Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on May 22, 2018, 04:40:01 PM
-
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/
watch the video
This is picking up steam..
-
The only court and judge that agrees with that logic, is this one.
Judge Mike Levine presiding ( brother of Mark)
Oh, you mean a 9th circuit judge.
-
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/
watch the video
This is picking up steam..
This could be pretty big. Levin is right (so to speak) again.
-
I think it's a bit too conspiracy minded.
Which part? The part where he talks about the express language of the Constitution? Did you even watch the clip?
-
of course I didn't watch it ;D
I try to keep an open mind, but some ranting lunatic , c'mon now , I consider that; "barbaric" LOL
I think it's a bit too conspiracy minded.
Troll. ::)
-
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/
watch the video
This is picking up steam..
Are your only sources those with which you agree and base your political opinions on? -Seems a bit narrow minded. There is no way you can have an honest perspective on issues if you only look at one side of them.
-
Are your only sources those with which you agree and base your political opinions on? -Seems a bit narrow minded. There is no way you can have an honest perspective on issues if you only look at one side of them.
You should watch the clip and see if what he says makes sense.
-
You should watch the clip and see if what he says makes sense.
Yes I should. I probably need to broaden my perspective as well. So I will do it now.
OK, I watched it. Can anyone (you) tell me to which article of the Constitution he's refering? I would like to read it before I draw any conclusions as to whether his comments and observations are valid.
-
Supposedly the custom when appointing a special counsel hajs always been for the justice department to appoints someone NOT in the same party at the POTUS so there can be no claim of bias
Kenn Starr - Republican
Archibald Cox - Democrat
Robert Mueller - Republican - so Trump gets a guy from his own party and a guy who most Republicans and many Democrats has nothing but good things to say about him.
BTW - who gives a shit what Mark Levin says.
-
Seems Howard came back in full troll mode
-
Yes I should. I probably need to broaden my perspective as well. So I will do it now.
OK, I watched it. Can anyone (you) tell me to which article of the Constitution he's refering? I would like to read it before I draw any conclusions as to whether his comments and observations are valid.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. At least you are open minded enough to watch the clip and read for yourself.
-
No thanks. I did that once in a USMC recruitment office .
You're not funny. Not even a little bit.
-
Supposedly the custom when appointing a special counsel hajs always been for the justice department to appoints someone NOT in the same party at the POTUS so there can be no claim of bias
Kenn Starr - Republican
Archibald Cox - Democrat
Robert Mueller - Republican - so Trump gets a guy from his own party and a guy who most Republicans and many Democrats has nothing but good things to say about him.
BTW - who gives a shit what Mark Levin says.
I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol
-
I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol
Kind of like "Christians" who will declare anyone who gets caught doing something illegal or morally reprehensible "Not a real Christian". Really? He was last Sunday when he was preaching in church.. now you want to claim he isn't? Mueller is a Republican, but because we don't like what Meuller is doing, the very thing he was hired to do by his Republican boss, its now irrelveant. If Muellar was a Democrat, you can imagine how often that would be thrown out there by Coach and the gang.
-
Kind of like "Christians" who will declare anyone who gets caught doing something illegal or morally reprehensible "Not a real Christian". Really? He was last Sunday when he was preaching in church.. now you want to claim he isn't? Mueller is a Republican, but because we don't like what Meuller is doing, the very thing he was hired to do by his Republican boss, its now irrelveant. If Muellar was a Democrat, you can imagine how often that would be thrown out there by Coach and the gang.
You mean how I think liberals that claim to be Christians (ie; Nancy Pelosi) can’t possibly be Christians? I stand by that 10 fold.
-
You mean how I think liberals that claim to be Christians (ie; Nancy Pelosi) can’t possibly be Christians? I stand by that 10 fold.
not a problem, there are very few actual christians out there. I'd guesstimate less than 5% of those who say they are christian would actually get into heaven if it exists. Which is in line with the Bible. It underscores in many places how few will actually attain heaven.
-
He was the first by a long shot to put forth that Mueller could not indict a sitting president. He's been saying that for months and only recently have the others picked up on that.
Not the first with this (as it states) but his platform will allow it to actually be noticed.
-
I understand the reasoning of you/coach wanting the naysayers to at least watch the Levine video.
You're not going to sit and actually LISTEN to Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters LOL ;D
But c'mon now, we all avoid listening to those we find wrong and/or annoying.
It's doubtful too many conservatives watch Racheal Maddow and few liberals listen to Hannity.
The real key is to find ONE voice you can stand , that's on the other side.
I tend to be more democratic now, but, I often watch Hannity.
For whatever reason, I like his voice and delivery style.
I may not agree with him much, but I feel informed about the conservative view pt when I watch his show.
I
I’ve listened to Pelosi defend MS-13, illegals crossing the border and aiding and abetting violent criminals using fake Sanctuary city laws. I’ve heard (and it’s the only thing she says) whack job Maxine Waters repeat herself by saying “impeach 45” with ZERO reason. Frankly, I couldn’t careless if you heard Levin or not.
-
You missed my point.Most conervatives can't stand to hear Pelosi, Maxine or Hildabeast, c'mon.
The idea is to pick one , just one , on the other side, you'd listen to and consider their view.
We all have pundits and journalists we can't stand and often ridicule.
BUT, try listening to ONE source with an alternate perspective that you can stand to hear/read.
Just because we can’t stand to listen to them doesn’t mean we don’t. Listening to these clowns is what keeps us more than the left and the reasons why we won. Tell me Howard, what does the left have to run on besides socialism?
-
I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol
yep, it means that Trump started out with an advantage that other Nixon and Clinton did not have
Trump gets a guy from his own party that virtually everyone on both sides of the aisle agreed was a great choice
Try really hard to keep in mind that the law is not supposed to be bias toward a political party and choosing an opposing party as special counsel was a way to demonstrate this
Justice is blind....remember
The law in this country is above politics.
I know that's really hard for you to understand since you're a blatant partisan hack and you think anyone who doesn't share your political point of view is a traitor
-
I understand the reasoning of you/coach wanting the naysayers to at least watch the Levine video.
You're not going to sit and actually LISTEN to Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters LOL ;D
But c'mon now, we all avoid listening to those we find wrong and/or annoying.
It's doubtful too many conservatives watch Racheal Maddow and few liberals listen to Hannity.
The real key is to find ONE voice you can stand , that's on the other side.
I tend to be more democratic now, but, I often watch Hannity.
For whatever reason, I like his voice and delivery style.
I may not agree with him much, but I feel informed about the conservative view pt when I watch his show.
I
I'm not asking you to watch the clip. I don't care what you think. You're a troll.
-
Muller was a well respected man and considered fair by both dems and GOP.
By playing it straight and fair, he's now hated by team Trump for refusing to be "their guy".
Organized crime always hated an honest cop. ;)
Wrong, Mueller is deep state.........
-
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. At least you are open minded enough to watch the clip and read for yourself.
Thanks. I just read it.
Unfortunately, the answer to the question of Mueller's appointment by Rosenstein being unconstitutional is complicated. If special counsel Mueller is considered a principal officer, than it appears his appointment was unconstitutional. However, an assistant U.S attorney is considered an inferior officer, who is appointed by a principal officer, (U.S. deputy attorney general Rosenstein). Mueller is supervised by principal officer Rosenstein, which deems him an inferior officer. In this scenerio, his appointment was constitutional.
Another view considers the scope of assistant U.S. attorney Mueller's investigation. Some would argue that his investigation puts him in a principal officer position because he is acting as a U.S. attorney. Does Mueller answer to his supervisor Senior Officer Rosenstein or is he operating on his own?
This issue has been argued in Morrison v. Olson and other cases. My guess is that this issue will be argued in the U.S. Supreme Court before it is settled. And there is always the possibility that Trump will go 'off script' and order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. This would not be a politically savvy move on Trumps part.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html (http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html)
-
Thanks. I just read it.
Unfortunately, the answer to the question of Mueller's appointment by Rosenstein being unconstitutional is complicated. If special counsel Mueller is considered a principal officer, than it appears his appointment was unconstitutional. However, an assistant U.S attorney is considered an inferior officer, who is appointed by a principal officer, (U.S. deputy attorney general Rosenstein). Mueller is supervised by principal officer Rosenstein, which deems him an inferior officer. In this scenerio, his appointment was constitutional.
Another view considers the scope of assistant U.S. attorney Mueller's investigation. Some would argue that his investigation puts him in a principal officer position because he is acting as a U.S. attorney. Does Mueller answer to his supervisor Senior Officer Rosenstein or is he operating on his own?
This issue has been argued in Morrison v. Olson and other cases. My guess is that this issue will be argued in the U.S. Supreme Court before it is settled. And there is always the possibility that Trump will go 'off script' and order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. This would not be a politically savvy move on Trumps part.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html (http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html)
Definitely a complicated question. But Levin is all over it. Regardless of what you think about his politics, he knows the Constitution as well as anyone. I don't like the way he treats his liberal callers on his show, but his analysis of almost everything is on point.
-
Definitely a complicated question. But Levin is all over it. Regardless of what you think about his politics, he knows the Constitution as well as anyone. I don't like the way he treats his liberal callers on his show, but his analysis of almost everything is on point.
Of course legal eagles don't necessarily agree on interpretation of the law. Explains why so many issues end up in court. Knowing the Constitution as well as anyone isn't all that special. Scholars and some politicians have made a career out of studying and understanding the Constitution. Levin is all over this, its put him in the limelight. Mark Levin is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality. What he isn't is a legal scholar.
-
Of course legal eagles don't necessarily agree on interpretation of the law. Explains why so many issues end up in court. Knowing the Constitution as well as anyone isn't all that special. Scholars and some politicians have made a career out of studying and understanding the Constitution. Levin is all over this, its put him in the limelight. Mark Levin is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality. What he isn't is a legal scholar.
lol. Plug his name in Amazon and see how many books he has written. He is a constitutional scholar. An outstanding one.
-
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/
watch the video
This is picking up steam..
I'm overwhelmed by your blissful ignorance.
-
Are your only sources those with which you agree and base your political opinions on? -Seems a bit narrow minded. There is no way you can have an honest perspective on issues if you only look at one side of them.
Thats all Trump supporters do is look at anything that agrees with their view point. They don't pay attention to facts, and that is why they watch Fox News. Anything that doesn't go along with their viewpoint they dismiss as fake news. Anyone that watches Fox News has to be mentally retarded.
-
Wrong, Mueller is deep state.........
Jesus Christ.. Deep State, go watch more fox news.
-
Thats all Trump supporters do is look at anything that agrees with their view point. They don't pay attention to facts, and that is why they watch Fox News. Anything that doesn't go along with their viewpoint they dismiss as fake news. Anyone that watches Fox News has to be mentally retarded.
Obama? Is that you?
-
Jesus Christ.. Deep State, go watch more fox news.
that is directly from your hero the dolt comey, deep state exists.
-
Muller was a well respected man and considered fair by both dems and GOP.
By playing it straight and fair, he's now hated by team Trump for refusing to be "their guy".
Organized crime always hated an honest cop. ;)
I think you nailed it
-
I'm overwhelmed by your blissful ignorance.
It's impressive
-
lol. Plug his name in Amazon and see how many books he has written. He is a constitutional scholar. An outstanding one.
I did this and more. This is what I discovered. He is his father's son....kinda hanging by his father's coattails. My previous post regarding him stands. Nowhere does anything I read suggest he is a political scholar.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/411CvVb%2BtdL._SX356_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51w-kBybOiL._SX338_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
and....
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51qx9VkHBlL._SX328_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
This book was written by his father who also is the author of many politically focused books.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y3XfKzsoL._SX323_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2BKUSxV81L._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Plus a couple more on his political views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin)
"Mark Reed Levin; born September 21, 1957 is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality." Somehow his Wikipedia Page neglected to mention that he is a political scholar." ::)
The bottom line is he is a conservative radio talk show celebrity.
If you want to exalt him to that status, you're welcome to. He did get his B.A. in political science.
Just to be clear about where he stands politically, read this:
According to The Guardian, "constant attacks on Democrats and the left are important components" of Levin's modus operandi. According to Politico in May 2009, Levin pronounced "almost daily" that Obama "was a failure, a liar and a "statist" who is trying to destroy individual freedom." In June 2017, Levin accused Senator Bernie Sanders of being “a radical Marxist who believes in violence.” According to Rutgers University political scientist Stephen Eric Bronner, Levin tends to use "socialism" as a "catch-all term to condemn any policy that strengthens the social welfare function of the state." In July 2014, he called Jon Stewart "a knee-jerk idiot", and suggested that Stewart was a self-hating Jew.
If you are interested in reading about Mark Levin's indoctrination to political conservatism, check out his father Jack Levin's bio. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
-
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/411CvVb%2BtdL._SX356_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51w-kBybOiL._SX338_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
and....
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51qx9VkHBlL._SX328_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y3XfKzsoL._SX323_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2BKUSxV81L._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Plus a couple more on his political views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin)
"Mark Reed Levin; born September 21, 1957 is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality." Somehow his Wikipedia Page neglected to mention that he is a political scholar." ::)
The bottom line is he is a conservative radio talk show celebrity.
If you want to exalt him to that status, you're welcome to. He did get his B.A. in political science.
Just to be clear about where he stands politically, read this:
According to The Guardian, "constant attacks on Democrats and the left are important components" of Levin's modus operandi. According to Politico in May 2009, Levin pronounced "almost daily" that Obama "was a failure, a liar and a "statist" who is trying to destroy individual freedom." In June 2017, Levin accused Senator Bernie Sanders of being “a radical Marxist who believes in violence.” According to Rutgers University political scientist Stephen Eric Bronner, Levin tends to use "socialism" as a "catch-all term to condemn any policy that strengthens the social welfare function of the state." In July 2014, he called Jon Stewart "a knee-jerk idiot", and suggested that Stewart was a self-hating Jew.
If you are interested in reading about Mark Levin's indoctrination to political conservatism, check out his father Jack Levin's bio. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
Why did you skip this one?
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ZLFa3uafL._SX320_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
And why would I read or care about what some liberal says about a conservative? You realize you're engaging in confirmation bias?
I have listened to a number of his podcasts. He knows his stuff. His constitutional analysis is excellent. Haven't read his books, but he writes about the constitution in many of them. So yes, he is a constitutional scholar.
I understand you may not like the fact he is brilliant when it comes to the constitution because you disagree with his politics, but that doesn't change the fact that he is a constitutional stud.
-
Why did you skip this one?
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ZLFa3uafL._SX320_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Mainly because the formatting disallowed a clean post. No other reason.
And why would I read or care about what some liberal says about a conservative?
You realize you're engaging in confirmation bias?
I have listened to a number of his podcasts. He knows his stuff. His constitutional analysis is excellent. Haven't read his books, but he writes about the constitution in many of them. So yes, he is a constitutional scholar.
I understand you may not like the fact he is brilliant when it comes to the constitution because you disagree with his politics, but that doesn't change the fact that he is a constitutional stud.
Perhaps you didn't realize that this post exposes your biases. He's a constitutional scholar because he writes books you haven't bothered to read? A scholar is a specialist in a particular branch of study, especially the humanities; a distinguished academic. How do you know that his books aren't utter nonsense, if you don't bother to read them. No, writing a book does not make one an expert; it makes them an author. Remember, his B.A. is in political science. Don't know about you, but this doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Two of my uncles are published authors. One wrote a book about his experiences as a foreign war correspondent during WWII and the other wrote about his experience as a spy in two wars. He had meetings and conversations with Ho Chi Minh prior to and during the Vietnam war. Easy for my uncle who was an expert linguist who was also adept at speaking 13 Chinese dialects and Russian, German, French and Spanish etc. Neither became celebrities on the radio talk show circuit, so you probably wouldn't have known about them.
If I am ever looking for someone to unquestionably champion me, I will certainly give you consideration.
-
I did this and more. This is what I discovered. He is his father's son....kinda hanging by his father's coattails. My previous post regarding him stands. Nowhere does anything I read suggest he is a political scholar.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/411CvVb%2BtdL._SX356_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51w-kBybOiL._SX338_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
and....
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51qx9VkHBlL._SX328_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
This book was written by his father who also is the author of many politically focused books.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y3XfKzsoL._SX323_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2BKUSxV81L._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Plus a couple more on his political views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin)
"Mark Reed Levin; born September 21, 1957 is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality." Somehow his Wikipedia Page neglected to mention that he is a political scholar." ::)
The bottom line is he is a conservative radio talk show celebrity.
If you want to exalt him to that status, you're welcome to. He did get his B.A. in political science.
Just to be clear about where he stands politically, read this:
According to The Guardian, "constant attacks on Democrats and the left are important components" of Levin's modus operandi. According to Politico in May 2009, Levin pronounced "almost daily" that Obama "was a failure, a liar and a "statist" who is trying to destroy individual freedom." In June 2017, Levin accused Senator Bernie Sanders of being “a radical Marxist who believes in violence.” According to Rutgers University political scientist Stephen Eric Bronner, Levin tends to use "socialism" as a "catch-all term to condemn any policy that strengthens the social welfare function of the state." In July 2014, he called Jon Stewart "a knee-jerk idiot", and suggested that Stewart was a self-hating Jew.
If you are interested in reading about Mark Levin's indoctrination to political conservatism, check out his father Jack Levin's bio. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
Dispute it..
But for shits and giggles let’s take that same bio from the Wiki you posted...
Mark Reed Levin, one of three boys, was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and grew up in Erdenheim as well as Elkins Park, Pennsylvania. His father, Jack E. Levin, is the author of several books.[8] He graduated from Cheltenham High School after three years in 1974.[9][10] After high school, Levin enrolled at Temple University Ambler and graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A. in Political Science in 1977 at age 19.[11] Levin won election to the Cheltenham school board in 1977 on a platform of reducing property taxes.[10] In 1980, Levin earned a J.D. from Temple University Beasley School of Law.[12] Levin worked for Texas Instruments after law school.[10] He is Jewish.[13]
Beginning in 1981, Levin served as an adviser to several members of President Ronald Reagan's cabinet, eventually becoming the associate director of presidential personnel and ultimately chief of staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese; Levin also served as deputy assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education at the U.S. Department of Education, and deputy solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior.[14] He practiced law in the private sector and is president of Landmark Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm founded in 1976 with offices in Kansas City, Missouri and Leesburg, Virginia.[15][16][17]
Levin has participated in Freedom Concerts, an annual benefit concert to aid families of fallen soldiers, and uses his radio program to promote aid to military families.[18] Levin is also involved with Troopathon, a charity that sends care packages to soldiers serving overseas.[19] In 2001 the American Conservative Union awarded Levin its Ronald Reagan Award.[20] He was awarded the inaugural Citizens United Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award at CPAC in 2014.[21]
-
Mainly because the formatting disallowed a clean post. No other reason.
Perhaps you didn't realize that this post exposes your biases. He's a constitutional scholar because he writes books you haven't bothered to read? A scholar is a specialist in a particular branch of study, especially the humanities; a distinguished academic. How do you know that his books aren't utter nonsense, if you don't bother to read them. No, writing a book does not make one an expert; it makes them an author. Remember, his B.A. is in political science. Don't know about you, but this doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Two of my uncles are published authors. One wrote a book about his experiences as a foreign war correspondent during WWII and the other wrote about his experience as a spy in two wars. He had meetings and conversations with Ho Chi Minh prior to and during the Vietnam war. Easy for my uncle who was an expert linguist who was also adept at speaking 13 Chinese dialects and Russian, German, French and Spanish etc. Neither became celebrities on the radio talk show circuit, so you probably wouldn't have known about them.
If I am ever looking for someone to unquestionably champion me, I will certainly give you consideration.
I admire your integrity and your attempt to speak reason to those who are not reasonable. I fear you will find as I did, facts aren't important, and in fact if they oppose a few here, they will be dismissed and you will be personally attacked.
-
Yes I read all that. It is impressive, if it's true. It also does not make him a constitutional scholar. He's entitled to his opinion, just as you are entitled to believe his opinion is absolutely correct to the point of exampling it in an argument for your foregone beliefs.
Neither you or I must or needs to win these discussions. My observation, which could be way off, is that what you believe is cemented in your mind so much so that you reject any challenges to it. This is your loss. Who knows, maybe I too have immovable opinions, which is my loss.
No one knows what the end game will be in the 'war' between liberals and conservatives who are so polarized that they cannot find middle ground. One can hope that solutions lay somewhere in the middle where we can find some semblance of harmony among us.
Compromise is a virtue.
I am going to take a break and do something else with the remains of my evening. This is not because of our banter. It is just what I need to do to remain somewhat objective and mentally healthy.
-
Yes I read all that. It is impressive, if it's true. It also does not make him a constitutional scholar. He's entitled to his opinion, just as you are entitled to believe his opinion is absolutely correct to the point of exampling it in an argument for your foregone beliefs.
Neither you or I must or needs to win these discussions. My observation, which could be way off, is that what you believe is cemented in your mind so much so that you reject any challenges to it. This is your loss. Who knows, maybe I too have immovable opinions, which is my loss.
No one knows what the end game will be in the 'war' between liberals and conservatives who are so polarized that they cannot find middle ground. One can hope that solutions lay somewhere in the middle where we can find some semblance of harmony among us.
Compromise is a virtue.
I am going to take a break and do something else with the remains of my evening. This is not because of our banter. It is just what I need to do to remain somewhat objective and mentally healthy.
well said
-
Mainly because the formatting disallowed a clean post. No other reason.
Perhaps you didn't realize that this post exposes your biases. He's a constitutional scholar because he writes books you haven't bothered to read? A scholar is a specialist in a particular branch of study, especially the humanities; a distinguished academic. How do you know that his books aren't utter nonsense, if you don't bother to read them. No, writing a book does not make one an expert; it makes them an author. Remember, his B.A. is in political science. Don't know about you, but this doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Two of my uncles are published authors. One wrote a book about his experiences as a foreign war correspondent during WWII and the other wrote about his experience as a spy in two wars. He had meetings and conversations with Ho Chi Minh prior to and during the Vietnam war. Easy for my uncle who was an expert linguist who was also adept at speaking 13 Chinese dialects and Russian, German, French and Spanish etc. Neither became celebrities on the radio talk show circuit, so you probably wouldn't have known about them.
If I am ever looking for someone to unquestionably champion me, I will certainly give you consideration.
As I said, I've listened to hours of his commentary. Much of his commentary is contained in his books, so I don't need to read his books to know he is a constitutional scholar. I've heard it from his own mouth. Now, you can continue to search Google for some liberal hack who will criticize Levin, but I've actually listened to him myself. If you have an opinion about him, it's uninformed unless you have actually listened to him or spent time reading his material.
But if you have confirmation bias, you will find someone from CNN et al. who will try to marginalize Levin because you need him to be a dunce to fit your political ideology.