Finally, Obamacare revealed w/related links.
Posted in the Mountain View Forum
#1 Sep 9, 2012
Subject: Hide Your Money and Lie About Your Age
They will have access to my bank account, and can take my money
Hooray!!! Someone FINALLY put the page numbers in so that we can
locate these accusations in the Health Care Bill. You can find the health care
bill in PDF format here:http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/BILLS-111hr3200ih/pdf/BILL S-111hr3200ih.pdf
If you have trouble locating the section on the page number just do
a control F and type in the word you are looking for.
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS...
At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible
for cancer treatment
What Nancy Pelosi didn't want us to know until after
the healthcare bill was passed. Remember she said, "pass it and then read
it!!." Here it is!
Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number
THE CARE BILL HB 3200
JUDGE KITHIL IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED
THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL.
Judge Kithil of Marble Falls, TX - highlighted the
most egregious pages of HB3200
Please read this........ Especially the reference to
pages 58 & 59
JUDGE KITHIL wrote:
** Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide
insurance to all non-U.S. Residents, even if they are here illegally.
** Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time
access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make
electronic fund transfers from those accounts.
** Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized
(by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community
organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now
** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this
section will not be treated as a tax.
** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the
same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.
** Page 272. Section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration
care according to the patient's age.
** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a
prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an
** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates
advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required
to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years.(Death
** Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify
which doctors can write an end-of-life order.
HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:
"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill
will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt
from the Social Security system ( http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blcongr...
), and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If
they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick
'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."
Honorable David Kithil of Marble Falls, Texas
All of the above should give you the ammo you need to
support your opposition to Obamacare. Please send this information on to everyone you know.
Since: Sep 08
Neon City Oh.
#2 Sep 9, 2012
#3 Sep 9, 2012
Another stupid mean person.
Judge not lest you be judged, OH wait you just judged yourself !
#4 Sep 9, 2012
Why do many right wingers assume that if you are a democrat, you must surely be an atheist.
Momma Bear, did you not just make a few judgments of your own?
Also, the info that you posted about the ACA is obviously inaccurate. Why spread lies and inaccuracies about the health care bill. Are you afraid that your more righteous side might lose, based on truths?
#5 Sep 9, 2012
Thought this was a forum of opinions, geezzzzzz you guys are playing pretty rough here !
#6 Sep 9, 2012
Prence, Momma Bear was posting what are alleged "facts," that are obviously inaccurate. People will believe that nonsense, if you do not speak up. Many people will believe it anyway.
#7 Sep 9, 2012
If you do not believe me, read the article below referenced by Russell, it says the same and more. You can believe what you want and so can I, it is my right, at least for now. Everyone better beleive it. Obama go home.
Russell called me a Republican, I called him a Democrat
Russell called me a Christian, I called him an athiest
Russell called me a liar, and I called him XXXXXXX
And you, Fried Horse are a "know it all" who is rude and unkind. This is a free country and I will say whatever I want to, I don't sleep with you, you don't pay my bills and you can't tell me what to say, write or think. Keep you horses head up your arse and leave me alone.
#8 Sep 9, 2012
Mama Bear, I read the Snopes article. What it said is that the stuff you are posting is a leftover, from when they were trying to pass an earlier version of the bill. A version that was originally drafted by Republicans, btw. If you look at the bottom of the Snopes article, you can read how all that stuff you posted is inaccurate. That stuff is not in the ACA.
#9 Sep 9, 2012
One last time, leave me alone ! I will write whatever I want and if you need to be the "police" do it with someone else. You are a democrat and I am a republican, this time. I vote the person not the party. I believe Obama is the worst thing that has ever happened to this country and he has got to go, I will say whatever I want too ! ONE LAST TIME, STAY OFF MY POSTS AND LEAVE ME ALONE ! ATTACK SOMEONE ELSE YOU HATEFUL BULLY !
#10 Sep 9, 2012
Well, as you said, this is a free country. I can say whatever I want. What I'm saying now, is that the information that you posted is incorrect.
Why do you believe that President Obama is so bad?
#11 Sep 9, 2012
It makes no difference which one wins this election because they are both avowed Keynesians. The problem is that Keynesianism is almost dead.
Since: May 12
#12 Sep 10, 2012
Obamacare is really RomneyCare is Really RepublicanCare.
For Example, the Republicans Loved the FEDERAL Individual Mandate Until Obama/Democrats Supported It.
1. 2010 - ROMNEY ON THE FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. "Some of my libertarian friends balk at what looks like an individual mandate. But remember, someone has to pay for the health care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays or the taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian."
2. 2007 - GINGRICH ON A FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. "Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect other to pay for their care when they need it.
3. 2006 THE CONSERVATIVE HERITAGE FOUNDATION SUPPORTED A FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. "But as part of that contract, it is also reasonable to expect residents of the society who can do so to contribute an appropriate amount to their own health care. This translates into a requirement on individuals to enroll themselves and their dependents in at least a basic health plan - one that at the minimum should protect the rest of society from large and unexpected medical costs incurred by the family."
4. 1993 - REPUBLICAN PARTY HAD THEIR OWN BILL REQUIRING A FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. In 1993, Republicans sponsored a bill that had an INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. It was sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah, Sen. Christopher Bond of Missouri, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, and 12 other Republicans.
It was titled "Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993"
"Subtitle F: Universal Coverage - Requires each citizen or lawful permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan or equivalent health care program by January 1, 2005."
Since: May 12
#13 Sep 10, 2012
WASHINGTON | Sun Sep 9, 2012 2:21pm EDT
(Reuters)- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has called for scrapping President Barack Obama's 2010 U.S. healthcare law, said in remarks aired on Sunday that he likes key parts of "Obamacare" despite his party's loathing of it and wants to retain them.
#14 Sep 10, 2012
Thank you for illustrating my point.
#15 Sep 10, 2012
Both parties seem to agree that health care is a dilemma. The problem is that neither of them will touch on the real issue, which is the cost of healthcare.
They want to keep focusing on how to fund healthcare, without dealing with the issue of runaway costs. Obama approached dealing with the cost issue, by suggesting that we have a single payer system. That is how the costs have been successfully reigned in, by other nations.
The Republican Congress would not even consider a single payer option, so we ended up with the individual mandate. Basically, the Republicans got what they had wanted for years. Now they seemingly don't like that idea, either. Probably because it was President Obama that managed to get it through.
If the Republicans win the White House this election, I doubt that they will even try to repeal the ACA. Why would they? It is basically a gift to the health and insurance industries. It is something that Republicans lobbied for in the past, also. Indeed, Mitt Romney instituted an almost identical system in Massachusetts.
President Obama claims that this gift to the insurance companies, in the form of a tax, will ultimately reduce the cost of healthcare. Somehow, I doubt it, but who am I? I am just a writer.
What is clear to me is that, if we cannot reduce the cost of healthcare, then it will remain a huge drain on our GDP. How the ACA will reduce those costs, I do not completely understand.
It seems to me, that as long as healthcare is a for-profit model, there will never be an incentive to lower costs. We have allowed the free market to control health care costs, for quite a long time. It has obviously not worked to our advantage. There simply must be a single payer system. Then again, what do I know?
President Obama may not be the greatest leader ever, but despite a deadlocked and vindictive Congress, he managed to get something done about healthcare. It may not be the ultimate solution, but he accomplished it. To me, that makes him worthy of another four years.
President Obama ascribes to the theories of Keynesian economics, for sure. As do most modern economists. To say that Mitt Romney does as well, may be a little bit of a stretch. So far, his platform falls more into the realm of Austrian economic theory.
Basically what Mitt Romney plans to do, is keep what President Obama has done, but destroy the tax base, at the same time. How will he pay for the imbalance? Not by cutting defense. Not by cutting corporate welfare. He wants to fix this imbalance by reducing aid to the poor, unemployed, underemployed, and seniors. Groups whose numbers will rise substantially, under his Austrian economic plan.
Mitt Romney's plan would also transfer much of the cost of Medicare back onto Seniors, by making it a voucher system. This will drain the already beleaguered savings of seniors, by allowing it to be vacuumed up by the health and insurance industries, as costs continue to rise.
It seems to me that President Obama's plans are a move forward. Mitt Romney would definitely be several steps back. Back to where? Back to the good old days? Yes. Mitt Romney would take us back to the good old days of the early 20th Century. 70 hour work weeks. No vacation. No home ownership. No healthcare. Slave wages. Industrial waste. No Social Security. No Medicare. No unemployment benefits. No thanks.
#16 Sep 10, 2012
You are all misssing the point!! While important, the issues you are concerned with are not critical to our future. This is: Obama thinks he is not bound by the Constitution. He can do whatever he likes by Executive Order, creating controls over us that we would never tolerate if we have a choice. And that choice is clear: vote to bring down Obana.!!
Since: May 12
#17 Sep 10, 2012
Are you kidding me, Healthcare is one of the most important policies critical to the future of the US. If you don't think healthy children and a healthy workforce is not important to the US, then I think you are missing the point. No workforce equals no economy. Healthcare has been spiraling upwards at double digit inflation for the last 20 or so years. This is the first year healthcare cost have only increased with single digit inflation and that is mostly due to ACA and the poor economy. The only other thing that is as important is education. Education goes in hand with having a healthy thriving workforce.
#18 Sep 10, 2012
Oh I would LOVE to know exactly why he sucks so much!
#19 Sep 10, 2012
With all due respect, from everything I have read, Tea Party Republicans are the ones wanting to amend and change SEVERAL Constitutional amendments. I am confused as to what exactly Obama is doing or wants to do that is worse than what these people have planned. Can you elaborate?
Since: May 12
#20 Sep 11, 2012
Well, today is Tuesday Sept 11th. Now the King of flip/flopping says he wants to dismantle all of ACA if elected president. With this candidate I can't seem to believe anything he says because the next day it is usually the opposite. The "market place" will take care of your health needs according to one of Romney's aids and healthcare benefits will now include undertakers competing with surgeons but only if they come in at the lowest price the market will bare for the insurance companies.
Add your comments below
|Did you vote today? (Jun '10)||1 hr||Guest||32,700|
|one god (Apr '15)||14 hr||acts||25|
|Dope heads (May '16)||16 hr||3balltom||31|
|Toddler dies last week||16 hr||Katie||48|
|poweful sith lord that works at walmart.||17 hr||3balltom||1|
|Trump for President||Mon||concerned||5|
Find what you want!
Search Mountain View Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC