They [the administration] began with the claim that there was no difference between activity and inactivity, since both involved decisions, and thus could be reached under the commerce power. Having largely abandoned this unwinnable argument, they now claim that the mandate does not really compel individuals to buy insurance, but merely regulates their inevitable future health-care consumption.
But because the future consumption of nearly all existing goods and services is inevitable across the entire population, this argument means that Americans can then be compelled to purchase an infinite variety of goods and services chosen by Washington. Far from limiting what government can do, this is the ultimate enabling principle. Even Soviet apparatchiks, who told producers what to make, did not dare tell people what to buy.
I hope, pray, that enought people have woken up; that the 2010 elections were for real; that the anger at big government liberalism and disgust at entitlement programs remains - even as a voter's "own" entitlement program gets cut.
If the above is true then Obama Care is toast come 2012 and we can go to the next step - a revival of respect for the 10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
and the concept of "States Rights" and "Laboratories of the States".
And then finally have it remembered that the locus of sovereignty resides in the people; that government has no power that was not delegated to it.
"That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them."
Virginia Declaration of Rights
Maybe then we can start pushing back against the Counter-Enlightenment (Marxism and contemporary liberalism) and return to the Enlightenment ideals of individualism, liberty and reason.