I think they intentionally made the bill ‘one big package’ in order to keep small pieces of the bill from being stripped off by Republicans (death by a thousand paper cuts). They made it one big house of cards because they believed no one could successfully challenge the core elements and were only fearful of repubs chipping away at it. It never occurred to them that core elements might be found unconstitutional and now they really can’t take it apart now to ‘save the key parts’ because well..it’s ‘one big package’.
I gotta say . . . I think Rush is a really funny, really smart guy . . . no wonder the libtards hate him.
Why anyone thinks Toobin has good judgment only needs to look at his personal life.
Waded through the slime swamp that is DemocraticUnderground dot com. Same old accusations (e.g., they claim republicans are sociopaths 100% against the will of the voters) spiced with outrage that Scalia laughed off the idea of reading all 2700 pages of the bill. A soon to be tomb-stoned DU’er noted that the bill had never been read so why start now. The rest of the pack were howling that it’s the job of the SCOTUS. I do recall Pelosi saying ‘we have to pass the bill so you can read it’ and then some senators admitting no one had ever read the whole thing.
Like others have pointed out the number of people in Congress who read the monstrosity is miniscule.
It's what happens when you have Universal Suffrage, and no penalties for Grand Larceny, Theft of Freedom.
That this is even a question for debate in front of the SCOTUS with the final outcome still in question tells all about the fate of this "Republic".
2700 pages of legalistic garbage.
Does it define what the meaning of, “is” is anywhere in the law? If so, that would be the only sentence the court should allow to stand.
So much for “too big to fail.”