Mark Levin: Ron Paul’s interpretation of the Constitution Not always accurate

Secession was "solved" by the civil war? Lincoln was Mr Republican? What? I have difficulty finding anything accurate in any of Levin's quotes above. Does anyone see them? BTW, if he's so certain that DiLorenzo is wrong, why won't he accept Tom Woods' challenge to a debate on this issue? ;)
 
Levin: "Last time I checked, Abraham Lincoln is like Mr. Republican."

Is that seriously his defense of Lincoln? Talk about the fallacy of appeal to common practice...
 
Secession was "solved" by the civil war? Lincoln was Mr Republican? What? I have difficulty finding anything accurate in any of Levin's quotes above. Does anyone see them? BTW, if he's so certain that DiLorenzo is wrong, why won't he accept Tom Woods' challenge to a debate on this issue? ;)

Why, yes, I'd say Lincoln was 'Mr. Republican', at least for the first eight or nine years of the party's existence. But as for Ron Paul specifically being weak on the Constitution because the 'secession question' was supposedly solved or somehow settled by a war, well, this not only marks Levin as a complete ignoramous on Constitutional questions, it certainly settles whether or not ol' Vladimir Levin thinks 'might makes right'.
 
So he wants to play the Reagan card?

Well of course.

Both Lincoln and Reagan are very convenient for those of Levin's ilk. You can put words in their mouths all day, and since they're dead they can't pop up and contradict you.

Of course, you can find record of what the men actually said that contradicts what Levin wants you to believe their views were. But Levin will no doubt respond to that with, well, he would admit if he could that the situation has changed...

I don't believe it. Do you?
 
I thin it's funny how they always ask Ron Paul "If candidate x is the nominee will you support him". Yet Mark Levin says "I couldn't vote for him and would readily throw the presidency back to obama".
 
Back
Top