fbpx ');*/ /*jQuery("#postgridID").addClass("second"); jQuery("#content-wrapper #page-wrapper .tt-content .vc_row .tt-slider-content #postgridID").before(''); */ });

Type to search

Right-Wing Trolls — From Scalia On Down — Take On The Obamacare Decision

Politics Top News

Right-Wing Trolls — From Scalia On Down — Take On The Obamacare Decision

Protesters in Minnesota call for smaller government and the repeal of the health care law enacted in March, 2010. (Fibonacci Blue via Flickr)

Right wingers are going into apoplexy over the Supreme Court’s decisive 6-3 ruling upholding federal health insurance subsidies under Obamacare — and a lot of it is pretty entertaining.

The decision in the King v. Burwell case is likely to be the last fundamental legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. (More litigation could certainly be on the way — but it would realistically only affect things at the edges.) And after five years of chasing this law like Captain Ahab chased a very large whale, these people really aren’t happy about it.

Of course, if we’re looking for an unhinged right winger who’s full of soundbites on just about any topic, there’s just no topping a member of the Supreme Court itself — Justice Antonin Scalia — who in his dissenting opinion called the ruling “of course quite absurd, and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so.”

“Contrivance, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!” Scalia also declared in a parenthetical aside.

In another memorable line, he referred to the Court practicing “interpretive jiggery-pokery.”

Scalia even capped off a section full of legalese, with an insult in the vein of Don Rickles.

The Court claims that the Act must equate federal and state establishment of Exchanges when it defines a qualified individual as someone who (among other things) lives in the “State that established the Exchange […]. Otherwise, the Court says, there would be no qualified individuals on federal Exchanges, contradicting (for example) the provision requiring every Exchange to take the “‘interests of qualified individuals’” into account when selecting health plans. […]. Pure applesauce.

And in an apparent bid to the start a Twitter hashtag, Scalia stated that the Court “rewrites the law to make tax credits available everywhere. We should start calling this law SCOTUScare” — a line that shall surely live on for years in right-wing talk radio and blogs.

Another government official, Mississippi governor Phil Bryant (R), got in on the act at the state level. And in an interesting choice of words at a time when much of the country is looking back on the struggles for civil rights in the Deep South (not to mention the Civil War), Bryant’s fiery statement invokes a lot of familiar old language of state resistance to the federal government.

Today’s decision does not change the fact that Obamacare is a socialist takeover of health care forced down the throats of the American people without proper review, and it does not slow the massive and unprecedented transfer of wealth that is at the heart of the subsidy system. Make no mistake—Obamacare is not about helping those in need or improving health care delivery. It is about destabilizing our health care system, ceding more control to centralized government and replacing individual liberty with government dependence.

Mississippi was right, as were numerous other states, not to willingly entrench Obamacare by establishing a state-based exchange, and I will continue to resist any efforts that attempt to shove Obamacare deeper into this state.

Bloggers chimed in, too. Michelle Malkin invoked the accusation that the Supreme Court was rewriting the law to mean anything that President Obama would want — citing a gay showtunes composer.

Bryan Fischer is a radio host for a recognized anti-gay hate group, the American Family Association, which is worth noting only because the group recently had to repudiate some of his claims because they were too vile even for them. This moral authority declared the SCOTUS ruling to be all but the death knell for America itself.

Sean Hannity blew his top on his own radio show, reviving one of the classic fearmongering routines against Obamacare, now that it has yet again gotten a clean bill of Constitutional health.

“And I’m telling you, death panels will exist! Because you know what that death panel is gonna be? It’s gonna be called a morphine drip. You get your morphine drip; it depresses your respiration — and guess what, you die! Is that the care you want?”

And Ben Shapiro of Breitbart tweeted out a rather — um, creative reference to the Fifty Shades of Grey franchise.

Photo: Protesters in Minnesota call for smaller government and the repeal of the health care law enacted in March, 2010. (Fibonacci Blue via Flickr)



  1. Insinnergy June 25, 2015

    I could take a crap on the ground, and that crap would give better political opinions than the frothing right wing.
    Especially Malkin. What a vacuous cypher.

    1. fortunev June 25, 2015

      Crap on the ground would smell better than any one of those creeps’ best days. Not only that, who gives a shyt what any of these out-dated morons think. The fools are creatures from another age; an age of right-wing stupidity that has no bearing on the future of a modern US world power.

    2. FireBaron June 26, 2015

      Ironic that a member of a minority group (Asian-American female) can spew such hatred against others.

  2. Daniel Jones June 26, 2015

    Scalia’s just pissed because he’s being held to his own fucking briefs on the same law.

  3. Dominick Vila June 26, 2015

    Scalia’s, Alito’s, and Thomas’ reactions are predictable. They also serve as a reminder of what is at stake in 2016 if the GOP seizes control of all three branches of the Federal government, particularly when we consider that there may be as many as 4 vacancies in the Supreme Court within the next 4 to 8 years.
    With that in mind, we should also consider the reactions of GOP candidates such as Huckabee, who referred to the SCOTUS 6-3 ruling on Obamacare as evidence of “judicial tyranny”, and Ted Cruz’s promise to repeal the ACA if he is elected. Short of Huckabee representing a Satanic Cult, it is hard to believe that a person that considers himself a Christian could reach such conclusion. That misguided preacher should re-read the teachings of Jesus Christ and the example he established for us to emulate. As for Cruz, his opinion is irrelevant. He doesn’t have a chance to fill a dog catcher’s vacancy in his hometown, wherever that may be.

    1. terry b June 26, 2015

      Dominick, you have it pretty much on the head. The only way to keep this country moving in the right direction is to keep a democrat in the white house and hopefully take back the senate. To me, a failure would see a rise of what I would consider the 4th Reich as Hitler promised.

      1. idamag June 27, 2015

        You are very astute.

    2. TZToronto June 26, 2015

      Now if only he could take his ball and go home . . . Sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose. The ACA decision was basically a no-contest, with a 6-3 majority. Now, the gay marriage decision, which Scalia also disagrees with, was a 5-4 majority, which he called a “bare majority.” Hmmmm . . . What was Citizens United, that most wonderful of all decisions for Scalia, I’m sure? Oh, 5-4, a bare majority. What a jerk!

    3. TZToronto June 26, 2015

      On ACA, I figured the Roberts would vote with the majority because scrapping the health care for millions of people would be cruel and would forever brand him as a pawn of the far right. On same-sex marriage, I figured he’d vote with the minority because a vote against same-sex marriage would probably be a loser anyway, and his opinion against same-sex marriage would do nothing–other than endear him to a diminishing segment of the population. And his no-same-sex-marriage vote would only affirm what thinking people know anyway. He can always say that he fought for the “moral,” if unequal, position. He’s no Scalia, though. Scalia is simply a sore loser, and his two buddies, Thomas and Alito, are no better.

      1. Dominick Vila June 26, 2015

        This is not the first time that Chief Justice Roberts has voted in favor of what is best for the country. I suspect he has done more than just read the Constitution, and understands the meaning of protecting the welfare of the people a lot better than Alito, Scalia and Thomas do.

        1. TZToronto June 26, 2015

          Scalia et al., seem to forget the preamble of the Constitution–“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

  4. Darsan54 June 26, 2015

    Hmmmmmmm, morphine. A wonderful drug Sean. Had it when my tonsils swelled and needed to be lanced at the ripe old age of 22. Wonderful, wonderful drug.

  5. docb June 26, 2015

    The real jiggery-pokery is when you bestowed ‘personhood ‘ on corporations, antonin!

    Stop your whining.

  6. Eleanore Whitaker June 26, 2015

    If you listened to the arguments by Scalia, you’d think you were watching a rerun of the “Godfather” movie. Scalia tried desperately to invoke “law” when his platitudes of same were so slathered in political ideology.

    We need SC judges who read LAW…not politics or ideology.

    1. terry b June 26, 2015

      Well said Eleanore. The nutcases can’t stand someone who speaks the truth as you and I do.

      1. Eleanore Whitaker June 26, 2015

        Thank you. But, I can’t take credit for the millions of Americans who were properly raised by hard working, decent, honest parents who taught all of us right from wrong.

        What the right wing wants is what we cannot allow…to enable lies, corruption, deception and greed. We know that’s wrong. How can they expect us to just look the other way when our freedoms are at stake?

        This just shows more and more Americans are pushing back at these all too selfish, greedy narcissists who would as soon demolish all our Founding Fathers and our brothers and sisters in the military fought hard to keep…democracy.

        1. terry b June 26, 2015

          If you are as beautiful as your writing implies then some guy is very lucky to be with you as a friend or spouse or both

    2. idamag June 27, 2015

      Yes, yes, and yes. A judge is supposed to be objective.

    3. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

      You mean read law the way you want it read. These issues did not fall into the SC. jurisdiction.They were issues of choice and states rights. Since you don’t believe in states rights I will drop it. I know you are happy now you can marry your lady love and get subsidized medical. Maybe you could get a SC ruling to have all men neutered.

      1. Eleanore Whitaker June 28, 2015

        No, I mean men so low life like you that you fight federal laws on the books for decades…like Roe vs. Wade….and should an asshat like you ever rise to the level of sane human being, you’d know the Founding Fathers NEVER intended states’ rights to be any more than part of the balance of federal and state regulations that protect all states.

        And as for your states rights BS, we all know that red states would have ALL the rights and blue states rights would be null and void. Don’t you Confederate asshats ever give it the hell up?

        There you sit on a huge butt posting drivel, instead of doing something productive with your life. But, you have the balls to judge others? I think not..Your opinion and your judgments are BS.

        I know you are happy with your male wife…I’m sure you and he can now live on welfare like the low life bums you are. Maybe YOU can be brain neutered since it is so obvious you are nothing but a control freak who like it all just your way…sorry bubby but your low life status speaks volumes of the kind of man you are NOT.

        1. hicusdicus June 28, 2015

          Why do you always have the same little group of reply’s, you need to get a more up to date rap sheet.

          1. Eleanore Whitaker June 29, 2015

            Your reptitious posts are ALWAYS the same. You post nothing that isn’t a personal attack on some poster. I’m sure the prison you are incarcerated in doesn’t realize that a computer in your criminal hands is nothing more than a tripe manufacturing company.

            But do keep up the same old same old same old BS….your “date rap sheet” isn’t exactly something for a chicken like you to caw about.

          2. hicusdicus June 29, 2015

            Gee! I always thought chickens clucked. How many of your dates have ended up on a rap sheet? hahahaha! By the way you are not some poster you are THEE poster. If there was anybody who could use a good long post it is you.

          3. Eleanore Whitaker June 29, 2015

            What are you? A teenager? Who “dates?” but a guy like you with an adolescent brain and raging hormones. Get off the Viagra. It’s been recently reported there ARE side effects. From your posts, I’m guessing that’s your problem.

            So..now…as to my “dates?” Let’s see, the first was a boy genius who helped tutor me in math. The next was an ace professional dancer. A jazz musician, a priest/Clinical pyschologist about to be defrocked courtesy of yours truly, at least three lawyers one in criminal law, real estate and wills and trusts. Add to that, a 28 year relationship with an industrial engineer and a robotics Phd…do try to keep up Viagra brain. I get hit on on my FB page more than women half my age. And all I have to do is post my photo…hate that don’t you?

          4. hicusdicus June 30, 2015

            Don’t I wish I was a teenager, Viagra would be the last thing on my mind. Wow! from your resume you have had more men than a crack head on meth. Maybe you should not hang with women half your age so you would not get hit so much in the face with a book. I believe you when you say that putting your photo on a post keeps the crows away from the corn. Why don’t we put your photo’s all along the border and keep the beaners on their side of the river. You are more fun than a turd in the punch bowl. Speaking of punch bowls have you had your monthly check up?

          5. Eleanore Whitaker June 30, 2015

            Sorry…I don’t “hang” with anyone. My male and female associates and friends are all highly successful, highly accomplished individuals, each in their own right.

            My photo is only out there due to my being a published author of 2 books, 4300+ online blog and business articles and dozens of short stories read by my readers around the globe.

            I suggest you stop posting drivel and starting acting like an adult with a mature mind. Always assuming, of course, you are not mentally handicapped.

          6. hicusdicus June 30, 2015

            When reading your posts being mentally handicapped helps me understand your line of thinking. I do admire your valiant effort to make your self look important. but to me you are light comical entertainment….. Around the globe! You certainly are getting carried away. I guess if you want to to be crazy you might as well go first class crazy. I know getting old really sucks but you are just going to have live with it. My advice is to try and avoid mirrors.

          7. Eleanore Whitaker June 30, 2015

            Let me disabuse you of your all too judgmental need to compartmentalize others. First, I knew the moment I exited the birth canal that I was important. That you feel the need to judge and degrade others proves who among us is grossly insecure and uncertain about your own importance. More’s the pity.

            Yes..I have readers who have read my short stories in places I couldn’t ever have imagined. Mostly, because I tend to write about places and characters in countries like Romania, Bulgaria, Germany, the UK, Russia (one of my favorites) and unlike you, I can PROVE that. You can read these short stories on blogspot.com if you have the guts.

            As for entertainment, any man with so much free time on his hands is obviously not gainfully employed. Being a village idiot doesn’t count.

          8. hicusdicus June 30, 2015

            Thanks for clarifying where you came from. Birth canal, is that your name fore the love canal. When you exited the love canal you were certainly special, every body had to move. As for your readership it most likely can’t compare to the folks who read comic books. I guess you can always find people with bad taste. Gainfully employed I have successfully avoided that curse for most of my life. Being the village idiot has its benefits.

          9. Eleanore Whitaker June 30, 2015

            Again…the Great Judge and Jury? Try again. I wrote suspense and mysteries. My readership is not like the dipshits in the south and midwest who like Honey Boo Boo, Duck Dynasty, Naked and Afraid, Mountain Men and Last Alaskans.

            My novels appeal to those with an interest in learning what causes some men to go off the deep end and how their early upbringing is a major factor. Take the hint.

            I’m sure your Daddy and Mommy Neanderthal never bothered to teach you any of the finer things in life like Nabokov, Dickens, Shakespeare or Wordsworth.

            I’m guessing being a gigolo must mean the ROI is you get to lay around all day with not much to stimulate that atrophied brain.

          10. hicusdicus June 30, 2015

            My mother died of a drug reaction right after I was born and never told anybody who the father was. I’m a bastard, feel better now? Nobody read me Shakespeare but when I was 6 I read the whole series Bomba the jungle boy. What did you read when you were 6?

          11. Eleanore Whitaker June 30, 2015

            Sorry to hear that. I never feel better hearing the life difficulties of others. No one read Shakespeare to me either. I read it in English Lit in sophomore read of high school. My favorite was “Macbeth.” Although, I did enjoy “Julius Caesar.”

            Sadly, I cannot tell you what I read at age 6. I have no memory of my childhood before age 10. I believe this has something to do with a very serious case of mumps at age 7. I contracted mumps in February 1953 and it somehow erased most of my childhood memories. The mumps were so bad that year that I ended up with temporary loss of hearing and pleurisy.

            I do remember reading the Bobbsey Twins when I was around 11.

  7. terry b June 26, 2015

    Mental illness seems to plague the right wing trolls who plague the GOP. The best method for determining a correct SC decision is by finding which side Scalia was on. He is always wrong which proves that this decision was correct.

    1. idamag June 27, 2015

      I have always wondered when Reagan emptied the mental hospitals and threw the patients to the streets, did most of them become t-partiers?

  8. Wedge Shot June 26, 2015

    I love it when the right wing loses. Obamacare has been a particularly interesting fight from the beginning. It appears lost to many that the government does not sell health insurance and that Obamacare is not a insurance policy. Mostly what Obamacare does is set minimum standards for what health insurance companies can sell; no differently than what auto insurers can sell. Most states have laws governing auto liability and personal injury coverage so that no one legally drives without having the ability to cover loses they may cause or may receive. Obamacare, or Affordable Care Act, does the same thing. It was determined by doctors, health care providers, legislators and insurance companies that certain minimum benefits should be included in order for the policy to provide a reasonable degree of coverage and to also include preventative medicine such as colonoscopies, diabetes testing, PSA testing for men, birth control and other things free or at a very reduced cost. The reason is simple; if you catch health issues early they can be treated before the are serious, expensive and deadly. Additionally, and perhaps the most important provisions include allowing everyone to get coverage regardless of a preexisting condition, eliminating lifetime limits, allowing dependent children up to 26 to remain on their parents policy. Equally important is that insurance companies have to compete by placing their plan on the exchanges where everyone can compare prices and pick what is best for them knowing that they all provide the same minimum standard. Of course, since no one can be denied coverage it became necessary for everyone to get coverage. The reason is simple; people would game the system and wait until they were seriously ill before getting insurance since they could not be denied. Lastly, insurance companies have to spend 80% of their premiums on actual health care and are limited to how much they can raise their rates each year and in some cases must return part of the collected premiums to their policy holders.
    All of this makes a lot of sense when taken to totality. But, a person does not have to buy insurance on an exchange, they can go directly to an insurance company and get it. They will, however not get help with the premiums if they do Also, it is also true that you do not have to buy insurance at all if you don’t want to but you may pay a penalty or tax if you don’t.
    This should be something the right wings loves,: personal responsibility. What could be better?

    1. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

      What you don’t understand is that heath care costs are completely out of control. The medical industry has this this bend over here it comes again attitude. That’s where the problem lies. Why does a 45 min procedure cost 30000.00 dollars ? Because if you need it done that is what they are going to break off in you. 37 years ago I spent 7 days in ICU it cost me 2200.00 dollars today it would be 220000.00 dollars or more. The more the health care can charge the more your insurance premiums. So get ready to bend over here it comes again.

  9. TZToronto June 26, 2015

    Hannity, there have always been death panels as long as there’s been health insurance, except the death panels were called insurance companies.

  10. idamag June 27, 2015

    Scalia is a big mistake on the Supreme Court. He cannot be objective and never has been. That is why it is so important, we elect someone who won’t pack the court with dipped-ins

  11. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

    Okay! Everybody happy? In about 3 or 4 years we will see how happy you are . It would be great if ACA works out. With human nature in the equation it can’t possibly happen.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.