I may be the only one.

i never think about it, i don't seem to be under any major restrictions

i think that americans i know seem to be too hung up on it, to the point of paranoia

i never think about it, i don't seem to be under any major restrictions

i think that americans i know seem to be too hung up on it, to the point of paranoia

take the gun thing, i know people who own handguns (it is possible) but only a couple, i know lots of folks who own long guns (live rural), i know lots more who never think about owning a gun of any kind

being that we just drifted away from our "other rulers" as opposed to having to fight them,
i guess that's why i don't get the paranoid fear of government (not that's that what it is, but it's how i view it)

America is based on Individualism, not collectivism.

Y'know, Dave, the more I read your posts and try to understand how your mind works, the more I realize that you have a lot in common with those horrible Communists that you profess to hate. Back in the days of the Soviet Union (that was back when we still refered to China as 'Red China' and did no business with it), the Russian Commies were fond of bragging how they had overtrown the terrible Tsarist monarchy and established a paradise for the freedom-loving proletariat. Whether or not even a scintilla of that was true is irrelevant. I'm talking about attitude here. That's the lesson all Russian kids were taught in school, just like American kids are taught that we overthrew the King of England's rule to establish a 'free country.' Whether or not even a smidgen of that is accurate is also irrelevant. You've bought the whole propagandistic myth hook, line and sinker, David. You do sound an awful lot like that guy -- what was his name? Vishinsky, I think -- bragging about his homeland, the great Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. You've just changed the nomenclature to the United States instead of Republics.

Nice going, ace.

Edgar: On NPR's Talk of the Nation this afternoon, a reporter was attempting to explain a couple of the legal issues that may come into play once the law is signed by President Obama tomorrow.
One is called "nullification" under which states can adopt laws specifically aimed at excluding those states from having to obey the law. This was attempted prior to the Civil War and in (many of) our lifetimes during the civil rights era.
Another is the "mandate" that in 2014 (most) people will have to buy insurance or they will be subject to a fine (or a tax). The novel argument goes that the Federal government can not do this unless an action has some connection to interstate commerce. A decision by a person NOT to buy is neither interstate nor is it commerce.
I don't pretend to be a lawyer or a constitutional lawyer so I probably botched this explanation. My understanding is as many as a dozen suits against the bill will be filed as early as tomorrow when it becomes law.

Would They?

There's a lot of nonsense out there about constitutional challenges to the Health Care Reform law on various 'state sovereignty' grounds. That's nonsense. The Nullification Crisis and Civil War settled those issues. But the more serious challenges are based on extremely forward-leaning conservative arguments about the 'commerce clause'. It seems very out there. Comical almost. And with your average Court, I would think it a trivial concern. But this Court, particularly the four most conservative members, have shown themselves to be not only so ideological but so activist and even so partisan that I'm not sure you can really put it past them. We're going to do some poking around to find out more, particularly views on this question among the sort of legal academics and would-be judges who cluster around the Federalist Society.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying I consider this at all likely. But I've seen a number of things happen lately that I didn't think at all likely. So I'm watching.

--Josh Marshall

But this Court, particularly the four most conservative members, have shown themselves to be not only so ideological but so activist and even so partisan ...