StrangeSox

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 22, 2014 -> 09:42 AM) After Surgery, Surprise $117,000 Medical Bill From Doctor He Didn’t Know Piece in the NYT highlighting how more and more people are being hit with surprise medical bills that include huge charges from out-of-network physicians and surgeons who did little or nothing.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 13, 2014 -> 02:08 PM) Man the video game industry has gotten really disgusting with the launches of completely broken like Assassin's Creed, Drive Club, and Halo in the past month. Two of those are even first party games. gotten? bug-filled major releases have been a staple forever, at least in the PC world.

oh! now do a telepromtper joke!

why does yahoo! still project the Bears defense to be good for the rest of the season?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 30, 2014 -> 02:27 PM) Apparently the 10th circuit is 7 democrat-appointed judges and 5 republican appointed ones, so this could end up being just like the D.C. circuit and reversed en banc. The problem for the plaintiffs is that under the Chevron doctrine, courts are deferential to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. When you read one line out of thousands within the bill, you can make the argument that the plaintiffs are that the statute excludes federally run exchanges and does so intentionally. Looking only at that one line and nothing else within the bill or any of the legislative history (nobody seemed to think this was a clever and deliberate way to force states to set up exchanges until this 'glitch' was discovered by people looking to destroy the ACA using any means necessary), it may even be the most plausible interpretation. When you read that line in the context of the rest of the bill, that argument is harder to make, and the intention of including federal subsidies becomes more likely. But really, which one is "more likely" doesn't matter. The courts don't decide that; as long as the IRS's "federal subsidies are ok" interpretation is a plausible reading of the statute, it's fine. Even if it's not the most likely interpretation, courts will still defer to the agency. So on Friday the SC granted cert (meaning they will hear the case) in King v Burwell, another case along the same lines as Halbig. The ruling in King was in favor of statutory interpretation i.e. federal exchanges are eligible for subsidies. What many people are fearing now is that if the SC accepts the "Moops invaded Spain" argument that's being put forth, millions of people in states that didn't establish their own exchanges will suddenly lose their subsidy eligibility and their access to affordable health care. They won't be able to afford plans without the subsidies, and they won't be eligible for Medicaid, especially in states that didn't take the expansion once the SC made it voluntary. Now, only four justices need to agree to hear a case, and we don't know who voted for cert and why, but it's hard to imagine that the liberal four would be confident enough in another Roberts "split the baby" ruling to vote for cert, and the other four on the court were more than ready to toss the entire law last time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 03:27 PM) I'll almost certainly be voting against her in the primaries but in a post citizens united world I can't see anyone having a shot at her. The Obama campaign in 2008 was plenty wall street friendly and that helped them a lot, but I think the level of support she'll now be able to get financially will be unprecedented. That depends if she hires someone as incompetent as Mark Penn again and her strongest challenger has a campaign team that understands and exploits the delegate selection process. That's how Obama got a foothold in 2008.

It's been on my list of "I've been meaning to see that movie" for a while.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 08:16 PM) Can cam get me eight points? Only time can tell. All signs point to no.

Can cam get me eight points? Only time can tell.

I haven't but I'm aware of the quote.

Republicans seem to understand modern politics and media coverage much better than the democrats.

Hey hey Ho ho Marc Trestman's got to go Hey hey Ho ho This Bears team really blows

Why.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 09:24 PM) Ready to hate watch this half

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 09:09 PM) We need a Bears player to go Charles Martin on Rodgers Screw that play better if you don't want to be embarrassed.

Lmao

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:53 PM) 35-0 and GB runs a safety blitz wow. It's like playing Madden. You just have to see how ridiculous you can make it.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:52 PM) I'm not a Bears fan but I'd think this is in funny bad range now. Enjoy. Solidly

Bennett still showing effort

Hey guys run some more short screens

Why are they running an end around to Chris Williams

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:49 PM) :flails:

Cutler has been rattled for weeks

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:45 PM) I'm sure a different scheme would help these awful players make tackles. Coaching has no effect on players, also the schemes aren't transparently awful.

Does Rodgers even bother playing the second half?