Mr. Roberts, it is not your job to make a better contract.
The four corners rule applies.
It is what it is.
If you pull a stunt like you did in 2012, the catastrophe may be far worse than that which can be contained.
Laws have meaning.
Not penumbras and emanations.
roberts sucks. If he got caught up in the revolution he would be mercilessly hung.
The Roberts married in their early 40s and adopted two children within a few months of each other in 2000.
Maybe, but he did say then that it was not the Court’s job to protect the nation from unwise or stupid laws. That seems to fit the current situation and if it was solid thinking in 2012, it remains so today. The Dims wrote the law , now they have to own it.
Mr Obama has the Supream Court in his back pocket—they will vote for his plan any time any where and anything else this con man thinks up—Like cancelling the election due to some “Crisis” he will come up with or his friends in Iran will do. He will serve 3rd term when Hillary is unable to run—a rigged election and he gets to stay. We better start planning for what we will do—if he tries a stunt like this.
“The four corners rule applies.” A contract, which essentially the scheme is, is interpreted by the plain meaning of the words within those four corners of the Pages. Write it such a way to try to force or intimidate States into setting up exchanges, and they choose not to play, the authors of Obamacare are stuck with what they wrote. The word “state” is not ambiguous.
Obama wants to change the rules because his bluff failed. No, never. Supporters of Obamacare will be in a difficult position of finding examples of the Feds calling themselves “the State.” The words used by them are “Federal Government.” The Feds always refer to themselves as the Federal Government.
between getting in debt for an operation or getting shot by government for opting out, I would rather take my chance with the private sector. but the government wants us to get shot, I fear, because the government wants to take zero risks.