Actually, no. Even ignoring the issue of subsidies, before ACA, if he'd let it get this far before getting insurance, he would've run into the "pre-existing condition" exception that was more or less universal except when prohibited by state law. And I suspect South Carolina was not among the states that did prohibit it. Wouldn't want to interfere with the poor insurance companies' right to operate in a "free market" now, would they?
I take no joy in his medical problems, but on the other hand, I do find it difficult to feel a great deal of sympathy for him and certainly do mock him for raving that his current crisis is "Obama's fault." Obama didn't make him a fool, he did that all by himself.
His point was that the ACA did not hurt the man in any way.
I wasn't disagreeing with Jhhnn's general point, I was noting that the hypocritical Mr. Lang is not only not being hurt by ACA, he's in fact being helped by it, despite himself and his failure to obtain insurance when he should have/was supposed to.
With a little hamstering you can blame dems for only fully funding Medicaid expansion until 2017. No way red states will be able to pick up 5-10% of the tab.
