’People Who Push ‘America First’ Are ‘Schizophrenic’ - Mark Levin is a lunatic, he's all over the place in his neurotic rant. Something about him just isn't quite kosher.....

Centuries of inbreeding have consequences.

He has been a famous Hannity admirer. He is an establishment type that has some distorted views on a lot of things. He has penned some decent books in the past but I have a feeling he is no Trump admirer.

He is very much a Trump admirer. The problem with a lot of folks is unless the individual is 100 % in lock step with YOUR personal views, then he's automatically labeled with whatever invective you feel fits... I don't always agree with some of his views ....

He trashed Trump all the time when he was a Ted Cruz fan boy, that is, until Trump won and he started loosing listeners.

That’s right I said It.. 5 years ago..

Jews are insane. It's the only answer that fits.

He correctly cites to the Declaration of Independence and Constitution and their appeal to natural law and natural rights and their applicability to all men. He is an original intent Constitutionalist, as he should be. He points out (quite correctly) that neither the Constitution or Declaration use the terms "nationalist" and "populist" and that the Framers were concerned with the possibility of mobocracy (which is the essence of populism). He rightly points out that this country is, first and foremost about liberty. He correctly points out that the 10th amendment rejects nationalism in favor of Federalism. He points out that Nationalists essentially want an all-powerful Federal government. He also points out the errors of isolationism. He is right on.

He does, indeed. Not on all points. He does, indeed, but it's entirely irrelevant, since those terms weren't used then. No, populism isn't the equivalent of mobocracy, nor is mobocracy the essence of populism. Populism refers to a viewpoint that's suspicious of the power of an elite, through deceitful means, gaining control over governance, and it's a viewpoint encouraged by the Founders. Liberty, under law. These are not on opposing sides. The Founders were both nationalists and defenders of Federalism, understood to mean that governmental power in the US is divided both within the Federal Government and between the Federal Government, the States, and the local governments, for the purpose of preventing consolidated centralized governance. Your assertion is completely false. Concern for one's own nation having priority over concerns for foreign nations isn't in the least inconsistent with decentralized governance.
He is dead wrong, as are you. "Isolationism" is a derogatory term invented by the internationalists, i.e., the advocates for global governance and the ultimate elimination of national sovereignty. So-called isolationists were those who rightly opposed that.

The American Revolution was explicitly nationalistic. That is to say, it made no contention…had no pretense of being a revolution for all mankind. Unlike, for instance the French Revolution, we didn’t wish to expand it. We did not go on any crusade to change the world. What change in the world we promulgated was to be accomplished by example, not force of arms or even revolution. It was that we founded what we believed to be the best form of government FOR THIS COUNTRY and OUR PROGENY. Sure, we believed that rights are universal and inherent, but we never claimed the right to assert them for on behalf of anyone else.

Only with the Civil War did we begin assume the right to forcibly assert these rights for others. As a result, we’ve been more or less continually at war ever since and our rights have steadily eroded here at home.

Spot on.

I never listen to pundits like him. Dhimmicrat or otherwise.

I'm proud to say I've never been fooled by the phony.

Mahatma Gandhi was a Nationalist also. People do not know what a nationalist is.

Screw Hannity and Levin. Both of these neocon azzholes get zero of my time

Well said!!

Public schools don't teach any of that.

Juden

I have to agree with this. I'm glad he is on our/my side on most issues. In fact, I don't know a single person in my own life with whom I've agreed or who has agreed with me 100% of the time. If everybody were to start looking for those 100%ers for whom to vote, the next election, for any position, would result in a 0-0 tie, if people were honest with themselves, in my opinion.

You two better stop with that talk. The koshervatives here will put you on their ignore list lol

This is the correct answer.

Great avatar. A real American hero.

Mark Levin is a bum - he originally opposed Donald Trump back in 2016 when Trump started pounding on Ted Cruz. He changed his tune when he saw what happened to Glenn Beck and that the American people were going FOR Trump. Mark Levin is a real neocohen.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/201...or-donald-trump-count-me-as-never-trump/

by IAN HANCHETT 8 Apr 2016

Talk radio host Mark Levin, who has endorsed Republican presidential candidate Texas Senator Ted Cruz, declared, “I am not voting for Donald Trump. Period” and “count me as never Trump” on Friday.

Levin said that a couple of years ago, the Senate Conservatives Fund contacted his publisher to buy old copies of his book, “Liberty & Tyranny” to promote membership, something he wasn’t involved in. Levin defended this as “perfectly legitimate,” and done by many groups and authors, and as far as he knew, wasn’t bulk buying, and didn’t impact any lists. He further stated that whatever money he got from this sale was donated to charity.

Levin then stated, “Roger Stone is a thug. He’s a sleazeball. … And he’s a hatchet man for Donald Trump. So he puts out this obscure article from this obscure website, that used that to claim that I’m bought and paid for by the establishment. … And in the article, they trash other people too, Beck, Erickson, I think there’s another fellow in there trashed, with these nutjob conspiracy theories, and just flat-out lies.”

Levin continued, “Now, there are sleazeballs, like him, sleazeballs like Coulter, and sleazeballs like some talk show hosts, and I’m biting my tongue, who are so contemptible and pathetic, they want to use the most outrageous attacks on one of their colleagues to try and promote themselves. It’s truly pathetic.”

He then added, “Now, I’ve backed Cruz, and I’m going to continue to back Cruz, but here’s what I’m going to do. As a result of what the Trump supporters have attempted here, particularly Roger Stone, I am not voting for Donald Trump. Period. … And if anybody has a problem with that, Donald Trump, you can talk to Roger Stone. These bully, dirty tricks, Nixonian tactics, they’re only going to backfire. They’re only going to backfire. So, count me as never Trump. There’s been too much of this folks, way too much of this. The crap in the National Enquirer against Ted Cruz, the attacks on Michelle Fields, I mean, I can go right through the list, too much, too much, too much. At some point, you’ve got to stand up to it.”

Levin concluded, “And if they piss me off one more time, I’m going to urge millions and millions of you, should he get the nomination, not to vote for him either.” And “‘Ooh, Roger Stone has nothing to do with the campaign.’ Oh yes he does.”

Yep. I remember him being a never Trumper. It was only his fear of losing his audience that caused him to change his tune.

All about the shekels.

yep, same with neocons Ben Stein and Savage. All Are pushing war with Russia now big time

Money sure is stronger than their characters and morals

lindburg? not wearing my glasses

Yes

I agree.

As far as Levin's 2016 comments go, he did go overboard. I think everyone is guilty of that from time to time. I think Levin was won over to Trump by when he saw that Trump really was going to try to do as he promised. For that matter, there are things Trump did and said that the majority of us would disagree with, but all in all we'd vote for him again. Nobody gets 100% of what they want.

Yep.
Well said.

Not rocket science. Levin hedged his bets on a conservative winning.

He was almost right.

Except it’s not.

I don’t know how anyone can listen to him, his voice is almost as bad as Ben Shapiro’s. And his little rants? Especially when he came out hard against Trump , then like was said earlier changed course to keep his audience.

I have always respected Levin but he is terribly opinionated and conflicted by a lot of things. I too was a Cruz supporter but after witnessing what Trump went through to do all the good he has done I am a loyal supporter.
Roger Stone started out at a young age working for Republican candidates. After witnessing where our Republican leadership has taken our nation I am ready to vote the bas$:7ds out. Trump STAYS.

He has conflicting loyalties and those are DEFINITELY playing into his perception of things in Ukraine.

He conflates many ideas and misrepresents an awesful lot. This is a massive misdirect. You can tell by his use of the word isolationist.

He points to all kinds of challenges boomers worry about and doesn’t make one mention of the issues facing this country right now inside our own borders.

Controlled opposition douschnozzle.

Nationalism and federalism aren’t at odds, but I do share his suspicion of populism.

Yes.

I care about:

1) members of our own regime’s opposition imprisoned indefinitely

2) redefining political activities once considered central to participation in our system as tantamount to terrorism, thereby labeling more than half our populace domestic terrorists

3) indoctrination of our kids into Marxist ideologies and sexual perversion

4) a southern border that is virtually non existent

5) election fraud has been perpetrated right before our eyes with nothing at all being done to address it


I can’t concern myself with the challenges to other countries when these things are going on here. Russia, Ukraine, China, the UN, the int’l criminal court… NONE pose even the slightest shadow of the threat that our own ruling elites do to this country.

He wants to talk about the Constitution but doesn’t mention ANY of these issues.

As my boys would say, pretty sus…

Spot on. Exactly right.

Neocon jews like Levin and Shapiro have over the past several decades pretty much taken over American "conservatism". Transforming it into... well... whatever it is today. Isn't it interesting how so many political talking heads and commentators belong to the synagogue of Satan?

I have never been able to stand to listen to Levin, even for a second. Shapiro is even more shrill and smarmy. I heard him once say he didn't care what race was the majority in America... I bet he cares what race is the majority in "israel".....


America's Founders established this nation for THEMSELVES and THEIR posterity. NOT the posterity of every savage tribe from around the globe. They codified that immigrants to America must be "Free White persons of good character". None of this "melting pot" schidt. You can keep your tired, poor, huddled masses, Ms. Lazarus....

Like.

As I recall, he tooted his horn loudly for Trump's appointment of Dumb Jeff Sessions as AG.

Not many of trump’s touted appointments by anyone worked out too well.

His press secretaries were good.

Seems Mark has been throwing a shoe with greater frequency lately.

So who are you faulting? Levin for supporting Trump’s decision or Trump for making that decision?

"I am not a nationalist!".....

Oh, Levin's a nationalist alright.... he's just not an American nationalist.

Does Levin have Dual Citizenship..
I also find him conflicted..
I find The Derby Donkey named Mitch and Ms. Lindsay even more Conflicted .. Treasonous..
Levin has NO Love for these Two..
For Good Reason..
Levin has a good sense on many issues but Ukieland ain’t one of them..
If your reading this Mark . If you ever support
Ms. Lindsay on anything again Your Dead to Me..

No sir, YOU could not be more wrong. Isolationism is indeed an abrogation of our national interests. I do agree with you that national interest ideas can vary and I do not agree we need to be the world's policemen, but for the sake of discussion if someone were to attack and takeover say the Panama Canal, it would most assuredly be in our national interests to intervene. And of course remember, my view of "globalism" is not the common view today. It was a much better world during the imperial era that even we got into it..

The American "Revolution" was not a revolution, but a very nationalistic "War Of Independence". Revolutions are internal and seek to overthrow an existing government. culture, way of life, etc., like France, Russia, etc. The American colonies were governed by an external power. But eventually, we did seek to expand, witness the Barbary Pirate invasion of Tripoli, the Monroe Doctrine (nothing more than protecting that other imperial expansion, Manifest Destiny), the Spanish American War, etc. A far cry from globalism AND isolationism

Jorge, you're making my point that the word isolationist doesn't actually characterize the views of Americans who opposed internationalism. The word's implications are false. It's a mere slur, falsely attributed to the opponents of internationalism. A nation using its military to defend its legitimate national interests is not in any way opposed to the viewpoint of nationalism, nor does it make one in any sense an internationalist.

Where do you listen to Savage? Two years ago they took him off the radio here.

I believe in intervention when it is in our interests, but therein lies the 64K dollar question, your ideas and mine may vary..

our own republican party is all in with the democrats wanting to start a war with Russia over Ukraine. Russia is trying to protect regions of Ukraine that have been subjected to genocide for decades by their own government. Outside of protecting a cash cow for politicians nepotism we have no "national Interests" in Ukraine. Levin is all for it. He is conflicted.

Think he's on-line only[maybe].

Savage used to be big-time. He was on 350 stations, maybe the fifth biggest host in America. He even had a tv show on MSNBC for a few months.
About five years ago Savage began losing stations, he dwindled down to about 100 stations. Then he announced that he was going to a "podcast" whatever that is.

He said he was more popular than ever and things would be much better once he was off the radio.

Yeah. Right.
And then, he was gone from the radio. Haven't listened to him in 2 years.

He lost a huge number of listeners when, after a mass shooting, he came out in favor of outlawing semiautomatic firearms and standard capacity magazines.

Savage...aka (((Michael Alan Weiner))).

If only there were some sort of pattern here...

Didn't he get his azz whooped on the streets of Sanfran?

Wiener is a (((chameleon))) from way back.

We're at War with Russia currently. You and many others here have simply become Jane Fonda

Levin rubs me the wrong way for some reason. One thing is I don't like any NeoCons and those who talk a good fight without ever putting their ass on the line. Hannity calls him "the great one" but I don't know what he is great at besides seeming to lecture all the time. Sometimes smart guys think they know everything about every thing and if he wants to F with Russia let him go over and walk the walk.

Lindsay Graham is another one as is Karl Rove but there are others.