Anyone record Levin's show today?

[Lucille]

The Daily Caller has it up.

H/T Lew

Despicable He
Posted by Lew Rockwell on March 29, 2011 10:35 AM

The Daily Caller runs a crybaby story on radiomouth Mark Levin, advocate of endless war, the police state, and presidential dictatorship. Unmentioned is the name of Tom Woods. Like the rest of the neocons, the DC links to nothing. Instead, we are told that Ron Paulians–”a-holes” in Levin’s lingo–are mean to him, and so all their dissenting responses on his Facebook page had to be erased. In fact, the civil comments showed up Levin by citing Woods, who actually knows American history.

New facebook group: Mark Levin is scared to debate Tom Woods

 

[anaconda]

Gosh I wish we wouldn't waste time on Levin. He is not educated and his show has no content. Just listen to his show and ask yourself if you're learning a single thing. It's really astonishing that he goes live with absolutely nothing to say. No facts. No intelligent analysis. Nothing. Try Randi Rhodes for someone who does her homework. You'll be frustrated with her socialist bent but at least you will get facts, events, and a good way to think about framing arguments to convince "progressives" to join us.

 

[payme_rick]

Gosh I wish we wouldn't waste time on Levin. He is not educated and his show has no content. Just listen to his show and ask yourself if you're learning a single thing. It's really astonishing that he goes live with absolutely nothing to say. No facts. No intelligent analysis. Nothing. Try Randi Rhodes for someone who does her homework. You'll be frustrated with her socialist bent but at least you will get facts, events, and a good way to think about framing arguments to convince "progressives" to join us.

Levin's audience is Rush and Hannity's audience... is it not important to convince his audience? Esspecially when he's the one of the three that keeps sticking his neck out there for us to chop at?

If we're ever going to get a Ron Paul elected president and Ron Pauls elected as governors etc..., we're going to need to win primaries... to win these primaries, we're going to need to change neo-con minds, and right now their minds are wrapped up in the radio shows of the Levins...

Now this is not to downplay the importance of winning over progressives...

 

[jmdrake]

Levin's audience is Rush and Hannity's audience... is it not important to convince his audience? Esspecially when he's the one of the three that keeps sticking his neck out there for us to chop at?

If we're ever going to get a Ron Paul elected president and Ron Pauls elected as governors etc..., we're going to need to win primaries... to win these primaries, we're going to need to change neo-con minds, and right now their minds are wrapped up in the radio shows of the Levins...

Now this is not to downplay the importance of winning over progressives...

But you are never going to win these people over arguing straight up. If you call in to Levin's show don't mention Ron Paul or "The Southern Avenger" or anyone else that you respect. Quote someone that they respect. Don't mention the founding fathers either because, while it's clear Levin doesn't respect them, he'll pass that off as "But they lived in a pre-9/11 world". Instead, quote a neocon who supported the Iraq war throughout the Bush years and savagely (pun intended) attacked Ron Paul in 2007/2008 for not doing so but has now come out against the Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libyan wars. I am of course talking about....











Note. This does not mean we trust Michael Savage. It means we use the fact that he is currently at odds with the Michael Levins of the world to our advantage. And there are a lot of other conservative talk show hosts that fall somewhere in between. They haven't yet found spine (or common sense) to attack the Iraq war or even the Afghanistan war, but at least they realize the intervention in Libya is stupid and illegal. They see the hypocrisy of the left. They just can't see (or won't admit) their own hypocrisy. Savage is at least smart enough to back away (somewhat) for a ridiculous position on foreign policy.

 

[Lucille]

The Daily Caller's Jeff Poor's response to me on twitter was about as intelligent as Levin's.

@TuckerCarlson did say he wanted @DailyCaller to be #tcot's PuffHo… @jeff_poor @marklevinshow RT @blogLRC Despicable He http://bit.ly/gjRwKp

@jeff_poor @MacGhil ZOMG LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS

@jeff_poor <- http://bit.ly/17Kcu1 Statist hacks are as statist hacks do. Why not link to @ThomasEWoods in your hit piece & prove us wrong?

"Hm hm hm..." What's good for the goose!

 

[speciallyblend]

Omg. I cannot believe I liked this guy just one year ago. It feels great to be awake.

welcome back from the dark side hehe

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Levin's audience is Rush and Hannity's audience... is it not important to convince his audience? Esspecially when he's the one of the three that keeps sticking his neck out there for us to chop at?

If we're ever going to get a Ron Paul elected president and Ron Pauls elected as governors etc..., we're going to need to win primaries... to win these primaries, we're going to need to change neo-con minds, and right now their minds are wrapped up in the radio shows of the Levins...

Now this is not to downplay the importance of winning over progressives...

There's some truth to this. However, trying to get someone like Levin to engage in a civil debate is pointless. Being an ignorant, biased jerk is his whole shtick. A more effective route is to use your own forum (youtube, blogs, radio, etc) to civilly and fully counter his points.

 

[Matt Collins]

But you are never going to win these people over arguing straight up. If you call in to Levin's show don't mention Ron Paul or "The Southern Avenger" or anyone else that you respect. Quote someone that they respect. Don't mention the founding fathers either because, while it's clear Levin doesn't respect them, he'll pass that off as "But they lived in a pre-9/11 world". Instead, quote a neocon who supported the Iraq war throughout the Bush years and savagely (pun intended) attacked Ron Paul in 2007/2008 for not doing so but has now come out against the Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libyan wars. I am of course talking about....


Note. This does not mean we trust Michael Savage. It means we use the fact that he is currently at odds with the Michael Levins of the world to our advantage. And there are a lot of other conservative talk show hosts that fall somewhere in between. They haven't yet found spine (or common sense) to attack the Iraq war or even the Afghanistan war, but at least they realize the intervention in Libya is stupid and illegal. They see the hypocrisy of the left. They just can't see (or won't admit) their own hypocrisy. Savage is at least smart enough to back away (somewhat) for a ridiculous position on foreign policy.

Actually you shouldn't cite other talk show hosts while on a talk show. Hosts are extremely egocentric and don't like the name of their competitors mentioned. Sometimes you'll even get censored via delay-dump from it.

 

[lester1/2jr]

people should listen to howard stern instead of any of these awful pundits you'll be alot happier

 

[payme_rick]

There's some truth to this. However, trying to get someone like Levin to engage in a civil debate is pointless. Being an ignorant, biased jerk is his whole shtick. A more effective route is to use your own forum (youtube, blogs, radio, etc) to civilly and fully counter his points.

For sure agreed... My point had nothing to do with debating Levin etc...

 

[Matt Collins]

A clip of Tom Woods being interviewed on the Mike Church satellite radio show:

 

[anaconda]

Levin's audience is Rush and Hannity's audience... is it not important to convince his audience? Esspecially when he's the one of the three that keeps sticking his neck out there for us to chop at?

If we're ever going to get a Ron Paul elected president and Ron Pauls elected as governors etc..., we're going to need to win primaries... to win these primaries, we're going to need to change neo-con minds, and right now their minds are wrapped up in the radio shows of the Levins...

Now this is not to downplay the importance of winning over progressives...

You make a good point, but I don't think there is much to be gained from listening to Levin. I would prefer to listen to Hannity or Rush to get the neocon spin.

 

[Cowlesy]

Apparently Levin went after Mike Church pretty hard today. Haven't read anything other than a facebook blurb.

I know some of you grumbled about his CPAC speech but his show is really a good listen.