13 votes

Neocon Mark Levin After Ron Paul Again and Wrong About War Powers

Mark Levin, queen of the neocons, had a schizophrenic segment on the war powers responsibility under the Constitution last night. I tend to check in with the oracle of liberty once in a while; lately I’ve paid attention because of our newfangled war—although it’s just a continuation of our fondness of killing in the Middle East. Boy has the sickness of our so-called prophets of liberty been diluted and poisoned with agitprop and disease. Mark, a neocon, who was a lickspittle of Bush, goes after Ron Paul and neocon foreign policy, only to embrace neocon policy. The pellucid water of liberty has certainly been poisoned!

I can never understand the myths that go into the mouth of the Zeus of liberty—you know, Mark Levin, the hero of what we call liberty today, per his “manifesto”—because his application tends toward vassalage, war, and prison. Mark’s slake for liberty is akin to Bonaparte’s thirst for Russia—utterly destructible. I mean this fervid champion of freedom is the one who thinks the president can lock anyone up, kill people in foreign countries, spy, drone, torture, and the like, without any wince of examination. So he cowers in a “bunker,” like a ruffian, only to gibe to all those who oppose tyranny as “statists.”

Mark, the pretentious and vainglorious puppet, tell us that:

“Ron Paul early on felt that the attack on 9-11 was provoked by us because of all our intervention in the Arab and Muslim World. That’s why I dismissed him. I’m not going to back somebody like that, ever! We didn’t provoke a damn thing. Hate America first—no I’m sorry I’m not into that. So you think my view is odd? Well that’s funny, because every single president of the United States has embraced this view—every damn one of em’, from Reagan to Obama."

Number one, who’s us?

Secondly, it was precisely because of our intervention in the Middle East over the years that have caused blowback, thirdly, Ron is for America First, rather than your dedication to Israel, and finally, your aptitude for trusting “every single president” is fact you are ignorant.

The neocon ideology is premised on puissance, artifice, and trickery. America hurts the most from these roguish and villainous vipers. The people of America must dismiss these vultures who prey on them, and embrace the Old Right, middle-American tradition of liberty, peace, and commerce.

Mark Levin’s show from March 25, 2011 is where he attempts to correct us vandals. His rant starts at the 16:00 mark. It then picks up at the 17:15 mark. At about 21:50 he makes his typical “RuPaul” remark. Then at 25:02 he starts again until about 29:22. BTW 25:02 is where he really hones in on Ron Paul.

For refutations on war powers see here, here, here, here,here, here, here, here, and here.

Edit: I typed up a transcript of most of what he said. I did it in haste, so the punctuation and words may be off a bit.

16:00
"...the mosquitoes out there who think they understand the founding and the Constitution, and there out there telling us things that are not accurate. Some of the libertarians have the constitution dead wrong. And some of the neocons have policy dead wrong. We’ve been involved in many military engagements; we’ve had very few declarations of war. And I’m including military engagements that were involved in by people you consider Founders of this nation. It’s because they’ve never, ever, required as a requisite—to defending this country, or even certain military actions—of getting Congress’ approval."

17:15
"...During the Constitutional Convention there was some debate, although not a lot, over war powers—who would have what powers. So I want to repeat this for those out there who write stupid stuff and are a little dense because they’re advancing a dogma rather than an honest assessment of what our history is. You can see some of these morons on television too. The language was originally “Congress shall make war.” The framers rejected that. And instead replaced “make” with “declare.” The president of the United States, well, they made him the commander in chief. Now why do you think they did those two things? Out of basic logic. They knew it was a dangerous world—hell they’ve been in a revolution. And by the way, after the revolution and establishment of our government it wasn’t clear still that it would survive given all the threats that we faced. So there had to be a commander in chief who could act quickly to muster the forces to defend the nation. Not to muster the paper work to send to Congress—to get Congress to decide—if he should defend the nation. And keep in mind, Congress didn’t meet all the time, its members were all over the damn place, it took two or three days for some of them even to get to Washington. Communication was very poor; they were never going to give war-making power to Congress. As for declaring war, if you actually understand the original intent of the framers, and the environment they were living in, the declaration of war was a declaration to the world that we are in a state of war with “X, Y, Z,” country. More than anything else it was also a diplomatic statement of fact—Congress declaring war. But the founders didn’t want a Monarchy either; they didn’t want an all-powerful president who at all times can do whatever he wanted, even though we needed a commander in chief. And so the power of the purse, not just to domestic activities, but certainly foreign activities, including the United States Military at the time: the navy and the army. And as Hamilton pointed out, it’s the ultimate power—the power of the purse. So if Congress really believed that what the president was doing was not in the nation’s best interest, it could cut him off at the knees. In other words, Congress has a power, more powerful than the War Powers Act.—which in my view is absolutely unconstitutional—which is why the left-wing Congress pushed it through over Richard Nixon’s veto in 1973; priory to 1973, Congress had the power to do what Congress has always had the power to do: defund. And as I pointed out two or three days ago, they did exactly that to end the Vietnam war. So why people re debated the war powers act. “RuPaul” at 21:50

25:02:
Mark goes on the Ron Paul attacked: saying “Ron Paul, early on felt that the attack on 9-11 was provoked by us, because of all our intervention in the Arab and Muslim World. That’s why I dismissed him. I’m not going to back somebody like that, ever. We didn’t provoke a damn thing. Hate American First—no I’m sorry I’m not into that. So you think my view in odd, well that’s funny, because every single president of the United States has embraced this view—every damn one of em’, from Reagan to Obama. Now when Obama was a senator he took a different view, we know he’s a hypocrite, but that’s besides the view. And many members of Congress embrace this view too..."

Edit: Just wanted to add the in-between from 21:50-25:02. Any errors or mistakes are mine of course.

At 21:40: "To my knowledge nobody has even introduced one, or if they have, it doesn’t have any chance of passing. Therefore, I conclude from that, that despite the fact that Kucinich and “RuPaul” are all over the place—speaking for the American people they claim—Congress must by its inaction, its unwillingness to submit bills to defund this action, support it."

22:14
"Most of the occasions in which war was declared by Congress was World War II, when FDR went to Congress on several occasions to get formal declarations of war. He didn’t get formal declarations of war because there was any question of whether or not he can respond to Pearl Harbor; or immediately after Pearl Harbor, Germany’s declaration of war against us. There was no question that as Commander-in-chief he had the power to defend this nation against an attack. He sought a declaration of war, not because he wasn’t going to defend this nation, but because he wanted to make it damn clear to the whole world that we were in a state of war with the Axis powers. And he did the same with Hungrary, and several others."

23:58 “Nor are we going to pretend, against the language of the Founders, and against what they said at the Constitutional Convention, that they were turning over war-making powers, which they specifically did not, to a bunch of members of Congress who can’t even keep secrets.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks for posting. Its sad

Thanks for posting. Its sad that people are brainwashed by this guy, and believe anything he says. More war propaganda. We will see a lot of this has the election cycle comes through.

"The economy's not a class you can master in college. To think otherwise is the pretense of knowledge."

He's on cavuto right now

That a-hole just called Ron 'RuPaul'
Jerk.

Colchester, New London County, Connecticut

Why Mark Levin hates Ron Paul and Glenn Beck.

By the Southern Avenger: http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/SouthernAvenger/archives/...

My favorite people in the world: Ron Paul, Glenn Beck, Peter Schiff, Judge Napolitano, Milton Friedman, Bob Barr, and John Stossel

Mark Levin: The 5 B.M.er

Levin's repeated reference to Beck by his time slot on FOX only, made me think something just as descriptive should be give him.

The Southern Avenger did an excellent job flushing out The 5 B.M.ers moving insights. Now all that's left is the paper work.

It would be worth spending money to be at this years Talkers convention, where Alex Jones will be the keynote speaker. I have been unable to find anything said about Jones by Levin, but I would attribute that to The 5 B.M.ers likely inability to hold back the kind of dump he'd like to take on him, in potty language that would likely get him kicked off the air.

http://www.talkers.com/216large.html

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

He is worse then Hannity by

He is worse then Hannity by 100 times. He has no idea what he is talking about except that it sounds good when yelling it. He IS a neo-con and always was. This crap about how he is for liberty and all that is just one big lie.

SteveMT's picture

Agree w/you. Levin is the quintessential talking head.....

without the brain to go with it. Great theater, but poor on substance. He is a Hannity, but without any tact or manners. One would think that one would have been humbled by getting their chest split open at the age of 42 for a by-pass surgery.

bump

Thanks for posting.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15