The difficulty in talking to these people–besides the fact that they are true believers for whom no logic will ever work–is the sheer amount of lies that come rushing out. It is hard to catch them all; it’s as if they come from an alternate universe. For example, in describing the benefits of the free market system I told him that the great advances in medicine had some from this country. His reply was that all of modern medicine stemmed from two discoveries, germ theory and vaccines, which were discovered by two Frenchmen, Louis Pasteur and Jonas Salk. Oops. Germ theory wasn’t discovered by Pasteur, although he certainly had a role in developing that theory, and of course Salk was American. All of those advances occurred in free-market capitalist systems but before you can prove it, they’ve shifted the argument.

You can’t call it “socialized medicine” he said, because the government doesn’t own it and run it. That’s the definition of socialized medicine. That may be true as far as it goes. When it comes to single payer it will be full-fledged, European-style socialized medicine and it is clear that’s where this government wants to take it. It was the second time I’ve heard that argument from widely divergent sources, so I’m guessing those are OFA talking points. So I concede the point: it’s really not socialized medicine, it’s fascism. In fascism, the state allows private industry to exist in a tightly controlled form. Think Fascist Italy, Krupp Industries under the Nazis or even China today. They don’t like being called fascists any better, but they do like the “China model.”

Then there was the argument that Canada has a better healthcare system because seniors go to Canada to buy their drugs more cheaply. Of course: Canadian drugs are subsidized by Canadian taxpayers and we are free to buy them (today). Here a specific fact is used to prove a general statement: a feat of inductive reasoning that doesn’t work. And he said cancer survival rates in Canada and Europe are higher than in the U.S.–easily and demonstrably false. In fact, survival rates are, in some cases, dramatically better in the U.S.

The fact is, you can’t pin these people down. They’re slippery creatures, sure of their conclusions and willing to trot out any argument, no matter how fanciful, to prove their point. They are eager to score debating points and quite frankly that’s all they are. They seek to overwhelm you, Alinsky-style, with a mountain of supposed facts, assuming that if you don’t counter each and every one they must be right.

There’s an old saying: Never wrestle with a pig: the pig loves it and you just get dirty. They’re not pigs, of course, but Aristotle did know who they were: Sophists. All argument and no truth. All style and no substance. Yet the Sophists were able to convince the Athenian masses to poison Socrates.

This is a full-fledged culture war and we have a lot of work to do if we are to avoid our dose of poison. Bill Whittle, always great, is never better than in this recent video on PJTV, telling us how bankrupt their ideas are and how we need to forge ahead.

This week I’ll be posting more on their plans, methods, and how to counter them.

We all know that the 2010 election is important; I’ve been saying that it is as pivotal as the election of 1860. Suthers remarks seem to agree: he said the 2010 election is about federalism, about federal control and power over the individual lives of citizens. The healthcare bill–don’t ever mistake it for mere reform–is the most sweeping power grab in our history and an affront to the very concept of federalism.

The left has long ago jettisoned a belief in the concept of federalism yet only certain powers are granted to the federal government in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. Those powers not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states or the people.

He noted that healthcare is not an enumerated power in the Constitution. So how does the left believe they can do this? The more cynical among us–me included–say that they do it simply because they want to and they have the votes. Suthers said that they relied on the Commerce clause. Funny thing about that, though: when CNS News asked key Democrat figures at the time, they couldn’t come up with an answer. Nancy Pelosi just sputtered, “Is that a serious question?” The Commerce clause is merely a fig leaf.

Suthers explained that the commerce clause was meant to regulate commerce between the individual states because at the time there were tariffs between them. It was meant to regulate interstate commerce. Over time it has been stretched to mean any economic activity across state lines. Although he didn’t mention it, the case which grossly expanded the commerce clause was Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) in which Filburn, a farmer raising wheat on his own property to feed his chickens, was ruled by the Supreme Court to have engaged in interstate commerce.  There are attempts today to overturn that ruling, but that’s another story. Ever since 1942, the Congress has relied on the commerce clause to justify a whole host of things.

But that, Suthers pointed out, was economic activity. The federal government influences our economic activity by incentives, such as tax credits for solar panels, or by offering either individuals of states federal dollars in exchange for playing by their rules. Drive 55 or don’t get federal highway money. We should never forget, however, that it is reality not “federal” money but rather our tax dollars. They’re bribing us with our own money!

Healthcare is different. This is the first time in our history that the government is saying to individuals, “Buy healthcare or be fined and punished up to 2% of your income by the IRS.” The Congressional Budget Office, he said, has been warning Congress since 1998 that federal power has never been used to punish citizens for not buying something; in essence, for a lack of economic activity.

If this law is allowed to stand, there is no limit on what the government can do. If this stands, the federal government can not only give you a tax break for buying that solar panel but also fine you for not buying one.

Recognizing, perhaps, the weakness of the commerce argument, Holder’s Department of Justice is basing its defense on the taxing power of the federal government. This, too, fails, said Suthers, because under Article I Section 9 of the Constitution federal taxes would have to be apportioned to the states based on population; this is individual. This, he said, amounts to a “capitation” tax, or a head tax, which the federal government is not allowed to levy.

Let me note here that it was a hearth tax that helped precipitate the French Revolution and a tea tax that helped precipitate our first Revolution. And yet this illegal health tax is not enough for the left: they are planning “cap and tax” right now.

One final note. For his courageous stand for our constitutional liberties, John Suthers has a big liberal target on his back. He is our only Republican elected official at the state level right now. The attorney general’s office is not usually a high-profile race but in 2010 it is a key to our liberty. The 9-12 groups in Colorado collected over 10,000 signatures in support of his efforts. But that is not enough: Please support him financially as well. What do you think will happen to the lawsuit if he is defeated?

Colorado Attorney General Suthers spoke first, explaining how bad Obamacare is: not only for health care in general, but also for the unprecedented intrusion and control in people’s lives. I intend to devote a separate blog post to his talk–it’s that good.

He mentioned that when the attorneys general case reaches the Supreme Court the decision is likely to be 5-4 and the outcome is not certain. That was the perfect lead-in for me, because this petition is about a second line of defense; it is about erecting a state-level barrier to forced health care. The left knows that once they control your health care, they control your life. In Locke’s classic statement of liberty as being composed of life, liberty and property, your “property interest” in your own being is the most basic of all property rights. It did not take them long to assert their right to control you by taxing tanning beds, a fact Rep Steve King mentioned.

L to R: Tom Tancredo, aide and Rep Steve King

Yes, Rep Steve King (IA-5) was there and talked, among other things, about the passing of the health care bill and Republican efforts to stop it. He relayed a story of how Michelle Bachmann decided to call the tea partiers to the capitol to protest; how they went home only to come back within 48 hours. I found the story fascinating as I had been following it at the time from the emails I was getting from the Tea Party Patriots.

Before he spoke, Rep. King spoke to my wife about the petition–apparently this was the first he had heard about it–and spontaneously pulled out a business card and wrote on the back of it: : “I support the petition to Repeal Obama Care!” and signed it. Now that’s not exactly what the petition does–it asserts Colorado’s 10th Amendment rights to block Obamacare–but it’s close enough. We certainly appreciate the sentiment and note that the House Republicans have already introduced a motion to repeal the bill. It failed, of course. This time. I think the Republicans should open every session with such a motion, much as Cato the Elder ended every speech with the phrase, “Carthage must be destroyed.”

The signatures for many, if not most, petitions in Colorado are collected by paid signature gatherers.

We need 120,000 signatures to ensure enough valid signatures to get the petition on the ballot in November.  In El Paso County we ought to be able to collect 50-60,000. Since there are over 500,000 people in the county, that means 10% of the population–not trivial. But recent surveys show between 58-63% of the population want Obamacare repealed, so it is possible. When you add in the surrounding counties, it ought to be easy.

On Friday, June 11, federal district judge Philip Brimmer issued a preliminary injunction against HB 1326, ruling several of its key provisions unconstitutional. As I wrote on June 12, the legislature passed HB 1326 in 2009 in order to make it harder to get initiatives on the ballot by making it outrageously expensive to do so.

With that hurdle overcome, it is full speed ahead. Volunteer efforts are key because we volunteers are much more careful about collecting signatures from registered voters–signatures that will withstand scrutiny.

Petitions will be available at all liberty events this month: check out the calendar at the CCM website for details.

Let’s show them what we think of Obamacare!

Fortunately we live in a federal republic–the first of its kind. The thirteen states that founded the federal government retained many rights for themselves and others for the people. The travesty of Obamacare is that it tramples the rights of both the states and the people. A key strategy of the left is that once passed, they believe we won’t have the intestinal fortitude to repeal it. Well, neither the people nor the states are going to sit by and take it.

In Colorado, the Independence Institute is sponsoring an initiative to put on the November ballot to amend the Colorado state constitution affirming the right of all people to have free choice of health care, prohibiting the state or the federal government to force individuals to pay for a specific health care plan. In other words: Obamacare won’t play here.

Oklahoma, which passed the bill on May 5, and Georgia have sent the bill to their governor’s desk for signature. A total of 41 states have either filed (37) or are planning to file (4) such legislation in their legislatures. The model legislation is sponsored by the American Legislative Exchange Council.

In Colorado, where the Democratic-controlled legislature was too busy passing tax increases, trying to gut TABOR, and trying to pass a voter fraud bill, a citizen initiative is under way.

As I pointed out last week, it is ironic that the Leftists in the legislature who call themselves progressives have been trying to limit citizen initiatives, a cornerstone of the Progressive Party’s platform. Perhaps this is why: having ignored the voice of the people, we will use the initiative process to put this on the ballot and pass it in November.

I’m collecting signatures in El Paso County. We need 120,000 signatures across the state. This is historic and you’ll want to be able to tell your children and grandchildren that you stood up for their freedom of choice in health care.

The LORD said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.” (Gen 18:26)

Are there 50 righteous Democrats in Congress?  The health care vote shows only 34. Bart Stupak can never again claim to be pro-life.

I’ve been saying for some time that after the liberty movement reclaims the GOP from big government, big spending RINOs the next task is to reclaim the Democrat party and kick out the Marxist extreme left (one of the meanings of “Reclaim the Blue”).

The health care vote show that maybe that’s not possible and that those who gave me skeptical looks when I mentioned it were right. Abram eventually negotiated God down to 10 righteous people and even that many couldn’t be found in Sodom.  In the end, God had a different solution: allow Lot and his family to leave.

That is probably also the best solution for the 34 Democrats who put the Constitution above party ideology: become independent, form a Blue Dog Party or even join the GOP. You’re welcome.

Of course, this is exactly what the Democratic socialists who run the government  are counting on.  Now that the health care law is enacted, they hope the reported 110 new boards and other goodies will prove impossible to kill. Even worse, they have shown the danger of permitting sometimes obscure, arcane and even irrelevant government agencies to continue to exist. An example that came to light this week is the expansion of the Public Health Service–removing all manpower caps and making them liable to involuntary call to active service

during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;… be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic;

It’s on pp.1312-1315 of the 2400 page bill. Do you think the Democrats have a purpose in mind for these officers beyond that of the current staff? I don’t mention this to disparage the PHS or its current mission or to question why this service exists or whether its functions duplicate those of other agencies. You can go to their site and judge that for yourself.

My point is that because it exists it can easily be re-purposed. I’ve been thinking about this re-purposing for a while now. It is clearly one of the strategies of the left as they seek to  subvert everything to their cause. It is easier to subvert an existing agency than to create a new one–and it attracts a lot less attention.

The only solution is to starve the beast: cut the funding and let these organizations wither and die. It will be good for the bottom line, too.

I was born with crooked teeth: crowded and one eye tooth stopped descending too soon.  Anybody’s fault? No.  Injustice? No. No “wrong” to be “righted;” just the luck of the draw. Life isn’t fair (see my earlier post on common sense.)

When I was a teenager my father took me to an orthodontist for a consult.  The orthodontist offered a treatment plan and my dad wanted to know whether he would guarantee the result.  He wouldn’t. Dad decided to forgo the treatment for me.  Do I blame him? No.  He was my parent and as such it was his decision. Under the socialist way of looking at things, my dad would have been a bad parent. The state, not the parent, would decide.  It takes a village, after all.

A bit later, the Air Force Academy offered me treatment.  They said they could fix things by pulling 4 teeth and putting me in braces for two of my remaining three cadet years. Call me crazy, but I didn’t like the idea of losing four perfectly good teeth. I passed.  They were incredulous that I would pass up free treatment, warned me that the offer wouldn’t happen again and I think even made me sign a piece of paper refusing the treatment.  You see, you have to be crazy to turn down government largesse.  It’s free, right? Well, no: somebody has to pay for it. The taxpayer.

Then much later in life I decided I wanted to have my teeth straightened.  I had paid for my wife’s orthodontic care and my son’s.  I felt it was my turn.  My health, my choice.  Had we been in a socialized medicine situation, they would have looked up the record.  Sorry, buddy, you refused care before and it’s too late now.  You’re too old. We’re going to save the treatmend dollars for somebody younger.  Should have taken the chance when you had it.

But we weren’t in Obamacare. I looked up a couple of orthodontists and got a couple of recommendations. I did two consults and got two different treatment plans. Choice: the essence of the free market. Competition. Under socialized medicine, a board will decide what the appropriate treatment plans are–not you and not your doctor. Since the government is paying, they decide. A lot like my father deciding when I was 14–but I haven’t been 14 for a long time and I resent the government choosing for me.

One plan called for 26-30 months in braces and the other for 20; I chose the shorter one.  Only one tooth would need to be extracted and another one shaved a bit to make it fit.  (I still have all four teeth the government orthodontist would have pulled.) By waiting I received the benefit of advanced techniques not available when I was a teenager. The free market had advanced the science of orthodontics.

Furthermore, I decided to wait a year to begin treatment. I wanted to pay for it through a Medical Savings Account and I’d just missed the deadline to start the account. Yes, government mandates controlled when I could start the plan and how much I could contribute.  Under socialized government-controlled health care, they will control a lot more than that.  Again, my choice: I could have paid straight out of pocket and forgone the tax advantage but chose not to.

The treatment has been finished almost four years now and I’m very happy with the process and the result. The orthodontist and his staff are all very friendly people with the interests of their patients at heart. Under government-controlled health care, that is not the case. The government is footing the bill and they are the ones who must be appeased. The patient is just a means to get government payments.

All the along the way I had choices and I was the beneficiary of the free market in health care. Why in Heaven’s name would I want to give that up for government-controlled care? Why would anybody?

Oh, yes: it also includes a federal take-over of college loans.  So you not only have to go to the government to get a mortgage or a car or health care, you have to go to them to get an education, too.

But chin up, boys and girls: Michelle already told you Barak knows you’re going to have to make sacrifices.

• Two wrongs don’t make a right. If the GOP used shady maneuvers to pass small bills, it is no excuse for the Democrats to use the same tactics to pass a big one.
• The ends do not justify the means. Right ends do not come from wrong means.  This one has actually been around since William Penn in our country and can be traced back at least to Machiavelli.
• There’s no such thing as a free lunch. Similar to, ” If it’s too good to be true, it probably is.” Somebody is going to pay for health care either with their dollars or by not getting it.
• Money doesn’t grow on trees.  It is just printed over at the Treasury.
• If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.  That’s actually my favorite; don’t know that I’ve ever heard anyone other than my other say that one.

The problem is that common sense isn’t common.  It is the result of experience.  My parents and grandparents went through the Great Depression and they learned those lessons the hard way.

Remember the Great Depression? That was the last time people turned to government in a crisis instead of to themselves. If we don’t show some common sense, history will repeat itself.