and i wasn't saying taxes were necessarily cut (though they were :))...i was merely stating that there seems to be a number of folks on this site who would criticize a tax cut, if in fact all of a certain tax wasn't eliminated.  
that analogy is to the Compact...that though we aren't removing the gov't totally from healthcare, that doing something better than it is now is somehow bad - envoking the 10th Amendment and bringing the spending and the decisions to have more freedom in that spending (and non-gov't spending) to the states.
i see it as clearly making the situation better and perhaps giving a blueprint for getting other areas of spending and regulation out of DC and closer to those impacted (and therefore able to make better decisions about the regulatory, or non-regulatory, environment desired).
i don't in anyway feel like a martyr, but the case of getting attacked for advocating the benefits of the 10th amendment and getting spending and regulations away from washington...i do feel misunderstood.

Parent