tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post4073006694102515725..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: Quick Roundup 190Gus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-9813364078576843552007-05-11T06:04:00.000-06:002007-05-11T06:04:00.000-06:00"However, (please read on) variations in rights ac..."However, (please read on) variations in rights accorded to individuals among the states assures evolving individual responsibilities and freedoms are more fully expressed, and that competition will exist for best practices in key human endeavors."<BR/><BR/>Individual rights, as I have outlined <A HREF="http://gusvanhorn.blogspot.com/2007/05/doublethink-redux.html" REL="nofollow">elsewhere</A>, are not "accorded" to anyone. They are inherent in man's nature. All a government can do is protect them adequately or fail to do so, including actually violating them, which is what socialized medicine will do in Colorado. In this respect, I find a flaw in your position, which is actually not an uncommon one. But the prevalence of a view does not make it correct. Just look at Colorado.<BR/><BR/>You are correct that permitted variations in laws among the states can at least localize tyranny. This is true, but it is an accident because the Federal government is superior to those of the states. <BR/><BR/>The federal government <B>should</B> step in to rule any state plan for socialized medicine illegal on the grounds that it constitutes slavery. Slavery is, after all, illegal according to the Constitution, which no state may violate. This organization is a reflection of the principle that individual rights supercede states rights as it permits the feds to stop states from imposing their own tyrannies.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, "states' rights" has been poorly <A HREF="http://gusvanhorn.blogspot.com/2005/03/dump-religious-right.html" REL="nofollow">understood and applied</A> throughout our nation's history. And the concept "individual rights" has been nearly forgotten. Again, just think of Colorado. <B>And the feds</B>.<BR/><BR/>In today's sad state of awareness among the public of the nature of rights and the purpose of government, the feds will not prevent Colorado from reinstituting slavery. Indeed the danger is that after enough states do so, the feds will install it top-down on the states in the form of national socialized medicine.<BR/><BR/>This is why I think it is foolhardy (and why I slammed you) to say anything about "states' rights" in this context: Because that concept is serving as a cover for a move to slip the yoke around all of us.<BR/><BR/>We can't all act every time and, to clarify, I do not regard it as a moral shortcoming for a non-Coloradan not to email this commission. But I do think it is wrong to claim that it is OK for Colorado to enslave its physicians due to "states' rights". This is how I read your earlier comment and why was not terribly pleased when I did.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-81320817801413255122007-05-10T18:06:00.000-06:002007-05-10T18:06:00.000-06:00Ouch! I may smirk, if only to try an expression la...Ouch! I may smirk, if only to try an expression lawyers actually practice. <BR/><BR/>You say, "States' "Rights" do not supercede individual rights". No issue is taken there. <BR/><BR/>However, (please read on) variations in rights accorded to individuals among the states assures evolving individual responsibilities and freedoms are more fully expressed, and that competition will exist for best practices in key human endeavors.<BR/><BR/>Our right as individuals to choose our domicile states, to elect or serve as representatives of state and local governments, and to pursue or to perpetuate the greater (or lesser) freedoms guaranteed under respective state constitutions certainly seem superior positions worth preserving, in my state and in my opinion.<BR/><BR/>Not one to "stand back", I have stood for and served several terms in positions of local leadership, and have helped influence outcomes in several elections. <BR/><BR/>That adult voters in Colorado prefer a path to socialized medicine slighlty amazes, but proponents of socialism are as ubiquitous as infections.<BR/><BR/>When occasionally our native socialists prevail, be glad we are compartmentalized into our various states and may follow their odd experiments for purposes of fact gathering rather than anarchistic propaganda. I alreay know you are also a better man than that.Vigilishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05051789616490005367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-26695514702177817632007-05-10T13:58:00.000-06:002007-05-10T13:58:00.000-06:00States' "Rights" do not supercede individual right...States' "Rights" do not supercede individual rights. If you want to stand by and allow momentum to build for national socialized medicine, that's your decision and potentially your life-threatening problem. However, as you should know, the purpose of government is to protect the rights of its citizens, not to enslave some and sicken others. <BR/><BR/>Because what happens in Colorado can have consequences for you personally, perhaps it will help for you to think of its citizens as already getting ready to interfere with things in your state and do something about it, if you are concerned.<BR/><BR/>Standing back and smirking while a catastrophe occurs and claiming the moral high ground on the basis of States' Rights of all things is about as brave and noble as hiding behind the skirt of a prostitute (and States' Rights is as close to one as a political concept can get). I would hope you are a better man than that.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-7213426369366506082007-05-10T12:36:00.000-06:002007-05-10T12:36:00.000-06:00re: 208 CommissionGus, thanks for highlighting the...re: 208 Commission<BR/><BR/>Gus, thanks for highlighting the Colorado experiment, which I apparently missed and will monitor with the anticipation of a financial train wreck. (Good thing federal grant transparency is starting next year, or the magnitutude of the Colorado disaster would be hidden with the usual redistribution ploys). <BR/><BR/>My respect for states' rights brooks no interference in duly legislated follies in other states. In fact, I get disturbed when outsiders try to out-influence us voters, here.Vigilishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05051789616490005367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-26914401297200818972007-05-10T12:22:00.001-06:002007-05-10T12:22:00.001-06:00Ah, now I see the link. Must have been a temporary...Ah, now I see the link. Must have been a temporary bug.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-13511120545495178642007-05-10T12:22:00.000-06:002007-05-10T12:22:00.000-06:00I'll check over there in a few hours. I have notic...I'll check over there in a few hours. I have noticed even here that backlinks sometimes take as much as a day to "form" on their own. (I am assuming that the "trouble" you note is that other links to BC that you now about aren't showing up there. Won't have time to verify at least for awhile....)Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-39959504407581062082007-05-10T12:15:00.000-06:002007-05-10T12:15:00.000-06:00For some reason, the backlink wasn't created. Othe...For some reason, the backlink wasn't created. Others are having the problem too. Maybe you'd like to go there and post a manual backlink?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-78649194448636021762007-05-10T12:08:00.000-06:002007-05-10T12:08:00.000-06:00Deliberate package-dealing, such as this, of such ...Deliberate <A HREF="http://gusvanhorn.blogspot.com/2006/03/package-deal-du-jour-biopiracy.html" REL="nofollow">package-dealing</A>, such as this, of such valid applications of egoism as division of labor with altruism in order to make it seem rational are among the most exasperating types of deception out there.<BR/><BR/>I hadn't even looked at the comments there this morning as I had an unexpected distraction during my normal blogging time, so thanks for pointing this out. It sounds like there might be a regular rogues' gallery of confusions (honest and otherwise) over there.<BR/><BR/>On the off-chance that someone from over there follows a back-link, I'll state this now: EGOISM DOES NOT REQUIRE LIVING AS A HERMIT AND TEAMWORK DOES NOT IMPLY ALTRUISM.<BR/><BR/>I feel somewhat better now!Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-17771455819608372002007-05-10T11:57:00.000-06:002007-05-10T11:57:00.000-06:00What were even more interesting were the comments ...What were even more interesting were the comments on that blog post at "The Belmont Club".<BR/><BR/>I haven't watched the speech (56k connection right now), but I have read the book, and Roark states in quite unequivocal terms that he was willing to collaborate with the other people involved in the construction -- however, he would like the architecture left to himself and not diluted by the meddling of pressure groups. And then you have a comment like this:<BR/><BR/><I>That Fountainhead is pure fantasy. Unless she’s building a tool shed in her back garden, <B>an architect must coordinate</B> with her own team, MEP engineers, structural engineers, cost consultants, [blah blah blah] and satisfy the client who actually pays for the construction (and hopefully the architect's fees). Once you jump over all those hurdles it’s time to start dealing with the contractors and construction workers who actually build the building.</I> (bold mine)<BR/><BR/>Although Roark IMO was too idealistic for the real world (I see that Rand meant him to be that way), this misrepresentation is ridiculous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com