TexasCHLforum.com

JUDGE KITHIL wrote:
"I have reviewed selected sections of the bill, and find it unbelievable that our Congress, led by
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, could come up with a bill loaded with so many wrong-headed elements."
"Both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the financial mess of both Social
Security and Medicare programs."

"I am opposed to HB 3200 for a number of reasons. To start with, it is estimated that a federal
bureaucracy of more than 150,000 new employees will be required to administer HB3200.
That is an unacceptable expansion of a government that is already too intrusive in our lives.
If we are going to hire 150,000 new employees, let's put them to work protecting our borders,
fighting the massive drug problem and putting more law enforcement/firefighters out there."

JUDGE KITHIL continued: "Other problems I have with this bill include:
** 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 counceling.)

** 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:
"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
Marble Falls , Texas

Well, if the people in power were level headed and had some common sence then none of this would even be an issue.
I can't believe that the healthcare bill has gotten this far. I hope to see it shot down when it's all said and done.
Besides, hospitals and EMS have to treat you regardless of your ability to pay. That's why so many EMS agencies and hospital systems are so far in to the red.
We don't need a new bill to give everyone free healthcare....they get it already.

MedicMan218 wrote:I hope to see it shot down when it's all said and done.

Democrats who vote "yes" are mostly going to get "shot down" at the polls this year, regardless of whether or not it passes. The whole thing is just so ill-conceived and cobbled together and so fraught with constitutional challenges that the administration's and democrat leadership's insistence of blindly forging ahead with it in the face of the disapproval of a convincing majority of voters is amazing to me. They are the most tone-deaf politicians I have ever seen.

I find some consolation in two probabilities: 1) if it passes, it is the end of democrat congressional majorities for the next 15 years (remember 1994); and 2) it can be repealed by a republican majority.

My biggest fear is that a republican majority would be too squishy to have the political will to repeal it. Many republicans haven't impressed me lately either. I am seriously considering re-registering as an Independent. Heck, if I get annoyed enough, I might even vote Libertarian!

I find it "humorous" that it was just a year ago that the Demo's (appropriate term?) were claiming that they had the now won the majority for at least a generation! Remember James Carville? Blowhard Extrodinare?

sjfcontrol wrote:I find it "humorous" that it was just a year ago that the Demo's (appropriate term?) were claiming that they had the now won the majority for at least a generation! Remember James Carville? Blowhard Extrodinare?

We haven't seen the results yet for the mid-term elections this year. It's far too soon to count the 2012 eggs as hatched.

boomerang wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:I find it "humorous" that it was just a year ago that the Demo's (appropriate term?) were claiming that they had the now won the majority for at least a generation! Remember James Carville? Blowhard Extrodinare?

We haven't seen the results yet for the mid-term elections this year. It's far too soon to count the 2012 eggs as hatched.

Well, I was really only counting 2010 eggs, but I am predicting that it's enough to bury Jimmy C. anyway.

Odumbell Care will open the door to violation of many of our rights. Under the cover of "saving health care costs" the socialist party will enact all sorts of "feel good" legislation. Heck, the very process they are using to ram this thing through is a violation of the constitution. They get away with this and they will shove all sorts of things through the same way. maybe even gun control.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Odumbell Care will open the door to violation of many of our rights. Under the cover of "saving health care costs" the socialist party will enact all sorts of "feel good" legislation. Heck, the very process they are using to ram this thing through is a violation of the constitution. They get away with this and they will shove all sorts of things through the same way. maybe even gun control.

They are actually going to have a vote on it in the House, that is not unconstitutional.

And is it possible to have discussion on the topic without name calling?

PSLOwner wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Odumbell Care will open the door to violation of many of our rights. Under the cover of "saving health care costs" the socialist party will enact all sorts of "feel good" legislation. Heck, the very process they are using to ram this thing through is a violation of the constitution. They get away with this and they will shove all sorts of things through the same way. maybe even gun control.

They are actually going to have a vote on it in the House, that is not unconstitutional.

And is it possible to have discussion on the topic without name calling?

Keep telling yourself that. We will see what you think when this bunch of yahoos use the same technique to pass gun legislation. It is 100% unconstitutional and they are doing it the way they are because it would not pass if proper procedure was used. Change the channel... Keith Oberman is messing up your thinking.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

PSLOwner wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Odumbell Care will open the door to violation of many of our rights. Under the cover of "saving health care costs" the socialist party will enact all sorts of "feel good" legislation. Heck, the very process they are using to ram this thing through is a violation of the constitution. They get away with this and they will shove all sorts of things through the same way. maybe even gun control.

They are actually going to have a vote on it in the House, that is not unconstitutional.

And is it possible to have discussion on the topic without name calling?

Keep telling yourself that. We will see what you think when this bunch of yahoos use the same technique to pass gun legislation. It is 100% unconstitutional and they are doing it the way they are because it would not pass if proper procedure was used. Change the channel... Keith Oberman is messing up your thinking.

They are voting on it, how is that unconstitutional?

If they "deem" it passed without a real vote, then they also deem themselves domestic enemies of the constitution.

tacticool wrote:If they "deem" it passed without a real vote, then they also deem themselves domestic enemies of the constitution.

But they ARE NOT doing that..... there is actually going to be a vote.

Repeat, a VOTE.

PSLOwner wrote:

tacticool wrote:If they "deem" it passed without a real vote, then they also deem themselves domestic enemies of the constitution.

But they ARE NOT doing that..... there is actually going to be a vote.

Repeat, a VOTE.

If they actually vote. In both the House and the Senate. And both pass the same bill. Then we have to see what's in the bill. Does it stick to things allowed in Article 1, Section 8 or did they vote to be domestic enemies of the constitution?

PSLOwner wrote:

tacticool wrote:If they "deem" it passed without a real vote, then they also deem themselves domestic enemies of the constitution.

But they ARE NOT doing that..... there is actually going to be a vote.

Repeat, a VOTE.

I'm glad they came to their senses and called an actual vote on the bill. They wouldn't have done so if not for public pressure. Make no mistake, this administration and this congress would do everything in their power to grant themselves dictatorial powers and it's up to We the People to stop them.

On Drudge at this moment is the following headline:

FLASH: Senate Republicans found a provision in the new House health care bill that likely makes it ineligible for expedited 'reconciliation' procedures in the Senate. Dems refused to meet with GOP and Parliamentarian.... Developing....

Why would any Party, Democrat or Republican, refuse to meet with the opposition Party? Methinks there are some major shenanigans going on in Washington.

Kythas wrote:Methinks there are some major shenanigans going on in Washington.

I think that quote could be used at any time, any point in history!