'How the hell can we live with ourselves?!’ Levin explodes at Trumptitlement 'BS'

[ABX]

Wednesday night on his radio program, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin called B.S. on Donald Trump’s new maternity leave entitlement program....


 - See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/how-the-hell-can-we-live-with-ourselves-levin-explodes-at-trumptitlement-bs#sthash.jDwBa2Gf.dpuf

[Cripplecreek]

Trump: I can enact the democrat agenda faster than Clinton can.

[Frank Cannon]

The question used to be that Hitlary is a Marxist POS, but there might be a possibility that Donny might not be terrible. We now know with full certainty that Hitlary and Donny are equally as bad. There is not an issue of importance that they do not have parity on.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Mark should calm down .... and listen to Trump's speech at the Economic Club this Thursday.

And while he's waiting, he might try and get his hands on a calendar from the 21st century.

[INVAR]

And while he's waiting, he might try and get his hands on a calendar from the 21st century.

Because the Constitution is just soooo 'out of date' and 'irrelevant' in this day and age right?

You Trump supporters truly are no different than Hillary's supporters.

Making constant excuses and justifications for big government Socialism.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Because the Constitution is just soooo 'out of date' and 'irrelevant' in this day and age right?

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

Making constant excuses and justifications for big government Socialism.

How is lowering someone's federal taxes and expanding individual choice Socialism?

[skeeter]

Mark should calm down .... and listen to Trump's speech at the Economic Club this Thursday.

And while he's waiting, he might try and get his hands on a calendar from the 21st century.

Does this mean we can take 'reduce onerous government mandates on private businesses' off the list of needed reforms as well?

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

Wow

<ignore>

[roamer_1]

Re: 'How the hell can we live with ourselves?!’ Levin explodes at Trumptitlement 'BS'

Quite simple, Levin... I ain't the one voting for him. I sleep fine at night.

[Cripplecreek]

Quite simple, Levin... I ain't the one voting for him. I sleep fine at night.

Nodding in agreement.

[sinkspur]

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

How is lowering someone's federal taxes and expanding individual choice Socialism?

Giving more taxpayer money to those who pay no taxes via the EITC IS expanding socialism.

[INVAR]

Quite simple, Levin... I ain't the one voting for him. I sleep fine at night.

Ditto.

If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures, to quote Hamilton.

[Smokin Joe]

I see Levin is not loving his ride on the Trump Train.   

Probably on the back of that bus. He didn't prostrate himself right away.

[GrouchoTex]

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

How is lowering someone's federal taxes and expanding individual choice Socialism?

It is quite simple.
since there is nothing in the constitution providing for child care, this is a 10th  amendment issue,
EITC credits will be given to those who do not pay taxes now,or very little,  thereby making it a socialistic type program, free money for having kids and taking time off.
It is a liberal position. No way around that.

A few more things that I have not seen mentioned:

There will be a new bureaucratic department set up of government employees to administer and over see all of this, all at taxpayer expense.

Has anyone heard how they plan to "prove" people who take this benefit are actually eligible?
Sure, there will be guidelines, but how will they be enforced, and who will enforce them?
It is as ripe for corruption as any other federal program is.

[Oceander]

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

How is lowering someone's federal taxes and expanding individual choice Socialism?

Trump's plan doesn't lower federal taxes, it merely redistributes wealth from one person to another person, solely for the purpose of purchasing the second person's vote, and it makes everyone worse off because the government inevitably wastes some of the money it takes from Peter on the way to paying Paul.  Government always wastes money as compared to the private market; the question in every instance has to be whether the problem to be addressed is worth that extra cost.  For example, maintaining an army for self-defense, and for asserting the nation's interests abroad, is, I think everyone can agree, worth the wealth wasted because government is maintaining the army, as was illustrated back in the 80s by the $600 hammers a contractor was charging the government for.

Trump's plan is just another standard-issue liberal nostrum for purchasing votes at the expense of the general welfare.  It is standard issue socialism.  Standard issue socialism is not worth the extra cost caused by government waste and inefficiency, not in the way that maintaining an army is worth the waste and inefficiency.

You recognized this back in 2012 when it was Obama vs. Romney, but now that your god Trump has exposed his true liberal core, you've tossed everything overboard in order to slurp up the liberal pablum he's spoon-feeding you.

There truly seems to be an inverse correlation between the rabidness of one's support for Trump and one's willingness to use the brains God gave one.

[Smokin Joe]

Mr. Levin, if we have to live with y'all, by golly, you're going to live with yourselves.

[Jazzhead]

He's pandering to win an election.   Just as he's pandered to cultural conservatives on abortion and religious liberty,  even though he donated to Planned Parenthood and probably went 20 years without seeing the inside of a church.

He's the living embodiment of PT Barnum, counting on that sucker born every minute.  Levin's just the latest sucker.

I'll say this - his child care proposals do seem to ring truer than the garbage he's been spewing for months to sucker conservatives.   His daughter is apparently behind these initiatives and she doesn't hide the fact she's a NYC liberal.

 

[Luis Gonzalez]

Where in the Constitution does it prohibit assisting working families through changes in federal tax laws?

How is lowering someone's federal taxes and expanding individual choice Socialism?

The lack of understanding of what the Constitution is in your statement is astounding.

The Constitution is both a GRANT of specific powers and a strict set of limitations FROM the States TO the Federal government. The listing of things that the Constitution does not prohibit the Federal government from doing is limitless. The list of things that the Federal government is empowered to do IS the Constitution.

All powers not delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution and not prohibited by it to the States "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people" (see the Amendment X, I.S. Constitution).

So my question to you is, where in the Constitution is the Federal government granted the power to do what Trump proposes to do with child care at the Federal level?

[Jazzhead]

So my question to you is, where in the Constitution is the Federal government granted the power to do what Trump proposes to do with child care at the Federal level?

The only conceivable grant of authority is the commerce clause, which the courts have stretched to become the all-purpose Federal power grab.   The federal ERISA law, for example, regulates private pensions in all fifty states, and is justified on commerce clause grounds because it allows companies to operate across state lines and offer uniform benefits without regard to myriad and conflicting state laws.   

[Sanguine]

The lack of understanding of what the Constitution is in your statement is astounding.

The Constitution is both a GRANT of specific powers and a strict set of limitations FROM the States TO the Federal government. The listing of things that the Constitution does not prohibit the Federal government from doing is limitless. The list of things that the Federal government is empowered to do IS the Constitution.

All powers not delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution and not prohibited by it to the States "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people" (see the Amendment X, I.S. Constitution).

So my question to you is, where in the Constitution is the Federal government granted the power to do what Trump proposes to do with child care at the Federal level?

That's what leapt out at me too.  How can one be so unaware of what is in the Constitution and call oneself a conservative?  Hopefully @Right_in_Virginia  will answer your question.  I would really like to understand how that works.

[TomSea]

Levin worked for President Reagan, he always makes us know that very well.

We love Reagan but from his amnesty and on down the line, we can nitpick at all politicians.

[Sanguine]

Levin worked for President Reagan, he always makes us know that very well.

We love Reagan but from his amnesty and on down the line, we can nitpick at all politicians.

Was there a relevant point in there?

[sinkspur]

[Cripplecreek]

Was there a relevant point in there?

Every time I hear about "Reagan's Amnesty" I write off the dishonesty.

Reagan's amnesty was a very small number. Congress turned it into an endless flood of millions.

[TomSea]

Trump's proposal also seems close to the initiative in some countries to encourage their women to have babies. I want to read what some prominent pro-lifers think of this.