Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Mark Levin "The Liberty Amendements"


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 19 August 2013 - 03:36 PM

Okay, I saw this book, being discussed on Breitbart.com and it seemed interesting, especially after I saw this:







Link to transcript of the interview: http://www.foxnews.c...erty-amendments


So, I read a sample of the book on my Kindle, and wow!  This seems like a good book. Has anyone else read it? And what do you think about what he is proposing? I've never heard of Mark Levin before, but he does make a lot of sense.

Another link: http://www.breitbart...-Breitbart-News

Review: The Liberty Amendments -- Amend the Constitution -- to Save It: http://www.breitbart...erty-Amendments


#2    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Seeker of knowledge

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,097 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 19 August 2013 - 04:46 PM

I am not a fan of Hannity, but this is an excellent video Kowalski...I wish I could like it multiple times.

There is so much truth in what this man has to say that it leaves you somewhat speechless....somewhat...I have never been one to be speechless for long.

The centralization of government has happened and it is exactly what our founding fathers and the documents they produced was dead against.  The Fed now uses strong arm tactics to force the states into submission.  "Want some Federal money to fix your interstates?...then you will do what we say"...

If you want to get down to it, many of the domestic organizations that have been created in the last century or so are actually unconstitutional in theory and practice.  Federal law that creates centralized entities to ride roughshod over the people and the states sovereignty...

Oh well...I am a huge fan of returning the power to the states, reduce the FED gov (and the cost burden of such).  As far as interstate policing...we used to get that done with a small organization whose employees were called "Federal Marshalls" that worked with the local and state authorities to apprehend criminals...there is no need for most of the revenue sucking alphabet organizations...just more "iron fist in a silk glove" tactics.

I hope people will turn off the boob tube and try to think for themselves soon...or else, it will be to late and our states will soon have no voice at all.

Posted Image

Edited by Jeremiah65, 19 August 2013 - 04:47 PM.

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#3    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 19 August 2013 - 05:05 PM

View PostJeremiah65, on 19 August 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

I am not a fan of Hannity, but this is an excellent video Kowalski...I wish I could like it multiple times.

There is so much truth in what this man has to say that it leaves you somewhat speechless....somewhat...I have never been one to be speechless for long.

The centralization of government has happened and it is exactly what our founding fathers and the documents they produced was dead against.  The Fed now uses strong arm tactics to force the states into submission.  "Want some Federal money to fix your interstates?...then you will do what we say"...

If you want to get down to it, many of the domestic organizations that have been created in the last century or so are actually unconstitutional in theory and practice.  Federal law that creates centralized entities to ride roughshod over the people and the states sovereignty...

Oh well...I am a huge fan of returning the power to the states, reduce the FED gov (and the cost burden of such).  As far as interstate policing...we used to get that done with a small organization whose employees were called "Federal Marshalls" that worked with the local and state authorities to apprehend criminals...there is no need for most of the revenue sucking alphabet organizations...just more "iron fist in a silk glove" tactics.

I hope people will turn off the boob tube and try to think for themselves soon...or else, it will be to late and our states will soon have no voice at all.

Posted Image


Not a fan of Hannity, and I try to steer clear of shows like these, but what Levin had to say makes a lot of sense and speaks much truth...

Quote

This book is written for those of us who fear what is happening to our nation--the increasing authoritarianism and abuse of the individual--and refuse to accept these events either by pretending they are not serious or as the inevitable decline of a great republic. This has been building for decades, since at least the advent of the Progressive era, and, in my view, requires a resolute, decades'-long effort to reverse course. So, the question arises, what do we do? For those of us who care, my book explores some of the possibilities. And they are provided in the Constitution itself.
The Framers knew better than others what it was like to confront actual tyranny. So why wouldn't we look to these greatest men for answers? So, that's what I did. If you look at Article V of the Constitution, it includes, among other things, two processes for amending the Constitution. The first process has resulted in twenty-seven amendments: two-thirds of both Houses of Congress propose an amendment, and three-fourths of the states are required to ratify it. In the second process, which is every bit as legitimate, two-thirds of the states decide to convene a meeting for the purpose of proposing amendments, which are then sent to the states for three-fourths ratification. It is a process that essentially bypasses Congress.  Let me be as clear as I can: this second amendment process provides for a convention of the states to propose amendments, which in turn must be ratified by three-fourths of the states; it does not provide for a Constitutional Convention. Furthermore, because three-fourths of the states must ratify proposed amendments, there would be no "runaway convention" overturning the entire Constitution, as some might fear monger. I fully expect the most vociferous critics of this constitutional process to be among those who support or have contributed to all manner of constitutional evasions and distortions in favor of the increasing centralization and concentration of power, which is precisely what the Constitution was established to prevent.
Now, this is something I want to discuss at length on my program, and which I discuss at length in the book.  I believe our strongest weapon is the Constitution, and therefore we should do all we can to reacquaint the American people with their Constitution. This is how we push back against a mindset that insists they surrender so much of their liberty to federal institutions; it is a mindset pounded home each and everyday by self-serving politicians, in academia, by the media, et cetera. Alexis de Tocqueville, and many others, eloquently warned about democracies acquiescing to the gradualism of soft tyranny and its destructiveness on man's nature.



#4    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 19 August 2013 - 07:46 PM

View PostJeremiah65, on 19 August 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

I am not a fan of Hannity, but this is an excellent video Kowalski...I wish I could like it multiple times.

There is so much truth in what this man has to say that it leaves you somewhat speechless....somewhat...I have never been one to be speechless for long.

The centralization of government has happened and it is exactly what our founding fathers and the documents they produced was dead against.  The Fed now uses strong arm tactics to force the states into submission.  "Want some Federal money to fix your interstates?...then you will do what we say"...

If you want to get down to it, many of the domestic organizations that have been created in the last century or so are actually unconstitutional in theory and practice.  Federal law that creates centralized entities to ride roughshod over the people and the states sovereignty...

Oh well...I am a huge fan of returning the power to the states, reduce the FED gov (and the cost burden of such).  As far as interstate policing...we used to get that done with a small organization whose employees were called "Federal Marshalls" that worked with the local and state authorities to apprehend criminals...there is no need for most of the revenue sucking alphabet organizations...just more "iron fist in a silk glove" tactics.

I hope people will turn off the boob tube and try to think for themselves soon...or else, it will be to late and our states will soon have no voice at all.

Posted Image

Pretty much my thoughts.  I agree with what Levin is saying in general terms, but my bet is he is very much behind the Global War On Terror.  I know Hannity is.

Levin makes many good points, but it takes on the flavor of partisanship, considering Hannity.  My guess is they are both supporters of the WOT.  This comes across as some form of lip service.


#5    Almagest

Almagest

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts
  • Joined:16 Mar 2013

Posted 19 August 2013 - 07:55 PM

Hannity was an apologist for one of the worst abusers of the United States Constitution in history - George W Bush. What he has to say on the matter is moot.

And Levin does not seem to describe these eleven amendments, just goes on with the same "defending liberty" rhetoric the right loves to pull while actively fighting to deny people their liberty.

Edited by Almagest, 19 August 2013 - 07:57 PM.

Heaven and hell suppose two distinct species of men, the good and the bad. But the greatest part of mankind float betwixt vice and virtue. - David Hume

#6    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 19 August 2013 - 08:19 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 19 August 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

Pretty much my thoughts.  I agree with what Levin is saying in general terms, but my bet is he is very much behind the Global War On Terror.  I know Hannity is.

Levin makes many good points, but it takes on the flavor of partisanship, considering Hannity.  My guess is they are both supporters of the WOT.  This comes across as some form of lip service.

I've never heard of this guy, before, so I need to do a little more research, but a lot of the things he was talking about in the video, are some very good points.
Not sure what his stance on the War on Terror is, but hey, I don't always agree 100% with what people say either.... A blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile.... :)


#7    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Seeker of knowledge

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,097 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 19 August 2013 - 09:00 PM

View PostAlmagest, on 19 August 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Hannity was an apologist for one of the worst abusers of the United States Constitution in history - George W Bush. What he has to say on the matter is moot.

And Levin does not seem to describe these eleven amendments, just goes on with the same "defending liberty" rhetoric the right loves to pull while actively fighting to deny people their liberty.

Very well said.

That is the "buzzword" of the moral majority and the extreme conservatives.  "We are here to defend personal freedom"...then in the hallowed houses of legislation they want to tell a woman what she can do with her body...they want to tell you what you can put in your body...they want to charge you an arm and a leg to start a business....yeah...what great defenders of freedom...what zealots for small gov...

When they create these "moral control" laws...they have to hire someone to enforce them....that oddly sounds like more bureaucracy to me...and that is not "small" gov....

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#8    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 19 August 2013 - 09:12 PM

Might want to check this link out, it explains all eleven of the amendments he proposes:
Link: http://www.breitbart...-Breitbart-News

Note:

Quote


Breitbart News: Among the many amendments you propose, there are no amendments on social issues--none on abortion, marriage, or prayer, for example. Is there any particular reason you did not include those?

Levin: These amendments don't proscribe social issues or any other issues. They provide, for the most part, a systemic approach to redress the dissolution of our constitutional process--that is, their primary focus is unraveling the concentration of power in the federal government, revitalizing federalism, and providing recourse for notorious federal acts. But obviously there are provisions for overriding federal decisions with supermajority votes by the states as well as a direct amendment reform empowering two-thirds of the states to directly amend the Constitution. Thus, the book does not provide a laundry list of specific issues but a more representative process for addressing them


This is interesting:

Quote


The statists' goal has always been to reshape man and his nature in pursuit of the ever elusive paradise. No matter how they try, as they have throughout history, they fail. But the misery is horrific. They demand that the individual surrender his free will--and some of us, I think millions of us, aren't prepared to do it. One thing that I use on my radio show to give people hope is some historical perspective. During the Revolutionary War, about one-third of the colonists supported the Revolution, and about one-third supported the Crown. The other third was relatively indifferent. If you look all over the world, at the various revolutions and uprisings and so forth, typically it's not 51% of the people rising up--it's the activists that are crucial. And so much of the what is done by the federal government is without input from, or in defiance of, the people. Most of us have no idea what laws and regulations are being promulgated in our name.  By the time their real effects are felt, it is too late.

I am not willing to say: it's all over, we're doomed, there is nothing we can do. I would rather say: let's fight. Let us do everything we can do to preserve this society right now, before it really is too late. Whether by Abraham Lincoln, or Joseph Story, or Ronald Reagan, we've been warned time and again that if America is to be destroyed, it will be destroyed from within.




#9    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Seeker of knowledge

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,097 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 19 August 2013 - 09:32 PM

Statists, progressives and liberals truly believe that the Id, the ego and the super ego can be caged and/or removed from the individual...it cannot...and all they manage to accomplish is an equal sharing of misery and suffering.  We have to look no further than Lenin's Russia...sad-sad times for those people.  We are born different...we all have something to share....

The problem is that all of these well intentioned and yet self loathing people do not understand that we are individuals...that is how we have advanced...that is how we have grown.  We are not all pressed out of the same mold....but that is what they seem to want.  They want one mindset, one skin color, one philosophy and one standard of living.  All this does is share pain....there is no joy in these situations...no individuality...no creativity.

That sounds extraordinarily horrific to me....variety IS the spice of life.  I may not agree with someone, but I appreciate that all of my views on the world are not perfect...so other opinions are welcome...even when I disagree with them.

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#10    moonshadow60

moonshadow60

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 710 posts
  • Joined:17 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Maine

  • "There comes a time when you have to choose between turning the page or just closing the book"... James Wilson

Posted 19 August 2013 - 10:59 PM

Mr. Levin is indeed very much to the right of the political spectrum.  I've heard his program because (a) it comes on before Coast to Coast, and (B) there isn't much else on the radio between 9 PM and midnight, but he is so heavy handed with his rants that it defeats the purpose of listening to the radio to get to sleep, so I change the channel a lot when he is on.


#11    Bama13

Bama13

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,893 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just Southeast of God's country

Posted 20 August 2013 - 01:08 PM

View PostJeremiah65, on 19 August 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

Very well said.

That is the "buzzword" of the moral majority and the extreme conservatives.  "We are here to defend personal freedom"...then in the hallowed houses of legislation they want to tell a woman what she can do with her body...they want to tell you what you can put in your body...they want to charge you an arm and a leg to start a business....yeah...what great defenders of freedom...what zealots for small gov...

When they create these "moral control" laws...they have to hire someone to enforce them....that oddly sounds like more bureaucracy to me...and that is not "small" gov....

Seems you have conservatives and republicans mixed up. Republicans are not conservatives. Conservatives believe in a small, non-intrusive government. Republicans quit believeing in that a long time ago.

" Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything —you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him" - Robert Heinlein

#12    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 20 August 2013 - 05:45 PM

View PostKowalski, on 19 August 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

I've never heard of this guy, before, so I need to do a little more research, but a lot of the things he was talking about in the video, are some very good points.
Not sure what his stance on the War on Terror is, but hey, I don't always agree 100% with what people say either.... A blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile.... :)

I understand what you're saying.

It seems to me that if he were the big constitutionalist he claims to be, he would have been raising hell years ago when Dubya, Dick and John Yoo were doing all the descrating of the document and its principles.

Maybe he did, and I just missed it.  But I'm betting he was majorly on the bandwagon behind all the military aggression and torture.


#13    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 20 August 2013 - 08:31 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 20 August 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

I understand what you're saying.

It seems to me that if he were the big constitutionalist he claims to be, he would have been raising hell years ago when Dubya, Dick and John Yoo were doing all the descrating of the document and its principles.

Maybe he did, and I just missed it.  But I'm betting he was majorly on the bandwagon behind all the military aggression and torture.

Probably....





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users