Mark Levin Speaks On The Steps Of The Capitol

[Lonestar_logic]

Yes, I failed because you're a Conservative, and I don't like talk radio hosts. Excellent points on all fronts! Please join our local middle-school debate team!

You failed because, well your you and that's what you do. Fact is you haven't provided any specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive other than "he's a conservative". You have proven yourself to be bigoted and I doubt you could be objective when presented with clear facts that Levin provides during his talk show. It's obvious you don't want a debate, you simply want to marginalize what you don't like. Name some specifics statements that Levin has made that isn't consistent with the truth.

 

[G.T.]

You failed because, well your you and that's what you do. Fact is you haven't provided any specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive other than "he's a conservative". You have proven yourself to be bigoted and I doubt you could be objective when presented with clear facts that Levin provides during his talk show. It's obvious you don't want a debate, you simply want to marginalize what you don't like. Name some specifics statements that Levin has made that isn't consistent with the truth.

I'm not going to entertain your dumb fucking cherade of dishonesty. I don't dislike his views there, fuckface, I just don't like divisiveness and yea, if you're going to claim he's not divisive I can pretty much write you off as somewhat of a fibber man. Not at all worth my time, tbh.

But just so you know:

"John Kerry and the other Democratic leaders are on the wrong side of history, as they were during the Reagan presidency. If they had won the day, and Reagan had failed, the Soviet Union would still exist, as would all the harm and suffering it unleashed, and American security would be far weaker as a result. And if they win this election thanks to a promise to undo the Reagan-Bush Doctrine, those cheering loudest will be the most evil-loving among us." Yes, here we see he believes Democrat supporters are the most evil loving. Divisive? We report, you decide.

“I thought… liberals always celebrated, they were the great defenders of the first amendment,” Hannity said.

“Never,” Levin chimed in.

Here, The Great One proposes "Liberals" are anti free speech. Stereotyping? Divisive? You decide.

“What Obama and the Democrats really want,” Levin claimed, “is government-run, single-payer (health care) plan… because they want to steal your liberty, steal your ability to choose what doctor you have… They want to ram this home while they can, but we’re going to slow ‘em down.”
-Here, The Great on claims Democrats want to "steal" liberty in attempting to reform healthcare. Like I stated in my earlier posts, he's assigning the darkest motives to a Democrat policy when in reality...COULD their intent be, to simply reform healthcare? I can't say either way, because I'm not inside of them.........but apparently "The Great One," non-divisive as he is, feels he can read their minds and motives.


“Every time (the liberals) take over the White House, they do social experiments with the military, they undermine the military, they cut the military’s budget. Why don’t you liberals just admit it? You don’t like the military. It’s all phony when you say you support the troops."

Here, The Great One claims liberals don't like the Military. Not a very divisive comment unless.........ya know....you're a liberal who's served.


I can do this all day long, but it's boring. To deny he's divisive is to ignore reality. To ignore reality is immaturity and insecurity. Sorry. To say liberals hate the military, yea.....he's not divisive.

 

[kwc57]

Yes, I failed because you're a Conservative, and I don't like talk radio hosts. Excellent points on all fronts! Please join our local middle-school debate team!

You failed because, well your you and that's what you do. Fact is you haven't provided any specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive other than "he's a conservative". You have proven yourself to be bigoted and I doubt you could be objective when presented with clear facts that Levin provides during his talk show. It's obvious you don't want a debate, you simply want to marginalize what you don't like. Name some specifics statements that Levin has made that isn't consistent with the truth.

Here is the simplest and shortest answer regarding Levin's divisivness. Instead of engaging in real and meaningful debate with those he opposes, his answer is "hang up the phone you big dope" before he hangs up on them and continues ranting about the most current form of boogie men. Is this how an intellectual who wants to engage in debate acts or is it how someone wanting his own ratings winning catch phrase acts?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You failed because, well your you and that's what you do. Fact is you haven't provided any specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive other than "he's a conservative". You have proven yourself to be bigoted and I doubt you could be objective when presented with clear facts that Levin provides during his talk show. It's obvious you don't want a debate, you simply want to marginalize what you don't like. Name some specifics statements that Levin has made that isn't consistent with the truth.

I'm not going to entertain your dumb fucking cherade of dishonesty. I don't dislike his views there, fuckface, I just don't like divisiveness and yea, if you're going to claim he's not divisive I can pretty much write you off as somewhat of a fibber man. Not at all worth my time, tbh.

But just so you know:

"John Kerry and the other Democratic leaders are on the wrong side of history, as they were during the Reagan presidency. If they had won the day, and Reagan had failed, the Soviet Union would still exist, as would all the harm and suffering it unleashed, and American security would be far weaker as a result. And if they win this election thanks to a promise to undo the Reagan-Bush Doctrine, those cheering loudest will be the most evil-loving among us." Yes, here we see he believes Democrat supporters are the most evil loving. Divisive? We report, you decide.

“I thought… liberals always celebrated, they were the great defenders of the first amendment,” Hannity said.

“Never,” Levin chimed in.

Here, The Great One proposes "Liberals" are anti free speech. Stereotyping? Divisive? You decide.

“What Obama and the Democrats really want,” Levin claimed, “is government-run, single-payer (health care) plan… because they want to steal your liberty, steal your ability to choose what doctor you have… They want to ram this home while they can, but we’re going to slow ‘em down.”
-Here, The Great on claims Democrats want to "steal" liberty in attempting to reform healthcare. Like I stated in my earlier posts, he's assigning the darkest motives to a Democrat policy when in reality...COULD their intent be, to simply reform healthcare? I can't say either way, because I'm not inside of them.........but apparently "The Great One," non-divisive as he is, feels he can read their minds and motives.


“Every time (the liberals) take over the White House, they do social experiments with the military, they undermine the military, they cut the military’s budget. Why don’t you liberals just admit it? You don’t like the military. It’s all phony when you say you support the troops."

Here, The Great One claims liberals don't like the Military. Not a very divisive comment unless.........ya know....you're a liberal who's served.


I can do this all day long, but it's boring. To deny he's divisive is to ignore reality. To ignore reality is immaturity and insecurity. Sorry. To say liberals hate the military, yea.....he's not divisive.

Dumb? Dumb is not knowing how to spell charade. Again I ask what specific statements or comments has he made that are not consistent with the truth? Oh and you can tell the difference between opinion and hard facts, can't you? Fact is single payer healthcare is exactly what Obama wants. Most liberals think of the military as redneck, gun loving, racist, homophobic robots who hate Muslims and kill for fun. Liberals only believe in the first amendment when it benefits them, they would like nothing else but to shut out all conservative viewpoints, hence the reason they attempted to marginalize Fox News and why they are in favor of the so-called fairness doctrine. Fact is Levin is no more divisive than Obama.

Fuckface? What are you twelve?

 

[G.T.]

Dumb? Dumb is not knowing how to spell charade. Again I ask what specific statements or comments has he made that are not consistent with the truth? Oh and you can tell the difference between opinion and hard facts, can't you? Fact is single payer healthcare is exactly what Obama wants. Most liberals think of the military as redneck, gun loving, racist, homophobic robots who hate Muslims and kill for fun. Liberals only believe in the first amendment when it benefits them, they would like nothing else but to shut out all conservative viewpoints, hence the reason they attempted to marginalize Fox News and why they are in favor of the so-called fairness doctrine. Fact is Levin is no more divisive than Obama.

Fuckface? What are you twelve?

So you disagree that "assuming" the intent of Health Care is "loss of liberty," as opposed to......necessity, making it affordable, etc.........is divisive?

You disagree that painting an entire large segment of the American population........with Veterans within them..............as anti military.........is divisive?

Alright, who's twelve. Your fingers are in your ears going la la la when I gave you what you asked for. See what I mean, when I say it's a waste of time? Thanks.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Yes, I failed because you're a Conservative, and I don't like talk radio hosts. Excellent points on all fronts! Please join our local middle-school debate team!

You failed because, well your you and that's what you do. Fact is you haven't provided any specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive other than "he's a conservative". You have proven yourself to be bigoted and I doubt you could be objective when presented with clear facts that Levin provides during his talk show. It's obvious you don't want a debate, you simply want to marginalize what you don't like. Name some specifics statements that Levin has made that isn't consistent with the truth.

Here is the simplest and shortest answer regarding Levin's divisivness. Instead of engaging in real and meaningful debate with those he opposes, his answer is "hang up the phone you big dope" before he hangs up on them and continues ranting about the most current form of boogie men. Is this how an intellectual who wants to engage in debate acts or is it how someone wanting his own ratings winning catch phrase acts?

Fact is every ideologue is divisive. The difference between him and Obama is he's not a public servant, unilke Obama who is supposed to represent ALL the people, not just those that praise him.

Here's some Obama quotes that I find divisive,

'they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy towards people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.'

'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

'I will stand with the Muslim's should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

Did Bush ever accuse his ideological adversaries of "peddling 'false theories...phony arguments and petty politics'"? Did he ever attack his opponents as Obama has?

 

[G.T.]

See what you did there Lonestar? You advised me I failed because I can't provide Levin's divisive statements. I spend a few googling. You then dismiss them out of hand, and then in your next post admit he's divisive. Thanks for wasting my time. No worries.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Dumb? Dumb is not knowing how to spell charade. Again I ask what specific statements or comments has he made that are not consistent with the truth? Oh and you can tell the difference between opinion and hard facts, can't you? Fact is single payer healthcare is exactly what Obama wants. Most liberals think of the military as redneck, gun loving, racist, homophobic robots who hate Muslims and kill for fun. Liberals only believe in the first amendment when it benefits them, they would like nothing else but to shut out all conservative viewpoints, hence the reason they attempted to marginalize Fox News and why they are in favor of the so-called fairness doctrine. Fact is Levin is no more divisive than Obama.

Fuckface? What are you twelve?

So you disagree that "assuming" the intent of Health Care is "loss of liberty," as opposed to......necessity, making it affordable, etc.........is divisive?

You disagree that painting an entire large segment of the American population........with Veterans within them..............as anti military.........is divisive?

Alright, who's twelve. Your fingers are in your ears going la la la when I gave you what you asked for. See what I mean, when I say it's a waste of time? Thanks.

I'm saying that all ideologues are divisive, the difference is Levin is not a public servant therfore he doesn't have to be all inclusive. On the other hand Obama as well as all public servants should not be at all divisive with their rhetoric because for the simple fact they represent ALL Americans.

As for heathcare that Obama's minions are peddling, I do see it as a loss of liberty and it's not at all divisive to acknowledge it. I believe there is a large portion of liberals that are anti-military, and again to acknowledge it isn't divisive in and of itself. The logic you seem to be wanting to use would suggest that anyone that has an opinion that differs from a portion of the people are being divisive as if that's their intent. Levin intent is not to be divisive but to offer his point of view in hopes of convincing others that his POV is the correct one.

You gave me Levin's opinions and called them lies. Perhaps I should have been more specific with my question.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

See what you did there Lonestar? You advised me I failed because I can't provide Levin's divisive statements. I spend a few googling. You then dismiss them out of hand, and then in your next post admit he's divisive. Thanks for wasting my time. No worries.

Hey dumbass, I ask for specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive. You then included a few statements that he's made to make your point. Before that you did fail because before you provided comments you had nothing but "he's a conservative" to support your opinion. Fact is I didn't dismiss the comments you provided, as a matter of fact I pretty much agreed that they were as most ideologues are in their opinions.

 

[G.T.]

Dumb? Dumb is not knowing how to spell charade. Again I ask what specific statements or comments has he made that are not consistent with the truth? Oh and you can tell the difference between opinion and hard facts, can't you? Fact is single payer healthcare is exactly what Obama wants. Most liberals think of the military as redneck, gun loving, racist, homophobic robots who hate Muslims and kill for fun. Liberals only believe in the first amendment when it benefits them, they would like nothing else but to shut out all conservative viewpoints, hence the reason they attempted to marginalize Fox News and why they are in favor of the so-called fairness doctrine. Fact is Levin is no more divisive than Obama.

Fuckface? What are you twelve?

So you disagree that "assuming" the intent of Health Care is "loss of liberty," as opposed to......necessity, making it affordable, etc.........is divisive?

You disagree that painting an entire large segment of the American population........with Veterans within them..............as anti military.........is divisive?

Alright, who's twelve. Your fingers are in your ears going la la la when I gave you what you asked for. See what I mean, when I say it's a waste of time? Thanks.

I'm saying that all ideologues are divisive, the difference is Levin is not a public servant therfore he doesn't have to be all inclusive. On the other hand Obama as well as all public servants should not be at all divisive with their rhetoric because for the simple fact they represent ALL Americans.

As for heathcare that Obama's minions are peddling, I do see it as a loss of liberty and it's not at all divisive to acknowledge it. I believe there is a large portion of liberals that are anti-military, and again to acknowledge it isn't divisive in and of itself. The logic you seem to be wanting to use would suggest that anyone that has an opinion that differs from a portion of the people are being divisive as if that's their intent. Levin intent is not to be divisive but to offer his point of view in hopes of convincing others that his POV is the correct one.

You gave me Levin's opinions and called them lies. Perhaps I should have been more specific with my question.

No, the logic I'm using is that when you say "liberals are" as opposed to "some," you ARE being divisive. Especially since, you know, a lot of Liberals are Veterans. That's knowing no shame, for political purposes.

You might feel the Health Care is a loss of liberty, and that's ok. But to say they're passing it because they WANT to TAKE your liberty is different...........when they could be intent to make it cheaper for the uninsired. It is divisive to say it the way he said it.

Think about it: if he's not divisive, he doesn't have a show. He has no ratings. It's his job.

 

[G.T.]

Hey dumbass, I ask for specifics regarding Levin and why you believe he's divisive. You then included a few statements that he's made to make your point. Before that you did fail because before you provided comments you had nothing but "he's a conservative" to support your opinion. Fact is I didn't dismiss the comments you provided, as a matter of fact I pretty much agreed that they were as most ideologues are in their opinions.

Right, I made a claim you later admitted you agreed with, which shows you just said "fail" to be...............well, divisive!~ Strong work.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Levin is about red meat. Whether he is divisive or not is subjective. Frankly, who cares?

The real question is whether he is right or wrong in his analysis. The rest is window-dressing and showmanship.

I happen to think that he is basically correct in his analysis. Do I sometimes get annoyed with the presentation of his point of view? Sure. That doesn't make him wrong though.

 

[xsited1]

For those that didn't catch it on his site (audio), or this

...

Very good speech and right on the money. But I'm afraid it may be too late. The Republic has been under attack for decades and it may be too far gone to save. Let's hope I'm wrong.

 

[G.T.]

Levin is about red meat. Whether he is divisive or not is subjective. Frankly, who cares?

The real question is whether he is right or wrong in his analysis. The rest is window-dressing and showmanship.

I happen to think that he is basically correct in his analysis. Do I sometimes get annoyed with the presentation of his point of view? Sure. That doesn't make him wrong though.

I think that implying the evilest of intentions, for Policy decisions that you disagree with, stokes uneducated fear and anger amongst the populace. And all for a buck.

I agree with him on lots of stuff, but these guys acting as though "opposite of my ideaology equals EEEVIL!" is divisive and it's a part of a growing problem in the Country.

 

[Tech_Esq]

For those that didn't catch it on his site (audio), or this

...

Very good speech and right on the money. But I'm afraid it may be too late. The Republic has been under attack for decades and it may be too far gone to save. Let's hope I'm wrong.

You're right. It's time for Republicans to stop accepting the Dems direction by default as we have since FDR. It's time to head in a new direction. It's time to remove some of the supports that the Dems have put in place to continue their agenda decade after decade.

Specifically:

1) Overturn the support for allowing the Commerce Clause to permit the regulation of anything and everything under the sun in the US. That means overturning Wickard v. Filburn.

2) Overturn the idea that the 10th Amendment is just a truism as stated in US v. Darby Lumber Co. The USSCT overturn a whole line of cases which were providing teeth to the 10th amendment. The 10th amendment was not written to be without effect by the founders, it is immoral for the USSCT to have rendered it so by their decision.

The effect of these two decisions would be to erase the foundation for large swaths of regulations that have been heaped on the American people in the last 60 years. Substantial portions of the federal government will be rendered unconstitutional and would have to be dismantled. Meanwhile, the tax payers would be the beneficiaries not having to support an ungainly and bloated national government.

I can just hear the Dems howling in their mortally wounded rage when they read this

 

[Tech_Esq]

Levin is about red meat. Whether he is divisive or not is subjective. Frankly, who cares?

The real question is whether he is right or wrong in his analysis. The rest is window-dressing and showmanship.

I happen to think that he is basically correct in his analysis. Do I sometimes get annoyed with the presentation of his point of view? Sure. That doesn't make him wrong though.

I think that implying the evilest of intentions, for Policy decisions that you disagree with, stokes uneducated fear and anger amongst the populace. And all for a buck.

I agree with him on lots of stuff, but these guys acting as though "opposite of my ideaology equals EEEVIL!" is divisive and it's a part of a growing problem in the Country.

I don't believe you understand the gravity of the situation.

Maybe you have limited frame of reference. I would agree with you, if this was Carter or Clinton. But that's not what we're talking about anymore. We are talking about fundamental and permanent change to the very framework this country was built on.

It isn't about name-calling, but if that's what it takes to wake some people up, then so be it. If a majority of Obama's program gets initiated, we can kiss America as it used to be, goodbye. You may think I'm over-stating it, I don't think so. And, I think I'm fairly well qualified to judge by any measure.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So you disagree that "assuming" the intent of Health Care is "loss of liberty," as opposed to......necessity, making it affordable, etc.........is divisive?

You disagree that painting an entire large segment of the American population........with Veterans within them..............as anti military.........is divisive?

Alright, who's twelve. Your fingers are in your ears going la la la when I gave you what you asked for. See what I mean, when I say it's a waste of time? Thanks.

I'm saying that all ideologues are divisive, the difference is Levin is not a public servant therfore he doesn't have to be all inclusive. On the other hand Obama as well as all public servants should not be at all divisive with their rhetoric because for the simple fact they represent ALL Americans.

As for heathcare that Obama's minions are peddling, I do see it as a loss of liberty and it's not at all divisive to acknowledge it. I believe there is a large portion of liberals that are anti-military, and again to acknowledge it isn't divisive in and of itself. The logic you seem to be wanting to use would suggest that anyone that has an opinion that differs from a portion of the people are being divisive as if that's their intent. Levin intent is not to be divisive but to offer his point of view in hopes of convincing others that his POV is the correct one.

You gave me Levin's opinions and called them lies. Perhaps I should have been more specific with my question.

No, the logic I'm using is that when you say "liberals are" as opposed to "some," you ARE being divisive. Especially since, you know, a lot of Liberals are Veterans. That's knowing no shame, for political purposes.

You might feel the Health Care is a loss of liberty, and that's ok. But to say they're passing it because they WANT to TAKE your liberty is different...........when they could be intent to make it cheaper for the uninsired. It is divisive to say it the way he said it.

Think about it: if he's not divisive, he doesn't have a show. He has no ratings. It's his job.

I lump all liberals together as all conservatives are lumped together, there's always the exceptions but generally speaking liberals are anti-military and anti-first amendment when it comes to opposing viewpoints. The healthcare is a means to take over one-sixth of our economy and it tramples on every citizens liberty.

Think about it, most Americans are happy with their healthcare, so why a massive change that will actually do more harm than good and still not insure everyone. What American's want (at least the ones I've spoken with) is lower healthcare cost and that can be accomplished with free market solutions i.e. tort reform and interstate competition. The poorest of the poor already have an avenue for their healthcare in the form of medicaid. We could expand upon that to insure more people that are just below the poverty line. We do not need the government involved in healthcare and only an idiot would think otherwise.

 

[mdn2000]

And so it ends in two threads, the liberal/marxist attacks, not with facts, and when confronted, the liberal/marxist is found, not among men, but amongst rats.

I'm just not sure what you're looking for, what you're begging for.

My first post in this thread is that Levin is divisive. You want quotes/facts backing that up.......................because?

He's what, a middle of the road American who has agreements and disagreements with Democrats? No, he's a hard-core Conservative to the T. This needs proof? I need to back this statement up with "facts?" Levin is NOT a partisan Conservative?

Do you know why I don't need to back this up...............because it's common fucking sense. Your cliche names for liberals and what-not, yea, you can go right in the can with him ass hole.

Thank God is Levin is a hard core conservative, me begging, is that how you wish people to see me, as a lame user begging, pretty good on your part.

What is it I want, facts, quotes, nope, not at all, I just hoped to goad you into revealing a bit of yourself, thats all.

The middle of the road, why is that a good thing, I see the middle of the road as a bad.
Levin is right, pure and simple, to compromise when right makes one wrong.

Let me quote John Adams for you, (this is not a google, I will type as I read from vol.1 of John Adams by Page Smith)

In politics the middle way is none at all. If we finally fail in this great and glorious contest, it will be by bewildering ourselves in groping after the middle way. We have hitherto conducted half a war... but you will see by tomorrow's paper that for the future we are likely to wage three quarters of a war.

I think you have a rotten idea of conservatives based on rotten republicans. I cannot find fault with true hard core partisan conservatives. If you wish to discuss my ideas on conservatism and what is wrong with republicans now that is worth discussing.

So you googled and came up with something you could cut and paste, now that is lame, is this what the Democrat/Liberal/Marxist pass as intellect, discussion, or debate.

KWC57

Here is the simplest and shortest answer regarding Levin's divisivness. Instead of engaging in real and meaningful debate with those he opposes, his answer is "hang up the phone you big dope" before he hangs up on them and continues ranting about the most current form of boogie men. Is this how an intellectual who wants to engage in debate acts or is it how someone wanting his own ratings winning catch phrase acts

Kwc57, Levin opposes the liberal/marxist in congress and the media, name one person that levin opposes that has accepted levin's challenge to debate on his show, name one politician or media person who will take a levin phone call to debate.

kwc57 is refering to idiots and fools who call the show, not intellects with opposing political viewpoints, not once has Levin hung up on a caller that engages in dialog, debate, conversation in a rational matter, not once.

kwc57 and G.T. do not listen to Mark Levin, had they, they would post something they heard on the show, they could reference the day, they can easily listen to the audio in the archives. Yet instead we can see that at most they have googled and came up with an answer.

This is enough for now other than dont confuse the "Old Democrat Party" with the new liberal/marxist democrat party of today.

If you are a democrat and not a liberal/marxist than thats great.

Conservatives are good, its what the country should be, pure, hard core conservative, I have not seen this type of conservativism in my 40 odd years of life

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Somehow I got banned from calling into Levin' show. WTF.

 

[kwc57]

And so it ends in two threads, the liberal/marxist attacks, not with facts, and when confronted, the liberal/marxist is found, not among men, but amongst rats.

I'm just not sure what you're looking for, what you're begging for.

My first post in this thread is that Levin is divisive. You want quotes/facts backing that up.......................because?

He's what, a middle of the road American who has agreements and disagreements with Democrats? No, he's a hard-core Conservative to the T. This needs proof? I need to back this statement up with "facts?" Levin is NOT a partisan Conservative?

Do you know why I don't need to back this up...............because it's common fucking sense. Your cliche names for liberals and what-not, yea, you can go right in the can with him ass hole.

Thank God is Levin is a hard core conservative, me begging, is that how you wish people to see me, as a lame user begging, pretty good on your part.

What is it I want, facts, quotes, nope, not at all, I just hoped to goad you into revealing a bit of yourself, thats all.

The middle of the road, why is that a good thing, I see the middle of the road as a bad.
Levin is right, pure and simple, to compromise when right makes one wrong.

Let me quote John Adams for you, (this is not a google, I will type as I read from vol.1 of John Adams by Page Smith)

In politics the middle way is none at all. If we finally fail in this great and glorious contest, it will be by bewildering ourselves in groping after the middle way. We have hitherto conducted half a war... but you will see by tomorrow's paper that for the future we are likely to wage three quarters of a war.

I think you have a rotten idea of conservatives based on rotten republicans. I cannot find fault with true hard core partisan conservatives. If you wish to discuss my ideas on conservatism and what is wrong with republicans now that is worth discussing.

So you googled and came up with something you could cut and paste, now that is lame, is this what the Democrat/Liberal/Marxist pass as intellect, discussion, or debate.

KWC57

Here is the simplest and shortest answer regarding Levin's divisivness. Instead of engaging in real and meaningful debate with those he opposes, his answer is "hang up the phone you big dope" before he hangs up on them and continues ranting about the most current form of boogie men. Is this how an intellectual who wants to engage in debate acts or is it how someone wanting his own ratings winning catch phrase acts

Kwc57, Levin opposes the liberal/marxist in congress and the media, name one person that levin opposes that has accepted levin's challenge to debate on his show, name one politician or media person who will take a levin phone call to debate.

kwc57 is refering to idiots and fools who call the show, not intellects with opposing political viewpoints, not once has Levin hung up on a caller that engages in dialog, debate, conversation in a rational matter, not once.

kwc57 and G.T. do not listen to Mark Levin, had they, they would post something they heard on the show, they could reference the day, they can easily listen to the audio in the archives. Yet instead we can see that at most they have googled and came up with an answer.

This is enough for now other than dont confuse the "Old Democrat Party" with the new liberal/marxist democrat party of today.

If you are a democrat and not a liberal/marxist than thats great.

Conservatives are good, its what the country should be, pure, hard core conservative, I have not seen this type of conservativism in my 40 odd years of life

Newsflash.......talking heads on radio have call screeners who protect the host and help shape the message of the program. Intelligent callers on their side of the fence get on. Intelligent callers on the other side of the fence never make it on the air. Talk radio hosts are not interested in debate. They are interested in ideology and thus closely control the content of the program to their advantage. But you already knew that.

And yes, I've listened to Levin. I can only listen for a few minutes as his style of insulting people and ranting come a little too close to Savage for my tastes.