Mark Levin's new book, published today, is essential reading. It is a remarkable work on several different levels. It takes no degree of clairvoyance to predict that it will become an enormous best seller and very soon begin to influence the national political debate.

Liberty and Tyranny artfully presents a harmonious marriage of the timeless with the timely. On the one hand, the book is a thorough yet compact briefing on the major political issues of this era. On the other hand, the author brings to bear the principles of the American Founders and Framers of the Constitution (and the great thinkers who guided them), illustrating, dissecting, and explaining our current political arguments, while enlightening the reader with the genuine wisdom bequeathed to all of us -- the sacred trust of the Founders, embodied in the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and Federalist Papers, all of which are quoted and applied with insight and precision.

Think of it as an outstanding tutorial in applied political philosophy, and you will begin to grasp the scope of Mark Levin's achievement. The fact that the book is lucid, unpretentious, and utterly accessible to anyone who cares to focus and think, means that it will elevate the quality of political thought and dialogue across a broad swath of the American populace.

If you care passionately about America, and worry for its future -- and who doesn't, given the current national leadership? -- then you owe it to yourself to buy and devour this marvelous work. It is an essential antidote to what ails America at the moment.

Each chapter is a well-constructed essay, so the reader is quite free to read it a little at a time. But, unlike so many contemporary political works, it is also a well-constructed and coherent whole. So you may be tempted to stay up all night reading it as soon as a copy comes into your hands.

Conservatives who read Liberty and Tyranny will be supplied with ample ammunition to outsmart, outthink and out-reason their liberal friends who are brave enough to actually engage in a serious political debate with them.

The overall plan of the book is simple and logical. Chapter One, "On Liberty and Tyranny," lays out the basic conceptual scheme. Levin contrasts two opposing political philosophies currently in contention: The Conservative versus the Statist. He grounds the Conservative in the values and insights on human nature of the American Founders, and does so economically and convincingly. For the other side of the debate, he quite correctly rejects the label "liberal", because in current usage the term has become entirely divorced from its literal meaning. He writes:

The Modern Liberal believes in the supremacy of the state, For the Modern Liberal, the individual's imperfection and personal pursuits impede the objectives of a utopian state. In this, Modern Liberalism promotes what French Historian Alexis de Tocqueville called soft tyranny, which becomes increasingly more oppressive, partially leading to hard tyranny, As the word "liberal" is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as a Statist. (p.4)

The following nine chapters, plus an epilogue containing Levin's own manifesto -- the political changes he posits as desirable (and with which I agree) -- are organized thematically, with titles such as On Prudence and Progress, On Faith and the Founding, On the Welfare State, and On Self Preservation (i.e., national security), wherein he encapsulates nearly all the major political issues of our day, providing essential up-to-date information, while also weaving in the wisdom a timeless thinkers ranging from Alexander Hamilton to St Augustine. As the book progresses, the chapters become more and more focused on current political disputes. But the beauty of the structure is that the principles discussed in the earlier chapters are brought to bear on the subsequent topics.

I am proud to note that American Thinker's Lee Cary is quoted in the book's chapter, "On Immigration." Considering the company Dr. Cary is keeping as a source for the book, this is a high honor indeed, both for him and for AT.

The epilogue, wherein Mark tells us what we conservatives can do, and where he outlines what changes he sees as necessary to beat back the now-ascendant forces of statism, may certainly spark some disagreement, because Mark pulls no punches. He is setting a lofty target, but one that is amply justified by the clear-headed research and writing that went into the body of the text.

Fans of Mark Levin's syndicated radio show will recognize the voice of the hard-hitting champion of conservatism they know and love. But there is also, for those unfamiliar with Mark's radio work (but perhaps propagandized by liberal media into dismissing him as a crazy right wing radical), a remarkable and persuasive tone, based on solid research, extensively documented, and unchallengeable reason. This book could actually change some minds, especially as the nation’s peril becomes more and more apparent.

All in all, Mark Levin has given us a remarkable gift. Read this book, and buy copies for those you care about, too. Anyone from a clever high schooler to a scholar of political philosophy can benefit from reading Liberty and Tyranny.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/mark_levins_liberty_and_tyrann.html

I used to listen to Mark Levin about a year ago. His radio programme comes up around 6pm when I am usually in my car on my way home from work. I am ever so intellectually stimulated by him even though he strikes me as too impatient to educate those who don't agree with his point of view. Perhaps, this book will be able to address his impatience and get his points across in a way that will not be misunderstood by non-conservatives.

I must say, I really think Mark is the most brilliant radio personality out there. While I love Rush Limbaugh, he has nothing on Mark Levin. Hannity, I do not find intellectually stimulating at all.

I will try and pick up a copy of his book today, which I understand is already number one in all national bookstores. I will try to summarise my readings as much as I have the time.

So sit tight, and let's take a journey together to understand what conservatism is really about!

Tayo-D:

I used to listen to Mark Levin about a year ago. His radio programme comes up around 6pm when I am usually in my car on my way home from work. I am ever so intellectually stimulated by him even though he strikes me as too impatient to educate those who don't agree with his point of view. Perhaps, this book will be able to address his impatience and get his points across in a way that will not be misunderstood by non-conservatives.

I must say, I really think Mark is the most brilliant radio personality out there. While I love Rush Limbaugh, he has nothing on Mark Levin. Hannity, I do not find intellectually stimulating at all.

I will try and pick up a copy of his book today, which I understand is already number one in all national bookstores. I will try to summarise my readings as much as I have the time.

So sit tight, and let's take a journey together to understand what conservatism is really about!

someone else finally agrees with me that Hannity is all hot air no brains.

@Davidylan,

someone else finally agrees with me that Hannity is all hot air no brains.

Anyone who listens to Hannity for 30 minutes will know he is no intellectual superweight. I believe he also knows that and never tries to exert himself. He is more of a reporter and he does a good job at that. He brings issues and news that the other news sources may try to hide to the forefront.

So in that we do agree. If you really want to know what conservatism is, I beliwve you will do well to listen to the following people for some length of time: Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh and Jason Lewis. Mark and Jason are the two smartest people you can ever listen to. Perhaps, their law degrees makes the difference.

Tayo-D:

@Davidylan,
Anyone who listens to Hannity for 30 minutes will know he is no intellectual superweight. I believe he also knows that and never tries to exert himself. He is more of a reporter and he does a good job at that. He brings issues and news that the other news sources may try to hide to the forefront.

He has never been a reporter, he is nothing more than a poor man's rush limbaugh. Much of his "reporting" has been pointed out to be false.

KAG:

So in that we do agree. If you really want to know what conservatism is, I beliwve you will do well to listen to the following people for some length of time: Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh and Jason Lewis. Mark and Jason are the two smartest people you can ever listen to. Perhaps, their law degrees makes the difference.

I dont know Mark and Jason but if i wanted to know what hot air was i'd listen to Rush Limbaugh.

@Davidylan,

He has never been a reporter, he is nothing more than a poor man's rush limbaugh. Much of his "reporting" has been pointed out to be false.

I don't know where you got your statistics from, but if it is one that exists, I will be glad to review it.

I dont know Mark and Jason but if i wanted to know what hot air was i'd listen to Rush Limbaugh.

Why don't you go pick up Mark's book?  I think it sells for about $20.  It will certainly make for a great reading.  I'm not sure if Jason Lewis has ever written any book, but men the guy is something else. He has a very good comand of facts and figures and he just reels these things out of memory like he is reading from a book.

As for Rush, if he were such a hot air, Obama won't pay millions of dollars in false advertisement to demonize the guy! to think it was that advertisement that got me listening to Rush! If Rush were inconsequential, Obama, the DNC and all their machineries won't use the position of their offices and the enormity of their platforms to continue to witch-hunt the guy!  And through it all, the guy is still standing.  Clinton could not bring him down, and I doubt Obama can!

@topic,

I just came back from Barnes and Nobles and the book is already out of stock. The customer service rep actually called other stores to find out if anyone still has any in stock. Fortunately or unfortunately for me, everyone has run out. To think that the book was actually released today!!

Where are people like Richyblack who claims that conservatism is dead! Why the huge appetite for this book? If I remember, Nancy Pelosi wrote a book (or maybe someone wrote a book about her) early last year. If I recall correctly, the sales of the book did not even exceed 20,000.

I think I will have to buy the book on Amazon and wait patiently for the few days of shipping.

David, I'll advise you do the same. Let's review this book together. What say ye?

@topic,

Still anxiously waiting for my copy of the book. In the meantime, I found some oline review of the book at: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/24/books-liberty-and-tyranny-a-conservative-manifesto/

Mr. Levin wants to roll back the modern state to what it was about 100 years ago. Put simply, he thinks government should exist only for the preservation of ordered liberty, or civil society. This leaves no room for a federal bureaucracy that endures and expands no matter what party controls the executive branch.

The administrative state Mr. Levin would like to destroy is described as follows:

"It administers a budget of over $3 million. It churns out a mind-numbing number of rules that regulate energy, the environment, business, labor, employment, transportation, housing, agriculture, food, drugs, education, etc. Even the slightest human activity apparently requires its intervention: clothing labels on women's dresses, cosmetic ingredients, and labeling. It even reaches into the bathroom, mandating showerhead flow rates and allowable gallons per flush for toilets. It sets flammability standards for beds."

Mr. Levin contrasts his vision of limited government aimed at preserving ordered liberty with the aims of modern liberals, whom he has renamed "statists." The statist builds a "culture of conformity and dependency, where the ideal citizen takes on drone-like qualities in service to the state, the individual must be drained of uniqueness and self worth, and deterred from independent thought or behavior." Contrast the man of the modern state to the individual of Mr. Levin's civil society who "is recognized and accepted as more than an abstract statistic or faceless member of some group; rather, he is a unique, spiritual being with a soul and a conscience."

Mr. Levin charts the expansion of the American state over the past century or so. He points out how the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1917, stripped the state legislatures of the authority to appoint senators and thus deprived them of a meaningful role in the federal government. He derides President Franklin D. Roosevelt's view that there should be a second bill of rights and blames his presidency with creating not only modern entitlement programs but also a school of thought that reads foreign meaning into the Constitution.

Some of Mr. Levin's toughest language is aimed at the environmentalist, whom he calls the enviro-statist. This chapter begins with a debunking of Rachel Carson, the author of "Silent Spring" and advocate against DDT pesticides. Mr. Levin forcefully argues that Miss Carson, in the name of stopping cancer, indirectly caused the deaths of millions in the Third World who perished from the malaria carried by mosquitoes DDT helped eradicate.

"The Enviro-Statist poses as a defender of clean air, clear water, penguins, seals, polar bears, glaciers, the poor, the Third World, and humanity itself," he writes. "But he is already responsible for the death and impoverishment of tens of millions of human beings in the undeveloped world."

Mr. Levin dissents. The conservative manifesto at the end of the book calls for a radical shrinking of the state, from the abolition of the progressive income tax to the sunset of all independent federal agencies at the end of every budget year. Mr. Levin wants to revoke tax-exempt status for environmental groups and neuter the national teachers unions.

i have never been enthusiastic about the environmentalist movt. perhaps, at last we have something we agree on. however, when u say liberalism is dead becuase pelosi's book didnt sell, or conservatism is thriving because your man's books sold, i laugh.

first of all, i dont believe in all this encasement of ideologies into liberalism or conservatism. if strictly followed, i belong to neither. i simply follow common sense. something that is lacking in the day and age.

secondly, someone can sell a book b/c he is popular, or is a great writer. even if he wrote rubbish. some pastors in nigeria can write books and fill it with chapters on nothing but repetitions, and it would sell greatly. so, try another argument. but know that the majority of americans have rejected the republican/conservative/small (inefficient) govt/rich-get-richer/poor-try-survive ideology. and until those guys start using their common sense first, they may remain in the doldrums for ten to twenty years.

Tayo, i havent read Levin's work but i will comment on this review

Tayo-D:

@topic,

Still anxiously waiting for my copy of the book. In the meantime, I found some oline review of the book at: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/24/books-liberty-and-tyranny-a-conservative-manifesto/

Mr. Levin wants to roll back the modern state to what it was about 100 years ago. Put simply, he thinks government should exist only for the preservation of ordered liberty, or civil society. This leaves no room for a federal bureaucracy that endures and expands no matter what party controls the executive branch.

The administrative state Mr. Levin would like to destroy is described as follows:

"It administers a budget of over $3 million. It churns out a mind-numbing number of rules that regulate energy, the environment, business, labor, employment, transportation, housing, agriculture, food, drugs, education, etc. Even the slightest human activity apparently requires its intervention: clothing labels on women's dresses, cosmetic ingredients, and labeling. It even reaches into the bathroom, mandating showerhead flow rates and allowable gallons per flush for toilets. It sets flammability standards for beds."

Unfortunately it seems Mr. Levin also wants us to roll back society to 1900 when we had no aircraft, used horses as primary means of transport and danced ballet in the streets. We can no longer shy away from rules that regulate society, as "mind numbing" as they seem, they shld be credited for giving us a fairly safe and orderly society. Imagine what life would be like if there were no strict rules on food safety, control of prescription drugs and drugs of abuse? What if there were no copyright rules, no flammability standards for housing materials or vehicle emission standards? Does Mr. Levin want to live in a city like Lagos with its pollution problems?

Tayo-D:

Mr. Levin contrasts his vision of limited government aimed at preserving ordered liberty with the aims of modern liberals, whom he has renamed "statists." The statist builds a "culture of conformity and dependency, where the ideal citizen takes on drone-like qualities in service to the state, the individual must be drained of uniqueness and self worth, and deterred from independent thought or behavior." Contrast the man of the modern state to the individual of Mr. Levin's civil society who "is recognized and accepted as more than an abstract statistic or faceless member of some group; rather, he is a unique, spiritual being with a soul and a conscience."

This is mere wishful thinking. The more complex man's life has become no thanks to the modern gadgets he continues to build, the more difficult it must be to adjust his life around a more complex world.

Tayo-D:

Some of Mr. Levin's toughest language is aimed at the environmentalist, whom he calls the enviro-statist. This chapter begins with a debunking of Rachel Carson, the author of "Silent Spring" and advocate against DDT pesticides. Mr. Levin forcefully argues that Miss Carson, in the name of stopping cancer, indirectly caused the deaths of millions in the Third World who perished from the malaria carried by mosquitoes DDT helped eradicate.

Mr. Levin is being deliberately mischievious. I doubt he really cares about malaria in third world countries. Unfortunately the environmentalists are right and Levin is wrong. DDT has a very very long half life (up to 30 yrs in soil) and bioaccumulates in fatty tissues of the body. Both organochlorine and organophosphorus chemicals can be very strong mutagens . . . and would have burdened the tax payer with even more health care costs with no regulation of the use of these pesticides.

Tayo-D:

Mr. Levin dissents. The conservative manifesto at the end of the book calls for a radical shrinking of the state, from the abolition of the progressive income tax to the sunset of all independent federal agencies at the end of every budget year. Mr. Levin wants to revoke tax-exempt status for environmental groups and neuter the national teachers unions.

More wishful thinking.

@pres-elect,

i have never been enthusiastic about the environmentalist movt. perhaps, at last we have something we agree on.

Perhaps.

however, when u say liberalism is dead becuase pelosi's book didnt sell, or conservatism is thriving because your man's books sold, i laugh.

What is your interpretation? Peaople like RichyBlack sugests that conservatism is outdated and has received a dead blow. Yet the conservatist talk show hosts have millions on listeners that the liberals are envious of. The liberals attempt to counteract this followership is not to compete with educational and entertaining programme, but to legislate the death of the conservative radio through the so-called "fairness doctrine". Perhaps, they know their stance cannot and does not appeal to common sense but emotions.

first of all, i dont believe in all this encasement of ideologies into liberalism or conservatism. if strictly followed, i belong to neither. i simply follow common sense. something that is lacking in the day and age.

The so-called Republicans today are not following conservative ideologies. That explains their predicament today. Conservatisnm is common sense. I have often said that on this forum.

secondly, someone can sell a book b/c he is popular, or is a great writer. even if he wrote rubbish. some pastors in nigeria can write books and fill it with chapters on nothing but repetitions, and it would sell greatly. so, try another argument.

In this time of fiancial hardship, I don't think people will be buying a book that does not fill their hunger for the topic it discusses. The only reason why those Pastors books will sell is because they must be discussing something that the people consider important. Maybe it is about prosperity, or healing. You know our people are always expecting God to do a muiracle.

but know that the majority of americans have rejected the republican/conservative/small (inefficient) govt/rich-get-richer/poor-try-survive ideology. and until those guys start using their common sense first, they may remain in the doldrums for ten to twenty years.

What Americans have rejected is big govt which Bush represents. Unfortunately, Obama represents bigger govt. Tell me, how do you expect the poor to get richer? Through govt handouts or through self development and production? Bush gave the poor a sense of being rich by succumbing to that community development act, which hands the poor properties they cannot afford. The end result? Global meltdown! So you see, the Republicans do not even represent conservatism. They may be closer to it than the DNC, but they certainly do not put it into practice.

@Davidylan,

I have still not read the book. Waiting for my copy to arrive in the mail. So my responsehere will not be a defence of Levin, but a reflection of my understanding of what I think he intends.

Unfortunately it seems Mr. Levin also wants us to roll back society to 1900 when we had no aircraft, used horses as primary means of transport and danced ballet in the streets. We can no longer shy away from rules that regulate society, as "mind numbing" as they seem, they shld be credited for giving us a fairly safe and orderly society. Imagine what life would be like if there were no strict rules on food safety, control of prescription drugs and drugs of abuse? What if there were no copyright rules, no flammability standards for housing materials or vehicle emission standards? Does Mr. Levin want to live in a city like Lagos with its pollution problems?

Mr Levin is no Anarchist. So remove the notion that he doesn't want order in the society. What you have failed to understand is that consumers hve the power to punish a producer who does not consider all these issues in their business. For instance, prove today that all of Wlamart's goods are lead based and could kill the consumers. Believe me, you don't need govt legislation before Walmart runs out of business if they do not change! Consumers have the ability to dictate to the producers what they want and how they want it by rewarding those who produce what the consumers desires with sales. The market can regulate itself if left alone. While I know you will refer to lack of regulation under Bush, I will plead with you ahead not to bother. It was govt regulation that encouraged the subprime mortgage phenomenon. And guess why people creaed all those product derivatives on the loans? Because the govt promises Freddie and Mae that they will back up all their risk. So in effect, it is govt regulation that encourage the situation that created the global financial meltdown.

This is mere wishful thinking. The more complex man's life has become no thanks to the modern gadgets he continues to build, the more difficult it must be to adjust his life around a more complex world.

Listen to yourself David. So you think the people in Washington will do a better job at making you life better than you can? Give the individual more credit than that. Can you tell me what the govt is involved in that they have basically not ruined? I don't understand all this govt is the messiah mentality. It is killing us in naija and we want to adopt it in the US! From all indications, the founding fathers were very critical and sceptical of the govt. The opposite seem to be the case in these days. No wonder Levin rightly called them Statists?

Mr. Levin is being deliberately mischievious. I doubt he really cares about malaria in third world countries. Unfortunately the environmentalists are right and Levin is wrong. DDT has a very very long half life (up to 30 yrs in soil) and bioaccumulates in fatty tissues of the body. Both organochlorine and organophosphorus chemicals can be very strong mutagens . . . and would have burdened the tax payer with even more health care costs with no regulation of the use of these pesticides.

What I believe he is refering to is the law of unintended consequences. Remember that Rush refered to this in his "first natianla address to the nation." Liberals reach for a goal in the hope that it is good for the people. Unfortunately, they overlook the consequences of those actions and we are never allowed to expose them. This is like the biofuels that they recently pursued. While they claim they are saving the planet, lots of people over the world were starving because they have to compete with cars for those food items. Food by definition should be consumed by people, not cars.

More wishful thinking.

What's wishful thinking there? You believe it is justice for one person to pay 20% in taxes and another to pay 50% just because he works harder and has become more productive? Why punish success and encourage mediocrity?

By the way, am I the only one that is unable to modify my posts? I see some errors I will like to correct but unable to do so.

Everyone has lost the modify button by the way

Tayo-D:

@Davidylan,

Mr Levin is no Anarchist. So remove the notion that he doesn't want order in the society. What you have failed to understand is that consumers hve the power to punish a producer who does not consider all these issues in their business. For instance, prove today that all of Wlamart's goods are lead based and could kill the consumers. Believe me, you don't need govt legislation before Walmart runs out of business if they do not change! Consumers have the ability to dictate to the producers what they want and how they want it by rewarding those who produce what the consumers desires with sales. The market can regulate itself if left alone. While I know you will refer to lack of regulation under Bush, I will plead with you ahead not to bother. It was govt regulation that encouraged the subprime mortgage phenomenon. And guess why people creaed all those product derivatives on the loans? Because the govt promises Freddie and Mae that they will back up all their risk. So in effect, it is govt regulation that encourage the situation that created the global financial meltdown.

I will give you a simple example - should government regulate vehicle emission standards and control abuse of prescription drugs?

Tayo-D:

Listen to yourself David. So you think the people in Washington will do a better job at making you life better than you can? Give the individual more credit than that. Can you tell me what the govt is involved in that they have basically not ruined? I don't understand all this govt is the messiah mentality. It is killing us in naija and we want to adopt it in the US!

Nigeria's problem is that we have no government at all!!! Will Mr. Levin prefer that system? Government is basically the reason Africa is in the doldrums and Asia, North America and Europe are streets ahead of us. Are there no private enterpreneurs in Nigeria too? Why are they not thriving?

Tayo-D:

What I believe he is refering to is the law of unintended consequences. Remember that Rush refered to this in his "first natianla address to the nation." Liberals reach for a goal in the hope that it is good for the people. Unfortunately, they overlook the consequences of those actions and we are never allowed to expose them. This is like the biofuels that they recently pursued. While they claim they are saving the planet, lots of people over the world were starving because they have to compete with cars for those food items. Food by definition should be consumed by people, not cars.

Pls dont make me laugh. Rush Limbaugh? That uneducated loud mouth knows nothing.
What do Rush or Levin know about DDT and its deleterious effects on the human body? Take a look at Africa where government is not responsible for health care nor do we regulate exposure to pollutants . . . we have a far worse life expectancy while that of America has steadily risen over the yrs. So shld the government simply have abandoned everyone with lead in their homes? Should they refuse to regulate the dumping of nuclear waste? Should the government look the other way when it comes to exposure to dangerous chemicals?
Should the government remove its flammability standards for homes? Should government stop regulating the water and air quality standards? Should government scrap the FDA and let us deal with salmonella on our own?

Yeah Rush indeed! And you wonder why African's with no governments are not Mr. Levin's pride.

Tayo-D:

What's wishful thinking there? You believe it is justice for one person to pay 20% in taxes and another to pay 50% just because he works harder and has become more productive? Why punish success and encourage mediocrity?

That is rubbish. If Mr. Rush and co earn 50 times what i earn just to make noise on radio then why shld we pay the same tax rate? Do you really think the CEOs on wall street work harder than the old woman at your local walmart simply because their paychecks say so?
What would Mr. Levin recommend we pay as tax? A flat rate where the rich continue getting richer and the poor get poorer or we scrap the tax code altogether?

and after scrapping the tax code we blame Obama for the deficit no?

@davidylan,

I will give you a simple example - should government regulate vehicle emission standards and control abuse of prescription drugs?

Just a question too.  To what end is the regulation intended?  And if the emissions are bad, why don't we kuku eliminate cars and every thing that emits CO2?  Govt is regulating or has banned the use of cocaine.  Does that stop its use and abuse?

Pls dont make me laugh. Rush Limbaugh? That uneducated loud mouth knows nothing.

You have imbibed the ways of a typical liberal.  Attack the person you disagree with even though you can point to no issue and provide a superior argument.

What do Rush or Levin know about DDT and its deleterious effects on the human body? Take a look at Africa where government is not responsible for health care nor do we regulate exposure to pollutants . . . we have a far worse life expectancy while that of America has steadily risen over the yrs. So shld the government simply have abandoned everyone with lead in their homes? Should they refuse to regulate the dumping of nuclear waste? Should the government look the other way when it comes to exposure to dangerous chemicals?  Should the government remove its flammability standards for homes? Should government stop regulating the water and air quality standards? Should government scrap the FDA and let us deal with salmonella on our own?

I find it hard to sort through the clutter you have written above.  The best way to deal with this is to declare your framework and we can discuss that.  Each item can be dealt with based on that framework.

Yeah Rush indeed! And you wonder why African's with no governments are not Mr. Levin's pride.

Again, you confuse a conservative stance to that of an Anarchist! 

Nigeria's problem is that we have no government at all!!! Will Mr. Levin prefer that system? Government is basically the reason Africa is in the doldrums and Asia, North America and Europe are streets ahead of us. Are there no private enterpreneurs in Nigeria too? Why are they not thriving?

You always get things wrong.  Relax a little bit and understand the isues.  This is not about no govt, it is about the govt carrying out what its legitimate role is.  The govts you are mentioning aint carrying out their legitimate roles. I dare say, it is the private sector and the entepreneurs that are upholding these societies, in spite of the govt.

That is rubbish. If Mr. Rush and co earn 50 times what i earn just to make noise on radio then why shld we pay the same tax rate?

Why don't you go make that noise and get paid just like that.  You think he would be paid for that much money if he wan't providing any services?  He is not your Senator Obama.

Do you really think the CEOs on wall street work harder than the old woman at your local walmart simply because their paychecks say so?

So you think the janitor at your school should receive the same salary as your Professor.  Listen to yourself.  If that is the case, why don't you pay the next guy who shines your shoes $5,000 for his service? 

What would Mr. Levin recommend we pay as tax? A flat rate where the rich continue getting richer and the poor get poorer or we scrap the tax code altogether?

The rich are not the poor's problem.  There is room at the top for everyone.  This notion that the poor are poor because of the rich is the greatest killer of initiatives I have ever known.  There isn't a single pie in which your share reduces by how much I get. You need to jettison that poverty mentality entirely.

and after scrapping the tax code we blame Obama for the deficit no?

Who should we blame?  Bush?  Are the rich to blame for the expansion of govt?  Why should they pay more to sustain the govt when they receive the least govt benefits if any at all?

tayo,

my bigest concern in this day, is the economy. this summer i'll be thru with studies, where is my fate. can i get a job? etc. if the western economies continue to fail, i'm worse for it, as an immigrant. so who will handle this economy better? obama or old john? we both know the answer.

these days the republicans cant even talk of old john with pride. their strategy is just to say no. and after much challenge from the whitehouse, they manufactured their magical budget proposals. magical because it will solve all america's problems without tackling it at all. budget without numbers, that is a world record. they should be given a chance.

and to propagate their stane, they change history, FDR's new deal was no good. the 2nd WW solved the problem. can the republicans run any organisation without talking war? if obama is spending too much(according to them) is war not going to be more expensive without being productive.

please. and pls try and do something about the RNC chairman. he is becoming a burden to u guys. and chenney needs a psychiatrist urgently

help him out

@pres-elect,

my bigest concern in this day, is the economy. this summer i'll be thru with studies, where is my fate. can i get a job? etc. if the western economies continue to fail, i'm worse for it, as an immigrant.

Forget that story. I keep getting job offers almost every week. I got a job offer in Carlifornia about 3 weeks ago, and even though it was tempting considering the nice weather compared to Minnesota, I dhad to turn it down. Why? Too much taxes. Even though I'll make more than I do now, I'll end up having less in my pocket. So I say, thanks but no thanks.

Let me help you with your job search. Prove to any employer that for every $1 he pays you, you will make him $5 and see if he will not higher you immediately. Do you now appreciate the role of the enterpreneur in the market place? Obama and co have demonized them without their followers realising that it akes those Enterprenuers for them to have a job.

so who will handle this economy better? obama or old john? we both know the answer.

I'm not sure we are on the same page here. If you mean Obabma will do a better job, I do not agree. What has he done so far except triple the national debt after 2 months in office! He is taking over businesses when he has never run one in his life. At least I can give him kudos for one thing, I have the right to now call the White House whenever my car breaks down! Heard what he said yesterday about GM and Chrysler? He is now talking about Bankruptcy. This is what we recommended months ago but he had to put us further in debt before he realised it.

these days the republicans cant even talk of old john with pride.

to tell tou the truth, it is people like Old John who are killing he Party. Constantly compromising on your values to appease the opposition erodes the support of your base.

their strategy is just to say no. and after much challenge from the whitehouse, they manufactured their magical budget proposals. magical because it will solve all america's problems without tackling it at all. budget without numbers, that is a world record. they should be given a chance.

Can you point to any budget that the DNC produced while Bush was in Office? It is not their job to create a budget. What is the point when Obama will not even accept it? Their job is to lay out principles which I elieve they have done over and over again. But of course, una no see am.

and to propagate their stane, they change history, FDR's new deal was no good. the 2nd WW solved the problem.

Was FDR's new deal any good? How much job did it create? What effect does it have on todays's budget? Could you tie those deals to the founding documents? Even Europe that we consider more liberal aint buying Obama's spending spree. I can't believe I will witness the day when Europe is more financially conservative than the US. Obama changed that in a few days.

can the republicans run any organisation without talking war? if obama is spending too much(according to them) is war not going to be more expensive without being productive.

I am not an advocate of war, but if you guys believe in govt spending to revive the economy as advocated by Keynesianism, war is the best scenario to practice it. After all, most if not all the weapons and machineries are sourced and produced locally. The money spent remains in the economy and does not find its way abroad. So far, AIG has spent a lot of the bailout it received on foreign soil.

please. and pls try and do something about the RNC chairman. he is becoming a burden to u guys. and chenney needs a psychiatrist urgently

We are not liberals. We believe in individuality. Let the RNC chairman be himself. He is not a cookie cut from the form of conservatism, even though liberalism's aim is to make everyone else conform to a particular standard. By the way, I am not a Psychiatrist, and I can bet that Cheney is doing much better than you.

help him out

tayo D

i have always known u to be someone sensitive to a personalisation of debates. i took a shot at chenney and u made it personal by attacking me, albeit indirectly. i wont care if somebody else said to me that a person who needs a psychiatrist is doing better than me, but for u to say it to me, i get upset b/c i know i've had to apologise to u for saying something other people wont mind me saying about them but for which u took offence. anyway, if i say chenney is mad, the best i expect of u is to say he is not mad. dont make statements that suggest i'm more mad. let's keep the debate ''official''. thanx

also, thanx for ur advice on job hunt. i'll give it a thought. i should be in the states by august. however, i see a lot of selfishness in ur statement or perhaps i should say, lack of concern. b/c while u may be getting job offers, ur statements tends to suggest that high unemployment we hear about was made up by the ''liberal media'' . if u have a job, just know there are millions of americans who lost their job in the last one year and there is a crisis now.

however, u talked of war, with great spending, keeping the money at home( and dead bodies abroad) being a good option, are you not then admitting that spending can jump-start the economy? and if so, is it not better to spend on bridges, roads infrastructure etc, than war machines that do no good?

@pres-elect,

i have always known u to be someone sensitive to a personalisation of debates. i took a shot at chenney and u made it personal by attacking me, albeit indirectly. i wont care if somebody else said to me that a person who needs a psychiatrist is doing better than me, but for u to say it to me, i get upset b/c i know i've had to apologise to u for saying something other people wont mind me saying about them but for which u took offence. anyway, if i say chenney is mad, the best i expect of u is to say he is not mad. dont make statements that suggest i'm more mad. let's keep the debate ''official''. thanx

I'm really sorry you took an offence to my statement. It wasn't meant to be one. Believe me, I hate personality clashes with every fiber in my being. I suppose your saying Cheney needs a Psychiatric assessment is not founded on a medical prognosis. My response is basically saying the guy is in a more enviable position than you do, at least social and professional wise. I'm not aware that Cheney really needs some help.

And as an addendum, if you are so sensitive to people calling you names, why then do you do same to others? Even though Cheney is not here to defend himself, he still deserves the baisc respect afforded to evey human being. Just a thought.

also, thanx for ur advice on job hunt. i'll give it a thought.

You are welcome. My statement I believe, is viable only when the free market is allowed to play it self out. It becomes obsolete when govt reulations steers the direction of the market. It is based on that premise that I really find it hard to believe what many black people here give as excuse for not getting better. The American system was built on capitalism. What should drive every business is the desire to make a profit. Any enterpreneur will hire you irrespective of your colour, race or religion ahead of others if you can prove to him you'll make him more money. That is the beauty of the system and I think it is being destroyed now.

i should be in the states by august. however, i see a lot of selfishness in ur statement or perhaps i should say, lack of concern. b/c while u may be getting job offers, ur statements tends to suggest that high unemployment we hear about was made up by the ''liberal media'' . if u have a job, just know there are millions of americans who lost their job in the last one year and there is a crisis now.

See, I don't mean to be insensitive. This curent economic situation affects everybody, me inclusive. For instance, one of the reasons why I really can't move now is that my house is worth about $100,000 less than what I owe on it right now. I will have to come up with that amount if I am to sell and relocate. I can't do that. Being in the management team at her work, my wife's income was recently cut as a cost savings measure. I know family and friends who have lost jobs and others who are thriving in this economy. My concern is what is the best way to get us out of this problem? The solution atimes might seem inhumane which is what you guys always accuse Republicns of, but we need to be practical in our approach.

however, u talked of war, with great spending, keeping the money at home( and dead bodies abroad) being a good option, are you not then admitting that spending can jump-start the economy? and if so, is it not better to spend on bridges, roads infrastructure etc, than war machines that do no good?

I did not admit what you have claimed. I only made mention of it in relation to Keynesianism which is a liberal's wet dream. War is not an issue that borders on economics, but on survival of a society. Do whatever is required to win and sustain your society is my creed.

As for building roads and infrastructures, how will those be maintained? I believe every infrastructure should be self-sustained and if those you build become a burden on the tax payers, it is not worth it in my opinion. Users must pay for the use of those infrastructures. Taxing automobile users to subsidize the transportation of the rail users is immoral in my opinion.

@topic,

I finally got the book in the mail yesterday. Wow, what a wait. Unfortunately, I cannot begin to read the book until I am done with an exam in 2 weeks. As much as it is tempting, I shall refrain from delving into the intellectual goodness I am bound to find in its pages.

But I must share the Abraham Lincoln quote printed on the back of the book. It so happens that Levin took the title of his book from that quote. Here it is:

"We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labour; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men's labour. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name - liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names - liberty and tyranny." - Abraham Lincoln, 1864!