Mark Levin v. Nathan Origer
Digg 
Stumble Upon 
Newsvine 
Slashdot 
Mixx 
Diigo 
Delicious 
Reddit 
Facebook
I was hoping to stay out of the Mark Levin discussion, but a particularly anti-intellectual and incendiary piece of online garbage has motivated me to make a few simple points.
To start, I have listened to hours and hours of Mark Levin’s show. My father is, I’m sorry to say, an avid fan of his and when i was a politically-immature New Right neocon (in high school) I enjoyed his show in particular. Why did I enjoy his the most? It seemed to appeal to my teenage angst and adolescent concept of political discourse. In short, I loved when a “leftist” or a “libertard” would call in and Levin would scream like a banshee over them. The conversation would reach its crescendo when Levin would scream “GET OFF THE PHONE, MORON!” and hang up.
I eventually did a little growing up. I read Russell Kirk’s fine critique of interventionist foreign policyand Robert Nisbet’s various critiques of militarized society. The conservative instincts that may lead people to listen to Levin and his half-wit friend Sean Hannity are, for the most part, healthy and well-meaning. But somewhere along the line they are lost and corrupted by the battles talking-heads are pledged to fight. And once it is ingrained into the listener’s head that critics of big government via military expansionism are “pinheads” and “surrender monkeys” it is nearly impossible to get it out.
So instead of proper political discourse (see: Buckley v. Chomsky on Firing Line years ago) we get Levin v. Anonymous-Leftist-Moron. Instead of “Mark Levin, an overly-bellicose and misguided thinker,” we get “Mark Levin, a loud-mouthed retard.” Two can play at Levin’s game, but the soul of American Conservatism is at risk when we accept the rules on his terms.
Someone like Nathan Origer–a smart guy and a good friend–is ripped as a moron and as deranged by Levin’s lackeys because he dared to admit that he has never subjected himself to Levin’s show. Oh, and he wears cowboy hats.
At any rate, I’ll take Nathan Origer, a self-admitted nobody who has never advised White House staff and never appeared on the bestseller list, over Levin any day.
EDIT: I replaced the original title of the post–Mark Levin, a Loud-Mouthed Retard–because it was correctly pointed out to me that it would be misinterpreted. I think without it the point still stands up.
Filed under: ideas
I’ve never understood the paleo’s desires to shoot the right first.
Sure, Levin is wrong on much of foreign policy.
But his critiques of environmentalism as a front for government expansion, his support for the free market, and opposition to the welfare state are pretty good.
Modern lefties are wrong on both sides, being both overseas adventurers (for ‘humanitarian’ purposes, of course), as well as lovers of Big Government.
I sincerely hope to live one day in a world where we have the choice between Nathan Origer and Mark Levin.
But as it stands, we have a choice between Mark Levin and Michael Moore.
And it should, I feel, be an easy one.
At any rate, I’ll take Nathan Origer, a self-admitted nobody who has never advised White House staff and never appeared on the bestseller list, over Levin any day.
Couldn’t agree more.
Logan – the problem is that just because Levin critiques environmentalism as a front for expansion of government is not enough. That critique, coupled with apologies for militarism, is just a front for the expansion of government.
I’m not saying Levin is right or good. But is he better than your run of the mill leftie? Sure.
Also, didn’t Buckley call Chompsky a queer? As deserved as that was, I don’t think it falls under the banner of “proper political discourse”.
My bad, Buckley called Gore Vidal a queer. Apologies.
In his book, Levin has a line that reads, “Republicans seem clueless on how to slow, contain, and reverse the Statist’s agenda.” Levin’s and American conservatism’s cluelessness (or deception?) can be captured in that single sentence. A statement like that is designed to make the reader think big government was invented in 2006.
Levin may appear like a potential ally because he sounds good on curbing statism at home, but what Republicans he supports have ever done that? Logan, do a youtube search to see how Mark Levin feels about Republicans of the Ron Paul mold and see much how much better of an ally he is than Michael Moore. Levin’s not as good for us as you might think.
As for shooting the Right first, that’s the policy of the neoconservatives. Jacob Heilbrunn reports in his book, “They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons” that it was Irving Kristol who adopted a “No enemies to the Right” policy.
The problem with people like Levin is that foreign policy is an overriding concern. Whatever else he believes takes a back seat again and again and again.
You did just enough growing up to call Mark Levin a loud mouthed retard. Glad to see you have graduated high school.
Paul,
Try reading the post next time. I said:
“So instead of proper political discourse (see: Buckley v. Chomsky on Firing Line years ago) we get Levin v. Anonymous-Leftist-Moron. Instead of ‘Mark Levin, an overly-bellicose and misguided thinker,’ we get ‘Mark Levin, a loud-mouthed retard.’ Two can play at Levin’s game, but the soul of American Conservatism is at risk when we accept the rules on his terms.”
“To start, I have listened to hours and hours of Mark Levin’s show. My father is, I’m sorry to say, an avid fan of his and when i was a politically-immature New Right neocon (in high school) I enjoyed his show in particular.”
So this makes you about, what, 21, 22 years old?
This guy is like Gestapo ! That sort of propaganda would never be accepted in Russia ! He gives bad name to Jewish nation and deceive a lot of good Americans ! I can’t believe hi is on the air . What he is talking is a crime ! It would be classified as such one in Europe .
“So this makes you about, what, 21, 22 years old?”
I’m still trying to figure out why that’s important.
Colleen, let me spare you the arduous task of thinking. I said it because instead of addressing Levin substantively, Patty here dismissed him because he used to listen to him “in high school.”
A taste of his own medicine, however ineffectual it is.
Well, I couldn’t disagree more. Although you have used all of your big words in the correct context, it’s obvious that you have allowed your liberal college education to consume your mind; brainwashed! It’s true, Levin gets loud, but don’t mistake his volume for ignorance. Why is it that all you so-called liberal intellectuals, or as Levin calls you “Statist”, believe that a passionate person is an unintelligent, emotional person. Why don’t you call Levin and debate him on a topic. He only gets irritated when morons like you come unprepared. Fortunately, conservatism is coming back, and soon you’ll be following the populace when your boy, Big Spender Obama, gets ousted right out of his seat in the White House. Just remember, you are represented by Pelosi, Franks, and now, Frankin. Just ask yourself one question; Are you a Clown or a Tool? MORON!
“A taste of his own medicine, however ineffectual it is.”
C’mon, now. Levin is an uneducated, ignorant moron who has never read anything, let alone an opposing viewpoint. Meanwhile, the omnipotent wunderkind blogger who has read Kirk and Nisbet is going to show us the way.
Levin has balls. I’ll say that. And if his rhetoric can promote conservative views within his audience, and with the release of his best-seller, persons outside of his audience, then I’m 100% behind him.
Mark Levin is highly educated, served under Ronald Reagan, Attorney General Meese, is a lawyer, etc, etc. Now has a radio show. His book (relegated to the back of large sellers like Borders, and further demoted to the bottom shelf there) is selling like hot cakes nonetheless.
All this is well and good, but I noticed in his book – which for some strange reason the publishers felt needed a picture of Levin right on the cover – he doesn’t really back up arguments against changing health care with any substance. He doesn’t address that there are 36 other countries that come before America in life expectancy with Georgia, Brunei, and the United Arab Emirates as our low-ranking neighbors. He doesn’t account for exactly how socialist nations like France must have a much worse health care system than ours, even though the French are, on average, living 7 – 10 yrs longer than Americans, along with Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, and Italy. Having lived in Europe for a while, I can attest to the existence of a myth here – that Europeans wish they had our health care system. Nothing could be further from the truth. I was hard pressed to meet a European who was remotely interested in trading their system for ours.
Guys like Levin and his supporters are good Americans, in practice, meaning they exercise their rights to free speech and patriotic discourse to the fullest, which should be taken as a good example by the rest of us. They mean well, and they truly believe what they believe. But I’m not sure I understand the chronic aggrandizing of our health care system as it is now. And I think it would probably benefit them to stop writing poorly-written books – the kind that are perused as the “non-fiction” read of the summer by semi-consciously illiterate masses right after that seventh or eighth re-read of The Da Vinci Code.
Jason K.
Why is it that everyone who disagrees with an interventionist “Wilsonian” Foreign Policy all of a sudden a liberal elitist? How is being against an interventionist foreign policy, building billion dollar embassies in Pakistan and Afghanistan that we can’t afford, and maintain 700 bases worldwide not conservative? I believe in a strong national defense, which why I want the “National Guard” defending the Country and not Baghdad. I’m against “socialized” medicine and cap and trade, but what needs to be understood is that when Government grows in one direction it grows in all directions. Government didn’t shrink under George W. Bush it grew, and chances are even if Sara Palin did enter the White House it would still grow. We’ve been playing this game of “liberal”, “conservaitve, Democrat and Republican for so long that no one checked to see if anything changed. Government will grow under Obama, and it would also grow under Palin, and Jindal. So the question is how is that conservative?
I would also ask how do conservatives plan to win Future Elections when they can’t even maintain their old alliances. How can you win, when you accuse your fellow conservatives, and libertarians of being liberals, and RINOs? Something else to consider, a Foreign Policy of Caution, and Restraint, especially in a time of soaring deficits and mounting debt is not liberal, but common sense. Spreading Democracy around the world is a nice idea if we had unlimited resources, and we weren’t depended on Foreign Capital to keep us afloat. But unfortunately we are dependent on Foreign Capital, we are spending more then we take in, and that combined with an over-extended Military, and trillion dollar domestic budget is a recipe for danger. Proceed with Caution…
“History will probably find that Conservatives of my ilk will be called Liberals.”
- Barry Goldwater
did you really have to use the word retard? ugh.