Liberal in the Land of Conservative

One of the cruxes of the entire conservative movement, aside perhaps from an unhealthy obsession with the 2nd Amendment, is their purported adherence to the 10th Amendment:

Now I don't necessarily share their passion for the 10th Amendment nor do I believe that it definitively proves their strict constructionist states rights beliefs but it is their belief none the less. Any true conservative will swear by the 10th Amendment and use it as a cudgel against any supposed deviation from the ideas of strict constructionism.

So, given that Bachmann is supposed to be a "rock ribbed conservative", it would stand to reason that she too believes in this principle of strict constructionism and the 10th Amendment, right? WRONG. Today at her town hall forum on health care reform she completely tossed out the amendment even going so far as to suggest "erasing the boundaries" around each of the states in order to create so called competition in the health insurance industry.

But what about the commerce clause, you ask, which allows the federal government to regulate interstate commerce? Well, that depends on whether or not you define health insurance as "interstate" or "intrastate". This leads to a bit of a sticky wicket for conservatives such as Bachmann. Why? Because part of their new claim is that due to its "intrastate" nature, health insurance cannot be regulated by the federal government (HOORAY 10th Amendment). However, if you turn health insurance INTO interstate commerce then suddenly the federal government will have the authority to regulate. To make matters worse for conservatives, they believe that given the absence of any mention of health care or health insurance in the Constitution there is no authority to make ANY law regarding it so Bachmann shouldn't even be able to create such a provision. Perhaps Bachmann or someone in the conservative movement should have thought this one through a little more rather than just parroting Anne Coulter...