Obamacare Nightmare ! Part 2

[etucker1959]

Tucky, one, you weren't there, I was. You know nothing about what happened at that event, or the other two events, I do. If peoples reputations were soiled then so be it. Whether any laws were broken will be up to lawyers and judges to decide. But from what I've seen, it looks like some were. Whether it was intentional or not, the courts will decide. Good people were hurt by actions of others at that and the prior two events which led to the exposure of either big mistakes being made, or fraud, cheating, and trademark violations being perpetuated, Either way, it needed to be fixed. But to use a very serious incident for humor purposes is pretty disturbing. The SKC events are charitable events for children and our finest, you know, the very ones who lay their lives on the line that allows you to spew your leftist rhetoric day in and day out. The very ones you have shown your complete lack of support and disdain for with your endless cries for cutting back funding for the military.

Those threads needed to happen. Whether they were done correctly or not is not for me to decide, but I stand by the decision to expose the problems and possible wrongs that were occurring. And if our children and our finest were being used for fraudulent financial gain, those perpetrators must go down. And if they were just honest mistakes, then hopefully the event can move on and continue for years to come and be a much better event for all involved. Lots of great people are involved and go to this and deserve a totally honest and clean event...

So you want to go there?????? I thought long and hard about it, to come up with a way to best explain my thoughts and NOT feed the fire that has already been built. My comments are not about WHAT HAPPENED, but how it was handled.

I think retelling of a famous WW2 story best illustrates my point. This is the story of the PT 109 skippered by John F. Kennedy. (as in President Kennedy) JFK was skippering his boat the PT 109 on a night time patrol when disaster struck, his boat was rammed and cut in half by a Japanese destroyer. Several of his men were wounded and by his sheer bravery in handling the rescue operation, he became a national hero. Some would argue, that he deserved to have been court martialed for negligence for losing his boat. By how he handled himself when disaster struck, exemplifies how a naval officer should behave under a duress situation. He then rode his actions, "all the way to the WHITE HOUSE"!!!!!!

I'm not going to pick apart what was done incorrectly, others had already done that. Though it did make for some pretty fun reading.

[DockRat]

though it did make for some pretty fun reading.

x2..............

[DockRat]

A Constitutional Attorney Has Read --- OBAMACARE (His legal opinion follows!) A quick read From: Mike Cahill, (Retired Constitutional Lawyer).

Snopes says this is correctly attributed… http://www.snopes.co...ox/connelly.asp

A retired Constitutional lawyer has read the entire proposed health care bill.

The Truth About the Health Care Bill - Michael Connelly, (Retired Constitutional Attorney)

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.

The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal health care direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.

The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;

The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest theyconsult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
(Constitutional Law Instructor)
Carrollton , Texas

[etucker1959]

A Constitutional Attorney Has Read --- OBAMACARE (His legal opinion follows!) A quick read From: Mike Cahill, (Retired Constitutional Lawyer).

Snopes says this is correctly attributed… http://www.snopes.co...ox/connelly.asp

A retired Constitutional lawyer has read the entire proposed health care bill.

The Truth About the Health Care Bill - Michael Connelly, (Retired Constitutional Attorney)

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.

The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal health care direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.

The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;

The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest theyconsult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
(Constitutional Law Instructor)
Carrollton , Texas

I hope what he said is not all true. Only time will tell, but the fact he came from Texas, gives us a glimmer of hope that he looked at it from a standpoint of fog colored glasses.

[DEVOREFLYER]

Frenchy you can add this to your opin of Paul Ryan and Social Security changes. "The Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution".

It's a pity you know so little about Law and Finance, you don't know what your missing.

[DockRat]

I hope what he said is not all true.

Etuck, have you read the 157 Obamacare plans and decided which one is good fit for you ?

[etucker1959]

Etuck, have you read the 157 Obamacare plans and decided which one is good fit for you ?

I'm waiting for the riff raff to go first, then I'll take a look.

[etucker1959]

Frenchy you can add this to your opin of Paul Ryan and Social Security changes. "The Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution".

It's a pity you know so little about Law and Finance, you don't know what your missing.

Why don't you explain this too me. When the Republicans keep talking about reducing entitlements, what do they want to reduce????? Or are they just talking out of their arse????

[DEVOREFLYER]

You have been told several times in my posts and are not paying attention which is the norm for Libs. Libs only hear what they want to hear, it's called selective hearing. They select only what they want to hear and tune all else out as NOISE!!!

Any changes/reductions would ONLY pertain to FUTURE enrollee's and not PRESENT recipients. Ya got it now, well do ya?

[etucker1959]

You have been told several times in my posts and are not paying attention which is the norm for Libs. Libs only hear what they want to hear, it's called selective hearing. They select only what they want to hear and tune all else out as NOISE!!!

Any changes/reductions would ONLY pertain to FUTURE enrollee's and not PRESENT recipients. Ya got it now, well do ya?

I got that!!!! But the Hawgee's of the world, keep saying to help reduce the deficit you must reduce entitlements big time. If you can't reduce anyone's entitlement who is already getting one, only new enrollees. Someone is a moron and it's not me.!!!!!!! I don't know why Hawgee doesn't swoop in here and set us straight.