issue? You're the one making the insane claim that Republicans are willing and eager to save Obama's bungled legacy law. How many times have they voted to repeal it now? As many times as they knew it wasn't going to go any further than their vote. How many times have the Republicans stood up to Obama only to, in the end, back down? I think their capitulation rate would still be higher than the MLB all-time single season batting average record.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875