Sometimes there is a bogeyman. Rhetoric is often served with a generous dose of fear – especially in this particularly rancorous political climate. And why not? With all due respect (or credit?) to Machiavelli, fear always seems to motivate more effectively than hope (or change).

Look at the 9/11 truthers, a group of paranoid conspiracy nuts convinced we either bombed ourselves that horrible day or allowed it to happen in some FDR-esque scheme to go to war against an entire religion. I’m surprised Oliver Stone hasn’t made this film yet. Or on the other end of the political spectrum, we have the only-recently debunked birthers, whose ringleader has already moved on to other paperwork, Selective Service cards and the like.

I think they’ve already managed a spin-off of “Osama’s still alive” conspirators. Maybe he’s having drinks with Elvis and Tupac somewhere. These high-brow versions of campfire stories have been around as long as this great union. And they’ll live on as long as we have unstable zealots to propagate them. But sometimes we should be afraid. One of the oldest arguments against universal health care also happens to be one of the most rational – at least mathematically speaking. Yeah, I’m talking about rationing.