Dueling rulings: Courts split on health law clash

From the article:

President Barack Obama’s health care law is snarled in another big legal battle, with two federal appeals courts issuing contradictory rulings on a key financing issue within hours of each other Tuesday.

More:

In that first ruling, a divided three-judge panel in Washington called into question the subsidies that help millions of low- and middle-income people afford their premiums, saying financial aid can be provided only in states that have set up their own insurance markets, or exchanges.

About 100 miles to the south in Richmond, Virginia, another appeals court panel unanimously came to the opposite conclusion, ruling that the Internal Revenue Service correctly interpreted the will of Congress when it issued regulations allowing health insurance tax credits for consumers in all 50 states.

The question(s) I have is(are) this….why should middle income people need a subsidy in the first place?  It is…or, should I say wasn’t it, the middle class that essentially kept this nation going?

And…..wasn’t this supposedly called, “The Affordable  Care Act”? What’s so affordable about that?  Oh, I see….only affordable AFTER you have the subsidy that you are…..in fact, really paying for  yourself.

If I remember right…..didn’t the Supreme Court call the “Affordable Care Act” a tax? So was this whole mess created to tax people into oblivion?  Wouldn’t that destroy the middle class?

Ah, maybe I ask too many questions? Okay,….my final question….did “they” or did “they” not know that this would be impossible to sort out?  And if “they” did…..?

http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/ap_ed797862c95a4d7e942400d6e0e9cdf3