Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    January 2011
    S M T W T F S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Archive for January 29th, 2011

Liberty Legal Foundation on Florida court ruling

Posted by Richard on January 29, 2011

I gave two cheers when the Virginia district court ruled that Obamacare's individual mandate is unconstitutional. I gave three cheers when the Florida district court ruled that, since the Democrats chose not to include a severability clause in that legislative monstrosity, the entire thing is unconstitutional. The Liberty Legal Foundation's Van Irion was pleased, too, but put the ruling into perspective (via email; emphasis in original): 

I was actually pretty disappointed with the Virginia Court when it found the individual mandate unconstitutional, but then found that it could sever the individual mandate from the rest of the bill. Now at least one Federal court has corrected that mistake.

I’m also disappointed that both Courts explicitly stated that Congress has the power to regulate health care and insurance. My immediate reaction was that both judges must be reading some other Constitution. The Constitution I have does not list “regulation of health care” within the enumerated powers granted to Congress. Then I remember, they’re following Wickard v. Filburn.

You see, District Courts work under the assumption that they must follow existing precedent from higher courts and rarely even consult the Constitution. Both the Virginia and Florida Courts were simply applying Wickard v. Filburn when they re-affirmed Congress’ general authority to regulate healthcare. This is why our Obamacare Class Action lawsuit must go all the way to the Supreme Court to get Wickard v. Filburn overturned.

Our Obamacare Class Action lawsuit is STILL unique because it is the only lawsuit against Obamacare that begins and ends with one argument: the commerce clause does not grant unlimited power to Congress, therefore Wickard v. Filburn must be overturned. I may sound like a broken record, but this message needs to be repeated until everyone in America understands it. For the first 150 years after the Constitution was ratified, all courts agreed that the Commerce Clause gave Congress only the authority to prevent individual states from implementing burdensome regulations on interstate commerce. Then the FDR-packed Supreme Court destroyed our Constitutional Republic by re-interpreting the commerce clause, eliminating all limits on Congressional authority.

The goal of all of the State-filed lawsuits is to get rid of Obamacare any way they can. That is an admirable goal, but it falls short of the more important goal. Liberty Legal Foundation’s goal is NOT simply to overturn Obamacare. Our goal is to restore Constitutional limits on Congressional authority so that when the political winds shift again, Congress can’t repeat a similar massive power grab.

Obamacare is simply the latest and worst example of Congressional abuse of authority. So, it became our tool to overturn Wickard v. Filburn. For 150 years the courts got the Commerce Clause right. For the past 68 years they got it wrong based solely on the political motivations of a handful of judges. There is more historical precedent supporting our arguments than supporting Wickard. This is a fight we can win! And success means Obamacare will be overturned AND our Constitutional Republic will be restored.

I urge you to join me as a plaintiff in the Obamacare Class Action lawsuit. All you need to do is go to Liberty Legal Foundation and sign on with a minimum donation of $1 (if you can afford more, please give more).

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The value of fairy tales and fantasy

Posted by Richard on January 29, 2011

This post began as an email message to some friends, following up on a marvelous quote I'd shared with them at breakfast. I decided it's worth posting here where others may see it.

"Fairy tales do not tell children that dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children that dragons can be killed." — attributed to G.K. Chesterton

I heard it on Criminal Minds, a very good crime drama if you like your crime dramas dark and sometimes disturbing. The protagonists are members of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit, which profiles and tracks down serial killers. Each episode features a quote, delivered as a voice-over, that's more or less apropos to the story. Some of them are cited here:

12 great sci-fi quotes from (yes, really) Criminal Minds

If you search for that quote (or a significant portion thereof), you'll get lots of hits, many from computer geek or sci-fi/fantasy sites.

The oldest source I found is an excellent 1994 essay by Terry Pratchett, "When the Children Read Fantasy." It's posted here, but reposted in a more readable font and format here. I highly recommend it.

Pratchett attributed the quote to Chesterton, but his version is slightly different:

One of the great popular novelists of the early part of this century was G.K. Chesterton. Writing at a time when fairy tales were under attack for pretty much the same reason as books can now be covertly banned in some schools because they have the word 'witch' in the title, he said: "The objection to fairy stories is that they tell children there are dragons. But children have always known there are dragons. Fairy stories tell children that dragons can be killed."

The Wikiquote page for Chesterton has this (but like all the other versions I found, it doesn't cite a source in Chesterton's writings):

  • Fairy tales are more than true — not because they tell us dragons exist, but because they tell us dragons can be beaten.
    • As quoted in Coraline (2004) by Neil Gaiman, epigraph.
    • Variant: Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed.
      • As quoted in Raising Young Children: 52 Brilliant Little Ideas for Parenting Under 5s (2007) by Sabina Dosani and Peter Cross, p. 38

I found the version in bold at some other quote sites, too. They're probably all just cribbing from each other. 🙂

Since Wikiquote's source for the variant (which is close to the Criminal Minds version) is a 2007 book, I suspect that that version may have evolved from Pratchett's version.

Wikiquotes also has this, for which it does cite a Chesterton work:

  • What fairy tales give the child is his first clear idea of the possible defeat of bogey. The baby has known the dragon intimately ever since he had an imagination. What the fairy tale provides for him is a St. George to kill the dragon.
    • Tremendous Trifles (1909)

Wikiquotes has lots of other interesting Chesterton quotes. Some I disliked, others I liked very much. Here are a couple of the latter:

  • Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable.
    • Illustrated London News (23 October 1909)
  • The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. …
    • Illustrated London News (1924)

As for the dragons quote, the version from Criminal Minds may not be authentic, but I think it's the best version. The wording is direct, simple, and elegant, and there's a nice symmetry/balance to the three short sentences.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »