Posted on 05/13/2014 5:52:30 AM PDT by JOHN W K
I caught the first ~ 30 min of Levin today, he spent it on Sterling, Guess he thinks that’s Americas most pressing issue.
He called him contemptible a number of times , while talking about his rights.
Levin said the commissioner didn’t follow the rules by fining him that $2500, said the maximum fine for embarrassing NBA is $1000.
Then he said that Sterling could sue except he tried a whole bunch of lawyers who turned him down because they don’t want to be associated with him.
I immediately thought how often Levin brags to us that he is a lawyer, and his fans rave about it too. But I didn’t hear Levin say he would offer to take the case himself.
See in this world (talk radio) real heroes are not doers , they are talkers, Levin complained about it. That is way more important than taking action.
You are unaware, obviously, that it was Levin's investigation on behalf of a Landmark client that revealed the IRS corruption.
Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation is active on a number of legal fronts.
It doesn’t have to be Zim levels. We have Occuppy Wall Street, Acorn spin-offs, and the rest of the welfare gang that is already inflamed by the MSM. Europe is teetering, and so are we. Whether it’s like a balloon deflating or a balloon popping is unclear, but the bond markets will not tolerate much more of us abusing our world reserve currency status. We are stealing from all of our international creditors through printing money. If China, Russia, and a few other countries begin doing settlements in another currency, the end could come really fast.
OK. So you don’t read. He is well intentioned and smart, but Levin’s tack is a dangerous waste of time. I’ve already written what should be done. It won’t be because “conservatives” prefer manifestos and words to actually doing something.
Oh, please. And Sam Adams said that the Revolution was in the people’s hearts before the actual Revolution broke out. In our case, we have a bunch of “conservatives” who want to pretend that making more laws to be ignored by a lawless government will somehow work magic. I guess that allows us to watch cable TV (tithing to the left), rant on talk radio, and post here.
And that changed what?
________________________________________________
If you wanted to make sure the Congress didn't exempt itself from laws, for instance, why didn't Martha Stewart's attorneys appeal her conviction on the basis of the Equal Protection Clause? Anyone convicted of 'insider trading' would have the same defense--that they had not received equal protection under the law because others were blatantly violating the same laws but were somehow exempted from them.
One final point, 'cause I think we're going to disagree on this FRiend, The people we are dealing with have not concerned themselves with the niceties of the spirit nor the letter of the Law, in fact they have shown the utmost contempt for both. There is no guarantee whatsoever that the results of such a convention will benefit America, Liberty, nor our descendants. With the incredible number of people who have no employment, no business to run, no fortunes nor sacred honor to pledge to the task, there remains the possibility that such a Convention will be hijacked by the parasite class, and the end result will be far from what those who want this have intended. This razor can cut in any direction, and it is a mere tool, without conscience nor moral obligation.
Anyone who does not recognize the danger of opening up our Constitution to tinkering by State Governments which have bought into the Tyranny the Federal Government maintains qualifies, either as a "stealth liberal" or a useful idiot, imho.
If you have a case, state it. Tell me how, for instance you are going to safeguard against things like:
Amendment nn: "Any state which maintains a budget surplus shall surrender that surplus to the United States Treasury for distribution among the the states or use by the Federal Government, as Congress deems fit."
Considering the combination of negatively impacted States and those economically devastated by their own catering to the parasite class within their borders, that should be a shoo-in.
If the Government will not comply with the Constitutional constraints which exist, what makes anyone think it will comply with additional ones? The only way, of course is that those in power now will seek to legitimize what they do now by altering the rules to comply with their actions instead of vice-versa.
Better keep your powder dry, because you're going to need it.
Yes, I’ve heard this before. I’ve read it before. I’ve discussed this before.
You think those who disagree with you don’t understand you. But we do.
Amendments mean nothing when we don’t follow the Constitution in the first place. Yet some people believe that new amendments will make all the difference in the world. I believe that is foolish. If this was as great of a plan as the proponents believe the liberals would be wildly against it.
They are rather quiet. What does that tell you? Oh, never mind.
And stop being childish with your stuck keyboard.
^5 to you.
I see this A5C as more hope and change.
If, for a second, you or anyone else thinks having to invoke the Second Amendment solution is a win/win, you are either a mortician or sell ammo.
If that needs to be done, there will be no guarantee of success, no guarantee the regime will not bring in foreign troops as "peacekeepers" who will have no compunction about third-world levels of violence against civilian populations, and it will be a bloody and protracted conflict. There is no guarantee other nations might not seek to take advantage of the conflict and invade at least parts of the US.
Imagine your wife and children and home in an artillery barrage if you can, and then tell me about how win/win that will be.
Our last Revolution was fought with different weapons, different rules, and different morals. This one will be far nastier.
I don't shrink from the possibility, but I have no illusions those making billions off of the current setup will relinquish it lightly, and to them, their ends justify any means.
A lot of freepers can't accept the basic fact that many state governments are just as bad or WORSE than the federal government when it comes to abusing their powers and establishing tyrannical unconstitutional laws against their citizens. They live in their fantasy world that "the states" are all controlled by Thomas Jefferson-like statesmen who want to safeguard the rights of Americans and return us to the society that "the founders" envisioned.
In reality, even solidly Republican states that are strong "conservative" on paper, like Alaska, have some really awful people in power at the state level. Worse, many of them rig the system so they stay in power at the state level regardless of how their state's citizens feel about them (my state house speaker currently has about a 22% approval rating but the gerrymandered legislature is guaranteed to re-elect him Speaker for eternity) There's a reason why Lisa Murkowski ended up as a U.S. Senator, and if the 17th was repealed, she'd be there for life.
!
For sickoflibs, and achilles, educate yourselves.
Levin has been making the life of liberals in general, and teachers' unions and the EPA in particular, less pleasant for over twenty years.
Yes. I’ve read his book. Levin has good ideas—on paper. But will a convention work in his favor? To what extent? Where is the guarantee that nothing will go wrong? What good will it do to change the Constitution when we don’t follow it?
This is where we divide between the optimists and the pessimists.
Von Clausewitz, wrote that no battle plan survives its first contact with the enemy. The bad feelings I have about this convention are emotional and deeply seated. I cannot shake them. It is simply a gut feeling that something is going to go wrong. It’s kind of like when you’re watching one of those cheap cheap horror movies and you’re screaming at the babysitter “Don’t open that door!”
Which amendments are your most/least favorite?
They don't even know he exists.
He's purely a cult phenomenon.
When he complains about Dems I get a kick out of it, he can be entertaining at that.
When he gives Republicans advice on how to win elections its a joke, same with how to frame arguments to beat them. He has no way of knowing either of those so his advice is usually terrible.
To be able to do that you have to step outside the (his) cult and see what's going on.
HAHA, A Levin cult line. Perfect example.
JWK
Reaching across the aisle and bipartisanship is Washington Newspeak to subvert the Constitution and screw the American People.
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.