I would be honored if the great one would stoop down so low as to comment on anything I have written, much less lend his wealth of expertise to my amateur tome.
On the other hand, you aren't the first to essentially call me arrogant. I don't mean that in a bad way. I am an arrogant person. I believe that I have the capacity to read well-written documents and discern the clear meaning, without years of training in the field.
I once had a neurosurgeon argue with me about medicine for three or four e-mail iterations before he decided it just wasn't worth his time to argue with an amateur. I don't blame him, but I cannot be persuaded that I am incapable of having a cogent thought which may actually trump even the Great One himself.
I try not to get wrapped up in personality. I have my opinions. I believe that they are grounded in fact, but I am always looking for additional input and insite. I haven't managed to poke into what Levin is saying about this particular agreement. But I did read his book and find his writing to be excellent, so I will make the effort.
I will be fascinated to see what his legal argument is for the constitutionality or lack thereof of a non-binding agreement between senators.
I know that I shold simply concede the point to you because you invoked the Great One, but I simply can't bring myself to do that. He could well be correct, and I could well be mistaken, and that would be something I would want to learn, but the mere mention of the name does not in itself enable me to correct whatever errors I may have made in my analysis.
It would have helped me had you borrowed the appropriate lines from things Levin wrote to show me what mistakes I made in my analysis, but since you have given me at least a vague reference I suppose I can do my own legwork.
In the meantime, I will concede your point (because of lack of evidence on my part) that Mark Levin has a different view than mine, and there is a good probability that he is correct and I am therefore incorrect.
But I won't concede that we know that for a fact until I see exactly what Mark finds unconstitutional about this arrangement.
Thank you for the head's up. And I look forward to the day when I may have provided enough useful thoughts for you to consider me a source of information.
I can't do anything about my age, that's simply a function of when I learned this place existed (which was when Steffen lost his job, if you want to know).
You give yourself far too much credit! I never called you arrogant; your far worse than that. You're a supercilious prig, verbose, and an egotist.
Mark will NEVER take you by the hand and show you the error of your ways here, point by point. He'll just eviscerate you! :-)
Here's a helpful hint...don't pretend to be an "expert" on things you aren't one on and don't talk about things you really ( and I mean REALLY!) know about. That'll save a lot of bandwidth and your ego. LOL