Fri, Nov 28, 2014, 12:55 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 8 hrs 35 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

OCATA THERAPEUTICS, INC. Message Board

  • jnichols_962711 jnichols_962711 Sep 21, 2013 5:03 PM Flag

    OT [Part one]; What Do(c) has ben harping about is correct. Elk you should accept this truth for many reasons...

    A retired Constitutional lawyer has read the
    entire proposed health care bill. Read his conclusions and
    pass this on as you wish. This is stunning!

    The Truth About the Health Care Bills
    - Michael Connelly, Ret. 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.

    Sentiment: Hold

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Re: "A retired Constitutional lawyer has read the entire proposed health care bill. Read his conclusions and pass this on as you wish. This is stunning! 

      The Truth About the Health Care Bills - Michael Connelly, Ret. 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.

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

      Well, here are the RWNJs going self-righteously and insanely feeble again in the face of all fact and reason, even when the case against them is totally overwhelming. This time it is a chain email that once had some legitimacy but was fully put to a genuine, humane, and appropriate death until these RWNJs got a migraine from reality and forced the dead ghost back out of its desiccated grave and though it looks incredibly wobbly and like a zombie of their worst nightmares and has no breath or pulse, they still are managing to somehow convince themselves it is vibrantly alive. Yes, the RWNJs are fully proving again how immune to facts and reality they are over there in delusion filled RWNJ Bubble of vast nonsense, distortion, misrepresentation and outright lies.

Connelly wrote this letter in 2009 when you could argue, and he and many did, that Obamacare is unconstitutional. (It should, further be noted that, as none of the RWNJs seem to be aware [not that they would care anyway, especially if it was bad for the case they want to make], that the bill Connelly was writing about at that time-- which was the House version of the bill in play when Connelly wrote his e-mail -- is not even the bill that ultimately passed the House.) In any case, Connelly's main argument was totally put to rest and rejected when the Supreme Court decided in June 2012, in accordance with its Constitutionally directed duty, that Obamacare is Constitutional. 

Anyone can disagree with this and not like it and make arguments that it was the wrong decision but the issue of Constitutionality has been decided in accordance with procedures set forth in and developed from THE CONSTITUTION. 

It is just amazing that the RWNJs have managed to drag this Connelly letter back into what they think is some kind of valid life. FOLKS YOUR SUPREME COURT HAS MADE THE DECISION. The main issue of Connelly's argument has been decided. Connelly was wrong on that issue. [And, again, Connelly wasn't at the time even writing about the bill that eventually was passed by the House and Senate, signed by Obama, and then decided upon as Constitutional by the Supreme Court. YES, RWNJs, CONNELLY WASN'T EVEN WRITING ABOUT THE SAME BILL THAT WAS PASSED!!!]

If the RWNJs can't see and won't admit their folly here then they are indeed in as bad shape as some of us say.

Further, with respect to other arguments Connelly made in that letter PolitiFact has soundly rejected several of them, as well:

"We took a look at Connelly's claim that the bill would provide "free health care for illegal immigrants." This has been a complaint of many Republican opponents of the health care plans in Congress. It's what prompted South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson to shout "You lie!" at the president. We concluded that while an argument can be made that there are not sufficient verification procedures to ensure illegal immigrants don't buy health insurance on a government exchange, CONNELLY'S STATEMENT WAS BELIED BY LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT SPECIFICALLY PRECLUDES ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM GETTING FEDERAL HEALTH SUBSIDIES. WE RULED HIS STATEMENT FALSE.

We also explored Connelly's claim that HR 3200 provides for "free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession." Since Connelly wrote his e-mail, the abortion language in the House bill has changed, rendering Connelly's claim moot. But WE CONCLUDED THAT IT WAS WRONG WHEN HE SAID IT, AND TO THE EXTENT HE SAYS HIS CLAIM NOW APPLIES TO LANGUAGE IN THE SENATE BILL, WE THINK HE'S WRONG ABOUT THAT TOO. AND WE GIVE HIM A FALSE.

Connelly also said the law "does provide for rationing of health care," a general claim we have addressed previously.

According to Connelly, "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."

We asked Connelly to point us toward the parts of the bill that say the government would limit the kinds of services that private insurers could provide. He referred us to Sections 1301 and 1302, both of which deal with setting minimum "essential" levels of service. But they would not restrict the kinds of services private insurers could provide.

"BOTTOM LINE," CONNELLY CONCLUDED IN OUR INTERVIEW, "THEY (DEMOCRATS) WANT TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE ENTIRE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY." THAT'S ANOTHER CLAIM WE HAVE DEALT WITH IN LENGTH, MOST RECENTLY WHEN IT WAS LEVIED BY REPUBLICAN HOUSE LEADER JOHN BOEHNER. WE RATED THAT ONE FALSE.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • Well, here are the RWNJs going self-righteously and insanely feeble again in the face of all fact and reason, even when the case against them is totally overwhelming. This time it is a chain email that once had some legitimacy but was fully put to a genuine, humane, and appropriate death until these RWNJs got a migraine from reality and forced the dead ghost back out of its desiccated grave and though it looks incredibly wobbly and like a zombie of their worst nightmares and has no breath or pulse, they still are managing to somehow convince themselves it is vibrantly alive. Yes, the RWNJs are fully proving again how immune to facts and reality they are over there in delusion filled RWNJ Bubble of vast nonsense, distortion, misrepresentation and outright lies.

      Connelly wrote this letter in 2009 when you could argue, and he and many did, that Obamacare is unconstitutional. (It should, further be noted that, as none of the RWNJs seem to be aware [not that they would care anyway, especially if it was bad for the case they want to make], that the bill Connelly was writing about at that time-- which was the House version of the bill in play when Connelly wrote his e-mail -- is not even the bill that ultimately passed the House.) In any case, Connelly's main argument was totally put to rest and rejected when the Supreme Court decided in June 2012, in accordance with its Constitutionally directed duty, that Obamacare is Constitutional.

      Anyone can disagree with this and not like it and make arguments that it was the wrong decision but the issue of Constitutionality has been decided in accordance with procedures set forth in and developed from THE CONSTITUTION.

      It is just amazing that the RWNJs have managed to drag this Connelly letter back into what they think is some kind of valid life. FOLKS YOUR SUPREME COURT HAS MADE THE DECISION. The main issue of Connelly's argument has been decided. Connelly was wrong on that issue. [And, again, Connelly wasn't at the time even writing about the bill that eventually was passed by the House and Senate, signed by Obama, and then decided upon as Constitutional by the Supreme Court. YES, RWNJs, CONNELLY WASN'T EVEN WRITING ABOUT THE SAME BILL THAT WAS PASSED!!!]

      If the RWNJs can't see and won't admit their folly here then they are indeed in as bad shape as some of us say.

      Further, with respect to other arguments Connelly made in that letter PolitiFact has soundly rejected several of them, as well:

      "We took a look at Connelly's claim that the bill would provide "free health care for illegal immigrants." This has been a complaint of many Republican opponents of the health care plans in Congress. It's what prompted South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson to shout "You lie!" at the president. We concluded that while an argument can be made that there are not sufficient verification procedures to ensure illegal immigrants don't buy health insurance on a government exchange, CONNELLY'S STATEMENT WAS BELIED BY LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT SPECIFICALLY PRECLUDES ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM GETTING FEDERAL HEALTH SUBSIDIES. WE RULED HIS STATEMENT FALSE.

      We also explored Connelly's claim that HR 3200 provides for "free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession." Since Connelly wrote his e-mail, the abortion language in the House bill has changed, rendering Connelly's claim moot. But WE CONCLUDED THAT IT WAS WRONG WHEN HE SAID IT, AND TO THE EXTENT HE SAYS HIS CLAIM NOW APPLIES TO LANGUAGE IN THE SENATE BILL, WE THINK HE'S WRONG ABOUT THAT TOO. AND WE GIVE HIM A FALSE.

      Connelly also said the law "does provide for rationing of health care," a general claim we have addressed previously.

      According to Connelly, "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."

      We asked Connelly to point us toward the parts of the bill that say the government would limit the kinds of services that private insurers could provide. He referred us to Sections 1301 and 1302, both of which deal with setting minimum "essential" levels of service. But they would not restrict the kinds of services private insurers could provide.

      "BOTTOM LINE," CONNELLY CONCLUDED IN OUR INTERVIEW, "THEY (DEMOCRATS) WANT TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE ENTIRE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY." THAT'S ANOTHER CLAIM WE HAVE DEALT WITH IN LENGTH, MOST RECENTLY WHEN IT WAS LEVIED BY REPUBLICAN HOUSE LEADER JOHN BOEHNER. WE RATED THAT ONE FALSE.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • This won't sway the loons one bit. Facts mean nothing to them, just look at elk. Facts make their heads hurt.

      Sentiment: Sell

    • Well, that was written in 2009 and plenty has happened since then, including the passage of the bill and one part being declared a tax and thus constitutional in a huge miscarriage of justice. If they had found it unconstitutional, we would not be in the current mess.

      BD

    • JN. good post which should be an eye opener to BO supporters. Be prepared for the usual insults and name calling that the left throws at anyone who questions this administration's power grabs and attempts to weaken or do away with the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. I will never understand why the left themselves do not stand with the conservatives to protect and defend the Constitution as they themselves have so much to lose..............their guaranteed Constitutiional rights which when gone will never be returned.

    • Next thing the demoncrats will be (harp)ooing about is some hero from san Diego ate all the donuts in the galaxy which is causing the repetive-ness of global warming....Lmao at the fools....or poets and surely they are bums,,,

    • [Lastly]

      This legislation also provides for access,
      by the appointees of the Obama administration, in direct
      violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to
      the Constitution, of all of your personal healthcare
      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 they consult 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

    • [Part 2]

      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.

      • 2 Replies to jnichols_962711
      • JN. do you think this liberal crowd really understands they are about to give away their Constitutional
        rights and the ramifications thereof for future generations? Are we looking at the result of the deemphasis of American history in our schools? Any who think they will be better off without the protection of the Constitution are in for a rude awakening. The shame of it all is they are taking these rights away from their children.

      • [part the seas]

        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.

 
ACTC
6.97+0.17(+2.50%)Nov 13 3:59 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
SeaDrill Limited
NYSEWed, Nov 26, 2014 4:01 PM EST
Transocean Ltd.
NYSEWed, Nov 26, 2014 4:01 PM EST