Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

December 2024
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Archives

Program note

Tonight, Mark Levin will be unveiling what he’s calling the “Levin Liberty Project,” which is essentially his suggested blue print for recapturing a constitutional republic from the post-constitutional relativism — selective law enforcement, crony capitalism, industry favoritism, waivers, politicized bureaucracies and agencies — the left has instituted and, in recent years, sough to institutionalize, much of it with the aid of GOP establishment law makers.

I’ve written here of the way both ObamaCare and the “comprehensive immigration reform” bill currently being pushed by the Left right along with the Rovian Republicans, a few faux-TEA Party sellouts, and the rest of the establican status-quo seekers on the “right,” seeks to make permanent the outsourcing of critical functions for “navigating” people through the federalized health care and, potentially, new-citizen initiation procedures, creating in effect a permanent dependence class indoctrinated and registered to vote by those leftist groups that have attached themselves to the contemporary New Left Democrat Party.

Dr Betsy McCaughey has argued that this will essentially destroy a fair two party system here in the US, creating a fifth branch of government made up of community organizing and activist groups, most of them which tack hard left, who will control both the health care process and the naturalization process.

Which, if you think the abuses by the Justice Department and the IRS were bad, wait until the Left builds a permanent voting majority with the help of Republicans who really don’t mind seeing the size of government grow.

So listen to Levin’s show this evening or get the podcast later.  We have discussed our own ideas for accomplishing an American revival — which is tantamount to a liberty revival, a Constitutional rebirth, an act of anti-establishment radicalism brought on by a revolutionary spirit that has never left those of us born in liberty without ever taking it for granted.

The reinvigoration of the individual, of federalism, of the power of Governors and state officials to seize back Constitutional control of issues now routinely imposed on us by federal legislation and a bare majority of 5 on an unimpeachable court — all of these things are part of a plan going forward we’ve discussed here.

The old adage “all politics is local” needs to be dusted off and brought back and revived, moving from empty platitude to rallying cry of a free citizenry that was never intended to be beholden to imperial dictates of a presumptuous Executive and his czars or a bureaucratic apparatus with the power to regulate (essentially, write law) that is immune from the efforts of those aggrieved to affect change by way of the ballot box.

Later on, we’ll discuss his ideas — and add our own tweaks — at length and in detail.

The Outlaw party is taking shape.  And frankly, it feels rather liberating to be on the outside, taking on the establishment.

Now if only we can schedule so love-ins and score some fine dope, the irony will be complete and unassailable.

51 Replies to “Program note”

  1. Shermlaw says:

    The emphasis re: the immigration bill seems to be on its effect on federal elections. I worry that it will destroy any 9th and 10th Amendment revivals, as well. Make sure all these dependent voters head to states with strong traditions in self-reliance and personal autonomy. We’ve seen the tip of the iceberg as refugees from California and other places bring their horrific ideas of governance to more conservative climes and screw up the place.

  2. ProfShade says:

    Does this make us a neo-Choom gang? Someone dig up Grace Slick and enlist Jimmy Carl Black.

  3. DarthLevin says:

    In any freshly reconstituted republic, I think one essential thing will be to reclaim voting privileges (not rights).

    My loosely-formed, imperfect thoughts on the matter are that, in order to vote, the minimum requirements would be:

    1) you are 25 years of age, or honorably discharged from military service.
    2) you carry a non-negative tax burden; in other words, you aren’t on the dole for anything. You might not pay any net taxes, but you aren’t a recipient of gov’t (i.e., the people’s) money.
    3) you don’t go by happyfeet or nishi. OK, not serious here. Not too serious.
    4) ??? I have some thoughts around minimum participation levels, but I’m not sure how that could be tracked or enforced, or if it’s consistent with the principle. Just because I have the privilege of voting, does that imply that I have an obligation to exercise it?

    Anyway, tonight’s show should be interesting. It’ll be better than watching the Reds lose to yet another divisional bottom-feeder, I know that.

  4. There’s an alternative to Congress for proposing constitutional amendments; there should be an alternative to Congress for the removal of lawless executive officials or judges. Simply waiting until the next election only allows the cross-branch corruption to take hold more firmly and (oh, I dunno, let me take a wild shot in the dark) ensure that the next election won’t remove the malcreants.

  5. bgbear says:

    It has got to be realistic so, I am assuming it has to do with federalism and have the states’ governments push back.

    I still don’t think Levin is keen on a 3rd party.

  6. mojo says:

    The Outlaw Party: Smokin’ OP’s

  7. eCurmudgeon says:

    My loosely-formed, imperfect thoughts on the matter are that, in order to vote, the minimum requirements would be:

    1) you are 25 years of age, or honorably discharged from military service.

    I would like to see a “dynamic” voting age, where in order to vote for a specific office, you would have to be the same age as to hold the office.

    For example, if you were 18-21, you would be allowed to vote for those city, county or state offices that allowed 18-21-year-olds to serve. When you turn 25, you could start voting for Representatives. At 30, you could vote for Senators (although I strongly prefer repealing the 17th Amendment and moving that role back to state legislators). At 35, you could vote for President.

    2) you carry a non-negative tax burden; in other words, you aren’t on the dole for anything. You might not pay any net taxes, but you aren’t a recipient of gov’t (i.e., the people’s) money.

    I’d rather avoid the issue altogether by abolishing most social welfare programs on the spot…

  8. Shermlaw says:

    The problem is not the Constitution we have, but those who have subverted it. Better to establish term limits on Congress and elect members to the Legislative branch who have the stones to impeach those officers who do not follow the Constitution. Alas, I do not think that’s possible. The only way is reasserting the States’ and citizens’ rights under the 9th and 10th Amendments and let the chips fall where they may.

  9. BigBangHunter says:

    – Just enforce the 9th and 10th with force and consequences if any citizen/any court/any judge/any gov department/any gov employee/ any business entity breaks the law….. Everything else will fall into place.

  10. sdferr says:

    There’s a problem. It’s political. What is it?

    There’s always a problem. It’s always political. What is it?

  11. Ultimately it is the states, or the people, who must force Washington to abide by the Constitution — and the same would hold true for any constitution.

    The assumption that a military outcome in 1865 has permanently settled an issue of law is absurd on its face, by the way.

  12. JohnInFirestone says:

    Tax Day is the day before Voting Day. You must show proof of payment before being able to vote.

    No automatic withholding of taxes (of any kind).

  13. Shermlaw says:

    sdferr, the political problem is that somewhere along the line, being a politician became a career, instead temporary public service, a la Cincinnatus. Once that happened, long about the 17th Amendment, the States lost whatever power they had after 1865. As a consequence, the pols are more concerned about staying inside the Beltway than following their oaths. See, e.g. Marco Rubio.

  14. leigh says:

    There’s always a problem. It’s always political. What is it?

    Power and the abuses thereof. The powers of the coequal branches of government must be stripped of their extra-constitutional power and made to follow the law as written by the Founders.

    Anything else is rearranging the deck chairs.

  15. leigh says:

    stupid html

  16. Blitz says:

    Yes Mcgehee. It is up to the states. See what’s going on in Colorado and Kansas…I believe this is the future of this Country. Possibly Civil war ( Other than race wars, which I also think are coming ) but cold and demographic.

    We need to band together with othe like minded folks and let the libs destroy themselves. Of course, there will always be intra state treaties ( Oil, water and travel ) But there needs to be a reckoning. I’m not the smartest, but I do see it coming. This shitstain of an admin. has split us 50-50.

  17. Salt Lick says:

    When he spoke at the “Audit the IRS” rally, Glenn Beck said taking the country back would be a long struggle and require significant sacrifices, and given his tone and reference several times to Martin Luther King, Jr, I took “sacrifices” to mean bodily harm and pain. It means getting out in public and facing the goons, just like the Civil Rights workers of the 60s.

  18. Blitz says:

    Salt Lick, That’s exactly what I’ve been ignorantly posting for years. Knew it was coming, just thought we had some time.

    I’ll gladly fight so my grandaughters don’t have to.

  19. The cold civil war has been going on for generations and our side mostly didn’t take it seriously until relatively recently — and now, of course, many are “staunch” only in their determination to undermine the resistance.

  20. dicentra says:

    Can I wear clown shoes to this?

    I wanna wear clown shoes.

  21. Blitz says:

    Di, shoes are optional. Brains, talent and experience count. Hell, I like a clown nose every now and then!! ( The kids love it )

  22. Blitz says:

    Mcgehee, I didn’t take it seriously at all until maybe 2008. Now? Some say I take it too seriously. I’m like Johnjay (Summer soldier winter patriot.com I think ) I’m pissed off and WANT a fight.

  23. Blitz says:

    Wait…Not want, but expect. Ready.

  24. Clown shoes are best if they’re steel-toed. Nobody ever sees that coming.

  25. Blitz says:

    I would do a link here, but it’s too obvious.

  26. Blitz says:

    However? to break tension and for clown shoes purposes? I propose this…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqz_4OgMi7M

  27. dicentra says:

    Sounds like Levin is going to propose that we push through some stiff Constitutional Amendments to stop the clowns in D.C.

    Still just making his case for Big Measures, though. He’s got three hours to fill.

  28. serr8d says:

    The coming economic collapse will pit the over-militarized police and armored, enhanced DHS elements against those who push back against whomever is running the federal government. Best we can hope for (least bloodshed) is a Soviet Union-style collapse to super-regionals made up of adjoining, like-minded States. But our Federal Republic will (must?) cease to exist as we know it.

    Chances of a mild collapse, like the Soviet Union’s? Not likely. Our streets will run with blood like we’ve never seen before.

  29. dicentra says:

    In other news, the first Great Blue Heron chick fledged this morning. He’s standing perplexed, on a log in the middle of the pond, poking at things and trying not to get his foots wet.

  30. dicentra says:

    Linky of the fledge; skip to about 4/5 of the way through.

  31. dicentra says:

    Whoa! Eleven amendments!

  32. bour3 says:

    I don’t care anymore about complete unassailable ironing. Steam the wrinkles out.

  33. leigh says:

    The cold civil war has been going on for generations . . .

    Someone else reads Derb.

  34. bour3 says:

    Truimph the Cornell insult heron: all these cameras here… for me to poop on.

  35. Salt Lick says:

    Blitz says July 10, 2013 at 3:41 pm>>>>>

    You and Jeff both, Blitz.

    I guess Levin’s proposed amendments provide an intellectual framework for this new “Liberty Project,” but I am not an intellectual. Practically, there are only two things I can see that work:

    1) Scare the Republicans. Show them we are willing to risk political suicide by giving our votes to third party candidates unless they shape up. Sarah Palin is again showing the way on this. She knows political guerilla fighting from her Alaska experiences and her capture of that state’s GOP.

    2) March in the streets and burn up the phone lines. Let the Republicans hear it.

  36. Ernst Schreiber says:

    1) won’t work because the problem Establicans are either entrenched incumbents, or, if you dig them out, secure sinecures for themselves in lobbying and consultancy. So go ahead and threaten them with political suicide. They know it will hurt conservatives more than it will hurt them. At least in the short run.

    Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. We have to. Just that we shouldn’t expect any result other than the political (assisted) suicide of the GOP.

    Kill it boldly, I say.

    They’re trying to kill us with a kiss.

  37. newrouter says:

    levin’s idea along with the states telling the fed reg agencies to eff off might work

  38. dicentra says:

    He’s assuming a longer timespan to System Failure than I am.

    Dunno who’s right.

  39. Blue State of Death.

  40. steph says:

    Devil’s Advocate General/Typical Voter: “State’s Rights? What is this? Please to explain. Double-dog-dare you. I have no idea what you speak of. Please explain what this means to me in terms of twitter, cuervo gold, iphone or android, my gay friends who deserve blah blah, highway death memorials, tofu burger
    and getting a marketing job at the cool non-profits.”

  41. newrouter says:

    “State’s Rights? What is this? Please to explain”

    the original 13 states created the fed gov’t. the existing states can replace the current fed gov’t

  42. newrouter says:

    “Enzi wants to be a sober, serious legislator working with his liberal friends across the aisle to make a better country. Except there are no friends across the aisle, and the liberals do not want to make this a better country. Liberals want to ruthlessly acquire and maintain power and control over every aspect of our lives, and anyone who does not see and understand that and who can’t commit to destroying their hideous plans for our country needs to get out the way for a true conservative warrior.”

    link

  43. dicentra says:

    Indeed, Kurt Schlichter is a very #caring individual.

  44. Jim says:

    States move to amend Constitution under Article 5. Levin is brilliant, as usual. First suggestion I’ve heard for what to do about the totalitarianism and corruption. Until now I’d been bracing for impact. Not that it will work. It probably won’t because the Loyalists of today are stupider and angrier and well funded and organized by the tyrant. But it’s a shot.

    You can grab the podcast on his site. I think it was in the second hour that he explained that George Mason’s concerns set us up with this remedy.

  45. Squid says:

    “State’s Rights? What is this? Please to explain. Double-dog-dare you. I have no idea what you speak of. Please explain what this means to me in terms of twitter, cuervo gold, iphone or android, my gay friends who deserve blah blah, highway death memorials, tofu burger and getting a marketing job at the cool non-profits.”

    “It means your husband will be able to work in manufacturing or power production without the Chicago Beltway Mob shutting down his workplace. It means your children will have a shot at a proper education without the Beltway Brainwashers teaching them to be powerless and dependent. It means your food and booze and gay friends and highway memorials will all be affected by legislators you might actually see and talk to, rather than unaccountable bureaucrats in some swamp on the Potomac.”

    This gets to another important element of any campaign to restore the Republic: we need effective communicators and educators who can deprogram our neighbors, to make them understand just how badly they’ve been miseducated and just how badly our system of government has been perverted.

    Freedom sells. I really don’t see how we can go wrong by appealing to people’s dignity and self-worth. Sure, there are always the hopeless cases who just want to be somebody’s zoo animal, but we don’t need them. What we really need is for our hipster children to “discover” that lifelong servitude to Washington is really uncool. The elements are already there, if we can find a medium to spread the message. These people already embrace ideas about local growers and local brewers and local craftsmen and local shopkeepers, and distrust (or hate) humongous faceless soulless distant corporations. It shouldn’t be hard to get them to embrace the idea of local political control and to hate their humongous faceless soulless distant bureaucracy.

    The trick remains finding the people who can articulate the message, and the medium by which they can spread it. Our enemies have a staggering head start on us.

  46. Jim says:

    Looks like Levin’s not alone.

    Mason: “It would be improper to require the consent of the national legislature[for amending the Constitution], because they may abuse their power, and refuse their assent on that very account.”

  47. Regarding Mark Levin’s proposal, as we know of it so far, please see my comments on Jeff’s post from today:
    https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=50041#comment-1001834

  48. Mueller says:

    serr8d said @4:55

    I pray it doesn’t come to that.

  49. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Freedom sells. I really don’t see how we can go wrong by appealing to people’s dignity and self-worth.

    Because freedom from responsibility sells too, and the packaging is more attractive.

    Why should you struggle and labor when you’re entitled to a fair share of whatever it is that the greedy rich are hoarding because they’re greedy and rich and won’t share fairly?

Comments are closed.