But Wark focuses his column on the topic of government corruption: "legislation is written by people called lobbyists, who are paid handsomely to shape the law of the land to the will of the oligarchs who really run the country." People complain about lobbyists who basically bribe elected officials, but never stop to question why lobbyists exist in the first place.

The fact is, if the government and its legislators would not interfere in the lives of private citizens, there would be no "need" for lobbyists. But because the government engages in unconstitutional meddling in the market, lobbyists are hired to make exemptions from the rules.

When the government interferes with business, is it any surprise business will interfere with government? And it's not just corporations. Unions also spend millions on lobbyists; Greenpeace, and nonprofits like ACORN and Planned Parenthood receive massive amounts of taxpayer money and also corrupt the law-making process. The point of bribing the government in exchange for favors is to have an unfair advantage over the competition.

This is not capitalism. This is fascism (a tactic perfected by Benito Mussolini.) When corporations team up with government, it is not a free market; it is the opposite of capitalism and free-market economics.

Wark scrounges up the old quote by Eisenhower that warns us of a "military-industrial complex." But as most people do, Wark leaves out the rest of Eisenhower's warning: "a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity ... The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever-present." Eisenhower makes the point (50 years ago) that government interference leads to corruption and to a greed more powerful than any corporate greed, which is the greed of government. Congressmen accept the lobbyists' bribes because they themselves wish to stay in office and mooch off the taxpayer for as long as possible.

Whether it's Goldman Sachs bailouts or Universal Welfare, unconstitutional schemes rack up the deficit for future generations. As Eisenhower also predicted, "our government must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage."

Wark spends a lot of time telling us that the lobbyists are really in charge of making laws, but then he demands that they make some of the most sweeping laws in the form of health care. He again cites a cliche statistic, "46 million... don't have health care because they can't afford it." But this is a false claim.

That number comes from the U.S. Census, which breaks it down further. Ten million uninsured are legal residents who chose to come to America and are not citizens. Nine million are people who make $75,000 a year or more and choose not to pay for insurance. Many more are young people like myself who also choose to spend insurance money on something else. In fact, only 5 million to 10 million Americans are chronically uninsured compared to at least 300 million Americans who are covered. And if you account for those who qualify for Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, SCHIP, WIC, Americorps, PeaceCorps, and literally dozens of other taxpayer- funded government-run programs that are available, why do we need to corrupt government even more in the name of universal health care?

Wark says that health industries have spent $300 million to lobby against HR 3200. Maybe it's because the health-care bill states on Page 16, "Limitation On New Enrollment:" "the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of the year the legislation becomes law." In other words, you cannot change your insurance once the bill goes through. If you leave your job for whatever reason, you cannot get private coverage again, and like myself, if you have no insurance when the bill becomes law, you cannot buy private insurance; you are forced to enroll in the government "option." This is a violation of your right to property.

The constitution was designed to protect individual liberty from the federal government. If the government passes this law, it will be illegal for insurance companies to sign up new customers. A company cannot exist if it cannot sign up customers. Such a law does not protect individual rights, it denies individual rights. Lobbyists are a huge problem, but the root of the problem is unconstitutional government.

Wark brings to our attention an important issue: government corruption. But by only focusing on the corporate side of that corruption, we continue to let crooked politicians off the hook. Perhaps Wark and I can agree that term limits will diminish the ability of politicians to spend 30 or more years living off the taxpayer. Perhaps we can agree that Goldman Sachs won't be able to fleece the taxpayer if we limit the amount of money the government takes from your paycheck. Maybe we can agree that if we repeal unconstitutional laws, which only empower the oligarchy we both distrust, then we, the people can restore our American republic to our founders' vision.