Home

Cultural Transmogrifier Magazine | Art Against Apathy BELLACIAO FDL News Desk Infobase Publishing - Home Blog - Countdown with Keith Olbermann To Our Faithful Current.com Users: Current's run has ended after eight exciting years on air and online. The Current TV staff has appreciated your interest, support, participation and unflagging loyalty over the years. Your contributions helped make Current.com a vibrant place for discussing thousands of interesting stories, and your continued viewership motivated us to keep innovating and find new ways to reflect the voice of the people. We now welcome the on-air and digital presence of Al Jazeera America, a new news network committed to reporting on and investigating real stories affecting the lives of everyday Americans in every corner of the country. Thank you for inspiring and challenging us. – The Current TV Staff

Home ThEy LiE We DiE : portail anarchiste, ressources sur l'anarchisme, annuaire libertaire, autogestion CENSORED NEWS History Commons Kevin Drum The Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, in which conservatives will argue that the text of Obamacare limits federal subsidies only to people who buy insurance from state-run exchanges, not from the federal exchange. Roughly speaking, there are two prongs of the conservative argument: The law contains text that explicitly limits subsidies to state-run exchanges. Democrats may not have intended this, but they screwed up in the rush to get the bill passed. was meant as an incentive for states to run their own exchanges rather than punting the job to the feds. The argument over #1 revolves around textual interpretation of the statute as a whole, as well as previous Supreme Court precedent that provides federal agencies with broad latitude in how they implement regulations. But the recollections of journalists aren't really very germane to a Supreme Court case.

Adbusters Culturejammer Headquarters | Journal of the mental environment