Posted on 07/18/2012 8:24:35 AM PDT by thesaleboat
At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment see page 272
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 - ACORN).
** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?)
** 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 exception.
** 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 counseling..)
** 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, 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 all of your email contacts.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Since no one has read it, who knows?
these folks say it is not. http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/kithil.asp
I have read parts of this bill and the government does want access to your banking accounts!
In a free society,no doctor with any self esteem would accept such a vile violation of rights and enslavement, unless he has no choice.
Snopes is always quick to put a favorable liberal spin on most issues. In most valid debates I have read, the language is so convoluted that almost every section of the law will be tested in court just to come up with a ruling about what it means.
My guess is that most, if not all, of the claims are accurate or close enough.
Snopes, of course, says it’s all a lie. I do not trust Snopes.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/kithil.asp
*
While they lean liberal, they are not wacko’s there at Snopes. The majority of their stuff is spot on. In this case, I would double check with another source, but I’d bet that they have this one right, for the most part.
That's an earlier form of the bill. ObamaCare, as passed, was H.R. 3590.
My aunt and I both have pacemakers. I'm almost 60 and she is
80. At some point, our pacemakers, like any other electronic device, will need to be replaced. As of now, if either of us needs a pacemaker, we get it — no fuss, no muss. However, under Obamacare, the replacement procedure will have to be approved by a bureaucrat or a panel of bureaucrats. The decision to replace the pacemaker will be made based, not on medical and health need, but rather, whether the procedure will be cost effective. My aunt may be deemed too old (she will probably die soon, so why waste money on her) and the money for a new pacemaker can be better spent elsewhere (like for some chippy's abortion). Never mind that if the old pacemaker quits, my aunt will be dead.
Me? I might be placed on a waiting list or I might be prescribed medication. Problem is, I did try medication to fix my problem and the result was a cardiac arrest. So without a new pacemaker, I will be dead too.
No wonder the new law is called Death Care
It absolutely IS real. I am sure of that. Social Security already has unfettered access to your bank accounts. They can withdraw or deposit without your permission.
I do not understand how that could possibly be acceptable under our Constitution.
While it is convoluted, it is not secret. You can read it yourself. I get these emails forwarded to me a lot, and I disregard them. Go ahead and look for the situations (helpfully referenced); the law is a monstrosity, but these emails are a little over the top.
“For here we have no continuing city, but we seek one to come.” Hebrews 13:14. There is no ultimate hope in man; look for the city to come, whose builder and maker is God. Thank you for your promises, Lord Jesus.
Cost effectiveness will likely be determined by estimating the present value of the future taxes you will pay or, ir you will not be paying in, the present value of the future benefits you will receive. Compared to the cost of the specific care/procedure needed. Those with net tax payments will receive priority care over those who cannot or will not be paying any more in IMHO.
Here’s the link to the PDF for the final version of 3590 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf
As far as Judge Kithel if you search using the search engine “dogpile” using the “&” ampersand (HR 3590 & judge kithel) you’ll find enough to support the theory he did say what’s attributed to him regarding H.R.3200. The problem is that the final bill H.R. 3590 may or may not say those same things. The final bill could have been washed of those things by hiding them somewhere else or eliminating them.
Sorry... just now saved the PDF so I’m not ready to declare one way or the other.
Do not believe Snopes.Very left leaning people who run that site.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.