Still want to call yourself a Democrat? The sheer nastiness and silliness of the "gotta hate because what else have we got going for us," attitude is highlighted in today's Huffington Post.
I'm referring to Lee Moran and article of today, 9/1/2017 headlined, "Of Course Sean Spicer's Goodbye Email Contained a Typo," (Huffington Post).
Given the substance of his criticism, we might note that Lee Moran has his own challenges. After all, the words "of course" should be followed by a comma, so Moran has his own typo to contend with.
However, more importantly is the liberal typo episode of King v. Burwell. In that case, liberals defended and the Supreme Court bought into a typo defense that ended up costing Americans millions of dollars in additional federal subsidies paid out under Obamacare. Surely, in light of this if anyone should be compassionate about typos, it should be the Dems.
Of course, the article is silly and petty, and therefore a headliner for the Huffington Post. In the context of Sean Spicer's departure, who cares if his goodbye contained a typo? He used the moment to provide us with the boilerplate language that we're all accustomed to upon a public employee's departure. On the other hand, considering OBAMACARE, a reader's response can only be, "ARE YOU KIDDING, complaining about a TYPO?"
Remember the REWRITING of Obamacare that inspired the King v. Burwell decision that cost regular taxpayers unmeasured new amounts as Obamacare was expanded to cover enrollees in Obamacare who had done so through federally established rather than state established exchanges? (See King v. Burwell, Subsidies and of course, Paul Krugman, November 12, 2014).
That was a Supreme Court Case where the Obama government's defense of their actions in defiance of the published Affordable Care Act, was a TYPO defense, straight from Obamacare fanboy, Paul Krugman.
At that time, Paul Krugman argued that the omission of the word “ANYONE” instead of the Act's actual language of "residents of an establishing or participating state" was a “typo.” Krugman continued, “Everything else in the act makes it clear that this was not the drafters’ intention, and in any case you can ask them directly, and they’ll tell you that this was nothing but sloppy language.”
Krugman also complained: “…the Supreme Court may be willing to deprive millions of Americans of health care on the basis of an…obvious typo,” (New York Times, “Death by Typo,” Paul Krugman, 11/9/2014.)
What really persuaded the Supreme Court, in my opinion, was the fact that Democrats feared that without paying subsidies to enrollees via federally established exchanges contrary to Obamacare's provision that such subsidies be paid only to "residents of an establishing or participating state," the law would embark on a death spiral (this was also expressed by the government in their arguments to the court). As we know, the TYPO defense won out and we now all pay to subsidize additional Obamacare enrollees regardless of whether they enroll via federally established or state exchanges.
If you need a typo as today's excuse to hate and make fun of others, read the King v. Burwell Democratic drivel. There's a "typo" that mattered.
