During the opening monologue of his Sunday “Life, Liberty & Levin” broadcast, FNC host Mark Levin criticized congressional Democrats for their response to President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress last week.
Levin said their “immature” response was indicative of a party that rejected constitutional values and supported an ever-expanding bureaucracy.
[Y]ou know, when I was growing up, Sunday nights were very important. They’re important for the family. They’re really wonderful times. Little apprehension, school was the next day, but we gather around the TV from time to time, and we would watch some of the best television that existed.
I remember watching Milton Freeman in “Free to Choose” and “Firing Line” with Bill Buckley and so many other great shows. They taught me so much. Thomas Sowell, I remember being introduced to Ronald Reagan again so much.
I try to use this show not identically to that, I mean, I’m not one of the greats like they were, but I try and reach a little deeper, so you’re not just getting basically what you’ve gotten all week, which is wonderful, but you don’t need it from me.
What am I talking about?
When I watched President Trump’s outstanding speech, and then I watched the reaction from the Democrats, I was thinking to myself, as you were, what a bunch of children, what a bunch of immature individuals, and then I got to thinking more. These are elected representatives to the House of Representatives. They have voters. It’s about half the body of the House of Representatives.
How can it be that we, you and I, see things so differently than they do? How is that possible that we see things one way, and they and their press see it a completely different way.
So I thought tonight, let’s take a look at this. Let’s take a look at this. We have a completely different and even opposite idea of power and of the law. Stick with me on this. I think you’ll find it somewhat intriguing.
So I thought, well, what are these differences?
Why do they hate you and me so much? Why do they call President Trump Hitler? Why do they call us Neo Nazis? Why do they attack the real originalists on the Supreme Court? Why do they attack the Constitution with 1619 Project and CRT? They use racism every other word. They use Hitler every other word. What is with these people?
Because they are trying to build something that does not exist. They’re something trying to build something that is ideological and based on an ideology that is not — that is not the basis of our own founding.
So it comes down to law and power, ultimately, government. They exercise power through the law. For us, law is exercised to contain power. They skirt, usurp, alter the Constitution because it provides barriers to what they want to do.
So they attack the people who wrote it. They smear them. They reject the document itself, of course, except for when they want to wave it around to attack Donald Trump, but they reject it.
We adhere to the Constitution, its intent and its purpose.
They believe in an ever expanding bureaucracy. That’s why they attack Elon Musk and President Trump, who are trying to reduce the cost of government, bring efficiencies to government to try and ensure that this nation isn’t bankrupt.
They believe in an ever expanding bureaucracy, so any evidence of waste, fraud and abuse to them is an effort to knock down what they’ve built and what they intend to build. You and I and our Constitution, we believe in a limited government. We believe that you and I in a civil society, should have as much room to operate as possible, not the government.
They believe in infinite rules and regulations. They don’t believe in cutting regulations. They don’t believe in pulling back the regulators.
You and I, we believe in minimal red tape that the individual, the entrepreneur, the innovator, the developer, the producer, people should be free within a big circle of freedom to operate and function.
They believe in infinite rules and regulations. To coerce, to control and to decide what people should be doing.
For them, the law becomes the source of power, so they have to usurp and skirt the Constitution, which is a document that divides powers, but they want power. The more power, the more good they think they can do in a perverse way. The more they can do, the more power they can get. The more laws they can pass, the more regulations they can issue.
We believe the law exists to maintain and nurture this civil society that we live in, not to empower the government to devour the civil society, but to maintain and nurture the civil society. They believe the law empowers the few in the name of the many, the ruling class, Washington, D.C., the bureaucrats.
We are a massive nation, vast resources, a diverse people with all kinds of backgrounds and interests and so forth and so on. But they believe the law empowers a relative few, the ruling class, primarily in the name of all of us.
We believe the law protects the many, the people, against the few.
See we have completely divergent viewpoints.
They believe the law is made and laid down by man and a relative few men. By that, I mean the people who are in power.
This is critical.
We believe the origin of law is transcendent, eternal, universal. They believe man lays down the law, that it is the brain child of men.
We believe the origin of law is bigger than man. That’s what the Declaration of Independence says. The laws of nature and nature’s God, talks about the divine and the creator. It doesn’t matter what religion you hold, it doesn’t matter what faith you are, it doesn’t matter if you hold any.
The origin is bigger than we, the people. It’s bigger than mankind. That’s not what they believe. They believe the world begins today and they’re in charge. They’re in Congress, or they have the presidency, or they have the courts, and they make the law today, and they lay it down the law, and the law is the law, because they say it’s the law, and so you can never have enough laws.
They believe the law is to be used to empower government, which power is to be used to rejigger society, to re-engineer human nature.
So first the perfectibility of government, then the perfectibility of the people. So there is no limit to what can be spent. The more you spend, the bigger the government, the more laws, the more rules, the closer we get to utopia, the Promised Land, and the closer we can make man more perfectible to do what men should do and women should do according to the few.
We believe the law is to reflect, undergird and secure the unalienable rights and the liberty of each individual. We believe in the supremacy of the family, the just and moral traditions and institutions of mankind, learned through experience and reason and passed on from one generation to the next. They don’t believe that. They believe the government dispenses and disperses rights.
We believe rights come before government, that government exists to uphold and secure our unalienable rights. They believe the individual can only fully realize his potential through the so-called public interest. Who decides that? A relative handful of people. What’s best? They get this from Rousseau and Hegel and Marx, among others.
We believe the individual is the sovereign, not the government isn’t the sovereign; we, the individual. The government exists to protect the individual, and it exists at the behest of the people. We, the sovereign. Where did we get that from? Locke, Montesquieu, the framers and so many more.
They believe a divided government with separation of powers, as our Constitution provides, is a dysfunctional government incapable of serving the needs of a quickly evolving modern country.
Decision making must be centralized and made by a class of experts and masterminds or specially educated and trained civil servants to determine not only what’s best for the country, t6rh the decision or the policies are enforced throughout the country. Woodrow Wilson and many of the early scholars, late 1800s and early 1900s of the so-called Progressive Movement, the early American Marxist, this is what they preached.
We believe, a divided government with separation of powers, as Montesquieu argued, as Locke argued, and Aristotle argued, is best suited to protect the rights and the liberties of the individual, their free will and their knowledge, experience and expertise that flows from their interactions into the whole of society.
So the pieces make the whole.. The whole doesn’t control the pieces.
People are imperfect, therefore they must be controlled, not by a just law, not by a representative government. They must be controlled. This is their belief. They must be controlled by a relative handful of people who know what they’re doing, who know what’s best. We don’t know how they know what’s best, or how they know what they’re doing, but they know what they’re doing. Why? Because they’ve managed to gain power. They’re congressmen, they’re senators, they’re judges.
Maybe it’s a Democrat President. They know better. They know what they’re doing, and they have input from masterminds — academia, so-called scientific experts, not the rabble, not the people, the so-called masses, the workers.
It’s interesting, the party of the bourgeoisie, proletariat narrative, Marxism, the bourgeoisie, the wealthy, the managers, the proletariat, the workers, the less wealthy. Actually, they have their own notion of Marxism, but they just don’t realize it. It’s not an economic or material form of Marxism. It’s a power form of Marxism, that is a managing handful of elites, self-appointed, self-aggrandizing elites manage We, the People, the proletariat.
Think about that.
We believe that people are also imperfect, therefore more power in the hands of fewer and fewer imperfect people is tyranny. It is tyranny.
The concentration of imperfection creates tyranny. People become power hungry. It is an opportunity for evil people to do evil things. So when you look, when you look at what took place on the floor of the House of Representatives when Donald Trump gave that fantastic speech, you’re watching the Democrats, you were disgusted.
But these people, despite their clownish behavior, despite their little signs, despite their ignorance, they are very serious people.
They are power hungry. They are power hungry people. That’s why they’re furious. That’s why they’re angry. They don’t believe they should lose elections. That’s why they’ve created permanent parts of the government that are bigger than the elected parts, the bureaucracy.
That’s why they appoint people to the bench who believe they should be more powerful than the President of the United States, and so we have these activist federal district judges, appellate judges, and a handful of Supreme Court judges.
They reject the American system. They embrace an alien system, an alien ideology, an alien notion of good versus evil, an alien notion of what power should be and what it shouldn’t be, and an alien notion of a just law.
That’s why they’re angry, that’s why they act out. That’s why this past election was so crucial, was existential, and that’s what we’re up against.
Breitbart News
Read the full article .
