The Heritage of Natural Law: Mark Levin on Rediscovering Americanism

National Review ^ | July 15, 2017 | Andrew C. McCarthy

[BuddhaBrown]

“... defender of President Trump...”

Yes. People can feel hurt or whatever regarding things said about their fave candidate. But Levin is quite intelligent, very experienced, in love with America and is right far, far more often than he is wrong.

Dismissal of him out of hand is immature. And about as wrong of a strategy as we could take.

Are we better off scaling down via purification tests?

Or better off scaling up via evangelization and results?

I’m not only the president of the latter strategy... I’m also a customer.

I was not a big fan of Trump in the primaries either for well-founded reasons we don’t need to re-hash in this thread. But I like most of what he’s done so far. And where he’s still wrong (health care, etc) he does appear open to reason and, at times, moving in the right direction.

The point is that I’m on board now. Should I be turned away from the club because I voted for one of the losers in the primary?

Hell, Trump was a jackass to lots of good people and entities dear to me: Walker, WI, the Freedom Caucus, etc.

Sticks and stones.

I’m over it, let’s get done at least the things we ALL agreed on before the election - repeal, etc.

[867V309]

Are you 12?

government school debating team?

[Rumplemeyer]

BTT

[Texas Eagle]

Thanks for the link to librivox.org.

Outstanding. Already on Book I, Chapter 3

[rdb3]

Are we better off scaling down via purification tests?

I'm right there with you on that question.

Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.

[rxsid]

"The foundation of Americanism, he posits, is natural law. That does not just spontaneously appear, nor passively persevere. Understanding our natural-law roots, reaffirming our attachment to them in the teeth of the progressive project to supersede them — this is hard work."

That is correct. However...

When the question of Barry Soetoro's Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 Constitutional eligibility to be President was put forth based on his being born with foreign citizenship (& therefore foreign allegiance owed) because he inherited his foreign fathers foreign citizenship regardless of his place of birth...THAT was a no go for ole' Mark.

The "natural born Citizen" requirement is straight out of the NATURAL LAW treatise that the framers actually read and referenced during the convention itself. The Law of Nations.

Since questioning Barry's eligibility was "hard work", Mark chose to ignore Natural Law and instead sided with the ignoramus's in media and constantly ridiculed the many of us who were actually putting our money & our efforts on the line to get the issue resolved.

Because he's inconsistent, and tragically so when it actually mattered most for our Constitutional Republic, I for one am not buying what Mark is selling.