While we're on the subject of logical conclusions for extreme positions, consider this from Utah's new Tea Party Republican senator, Mike Lee. Sen. Lee is explaining his views on early 20th century legislation, specifically a law meant to end child labor in the United States:
[T]he Supreme Court acknowledged something very interesting -- that, as reprehensible as child labor is, and as much as it ought to be abandoned -- that's something that has to be done by state legislators, not by members of Congress. Why? Well, because labor and manufacturing, as the Supreme Court explained, are activities that take place in one state, at one time. They are by their very nature local activities.
And while they may have some commercial aspects to them, they are not themselves interstate commercial transactions. . . . The Supreme Court said no. . . . As laudable as its objectives may be, the law's no good.
This may sound harsh, but it was designed to be that way. It was designed to be a little bit harsh. Not because we like harshness for the sake of harshness, but because we like a clean division of power, so that everybody understands whose job it is to regulate what.
Just as gun extremists take a radical approach to the Second Amendment, so Sen. Lee is taking the radical, Tenther approach to the Tenth Amendment. Think Progress spends several graphs dismantling Rep. Lee's case. It makes for a fine morning tonic.