My favourite political commentator comes out swinging against Donald Trump. And of course Levin is correct in most of what he says. However Trump is correct on the BC issue- it is an important Constitutional issue that other Republicans should be much more concerned about.
Look how Chump operates. Caught red-handed now with his vicious attacks on George Bush, who most conservatives had issues with, he now says but for Bush there would have likely been no Obama. That may well be true. I have been a harsh critic of Bush’s spending, including in my book. But Chump was calling Bush EVIL and demanded his IMPEACHMENT because of the Iraq war and in the middle of that war. He said Bush lied to get us into Iraq. His comments were vile and outrageous, not unlike the America-hating leftists who sought to undermine our armed forces there. Now he wants us to believe that his criticism of Bush was because Bush’s poor record set the stage for Obama? Chump attacked Bush over Iraq because if you were a big-mouth, attention-seeking liberal, it was the thing to do. He had no altruistic or principled conservative motive for doing so at the time and expressed none.
As recently as last year, while conservatives and Tea Party activists were organizing and rallying against Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their radical agenda, Chump was helping to fund some of our opponents. He contributed to left-wing, Tea Party-hating menaces like Chuck Schumer, Anthony Weiner, and Harry Reid. What about his contributions to Charlie Crist, while Crist was running against Marco Rubio? Did he donate to any of the Tea Party candidates? Did he contribute to the Tea Party movement in any way, with time or money, before today? Why not?
Chump also praised Nancy Pelosi. He thought she was great. I played the audio. I guess he was just mistaken, again. He supported universal health care, but not any more, of course. He supported abortion and gay marriage, but that was then, this is now. He supported John Kerry for president in 2004, but that’s because Bush was so evil. He leaned on government officials to use eminent domain against a little old lady whose home happened to be in the way of a parking lot he wanted to build for one of his casinos in Atlantic City, but he has always been for private property rights.
So now Chump rails against China and demands Obama’s birth certificate and we are supposed to swoon over the man. But when asked about the Ryan budget, he turns stupid again — he says Ryan should not take the lead on this, we need a bipartisan consensus to move forward? And with whom do we build this bipartisan consensus? Reid? Obama? Is Chump really this dumb, or is he, once again, trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing?
3 thoughts on “Mark Levin- Trump is a Chump”
I’m very glad you wrote of this today RB. I was going to include the following link to your daily General Debate thread had you not. http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930#
That links the page with Levin’s daily podcasts. I strongly recommend listening to 4/15/2011. You can listen online or you can download it as a free mp3.
In it Levin plays so many clips of Trump mouthing off like a lib in the last ten years that I lost count.
I take it back about Trump being a danger to split conservatives to defeat Obama like Perot did for Clinton. Perot was not this transparently awful as is Trump. The statements that Levin repeats on that link are that revealing.
Bloody weird if the Republican Primary turns out to be between Palin and Trump. Palin has to get stronger on Obama’s eligibility.
I don’t agree with Levin there. We shouldn’t forget that Bush was a very poor president, who indeed lied in order to get the Iraq war started, and once it was underway took an appalling strategy. The purpose of a war is to defeat an enemy, not to spread the going definition of democracy. On those principles the Iraq war was a wasteful blunder, there was no clear, let alone well defined enemy, hence there can be no victory and that shows, as Iraq will simply fall into disarray as soon as the US withdraws. Same goes of course for Afghanistan, another rat hole that should be left to its own devices. If such countries harbor criminals and or terrorists they should be hit hard, so that their own governments/people make sure that no evil can breed within its borders, that’s it. If they want to behave like savages within their own borders, so be it. I’m not too concerned about Trump’s alleged sympathies, the proper role of a president is to manage government, not to impose ideology, that’s what the constitution is for. So anybody with the management skills and capacity to implement the tough measures will do. I do agree that we must hear more about Trump’s concrete platform, but we haven’t got that from Palin either. (Nor from any other of the potential would be’s by the way).
Comments are closed.