Don't Expect Reason From A Progressive

Don't Expect Reason From A Progressive
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119304/gop-states-expand-medicaid-obamacare-opponents-get-desperate
"" Their argument is merely that if you read a poorly drafted section of the statute out of context, it appears that the law doesn't contemplate subsidies in states that availed themselves of the federal government's backstop, Healthcare.gov. Millions of people would lose their health insurance in service of teaching Congress a lesson about the importance of legislative draftsmanship.""
If a law is poorly drafted, here means it says something the backers don't want to hear. If the meaning is clear until context is added which is supposed to change its meaning, isn't the law invalid? That millions are effected by a poorly drafted law that is therefore invalid, does not change the wording of the law. Generally there is a provision that says that one section being invalid does not allow the balance of the law to be declared invalid. The poor drafters forgot that, also, putting the whole law at risk.
"" That's not a very becoming political argument, though, so the Halbig supporters have stapled a grandiose claim to their core challenge. Because many of the people who would lose their insurance would also qualify for an exemption from the law's insurance coverage mandate, they frame it as a principled campaign for liberty.""
This isn't true, it is a straw man argument the GOP has not made. " not a very becoming political argument,"? How is that relevant? Laws are words carefully selected to define unambiguously what is required. If politics is involved it is no longer the rule of law but of men. Men, as we have seen are corruptible. The most adversely effected are the poor and powerless.
"" These are the people whose liberty conservatives claim to be fighting for—the people who were only able to purchase insurance because the subsidies made it affordable. The people who, as Bagley writes, would "be free to decline coverage that, without tax credits, they can't afford anyhow."""
This is getting ridiculous. There will be no private coverage and government coverage is designed to put doctors out of business. What good is insurance that is not accepted?
"" This kind of post hoc appeal to liberty long predates the Affordable Care Act, but it has become particularly salient in the fight against Obamacare as enrollment has grown and weakened traditional tools of opposition""
Do you remember, "you have to pass ObamaCare to see what is in it"? All arguments are therefore post hoc. But wait, the argument predates! It isn't post hoc. The author contradicts himself in 5 words after the assertion.
""But there's something conspicuous about the Obamacare opponents posing as tribunes for liberty, too. They're nearly all affluent white people, who take their own health insurance for granted and probably wouldn't consider themselves liberated if a court or legislature took aim at it for any reason. And though their rhetoric suggests otherwise, they're waging the final Obamacare battles against poor people and minorities, not on their behalf.""
No one is or should be taking health insurance for granted. All private health care will be eliminated and government health will be worthless. It will be cash to the doctors who remain that is the one choice. So right, only the rich will have health care. Maybe we can import the barefoot doctors form China, they work cheap.