…oddly enough, they’re now noting in an update to their original post that, contra Senator Bill Nelson of Florida*, the lack of a severability clause in Obamacare is both: conspicuous; and a major factor in Judge Vinson’s decision.� Which you already knew, because you read about it first either at MoeLane, or at RedState.� And apparently, so does somebody over at ABC News**.
Still, let me not be unkind about this, given that they actually fixed the mistake and didn’t also try to memory-hole it.� So, let me be among the first to congratulate ABC News for its timely correction to the record; we at Redstate are always happy to help another media outlet correct, and learn from, their mistakes.
Moe Lane (crosspost)
PS: You really need to have Senator Nelson explain that one, Rick Klein.
*Very quick recap: Nelson did an interview in which he claimed that there was a severability clause in Obamacare that would protect the rest of the law, even if the individual mandate was declared unconstitutional.� The problem is, there isn’t such a clause, it was taken out, and anybody who was familiar with either the original law or Judge Vinson of Virginia’s court decision would have known that.
**I’m guessing that it’s probably RedState that they’re reading: after all, we’ve just had it demonstrated that the Center for Disease Control is.
Source: http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/02/04/abc-news-hey-about-that-severability-clause-thing/
No comments:
Post a Comment