Posted on 11/23/2016 8:00:22 AM PST by 198ml
I would like to discuss something rather foundational.
What do you think about this “new nationalism”? Do you think it's new? What does it mean? Does it mean putting America first? Does it, in fact, put America first? Has this new nationalism been tried before? It very much has.
The phrase "new nationalism" was actually coined by Theodore Roosevelt in a speech he gave in Kansas on Sept. 1, 1910. In that speech, Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, later to become a Progressive Party candidate, in essence denounced the Declaration of Independence, and embraced the new nationalism.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...
“Mark Levin: Populism, nationalism and Americanism” and thumb sucking self pity!
Do Hannity and Limbaugh still mention his comments or refer to him as the Great One?
“The Slimy One” could catch on.
My local station now pre-empts his third hour to run an infomercial, so apparently many agree with you.
I disagree with Levin on the sum and substance of what he wrote, based upon this alone: Words, and especially political labels, change meaning over time.
Examples: Gay used to mean happy, joyful, and ecstatic. Now it means homosexual. Regulated used to mean maintained and appointed with adequate supplies (e.g., a Well-Regulated Militia). Now it means to be controlled by laws and regulations.
Whatever populism meant in Levin’s citations, the modern definition has changed. It now means to be for people and their rights.
Whatever nationalism meant in Levin’s citations, the definition has changed. It now means to be for nation-states (especially America) and against globalism.
I shall continue to use those words in their modern context.
I'd accept that, except for the fact that he only requires ideological perfection from Trump. He had no problem making excuses for or ignoring litanies of ideological impurities in past GOP nominees or Presidents-elect. As I said on another thread, this ideological purity test for Trump is all pose. It isn't ideology that he objects to, it's personality and the fact that Trump isn't part of the "respectable" GOP elite caste.
I'm with you Dead. I hate to see blind devotion to anyone.
I don’t care if he was glowingly pontificating about the greatness of me, Levin is still and will always be dead to me.
Free Traitor™ lies. We may have hundreds maybe thousands of tariffs on the books but the rates are set so low( Thank you K Street. /sarc) that the USA collects about 1% in duties on imports. 1%. A big nothing burger.
The fact is O "Great One", we need more consumption based income including tariff income and less income from income taxes. Not only do tariffs raise revenue, tariffs have another advantage over income taxes because they are not progressive in any way. Some say they are even mildly regressive. Tariffs also promote domestic industry. Thank me.
Mark Levin, just another rotten lawyer.
per dictionary.com
Word Origin and History for Americanism
n.
1781, in reference to words or phrases distinct from British use, coined by John Witherspoon (1723-1794), president of Princeton College, from American + -ism. ( American English “English language as spoken in the United States” is first recorded 1806, in Webster.) Americanism in the patriotic sense “attachment to the U.S.” is attested from 1797, first found in the writings of Thomas Jefferson.
He’s one confused SOB. He needs to look at Andrew Jackson, not Teddy’s ill-advised Bull Mooses, to see Trump’s precedent.
So you have a liberal/progressive view on economics, as opposed to conservative/free markets.
Nonsense. Mark Levin lost all credibility when he jumped the shark on presidential eligibility. He basically proved he has rejected or just doesn't understand natural law, the true foundation of American law.
His entire essay is just a smear of Donald J. Trump, insinuating that he is a National Socialist. Just another media jew calling Trump a Nazi. He has lost the argument.
I believe that human life begins at conception, but would accept a ban on abortions after the first trimester. Not ideal, but an incremental step to the goal of illegalizing all abortions.
I believe that human life begins at conception, but would accept a ban on abortions after the first trimester. Not ideal, but an incremental step to the goal of illegalizing all abortions.
Wrong...constitutional amendments are conservatives’ GREATEST weapon against the left. If we had done a marriage amendment or a balanced budget amendment in the ‘90s, our country would have been so much better off than it is now in countless ways.
And, no, the left isn’t going to “hijack” the process. The amendments have to be passed by Congress and WE own the Congress now. Now is the time to do this.
Ted Cruz is 100% eligible to be President. The law defines what citizenship is. Ted Cruz was a citizen at the time of his birth based on the law at the time. He is a natural-born citizen.
Levin called for people to get out and vote Trump up to and including election day. He did not oppose electing Trump. Any good conservative will oppose Trump when he makes a bad decision, as many on this site are concerning Romney As SOS.
Mark Levin is the greatest voice for true conservatives in the media today.
“Guys, he’s talking simple American HISTORY here. “
You mean like what he wrote on tariffs?
Mark had never heard of the Fordney-McCumber tariff of 1922 until it was brought to his attention here at FR; and he’s no smarter now than he was then: far from creating a trade war as he claims it accompanied the booming Roaring 20s economy.
The Smoot-Hawley tariff was enacted into law a full year after the onset of the Great Depression; so does “historian” Levin believe that cause and effect can run backwards? Of course not, what it means is that he has never done any real study of the Depression and he just repeats whatever canard he finds useful in his war on Trump, tariffs causing depression in this case.
Authentic economic historians Milton Friedman, Anna Schwartz and Joseph Schumpeter, as opposed to hack amateur Levin the lawyer, agree that the Great Depression was caused by a collapse in the American banking system due to the Fed’s failure to act as lender of last resort and sitting idle while one third of the American money supply evaporated. Tariffs cannot cause a deflation like this, but then Levin isn’t educated in this field and doesn’t know anything about it. He counts on the fact that 99% of the reading public won’t know any more of this dry arcane history than he does, and will believe whatever crap he writes about it.
What does tariffs only accounting for 1% of revenue have to do with ANYTHING?? The real destructive nature of tariffs is in the barriers it puts up to trades in the first place. C’mon man ... this is 8th grade economics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.