I used to think syndicalists were nuts,then I encountered the "Paulians", AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH..................... ;)
Bombing military compounds, government buildings, and civilians is not war. It is called a "no fly zone". That is all that we are doing.
Isn't it ironic that the patriot tribal leaders of this country are the very ones selling us out to world government? Kinda makes those who think our government is protecting us look a little silly.
To live in a free nation would be bliss. Actually, just get rid of the "nation" part, and insert society. I don't think that nations are ever a good thing. As Europeans desired land ownership, I only desire the ability to use it and be left alone. I don't even care about owning it, except for the purpose of claiming it to keep governments out.
I guess I just care too much about silly things like life and liberty. I don't like being poisoned and irradiated by corporations and government. I have this incessant objection to the fruits of my labor being extracted by force by a corrupt governing body to be used for murder and mayhem around the world. Not to mention the tyranny at home.
I don't know what is wrong with me. I know that I should love being viewed as a possible terrorist as a citizen in the US. I should get warm fuzzies about millions of men, women, and children being killed with depleted uranium ammunition that will kill millions more over the years. I get to help fund it, and I have a problem with that for some unknown reason.
I obviously have some brain chemical imbalance. Maybe a psychotropic drug would help make me normal. There are people that want to put lithium in drinking water along with the fluoride. I know that it would help me, but I have this stupid little thing about forced medication.
What are they gonna do about me. Wait.... Someone is at the door, and there are flashlights and laser beams coming in my window. Why would there be a swat team in my yard?
Well, gotta go.
You should see how The Daily Show addressed it by having a fake commercial about "freedom packages."
What actually makes this worse is the fact that Obama did the exact opposite of what Bush did. Bush got approval from Congress, but not the UN while Obama gets approval from the UN, but not from Congress. As much as I'm against all 3 of these...it's absolutely atrocious to me that our president would consort with foreign governments yet not his own people...and people still think globalization is a conspiracy theory. Haha.
I tend to believe that when the markets crash and the dollar is devalued to the level of the peso, that we will enter into a global financial constitution such as Gordon Brown talked about. There has been a plan in the works for some time to switch to a global fiat SDR reserve currency controlled by the IMF. This is why I believe that they are spending whatever it takes to set up this massive control grid around the world and in America. They don't care about the dollar anymore, and they are trying to get the most out of it before it fails.
In the midst of this crisis, we will likely hand over our troops to UN control. They will use foreign troops in the US to control the masses, while using US troops in other countries as they are now. Posse Commotatus was negated by the Patriot Act, so military has an open door to police civilians as they did in Catrina.
World government will consist of the IMF, the UN, and the Trilateral Commission. We will be subject to them all through treaty and financial dependence. We will be a part of the North American Union that has been fought for for a couple of decades now.This is why we have NAFTA and GATT and open borders. Canadians, Americans, and Mexicans will all be one people. We will still remain Americans, just North Americans.
This is your world government in a nut shell.
I usually agree with Levin's points, but on this one I don't like the lawyerly weasling with "ambiguities" in the constitution. Having said that, we've been violating the constitution for decades by having a standing army.
There is no question whether this is a war or not: This is a war, we were the ones that conducted an act of war by attacking a sovereign country. Were anybody to fly across our border and blow up our tanks and fighter aircraft, there would be no doubt.
You don't read the Constitution much do you? Art.1 Sec.8
"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;" there's the authorization for a "standing Army".
By that logic, we shouldn't be anywhere doing anything that we are. Are you one of those Ron Paul supporters?
Yes. If you absolutely trust the government without question, then Levin is absolutely right.
Seeing as how they're not calling it a war...then it could technically be perfectly constitutional to declare a "police action." My question though is why didn't we call the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions just "police actions," since that's what those were and still are to this day? We called those wasteful debt-incurring abominations "wars," which were never actually declared yet this is somehow different because...? (crickets chirp)
The supreme court is corrupt as well. They are appointed by the highest level of corruption. They recently ruled that Chicago cannot take away a person's right to own a gun, but they can regulate it to the point of non use. Seems to me that the court doesn't understand the few simple lines in the second amendment, or the basis for them being there. A junior high school student wouldn't have a problem understanding it, but the Supreme Court can't figure it out.
Anyone who takes comfort in believing that the constitution will protect them from government, need only look at the Patriot Act, or the health care bill. Or hundreds of other pieces of legislation that take the simplest of rights away from Americans.
As they finish destroying any semblance of prosperity and freedom that we have, more people will hopefully wake up to these things and realize that we do not have a representative government any longer. Spreading democracy around the world is a joke. Democratic dictators is more like it. We spread what our government wishes they could do.
If you don't know where Levin is coming from then you need to read his book Liberty and Tyranny. Makes his show so much more applicable.
Yes I watched it and was mortified, but not surprised.
People like Levin are the worst.. They claim to believe in and support the constitution, but shred it when it's convenient for them. They care about power, and winning elections - They love centralized power and a large, powerful federal government, and in this case a powerful executive who can declare war when and where he wants to without the approval from congress for 60 days.
#1. THIS IS A WAR.
This is another thing these these dishonest, unconstitutional weasels try to do - change the very fact that we all know this is an act of war. Any military activity in which you violate a country's border with (violent) military force is an act of war by each nation involved. Levin is trying to change the definition of war in order to give the President total control over when HE commits our troops to war. We must let our representatives have control over when we go or do not go to war, least we have a King?
The War Powers Act itself gives the President the leeway in the event of an imminent attack, and President Obama can't even meet the imminent threat escape clause.
Under Levin's broad war powers interpretation a President can declare war on ANYONE, ANYWHERE, FOR 60 DAYS AND ALL OUR REPRESENTATIVES CAN DO IS ACT AFTER THE FACT? What about the damage done before those 60 days and where's the voice of the people? Where's the debate?
RON PAUL AND DENNIS KUCINICH (BOTH HOUSE MEMBERS) ARE RIGHT!
The power is supposed to reside with the people through their representatives in our constitutional Republic so we all have a say in any question of war because it's our military which is fighting on OUR BEHALF. We do not give our President a King-like power to declare war, rather that power is vested in the Congress as it should be and Levin should know this.
This weasel Levin is trying to squirm around the definition of war, similar to Bill Clinton with the word sex. In both cases you're witnessing tyrants in a desperate attempt at getting around the clear letter of the law.
WHY IT'S IMPORTANT
If there was ever a situation where the United States was under imminent attack then the President has every right to respond. But that in no way applies here and as such is completely unconstitutional on its face. If this intervention is so important than why not bring it before the Congress?
I would submit that there is no legitimate reason for being in any other country. Our presence in other countries has nothing to do with self preservation, but rather corporate domination. Corporations run the wars, literally telling our representatives what needs to be done. The amount of private mercenaries in these "wars" is staggering. These wars are about global domination by the corporate elite. It isn't even as much about money as it is control. These guys print the money, and run the markets. Money is just a necessary vehicle to achieve control.
If it were about protecting Americans, we wouldn't have open borders. We fight a "war" against drugs so that drugs are higher in value. Our government grows and ships the drugs while they clamp down on Americans. This has all been in the news. Meanwhile they let the drug cartel pass into the country killing Americans.
We have infighting about budgets, union control, social programs, and many more and don't pay attention to the fact the the anti war candidate Obama is sending the corporate controlled military industrial complex into yet another country because they don't like the dictator anymore.
This is just after Google brags about starting the who Egypt ordeal. Google has admitted cohesive interaction with government to spy on the public and report to the government.
People keep talking about "constitution this, and constitution that", and they don't realize that the constitution was abandoned by American political powers about eighty years ago, and is only used by national political powers to keep endless debates going.
We keep buying into these diversions while they shut down our industries, invade sovereign nations, and clamp down with a growing police state here in America.
As long as we buy into the whole boogy man story, we are doomed to supporting terrorist acts by our government. Which is not actually a legitimate government according to our supreme law.
Don't worry though. These loving crony corporate leaders will tell you to drink down some more fluoride, swallow some more aspartame, eat your GMO pesticide ridden food, and get lots of vaccines while also saying that the recession was over in June of 09, the foundations of the economy are strong, and higher levels of radiation are actually good for you. So go get you chest ex-rays at the airport, and look for them in the shopping malls to get an extra little something for your health.
I almost forgot, go fill out your march madness pics, because as Obama said "its a nice distraction from all that is going on".
"hush little baby don't say a word, governments going to buy you a mocking bird"
adequate? That depends on the person. But it is accurate. So if you had a WTF moment, that's because of what he said, not because of deception on my part.
No one thinks you're being deceptive. You're a neo-con that believes that a large centralized government can be used to enforce/force good upon the unwashed masses. @ least you are honest about it.
Actually - I've followed you since shortly after you founded the site, I just haven't posted. I appreciate your Christian ideals and your enthusiasm - you're just not well read. However - I recognize from your writing that you have the capacity for it.
Neo-cons encourage the growth of the military industrial complex as a means of imposition. There's a huge gulf between the concept of national Defense as envisioned by Reagan and militarism as described by Eisenhower.
The concept of war - especially from a biblical perspective - doesn't have shades of mercy interlaced. It's something you do all the way or you don't do at all - otherwise - you create life long enemies that you'll have to perpetually have to deal with.
Levin is as naive and childlike as Obama and he has all the confidence in the world to back it up.
You know, I think I'm gonna sit this argument out. I plan to the let the left eat the left and not do give them any reason to focus on what the Conservatives in the House should be doing. This is Obama's war and anything we say will be used against us in the next election.
I highly respect Mark Levin, but in this issue I am in total disagreement. Yes, Obama is the Commander & Chief - but it is up to congress "to declare War, grant Letter of Marque, and Reprisal -----" We cannot help it if congress is chosing to be dormant - if John Boehner is acting passive or not stopping any military appropriations. But, Pres. Obama should have and did not due his duty in going before congress and asking their permission to take action.
We have had too many president's over the last 100 years overstep their authority and violate their oath to uphold every nuance of their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution.
I listened to the audio and I do not agree with Mark Levin on this issue.
Well rather than looking to Levin, how 'bout we check out what the document says? Only Congress has the power "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations; To declare War...To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions...
I'm not sure I care any more what Levin "feels."
We, as conservatives, claim that we recognize that we've drifted from following the constitution. It's no argument to say, "Well, we haven't declared war in a long time, so who cares?" The worst and most unjust of this war, yes, war in Libya is that we are there under the authority of an unelected world government body known as the U.N. Personally, I believe that that alone violates just war theory - but it sure ain't conservative. Sigh.
Perhaps you should look up the UN charter that congress approved some time ago and no congress has ever made a move to reject. I would also suggest reading The War powers Act of 1973 paying particular attention to Section 8. I don't agree with it but it is the law.
sorry, fb posting isn't working. This is Aaron again:
Yes, but I'm responding to the written text at the top, "Levin on his radio show tonight said that it’s absolutely ridiculous to say that we must declare war to attack Libya." and "he feels that if you want the Congress and the people behind you, that you should make your case to them and involve them."
I think the case can be made that you could attack a country if they posed an immanent threat, (to our country) but that isn't Libya. And it really gets my goat when I hear a conservative using the word, "feels..." This really should be cut and dry for a conservative, it makes me so sad to see us playing footsie with the U.N.
alan west is a passionate, disciplined man
chris christie is a passionate, prosecutorial expert
ron paul is a wise, passionate, righteous, moral man who deserves to be president (in my opinion the only truly constitutional candidate of 2008)
mark "great one" levin is pasionate too - about being whiny, and shameless about his own self-promotion, with a deep root in the blowhard department.
levin is as difficult to listen to as obama
they are equal on the "skin-crawl-o-meter"
The Great One is a passionate man. Not everyone may like that, but I love it as do most of my readers.
The point wasn't though, that everyone should listen to the audio regardless of whether you like him or not. The point was in fact that if you are going to refute him it helps to listen to him before you do it.
That is all.
we dont listen to the audio because its so difficult to stomach a whiny, conservative, shameless, self-promoter like levin. his point of view may be of interest on a balanced scale, but the "great one" is a blowhard.
Why don't you listen to the audio before you dismiss him. My summary is not exhaustive and in fact he makes his case quite well. In other words before you diss him, listen to him.