« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Seriously: Marijuana Will Kill ObamaCare

Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center provides a peek at how just how ObamaCare can be stopped. Before continuing, keep this quote from Gandhi in mind:

40,000 British troops cannot force 300 million Indians to do what they will not do.

Power in numbers. If Americans don’t want ObamaCare, we don’t have to accept it. We have been conditioned that we must accept it, or that we must rely on the Supreme Court or Congress to save us, but what if the problem is the Supreme Court and Congress? What then? Micheal Boldin provides the answer:

Now that Heath Care legislation has passed, the obvious question for opponents is this: Now What? My answer is best summed up with just one word:

Marijuana.

No, I don’t mean that you should go out and smoke away your anger and frustration. Instead, you should feel empowered. The best way to explain this is by telling the story of a disabled mother from Northern California.

ANGEL’S STORY

Angel Raich has been permanently disabled since 1995. She has an inoperable brain tumor, a seizure disorder and other serious medical conditions. In 1997, her doctor felt that marijuana would be an effective medication.

Angel used homegrown marijuana, and she and her physician claim that it’s helped significantly. You may not agree with Angel’s choice, but it’s one made in accordance with California state law, which allows for such use. The federal government, however, has not shown much respect for state laws in recent decades, and chose to take action. After DEA agents seized and destroyed all six of her marijuana plants, she sued to stop them from doing so again.

The suit went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in Gonzales v Raich, Angel lost. The 2005 ruling made clear that the federal government did not recognize state laws authorizing the use of marijuana – in any situation.

The culprit here is the Commerce Clause, first defined in loose terms by Chief Justice John Marshall in the 1824 case of Gibbons v. Ogden. Justice Marshall is famous for his legislating from the bench and turning the defeat at the Philadelphia Convention of the nationalists, who believed in a strong central government with powers over the states, into a victory. Future Supreme Courts would take even more license with the Commerce Clause to grant Congress virtually unlimited powers – even under so-called conservative Chief Justices and conservative courts.

Mr. Boldin continues:

THE COMMERCE CLAUSE

The court ruled that control over a plant grown and consumed on one’s own property was authorized under the “Interstate Commerce Clause” of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution empowers Congress to “regulate…commerce among the several states.” It has never been amended.

Like any legal document, if the words of the Constitution mean today what they meant at the moment it was signed, we must understand just what those words meant at the time of its ratification…

…With this in mind, the Supreme Court, which is not a set of nine infallible gods, ruled incorrectly. But rule, they did. Thus, all three federal branches agreed that State-level laws allowing marijuana were a no-go. In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas gave a stark warning:

“If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption…then Congress’ Article I powers…have no meaningful limits. Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns, or any number of other items, it may continue to appropria[te] state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce.”

If this is starting to make a bit of sense, it should. The Supreme Court ruling should have ended the matter, right? Even with the incorrect assumption held by most Americans that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the constitution it did not. More than half a million people are registered users of medical marijuana, with millions more unregistered. So who is the final arbiter of the constitution? The states are, as our founders clearly wished it to be. Remember the nationalists were thumped at the Philadelphia Convention, it was only Marshall’s legislating from the bench that began to form the illusion the Supreme Court was all-powerful. Mr. Boldin continues:

RESIST DC

Even though she lost the case, Angel indicated she’d continue to use marijuana. At the time of the ruling, there were 10 states that had such laws. Not one of them has been repealed. Since then, another 4 states have passed similar laws, and many others are considering them, including South Dakota, Kansas, and New Hampshire…

…What’s been the result? The federal government will occasionally arrest some high-profile users, but taken in the perspective of the multitudes consuming the plant, the threat is quite low.

And, in mid-2009, recognizing a need for “efficient and rational use of its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources,” the Justice Department announced that it would back off the prosecution of medical marijuana patients even further.

Now it’s time to segway into the health-care arena. What, pray-tell, does the above have to do with ObamaCare? It’s the lesson, actually that, as Mr. Boldin states:

When enough states pass laws defying federal laws, and enough people actively defy them too, D.C. simply doesn’t have the manpower to arrest and prosecute all of us.

Many of us are relying on a political solution from Washington to solve our problems. Or perhaps we are putting our hope the Supreme Court will come to the rescue and not interpret the Commerce Clause in some novel way that will increase the power of Congress to control our lives to stunning new heights. For those who place their hopes in such entities I only have to say, good luck. Past experience dictates that such hopes are sure to be dashed, and even if a battle is won, the war will be lost until the people take action and not rely on the power of others to do the work they need to do. Never in history have people been rescued from tyranny by the very enablers of that tyranny, and the march to big government will always continue under both parties. It is only a matter of degree. As Dr. Larry Hunter points out in Who Lost Healthcare? (emphasis mine):

What do Harlem Globetrotters basketball, professional wrestling and American politics all have in common? They are FAKES…

…The sad thing is, most conservatives actually think American politics is a real contest between different visions and alternative practical courses for America. Au contraire. Politics in America today is between two Establishment political parties that need each other as foils—gotta’ have that “bad guy”—egged on by the mouth-radio carnies. The dirty little secret is most of the participants fundamentally agree on the need or the practical necessity of perpetuating and growing the welfare/warfare state. They differ only in degree, not kind.

The proof of this assertion is unambiguously clear: Government in the United States continues relentlessly to get bigger, more intrusive and oppressive no matter which political party is in control, no matter for how long. Yes, each party proceeds at a different pace and by different routes but they all herd us to the same destination nonetheless, confirming Thomas Jefferson’s observation that, “The natural tendency of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield.”…

…The joke is on those Americans who actually believe a restoration of limited government, individual freedom and personal liberty are the objectives of either political party. The poor saps have spent their entire lives paying the full price of admission to cheer on the Washington Generals. How pathetic is that? Pitiful.

So, when the history of the government takeover of healthcare is written and the question asked, “Who lost healthcare?” the answer will be unambiguous: “Republicans, who failed to take a political risk and refused to employ every parliamentary device at their disposal to stop ObamaCare from being enacted into law.”

Conservatives, irate at the Democrats, will make heroes of Republicans for fighting the good fight rhetorically and overlook their unwillingness to act. They will flock to the polls and throw lots of Democrats out of office. Republicans will claim a mandate—but a mandate to do what, slow the boil?

So where do we go from here? Back to Michael Boldin and nullification:

This kind of activism – while it clearly carries personal risk – should be a real blueprint for people that have been consistently unable to find constitutional relief in Congress, the Executive, or the Courts.

Marijuana users: Love ‘em or hate ‘em, but show some respect for them, as many have suffered greatly for doing what they believe is right. People who believe strongly about other issues, like health care mandates, would do well to learn from them.

What should be done about federal control over health care? The same thing that should be done for every unconstitutional federal law, regulation, or mandate – Nullify Now!

If the politicians in Washington fail us (and there is already plenty of backtracking on promises of repeal) and the Supreme Court rules against the people, what then? By ignoring a perfectly good approach to taking back power from a tyrannical few in DC, we have only ourselves to blame. By putting our eggs in the federal basket and failing to pressure our state leaders to pass laws nullifying ObamaCare and coordinating with other states to do the same, we miss a real opportunity. An opportunity to send a message to Washington that, even if the Supreme Court sides with you and even when you back down from pledges to protect the people, we can still win. There are millions of us and only a few of you. We refuse to accept your tyranny and we do so without firing a single shot. All we have to do is ignore you, just like you ignored us.

Be sure to check out other posts at the Tenth Amendment Center that describe how legislation is shaping up, what local Sheriffs should do, how a state can react when Congress threatens to remove federal funds, and other items. Also, check out Nullification – Our Constitutional Option.

Remember, sometimes if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Relying on politicians and judges to save us is a perfect example of why this little pearl of wisdom is still good advice.

Cross-posted.

COMMENTS

  • d_lamar

    It may be that the tea partiers have it figured out as you so eloquently have written. There is not a dime’s worth of difference in the two parties. We must support conservatives, rather than party.

    The unwillingness of the people to give respect to the tyrants in Washington is the only thing that will stop them.

    As you aluded, if the Congress, president and supreme court ignore our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, we have no alternative but to ignore them.

    • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com Beaglescout

      However imperfect Republicans have been in their conservatism, and however many progressives may have been in party leadership positions in previous years, they are both a weak party and a party with a conservative base. Instead of damning both parties, conservatives must become precinct committeemen and other voting members of the local Republican Party structure to help take it over. The Republican Party can be taken over the conservatives. I know this because it happened to the Democrat Party when the socialists took it over. This is a plan you and all other conservatives can execute.

      Precinct Project

      • eastbaylarry

        enough progressives, including RINOs, to effect the DC politics significantly. Meanwhile nullification efforts will slow the socialization of America enough to give us that breathing room.

        Nullification will also set a precedent for the future as the best way to reign in power grabs at the federal level.

        I especailly like the idea of the states taking back control of federal tax revenues. This will eliminate the main power of the feds to get the states to meekly follow their mandates. The states would no longer need to beg the federal government to pay them for the federal mandated expenses like MediCaide.

        • eburke

          get off their a@@es and become PCs.

          I’m not saying some of these other tactics might not have merit but the long-term solution is for conservatives to take over the party at the grassroots level. It worked for the socialists in the Democrat party (why do you think that Obama cleaned Hillary’s clock in most of the caucus state) and it can and will work for us as well.

          Become. A. PrecinctCommitteman. Today.

          • http://www.thesubstratum.com GJ Merits

            To another post.

            I only ask that you refute the case I make here: http://www.redstate.com/johnnypat/2010/03/27/the-case-for-organized-civil-disobedience/#comment-16

            The important part is the section that discusses politicians and their corruptibility. What you suggesting is to place the trust of the entire future of this county in politicians. I have already demonstrated that, as has Dr. Hunter, to be a foolhardy pursuit, admirable in its ideological goals, but pragmatically lacking any sense of reality.

            I do admire the thought that went into this approach. However, other means must be simultaneously enacted least we put all our eggs in one basket. It would be negligent of us to ignore looking at all avenues of approach to fulfill what the Declaration of Independence states is our duty. Personally, I am exploring non-violent means to take back this country now.

            The long-term solution is for the people to wrest back power from the federal government. The solution you provide, to me, ignores obvious failings of human nature which have been with us for thousands of years. We are losing the Republic.

            I wish I were more optimistic. But the writing is on the wall. I have been down every road open to me in exploring our predicament. I have had my bubble burst more than once. Every corner I turn, every solution I look into deeply enough, shows itself lacking long-term efficacy. They have been either band-aids, or plain naivety on my part. However, over time I have been mentally funneled in a certain direction. It is still a work in progress and I hope to join others in fleshing out a real strategy. Maybe what you are attempting to do will compliment it, but I don’t look at it as a solution to the war. Maybe the battle, but not the war.

          • http://www.thediscerningconservative.com discerningconservative

            Here you go again, attacking conservatives that join the ranks of the party. I am officially convinced that you are an absolute idiot. You attack the idea of conservatives joining the party to regain control, but advocate building hospitals on boats offshore. Morons everywhere are embarrassed by how stupid you are. Again, I will ask you nicely… Please refrain from attacking those of us that have joined the party ranks to try to wrest control of the party back to conservative values. It is offensive, stupid, and not in any way aligned with the purpose of Red State.

          • http://www.thesubstratum.com GJ Merits

            I am making observations about the type of people you are putting your trust in. It would do you well to read before making such accusations as is does not present you in a good light.

            As I indicate continuously, trusting politicians is a very risky business, and there is a very wide gap experience between your experience and that of the people I deal with with respect to the type of people you are wagering the future of the Republic on. History is also not on your side.

            I will ignore your personal attack as it is juvenile and not worthy of any actual response

            As far as the offshore clinics, this is something one of my specialists brought up. It is not my idea, but as ideas go, it is actually quite good. Floating hospitals in international waters where real top experts – the type you will lose over time in a socialist system (look at Canada and Britain) – can practice is no different than medical tourism. There are always solutions. To call me a moron for bringing it up is rather laughable.

            Here is an idea. In my diary entry, read it and refute it. How about trying that. The key word in the phrase “intelligent debate” is “intelligent”. Follow the links, read Dr.Hunter’s description of politics within DC and rebut it. Show me how your approach will work and what past examples you have throughout history that it has worked. Dispute my statements about the Marshall Court and its impact on nationalism.

            Show me where I am wrong. Show me where MLK and Gandhi were wrong. I did not say don’t try your strategy, just don’t put all your eggs in the power of others to save you. When in history has the power of others worked better than self-power (empowerment and independence). Real change requires sacrifice. Waiting for judges and politicians to save you is not sacrifice. It is waiting for judges and politicians. Like I said many times, your approach is admirable in its pure ideology and intentions. It is not pragmatic. Show me why it will work – and work quickly – to restore power to the rightful owners of that power – you and me and every reader of this blog and every voter and resident of this country. Make your case.

            I used a real example. I provided an end goal. I indicated a way to get form point a to point b. I showed why other methods do not work that rely on politicians and federal judges. I have plenty more examples if you wish to hear them – I have only scratched the surface.

            And for God’s sake do it like an adult next time. Personal attacks equate a tactic admission you have lost the debate. I have traded barbs in the past with those who practice such foolishness, but I find it a waste of my time and will no longer do it – my efforst are concentrated on saving the Republic.

  • partyof1

    Thank you for writing this. What you have laid out is truly the path to victory

    I have been researching the commerce clause and the constitutionality of forcing people to buy insurance since 3/21 so your post finds me at just the right time.

    All conservative legal experts I read agree that insurance mandates are unconstitutional, but also agree that the USSC will not do its duty and strike it down.

    If I was in charge at RedState, this post would be stuck permanently at the top.

  • mikerazar

    Congress could mandate that all citizens buy at least a thousand dollars worth of pot a year. Those who can’t afford it should get a subsidy.

    All women over 18 will have to show proof of having had at least one abortion in order to be eligible for a student loan. Free fertility treatments will be available for women who have trouble conceiving. Women who wait until the third trimester get full scholarships and a commendation.

    Fat people can be forced to hire a government certified personal trainer or pay a severe penalty.

    There will be a 1% payroll tax increase to subsidize Acorn.

    Before being allowed to hold a paying job, all citizens must devote a year to being the personal servant or valet to an elected or appointed government official.

    Show me where the Constitution bans any of those laws.

  • partyof1

    they can all be tied to commerce in one way or another.

    The “flexible constitutionalists” have replaced the Rule of Law with The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, or should I say, the six degrees of the Commerce Clause.

    Ultimately, though, I have to side with Justice Breyer?s view of the Constitution?that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.

    -BhO

  • mikerazar
  • http://www.thesubstratum.com GJ Merits

    That’s the whole point behind the above analysis. The Constitution has turned into whatever the Court says it is. Recall Justice Kenndy often uses international law as a guiding principle to make his decision. A Supreme Court justice looking to internatinal law? What is wrong with this picture?

  • texasgalt

    Because in the end, only a political solution is a real and permanent victory.
    Conservatives have to take over the Republican party.

    Not that a little misbehavin’ in the interim is a bad thing. :-)

  • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com Beaglescout

    An unjust government demands civil disobedience.

  • http://www.thesubstratum.com GJ Merits

    I love your name. Tying Texas and Galt together is genius.

    Please read my reply above and follow the link to the other diary where I left a comment. I think I laid out a pretty solid case why believing as you do ignores basic human nature – a human nature our founders understood too well – we are a corrupt bunch.

    I agree with your statement, but only IF the war has been won. The war of power in the people’s hands vs. the nationalists. That war cannot be won by the federal government, no matter who you put in there. Asking the federal government to limit its own powers that it has increased over the past 200 years since the Marshall Court is the equivalent of kissing your own lips.

    So your second statement about a little misbehavin is spot on, but it is the complimentary strategy to the what you identify as the primary strategy. In the end, both are equal and your primary strategy will only work if the people take back their rightful power over the nationalists.

  • jdw4america

    might be premature. Right now, we have the advantage. Right now, the social-dems are scared, swaggering bravado notwithstanding.

    AND- I’m happy to say, so are the Republicans! Their mealy-mouthed, half-hearted attempts at stopping the agenda of the left under barry and their fiscal recklessness while they were in power, have them squirmlingly supporting the tea party movement…but they’re worried that the people might not be too eager to see them return to DC either.

    eburke is right on the money. Let us work to change the face and the movement of the Republican party. Make it a hard right!

    Above all, do not underestimate the people! That’s how barry and friends got us here. That’s why the last Repubs Congress spent like sailors at a happy house – they thought they could get away with it.

    Absolutely take the States back from the left, but don’t give up on the Feds! It’s our government so long as we are willing to fight for it.

    In the meantime, we cannot stop putting pressure on the Repubs in Congress. Keep emailing, calling, writing, protesting. They are afraid of losing their seats – look at McCain! He disavowed Palin after the election, but he’s hoping she can save his skin now, isn’t he?

    We can do this, in every state, with every member. WE CAN!

    Never give up! Never surrender! (Galaxy Quest)

  • texasgalt

    But some of the animals are more corrupt than the other animals.
    It takes vision to properly cull the herd.

    In the end it comes down to this: Our work or THEIR guns.