Patterico's Pontifications

9/15/2010

Mark Levin: No, Really. Patterico Is a Jackass. I Would Have Kicked His Ass in Court.

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:25 pm



Mark Levin shows us UNITY!!! again on Facebook:

This idiot is a prosecutor?

God save the good citizens of California who pays [sic] his salary.

Well, Mr. Prosecutor, you say you’re concerned about facts. Show us where I said Castle voted for impeachment – not where someone said I did but where I said I said it. See, this is why you’re a moron. And a dissembler to boot.

As for Mirengoff and Harriet Miers, I know we’re moving fast but try and keep up. Mirengoff argued for her nomination up until the day before she withdrew. And Hinderaker trashed George Will for daring to criticize her. You’re concerned about facts? You’re a jackass, but I repeat myself.

And no need to feel inferior for not having written a book. I don’t know why you brought that up, but that’s for you and your shrink. I just hope you can read them.

Boy I would have loved to kick your ass in court.

https://patterico.com/2010/09/13/september-surprise-castle-voted-to-impeach-bush-uh-not-really/

Let’s address these “points” one by one:

Well, Mr. Prosecutor, you say you’re concerned about facts. Show us where I said Castle voted for impeachment – not where someone said I did but where I said I said it. See, this is why you’re a moron. And a dissembler to boot.

Show you where you said it?

How about you show me where I said you did?

Because I didn’t. What I said was that your pal Dan Riehl claimed it may have started with you. Here is what I said:

Dan Riehl was pushing this crap for much of the day. He now has updates to his posts, that pretty much negate the entire substance of his posts. . . . Riehl says it all may have started with Mark Levin: “I believe Mark Levin may have broken this on his show.”

You falsely imply I was the one who made the claim. I was not. It was your pal Dan Riehl.

Now that you appear to deny it, I am happy to correct it — even though it wasn’t my claim. Pay attention, Mr. Levin. This is how it’s done. I went back to the original post and made the correction — something you never bothered to do with your numerous mistakes regarding Mirengoff.

Levin continues:

As for Mirengoff and Harriet Miers, I know we’re moving fast but try and keep up. Mirengoff argued for her nomination up until the day before she withdrew. And Hinderaker trashed George Will for daring to criticize her. You’re concerned about facts? You’re a jackass, but I repeat myself.

As before, I will refrain from descending to your childish level of name-calling and address the facts. I noted at least three separate factual errors in my original post criticizing you.

We’ve covered the Harriet Miers issue already; you initially failed to acknowledge Mirengoff’s ultimate position against her; you have now done so, making your original uncorrected charge a half-truth. If you’re proud of a half-truth, that’s your business. You should still correct the error in your original post. You have not done so.

You admitted you were wrong about Toomey. You should correct the error in your original post. You have not done so.

Facebook allows you to update posts; hell, you included one of your false charges in an update.

What’s more, you still haven’t addressed the fact that you said Lindsey Graham is Mirengoff’s “brand of Republican” when Mirengoff has said Graham is his least favorite Republican senator.

In short, you spouted off about Mirengoff without knowing a damned thing about him. Then you derided my posts noting your factual misstatements — because you’ve written a book and I haven’t. Which leads us to the end of your latest screed:

And no need to feel inferior for not having written a book. I don’t know why you brought that up, but that’s for you and your shrink. I just hope you can read them.

Boy I would have loved to kick your ass in court.

Oh, I’m the one who brought up not having written a book?? This new false charge of yours makes it clear who the true dissembler is: you. You are the one who brought up having written a book, in your original diatribe about me:

I look forward to reading his book one day, where he lays out with some coherence his philosophy on governance and politics. In the meantime, he appears to be just another loser with a keyboard . . .

All I did was note the distinct whiff of the “Ruling Class” in your haughty statement.

I don’t feel inferior to you at all, Mr. Levin. In fact, as you pile on the childish invective and continue publishing falsehoods, it’s becoming quite clear why I say that.

Kick my ass in court? Really?

If you conducted yourself in court the way you have conducted yourself the past several days, I would be shocked if you ever actually tried a case to a successful conclusion. I say that in all sincerity. No trial lawyer convinces 12 people with transparent lies and juvenile name-calling.

Always nice to hear from you.

118 Responses to “Mark Levin: No, Really. Patterico Is a Jackass. I Would Have Kicked His Ass in Court.”

  1. UNITY!!!

    Patterico (c218bd)

  2. “Boy I would have loved to kick your ass in court.”

    I tried to do that to a D.A. once, and the judge got all upset.

    Guess they must have changed the courtroom rules in recent years.

    Dave Surls (866d6b)

  3. Depends on the judge, Dave. Depends on the judge.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  4. #3

    Things have changed.

    In my day, you couldn’t even punch your own lawyer, much less a D.A.

    😉

    Dave Surls (866d6b)

  5. Behold: The Great One

    What a freak. I’m embarrassed for the folks who have said they have enjoyed this guy, but so many of them are obviously reasonable people. Is he always like this?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  6. O’Donnell winning an actual election isn’t on Levin’s agenda.

    Why smack all the new O’Donnell supporters in the face like this when you were wrong in the first place? Mirengoff is a huge asset to the cause, and it’s pretty selfish to try to burn down all these good people. So Levin got a bunch of facts wrong. Nobody would really care too much if he had admitted he was in error and corrected. To instead just drastically ramp up the personal attacks shows his actual motive.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  7. No trial lawyer convinces 12 people with transparent lies and juvenile name-calling.

    A defense lawyer only needs to convince 1.

    A Balrog of Morgoth (f4817a)

  8. True, but Levin claims he was at DoJ.

    Patterico (315504)

  9. I don’t know if this audio, strictly speaking, is Levin claiming that Castle voted for impeachment, but it’s certainly pretty close:

    http://bootmikecastle.com/2010/09/castle-voted-with-dems-for-bush-impeachment-resolution/

    He certainly says it’s “stunning” that Castle voted for something-or-other having to do with impeachment.

    Foo Bar (c1726e)

  10. As the line from South Park put it, “… using logic and reason isn’t enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn’t think like you.”

    That seems to sum up the past couple of days.

    Russ (91df94)

  11. this is about power for Levin … he wants to be considered a Tea Party leader like Palin … he wanted a high profile win with his support if O’Donnell and didn’t want anyone upsetting his apple cart ….
    This shows how small Levin is … too bad, he has some good ideas but this sort of stuff should doom his future as any sort of voice on the right …

    Jeff (fba88f)

  12. Levin was Ed Meese’s Chief of Staff.

    That’s a LONG WAY from being a courtroom lawyer.

    shipwreckedcrew (436eab)

  13. Patterico:

    Hah, you prosecutors pretend you’re so tough. I was there in that rodeo bar in La Verne when Joan Jett whupped you so bad, you begged her to stop riding you like a pony.

    Dafydd

    Dafydd the Pugnacious (632d00)

  14. Foo bar: 1

    Levin: 0


    A lengthy reading of the Articles of Impeachment followed with transparently fake suspense and “Castle voted for it.”
    (same link as foobar… I noticed the link before I saw he already nailed him).

    Pure Class.

    He clearly is telling his audience that Castle was in favor of an impeachment.

    Even a slight amount of research shows Castle opposed impeachment. By making the ‘he’s allowing investigation’ claim about a minute and 45 seconds before he says ‘Castle voted for it’, it’s also misleading to the casual listener. And that’s if you pretend the context was true, that this vote somehow unlocked the Judiciary Committee that was previously not allowed to investigate (of course not).

    He notes the significance of this being a privileged resolution, so it seems like he knew that the resolution would reach a floor vote if it wasn’t referred.. This is the most stunning part. He should see why this means Castle prevented the impeachment vote (after a lengthy show of Kucinich reading the Articles). The Constitution says the House has sole power of impeachment. There’s nothing about ‘allowing’ the judiciary committee to investigate. Only *ONE* thing changed as a result of this referral. The privilege motion was kept from the floor, referred to committee and dead. The concept of killing a bill in committee should be understood by someone who wrote a book.

    It’s strange that he actually thinks Castle would be willing to impeach Bush. Is he totally unfamiliar with Castle? This Castle RINO is a jackass on so many things, but he never used that kind of ‘Bush lied’ rhetoric.

    What really eats me up about this is that there was so much truthful stuff out there to attack Castle with. If it’s a contest to be the baddest mofo on the right, maybe ousting a RINO based on the well proven fact he’s a RINO isn’t enough? I guess Levin had some kind of reason to pull this stunt. I have little interest in protecting Castle, whose votes were often extremely bad for our country. You don’t need to lie to conservatives about someone who favors Cap and Tax. But Levin made a damaging and untrue claim at the last moment of the election. He had a responsibility, to whatever sort of character likes his program, to do his homework on such a serious accusation.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  15. I never liked words like “childish” and “infantile”. Some children and infants are very well-behaved. As for Mr. Levin, we will see how his preferred nominee (O’Donnell) does against Coons, and if Coons wins then we shall see what havoc he wreaks in the lame duck session.

    Andrew (a3af39)

  16. Patterico,

    Tea Party members gave up on the Republican brand during the Bush years. The abuse of power, reckless spending, the refusal to serve the constituency between election cycles.

    I’ll take Levin’s side here. O’Donnell and the Tea Party supporters were getting bashed by commentators representing the brand and he felt the need to push back. I’m thinking your reputation will survive his name calling. And what’s the point of using Levin’s tactics in the debate? You criticize his tactics, claim not willing to sink as low as him, and then use them against him in your post Mark Levin’s Elitist Attack on You?

    Criticisms of Tea Party leaders and candidates are for not being sophisticated in the ways of Washington. That will continue to be the case as citizens new to politics will step up and declare themselves publicly. Try to lower your expectations, people.

    All that should matter about O’Donnell is that she has never mis-used public funds. That seems a pretty low standard but its one that not even a majority of our elected officials in Washington can claim.

    The Tea Party is still learning to organize in effective numbers and to find and fund right minded candidates. Give these unsophisticated candidates a chance to take their shot at trying to limit government. What have you got to lose? Your reputation as that idiot behind that keyboard?

    pk (f66720)

  17. “I’ll take Levin’s side here.”

    PK, it’s not clear that you’re taking Levin’s side. This idea that we should support O’Donnell, not be elitist, and accepting that we’ve got nothing to lose at this point in supporting the Tea Party’s choice seems like Patterico’s POV.

    I don’t see any reason to pretend Levin has a thing to do with the Tea Party. Is he one of those people pretending they are the real leader of the Tea Party? We (the Tea Party) eat at least 2 of these for breakfast every day.

    I don’t speak for Patterico, but if your comment somehow corrects his views, I really misunderstood where he stands. Except on Levin.

    It’s beyond question that Levin is wrong, and he’s acting like a nut. Anyone being attacked with the kinds of arguments Levin is throwing are completely entitled to state the facts.

    Read the post again. It is probably clear to you that Patterico is trying not to sink to Levin’s level.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  18. It is just plain weird that people come here and give the same

    ohhhhhhh why be so rude? Be niiiiicer. It’s not OK to use the tone I see here: [quote some completely reasonable sentence].

    I assume most of these people came from a link from Levin, so they obviously are fans of a guy who constantly shrieks high pitched insults all the time.

    What’s up with the disconnect? I’ve seen several people make this same argument that the tactics being criticized are the same ones being used.

    PK, what are the tactics being criticized? I thought the main one was Levin reacting to factual corrections dismissively and rudely, and with no correction made. And another one was pretending people who didn’t write a book are less worthy of commentary. And another is that is to sink to insults instead of arguments.

    Are we on the same page? PK seems to acknowledge Levin is guilty as charged. If I’m reading him right, he excuses this because The Great One felt the need to push back against ‘the brand’, whatever that means.

    This isn’t about Levin’s ego problems. O’Donnell is running for US Senator. You don’t start lying about or insulting commentators when you feel the need to ‘push back’. But this ‘push back’ concept explains Levin’s dishonorable reaction to corrections. He just pushed back, like a child.

    PK, what do you see in ‘The Great One’? How is his pushing back against the Tea Party helping the Tea Party?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  19. pk:

    O’Donnell never misused public funds? No, she just lived off her campaign funds and used them to pay her rent. It is hard to never live off public funds when you do not have access to them.

    And as for Bush, he was honest, the people in Congress who abused their power did so on their own without any help from George Bush.

    I think Levin has made a complete ass of himself in recent days. I won’t waste my time listening to him. He is an arrogant prick.

    In fact when I heard Hannity and Rush both say things that were just plain false in the course of this race I have to admit I lost a lot of faith in them too. And then of course we had to hear people get all outraged that Karl Rove had the audacity to speak his mind about Christine on her big day. Oh please. Rove is like the mean coach who tells that you are going to have to lose some weight, quit smoking, stop partying, and work out before the big game or the other team is going to kick your ass…Levin and lot of other conservative pundits are the best buddy saying…nah, you look fine man, a few extra pounds never hurt anyone…a few smokes won’t kill ya…practice? Nah lets go party…you can kick their ass anyday.

    So now we have self styled leaders like Levin attacking anyone who disagrees with him and calling them names just for speaking their mind. It is absurd.

    Terrye (7c855d)

  20. There is so much vitriol because the stakes are so
    small.

    Levin? meh.

    Pat? You’ve been trolled.

    Jack (e383ed)

  21. Levin has forfeited whatever credibility he may have enjoyed with reasonable people by his false and malicious actions in the brouhaha over Delaware. The guy has repeatedly lied and/or misrepresented his own or his opponents’ positions with an aggressive arrogance. There is no excuse for such behavior. I expect no better from leftist cretins, but Levin should have higher standards, and apparently doesn’t.

    Adjoran (ec6a4b)

  22. Levin has beclowned himself.

    (Sorry if someone beat me to this one.)

    Mitch (e40959)

  23. comment eaten
    going to pout now
    first repeat comment:

    Hannity
    levin
    Savage

    repetitive boring shouters

    yuk

    quasimodo (dce353)

  24. Being energetic in pointing out mistakes is good, being condescending and disrespectful, especially to people you don’t know, is not. I’ve often had Levin on the radio when I’m working on projects because there is nothing else interesting at that time of evening. I’ll now turn off the radio.

    MD in Philly (5a98ff)

  25. unbelievable – I actually could listen to Levin… have listened to Levin. Actually thought he had a place in the pantheon of radio show hosts. I like his (what seemed to me) uncompromising standards – calling a spade a spade, so to speak. So this is a terrible thing. I’ll be honest… Rush lost me years ago – he doesnt walk the walk. Hannity is like Rush Lite and too cheerleaderish for me. Cant stomach OReilly cause he’s kind of well dumb. I will go as far as to say that Mark Belling (Milwaukee) and Charlie Sykes (also Milwaukee) are the only ones left for me. I sure hope Belling goes national soon. Pat – you are right to hammer Levin for being wrong – for not correcting incorrect statements. I love that he thinks he should be star f**ked because he is a celeb. And I love that you refuse to give him a hall pass. Lots of respect lost for Levin when all he had to do was be honest.

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  26. Cap and Trade is a huge money making scheme and not rooted in any reality as for as global warming goes. Anyone who supports a candidate that voted for Cap and Trade is the enemy of conservatism. I’m not a genius but I knew what Rush and Levin were saying and they weren’t saying that Castle voted for Impeachment. Look your lib lost so get over it.

    Mike (10b60d)

  27. Heartbreaker – I love listening to Levin and his book ‘Liberty And Tyranny’ is classic conservative manifesto – but his behavior over the last two week has been atrocious. That goes for Karl Rove as well. Pathetic.

    Let’s drop all the BS and focus on the Dems – this is all a waste of firepower and there’s no joy in watching it…

    Shane (aa525d)

  28. You criticize his tactics, claim not willing to sink as low as him, and then use them against him in your post Mark Levin’s Elitist Attack on You?

    I am not going to let Levin and his supporters frame this as an argument over O’Donnell or political tactics.

    It is an argument about honesty. Specifically, his failure to demonstrate it.

    Patterico (b677cb)

  29. And his arrogance in failing to acknowledge his errors, and in haughtily responding to an honest critic who lacks his fame.

    Patterico (b677cb)

  30. Levin has a much larger audience that Pat… so why is Levin beclowning himself? Maybe he doesn’t get that in politics, it makes no sense to elevate your opponent, which would speak volumes about his expertise at his chosen field. Or maybe the dead-on criticism bothers him so much he can’t help but respond. Maybe he forgot that the Internet is not radio. He doesn’t get to screen his calls, or hang up on anyone who makes a point against him.

    Pat has talked about the need for unity now, but Levin – whose candidate won – is doing his best to create disunity. Yet another example of Levin showing no grasp of the basics of the topic on which he is paid to opine.

    Karl (83846d)

  31. Patterico? Who the hell is Patterico? Where the hell am I? Hey, how did I get here?

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  32. Like I wrote before, Patterico, the measure of a person is not just how well they deal with difficulties. Sometimes, it is how they deal with successes.

    Mr. Levin believes the hype others have dealt him.

    Hubris is an unattractive characteristic. And when he makes everything about personalities, he cannot then later bemoan the fact that his opponents do the same.

    This is like something out of Greek mythology: a tragic lesson for “The Great One.”

    Eric Blair (58b0cf)

  33. Karl and Eric B – perfect. Spot on. But still it’s sad to see.

    enoch_root (9548cd)

  34. Maybe I’m just guessing, but you are inplicitly defending someone who certainly doesn’t care about
    ‘deport them’ or ‘right to bear arms’ or the Petraues counterinsurgency strategy, you think he
    was going to act better, or he was going to make
    Jeffords look like a Bircher.

    ian cormac (6709ab)

  35. Levin lacks the dignity for hubris. He is an actor, putting on a show. That’s all. Actors, as a rule, are self-centered and narcissistic. If you do not applaud them, in their minds you attack them.

    nk (db4a41)

  36. For a political hack and talking head like him to talk that way about a felony prosecutor in Compton, to people who really know about these things, is laughable.

    Did I say actor in the previous comment? I meant clown.

    nk (db4a41)

  37. Belling is a good substitute for No Doze, Levin is a little hard on the ear, fair point, but has he been wrong on the law.

    ian cormac (6709ab)

  38. I never liked Levin’s radio show, being unable to stand his act or his grating voice for even 10 seconds at a time.

    But now, Patterico has made his look like the dishonest, bile-filled clown that he is. And Levin is welcome to come here and try to kick my ass … if he can even find his own.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  39. O’Donnell is a craptacularly bad candidate, but he is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than Hairy Reid’s pet marxist Coon.

    JD (896f08)

  40. Geez- you have to wonder about people who take Levin seriously as an “informed opinion”. The guy is an angry hysteric. He’s one of those people who can’t think of anything intelligent to say, so he drops a few dozen cuss words to distract from his inadequacies.

    Not that I am offended by the word “jackass”- or whatever else he wants to blurt out. I’m just not impressed by it either.

    Jewels (c7b6c5)

  41. Levin’s attempt to be the Bob Grant of his radio talk show generation has created a number of feuds, not just with the left, but with anyone who crosses his path — those who champion Mark’s support of O’Donnell right now might want to remember his attempt to start a steel cage death match with Glenn Beck last year.

    Tarring his enemies as liberals is the easiest path to trying to get listeners/readers support, but Levin’s habit of tossing out that charge against everyone he’s got a beef with makes him come across more like the conservative version of the zealots like Markos Moulstas Zungia who ran Joe Liebermann out of the Democratic Party four years ago in favor of Ned Lamont, because Joe wasn’t ideologically pure enough of a Democrat to meet their standard.

    Kos and his crowd thought their strategy of all-angry, all-the-time was working two years ago with Obama’s election, despite Liebermann’s survival in 2006. And their current strategy — to call all the voters who don’t agree with them racist, sexists, homophobic, Islamaphobic, etc-phobic, isn’t exactly firing up the base right now. Levin’s smarter and far better on the issues than that crowd, but his anger causes him to make the same mistakes of trying to demonize/intimidate all who dare to deviate slightly from his idea of what conservatism is.

    John (e3fdad)

  42. Let’s drop all the BS and focus on the Dems – this is all a waste of firepower and there’s no joy in watching it…

    I hope you’re leaving a comment like that at Levin’s site. He’s the guy who needs to hear it.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  43. #9, Foo Bar,

    That certainly sounds like he’s accusing Castle of being for Impeachment to me… does he make a disclaimer later in the show? (a hurried one, most likely, perhaps right before commercial break?)

    Jewels (c7b6c5)

  44. Patterico, I frequently disagree with your conclusions, but I think you get to them honestly and in good faith.

    But you are picking a fight with someone who is fundamentally an entertainer, as are most modern big-time media pundits on both sides.

    If you are proceeding out of a sincere hope that you’ll provoke an honest and thoughtful response — rather than a playing-to-the-crowd response — then I respectfully submit you’re being naive.

    If you’re just doing this to further illuminate the sad opinion-pornstar condition of modern big-media punditry, then carry on, by all means.

    Ken (2e87a6)

  45. If you conducted yourself in court the way you have conducted yourself the past several days, I would be shocked if you ever actually tried a case to a successful conclusion.

    Using “tactics” like that, I have to wonder if Levin ever tried a case at all, much less won it.

    kishnevi (3721d8)

  46. Ken – He is a serious-minded superior person, dontcha know? He wrote a book.

    JD (896f08)

  47. ian, that’s all special. But not the issue. I happen to disagree with Patterico on O’Donnell but that does not make Levin anything but a dishonest vile hack.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  48. Ken:

    I am responding to an attack. A pair of them, actually.

    I hardly think I’m picking a fight. I’m just not backing down.

    You have one valid point: I would not normally spend this much time responding to attacks that are this childish. It’s the size of his audience that makes it feel necessary to respond.

    Patterico (b677cb)

  49. A week back you had a survey ’bout what sometime readers wanted to see in this blog(I think I confused DRJ, who I liked, with another named Drummond, I also liked).

    I don’t remember Blogger Flame Wars among commenters’ “likes”, “needs”, or “better that sex” preferences.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  50. “better that sex”

    Don’t let O’Donnell hear you talking like that.

    JD (896f08)

  51. I’d vote for blogger flame wars, gary. Great entertainment.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  52. I haven’t read Levin’s book, frankly, because he sounds like a clown on radio. I don’t think O’Donnell is a good candidate because she has a number of rather glaring weaknesses in her history. However, this is a wave election and that might be enough.

    It’s nearly as interesting to me that Adrian Fenty, the reformist mayor of DC who was saving the school system, was defeated yesterday because “He is too friendly with white men.”

    Mike K (11fb04)

  53. Kick my ass in court? Really?

    If you conducted yourself in court the way you have conducted yourself the past several days, I would be shocked if you ever actually tried a case to a successful conclusion.

    Levin said that? Really? Has he ever SEEN a courtroom? Levin entered the legal profession for money and politics. To my knowledge, he has not practiced law since the 80’s. He set up a foundation for his antebellum understanding of the Constitution and neo-feudal economic views and lives off the fat of conservative donors. Hell, he’s running a legal foundation, supposedly, but I have never heard of Landmark being involved in even a high profile appellate case. Levin wishes he were Jim Bopp, but he’d have to be less of a charlatan and huckster for that to happen.

    timb (449046)

  54. I have helped save a client from the death penalty in double murder, kidnapping, rape, sodomy case with, in practical terms, a 40-year prison sentence (80 years minus day to day good time) After trial, not plea-bargain. My only plea bargain for jail time has been six months, with three months considered served, in a double attempt armed robbery case.

    Come and kick my ass, Mr. Levin.

    nk (db4a41)

  55. Did you read the comments over there? Apparently, all of California is filled with liberals and Democrats! Those people are 100% more crazy and douchier than any commenter here….I thought only Stacy’s crowd could be that wrong and half-educated.

    timb (449046)

  56. Stalkerish fundamentally dishonest wannabe lawyer types are such angry hatey nasty people.

    JD (896f08)

  57. This has become a bigger pee-pee argument. Fact is this web site benefits from this Levin issue — you should keep up the nasty dialogue and send him a thank you note.

    With that said, it seems Levin is a cock-sucker on this issue much like O’Donnell is a habitual liar.

    With that said, boy o boy folks here do go over board. A few mistakes turns you into Satan.

    HeavenSent (e230a5)

  58. I don’t agree much with that hyperbole – this blog is frequented by most folks who are interested in opinions buttressed by actual facts, not conjecture backed up with insults. However, if you do feel that you’re the Devil incarnate here, wear those horns with pride!

    Dmac (d61c0d)

  59. This has become a bigger pee-pee argument.

    Not really – it’s an argument between a guy with a radio job who wrote a book about his doggies and an actual prosecutor.

    Dmac (d61c0d)

  60. Now I don’t listen to Levin, only seen him on Cavuto I suppose, but here’s a very recent post of Mirengoff’s that served to remind me why it is profligate to waste my time so abjectly:

    “It’s clear that the Tea Party is a huge and often valuable player in the Republican party. If the current co-habitation fails, neither the Republican establishment nor the Tea Party is likely to prosper. Co-habitation will require mutual accommodation, and it’s far from clear that we’ll see enough of that to make the “marriage” work.”

    This condescension is calculated to annoy, irritate and provoke.

    Fully three quarters of those allowing themselves to be termed “Republican affiliates” believed the Party to have lost its way and was unresponsive to their concerns.

    That is the reason their numbers fell to 25% of the electorate in 2008. The Tea Party, in the main, is comprised of Independents who feel, in general, only a bit less hostile to the GOP than they do towards Democrats.

    Taking any stand with a fool, on any pretense, engenders rebuke.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  61. Give this a listen for about 3 minutes and 16 seconds;

    http://www.wgmd.com/?p=9496

    I’m not too familiar with liars, thankfully I’m surrounded by active duty military where integrity still means something but even I can figure out that “squirelly” is probably too nice a word for what is going on.

    madawaskan (565543)

  62. Terrye
    In fact when I heard Hannity and Rush both say things that were just plain false in the course of this race I have to admit I lost a lot of faith in them too.

    What did they say that was plain false?

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (368c7b)

  63. “62.Give this a listen for about 3 minutes and 16 seconds”

    Sorry, I couldn’t take 30 secs. Delaware, my hat’s off to you. 40 years of Biden and Castle and here’s how you have to start it all over? May God bless.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  64. Bradley, Hannity made an error about Castle’s obamacare voting. I don’t follow him, but I bet that one was an honest mistake and it was corrected. FNC is a legit news organization.

    I like Rush. I used to care that sometimes he looks like he doesn’t walk the walk, but he’s just a fun and smart guy to listen to. His only real annoyance for me is that he, like everyone else in his line of work, pretends it’s all about him.

    Here’s Castle talking about Rush and Sean ‘Lying’. (Youtube). I’m still unclear on what Rush said wrong. I will note that Sean, in this video, and post primary, does misstate Castle’s view on Obamacare yet again as against repeal, rather than simply aware it isn’t possible with Obama in the WH.

    No biggie, IMO, but there is such a damn void in our media for serious and reliable commentary. Maybe it’s better that it’s obvious that almost everyone has taken a side and is grinding an axe.

    I’m curious if other people think Levin deserves responsibility for the ‘impeach bush’ smear. I think it was amazing to bring something so serious up in such a sloppy way, so close to an election.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  65. I like his (what seemed to me) uncompromising standards – calling a spade a spade, so to speak.

    It’s funny how easy it is to call a spade a spade except when it’s about someone else and how easy it is to have uncompromising standards – except when it’s about oneself, then the standards are in a state of convenient flux.

    Levin continues to attempt to make this about O’Donnell, lack of unity, etc., rather than what it really is: an examination of his evidenced lack of character and integrity. He’s made this so much worse for himself than what it needed to be. But Ego is a harsh mistress.

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  66. It’s funny how easy it is to call a spade a spade except when it’s about someone else

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  67. No trial lawyer convinces 12 people with transparent lies and juvenile name-calling.

    I was gonna mention Johnny Sutton but I guess he was a prosecutor.

    There was definitely different motives at work for the reps who voted to advance impeachment proceedings against Bush. It helps Castle with the liberals in Delaware, as long as no media ever asks him about his motives at the time. There is nothing about Castle that should earn him the benefit of a doubt in this instance. Although I doubt he actually wanted Bush to be impeached, I think he wanted his leftist constituency to have that perception while his constituency on the right would assume different motives.

    j curtis (64f417)

  68. Levin, get off my computer, YOU DOPE!!!!

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  69. “No trial lawyer convinces 12 people with transparent lies and juvenile name-calling.”

    Try Johnny Cochran getting OJ off.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  70. I doubt he actually wanted Bush to be impeached

    J Curtis, he has never been a ‘bush lied’ type. He told Delaware media Bush committed no crimes. This maneuver wasn’t novel or secret.

    No doubt, many of the DEMOCRATS voting to kill this impeachment craziness did so because they opposed it too. It’s just so off the wall that it’s harmful to the country and embarrassing to let it come to a floor vote.

    And keeping it from coming to a floor vote was the single impact of Castle’s vote.

    In short, you’re right, it is not reasonable to say Castle favored impeachment. I go a step further in saying that to mislead on this, which Levin obviously did, so late in an election, is a dirty trick.

    You can cynically assume Castle was playing some kind of game, but there’s evidence for that. I don’t trust statists like Castle, but he’s been so outspoken about his anti-conservative views. But speculating honesty about his motivations, even asking him to explain himself, strikes me as far more honorable than what Levin did.

    If they replaced Levin with J Curtis, everyone would come out ahead, except the RINOs. There’s no excuse for the way Levin handled this.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  71. “It helps Castle with the liberals in Delaware, as long as no media ever asks him about his motives at the time.”

    j curtis – You may have missed it. Media did interview Castle at the time. He said he voted to refer it to Committee so it would die there. Powerline had a post about it.

    daleyrocks (940075)

  72. gary gulrud-

    Sorry. Cripes I actually sat through the whole thing-once.

    I feel dizzy…

    madawaskan (565543)

  73. Media did interview Castle at the time.

    Do you have a good source for that or just some blogger claiming he talked to X who told him Y.

    j curtis (64f417)

  74. “Cripes I actually sat through the whole thing-once”

    I’m probably a lot older and am my toddler’s caregiver.

    What’s preposterous to me, even after that interview, is that anyone would argue that a seamless liar-read career politian-is preferable to an artless one.

    Then again, 52% preferred in-your-face-horseshit in 2008. Vote the bums out.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  75. I’ve not cared for Levin from when I first heard him. Although I often agreed with the conservative principle he was advocating, I also noted that he often distorted facts and situations to serve his diatribe. If I want to support a disingenuous pundit, the MSM have many smoother ones from which to choose.

    If conservatives want the country to trust us, we must be trustworthy.

    Teflon Dad (48e81b)

  76. If conservatives want the country to trust us, we must be trustworthy.

    +10000

    I keep looking for some strong statement on Castle on Iraq. To be honest, he’s damn wishy washy about Iraq and I don’t think J Curtis is out of line to see this as playing both sides.

    Doesn’t change the fact that this vote didn’t assist the ‘investigate’ Bush process in any material way, but actually stood in the way of a vote on impeachment.

    Castle never made any of these kook noises. One of his few good traits is that he has no kooky or nut redundancies. He’s a RINO for sure, but there’s not a shred of evidence he supported impeachment.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  77. Well for this conservative Californian and former Levin listener, all I can say is, “Levin is a spoiled brat!” There, I said it!

    MikeHu (255b30)

  78. What I said was that your pal Dan Riehl claimed it may have started with you.

    I was there. In both cases. That’s exactly what was said.

    Are we 100% sure this wasn’t Carl Levin?

    What a jerk.

    papertiger (a53e34)

  79. Brother Bradley:

    What did Rush and Hannity say that was just plain false? Rush said that Castle voted for the Stimulus bill when he did not and Hannity said he voted for Obamacare when he did not. I think Hannity corrected himself a couple of days later, but he should not have been such an idiot in the first place, no Republican including Castle voted for Obamacare.

    And of course O’Donnell has been caught in a couple of whoppers herself, not that any real conservative is supposed to care about that.

    Terrye (ce0d6f)

  80. Well-

    Here’s this little cartoon.

    Kinda funny takes a swing at Mark Levin in the end.

    http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7140347/

    madawaskan (565543)

  81. Oops!

    Hunting with Mark Levin

    madawaskan (565543)

  82. “Do you have a good source for that or just some blogger claiming he talked to X who told him Y.”

    j. curtis – Powerline has the sources. Read it there as I suggested.

    daleyrocks (940075)

  83. Patterico, Levin, et al: Give it a rest. Everyone knows that Riehl is an instigator, that all bloggers make mistakes now and then or write things that get misinterpreted, let it go. We have an election to win in as many states as possible and all this in-fighting, childish name calling, and trash-talking of republican candidates is just crazy. This “yes you did, no I didn’t” BS is sounding more and more like a couple of 4th grade boys on the playground.

    If you can’t control your impulse for name calling and trash talking, then at least look around the dems for much more interesting fights. There is our own dumber than a box of rocks, don’t call me ma’am Boxer, or the less than illustrious Moonbeam Brown, or how ’bout “the war is lost” Reid, or any number of others. Don’t want to go after a candidate, then how ’bout the trial balloon from the past weekend of John “Coward” Kerry for Secy of State, or Michelle Antoinette thinks being First Lady is hell.

    Focus boys! And for Pete’s sake, all of you quit pushing the meme that one of our candidates can’t win. All you are doing is implanting in voters’ minds that there is no reason to go to the polls since it is so obviously a foregone conclusion setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy. Is that your goal? No? Well then all of you, just chill and get off your bruised egos and get to work on things that will advance the agenda on election day.

    Sara (Pal2Pal) (4d3f49)

  84. That’s a great post, Sara. Unfortunately, you posted it on the wrong blog. Lemme find Levin’s address for you …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  85. You’ve linked to a study about manliness from a place where men wear short skirts, AD. 😉

    nk (db4a41)

  86. If you can’t control your impulse for name calling and trash talking,

    You know how I can tell you didn’t read the post you’re commenting to?

    There is no ‘both you guys’ in this case. Levin’s shown a lack of character, and this ‘yes you did, no you didn’t’ 4th grader problem you cite should consider the fact that yes, he did. It’s an adult dressing down a 4th grader that has too many over loyal fans.

    This is as civil and controlled a reply to a jerk as you’re ever going to find, Sara.

    I’m surprised at how well O’Donnell appears to be doing. I think a lot of pundits completely miscalled the viability of her campaign. We could actually get a conservative (if she turns out to be one) in Delaware and so you’re right her chances of winning shouldn’t be understated. That was an error of fact, not reasoning, but it’s not an error in this post you’re replying to. Levin may be pretending he’s defending O’Donnell, but he’s attacking an O’Donnell supporter.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  87. Dustin:

    I think it is too soon to know how well or badly O’Donnell is doing. A new poll came out today that had Coons 53 and O’Donnell 42.

    Terrye (ce0d6f)

  88. And to be honest, when she was running for the nomination a lot of her supporters were not denying that she would probably lose, they just thought that sending the message was more important than winning the Senate.

    Terrye (ce0d6f)

  89. That’s a good point, Terrye. The folks saying ‘so what that a Dem will win! Better a Dem than a RINO!!!!’ don’t have an argument that the ‘establishment’ was wrong about any potential victory for O’Donnell.

    I think this race will be closer than either side predicted. If her unelectability turns out to be a myth, it was a good faith error on both sides, but I’m sure some of the jerks will be unable to resist taking pot shots.

    O’Donnell has been blessed, a second time, with an awful opponent. But looking back to Castle, some of his behavior since the election has been awful. He sent out an anti-O’donnell email after the nomination was decided, he took a call Obama fueling paranoia about a defection, and he has made a statement that he will stay neutral. That last part isn’t logically different from declining to endorse, but in my mind, it’s a lot worse.

    Castle was worse than I thought he was. And I didn’t like him. I think O’Donnell can win and while I share your concerns about her ethics, I think the ‘we’d rather have our flawed guy than their flawed guy’ argument Patterico and AP are making is powerful.

    I just wish the folks conjuring some parity between the actual coalition builders and the coalition breakers like Levin would actually pay attention. It’s not Levin’s fault a crank has media power: it’s his listeners’ fault.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  90. And while I hold Castle responsible for his behavior, intelligent O’Donnell supporters weren’t calling him and his supporters the nastiest stuff they could imagine because this result is very predictable. It’s not like Levin wanted to win anyway, so I guess I can’t call him out for making it a lot harder than it had to be.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  91. Judging by the comments, most of Pattrico’s supporters seem to be liberals – why am I not surprised?

    Pattrico always seems to be attacking conservatives… Coulter, O’Reilly, Protein Wisdom, Reihl, Malkin The other McCain , Levin, Rush, Beck, Buchanan, Mark Steyn, Palin, Hannity, the list goes on and on. Liberals never seem to get him upset.

    Again, why am I not surprised?

    Rcocean (43ec56)

  92. You must be new here, Rcocean.

    Some chump (4c6c0c)

  93. Rcocean, judging by your comment, you are clueless and a troll.

    Why am I not surprised?

    Why did you feel the need to post such a ridiculous comment? Did making up something so utterly false make you feel better about yourself?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  94. Rcocean–you owe a lot of people keyboards from all the drinks they just spewed laughing at your comment.

    Patterico is not a liberal. Dustin, Daleyrocks, nk, SPQR, and almost anyone else I could name are not liberals. Ninety-five percent of the commenters here are not liberal. If anything, they are to the right of the people you name, and a good deal more sympathetic to the tea party movement than most of them.

    I’m one of the “leftmost” here only by comparison–I’m actually a libertarian, and sometimes when I argue against standard conservative positions on immigration, the mosque controversy, etc. I get mistaken for a liberal. But I’m not.

    Liberals never seem to get him upset
    That is true.

    Liberals get Patterico enraged.

    kishnevi (fb9343)

  95. Rocean,

    This is not an attack on conservatives. You need to carefully read all the posts involved.

    This is about a misrepresentation and distortion of truth being calmly confronted in a straight up manner with simple facts that dismantle and correct the misrepresentations and distortions. It’s also about the subsequent vitriolic attacks of a bruised ego unable to accept the facts.

    Don’t attempt to make this something it is not.

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  96. Comment by nk — 9/16/2010 @ 3:02 pm

    I just briefly scanned the article, but thought it might be a snarky rejoinder for some of the excess testosterone that seemed to be flying about.
    And, being Scots-Irish myself – what’s wrong with kilts?

    AD - RtR/OS! (318661)

  97. Rcocean would not respect a factual correction, to a dishonest jerk, if that correction came from someone with the wrong politics?

    So all these Levin listeners are admitting they don’t really know if any of these attacks on liberals are accurate… but that’s OK because they were attacks on the left from the good guys?

    At what point did Rcocean determine that the conservatives were the good guys if he doesn’t actually think on the merits? You might as well listen to a WWF podcast.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  98. Dustin, you mean WWE? You wouldn’t want the World Wildlife Foundation to sue you would you?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  99. Google says that I meant WWE. I coulda sworn they spelled it differently.

    Anyone remember GLOW?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  100. And, being Scots-Irish myself – what’s wrong with kilts?

    The older men still wore them when I lived in Greece — but over wool britches. My grandfather went to war in one, in the Balkan mountains. I’ve been meaning to scan a picture of him with Greek Mannlicher-Schoenhauer.

    nk (db4a41)

  101. Nozzles of douche worldwide are demanding that Rocean cease and desist.

    JD (8ded14)

  102. …wool britches…
    Well, it does get a little cool up there in the hills.

    AD - RtR/OS! (318661)

  103. Patterico, I have enjoyed your blog for quite awhile now, but I have to ask; why the need to air your dirty laundry here? Seems if you have a problem with Mark Levin, you should take it up with him, personally.

    Think I’ll come back when you decide to act like an adult and not like some kid who is trying to be the biggest, baddest ass in the school yard.

    retire05 (95b130)

  104. itchy too

    SteveG (cc5dc9)

  105. retire05:

    You don’t like factual errors being corrected in public? Or you don’t like factual errors corrected when the errors are made by famous conservative people? Or what, exactly?

    I find it very amusing that you think I am the one acting like a child. Perhaps this is not the blog for you after all, if you’re having that hard a time distinguishing between the children and the adults.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  106. “Judging by the comments, most of Pattrico’s supporters seem to be liberals…”

    That makes my brain hurt.

    Dave Surls (654c08)

  107. “Boy, I would have loved to kick [Patterico’s] ass in court.” — Mark Levin

    “Boy, I would have loved to carry 49 states against Reagan.” — Fritz Mondale

    “Boy, I would have loved to nail Elle Macpherson.” — Martin Short

    gwjd (032bef)

  108. And, being Scots-Irish myself – what’s wrong with kilts?
    Comment by AD – RtR/OS
    My grandfather went to war in one– nk

    So nk, is the real issue that you don’t like bagpipes?

    MD in Philly (5a98ff)

  109. On the contrary, MD, nk has been checking under some kilts, looking for both bag & pipes.

    It’s okay, though. He tells us that he’s a lawyer, but he’s really a doctor.

    Well, he’s actually a gynecologist, but it’s his lunch hour.

    Icy Texan (f486e9)

  110. Patterico,

    Keep up the good work. It seems that Dan Riehl has replied yet again.

    Coincidentally, it looks like his original posting that you commented on has been thorough edited leaving almost no trace as to what it originally said.

    Word of advice : Start grabbing screencaps of any of Riehl’s postings so you’ll have definitive proof when he changes them later.

    Sad really as I used to like reading the guy

    Demosthenes9 (f2aebd)

  111. Forgive me if I ignore Dan Riehl.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  112. Dan Riehl is being honest. He’s correcting his previous posts to correct the mistakes he made, as requested.

    pk (f66720)

  113. pk,

    Your evidence of this ??

    Demosthenes9 (f2aebd)

  114. So nk, is the real issue that you don’t like bagpipes?

    Comment by MD in Philly — 9/16/2010 @ 9:13 pm

    No, it’s plaid. The schoolgirls from St. Viator’s were always beating me up when I was little.

    nk (db4a41)

  115. I would like to know the last time Mark Levin was in court. Do a Westlaw search for him and you get a lot of “With him on the briefs was Mark R. Levin.” I don’t this guy has seen the inside of too many courtrooms, so I think Patterico would beat him pretty easily.

    Splenda (fe86bd)

  116. As everyone knows, Levin has participated at Free Republic for years as ‘holdonnow’, where he often bullies, namecalls, and threatens.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:holdonnow/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change

    In Levin’s world, everyone with a different opinion is an ass looking for an ass beating from him, if only they will meet him in the alley, blabla.

    His negative influence on Limbaugh is so obvious-Rush also has turned into an ass in recent years, teetering on the edge of rational thinking.

    Let us not forget it was Levin, along with Sean Hannity, who called Brian Whitman’s WABC radio show and disrupted his interview with Alec Baldwin. Partially embarrassing was that neither of them were able to ‘best’ Baldwin, yet each believed he had. They congratulated each other on their senses of humor.

    That is the worst mistake anyone can make, in assuming they are “funny” when it is really just embarrassing.

    Levin and Hannity both suffer from it.

    VickySTL (34d02e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2186 secs.