Replies

Has the tables been turned on Mr.Levin?

Why isn’t he grading papers ?

Baseless investigation.

The guy puts up a site, speaking his mind on POLITICAL issues, using only his OWN money and somehow this warrants an "investigation"?

Has the tables been turned on Mr.Levin?

Yes.

Rush is on this now.

I sure hope so! The threats of violence he made would make me very nervous if he were teaching my child. He seems to think that the only opinion allowed is the one he and his other self identified “enlightened” people posess. He and his ilk are determined to make the tea partiers into what the media has tried to portray us as to destry the movement.

F-ing school teachers!! Using our money and kids against US and freedom! I really and fed up with these idiots!

Libs are upset at Levin because:

1. He gave the Tea Parties an excuse if anything negative turns up on video.

2. He makes the anti-tea-party group look petty and vindictive.

The anti-tp groups need a bus, pre printed signs, and paid protesters to stage a black ops.

The 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus/street revolutionary rabble and their ideological issue (Obama's parents and arguably now the Establishment) are in a typical panic this time due to the Tea Party Patriots.

That explains their glaringly obvious stupid and paltry subterfuge of anonymous three-stooges-like provocateurs. The state controlled media (SCM, pron'd: SCAM) know who the stooges are and by SCAM's actions so will we.

Then there are "netroots" wannabe Marxist-Alinsky campus/street revolutionary rabble, take Jason Levin.. please!

Wannabe Marxist-Alinsky campus/street revolutionary rabble (my description) are explained in an interesting book, though the author is sympathetic to the ultra left netroots, the book explains the ilk of Mr. Levin. (my comment)

"The Argument – Billionaires, Bloggers, and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics" by Matt Bai. To wit, "One of the hallmarks of netroots culture was a complete disconnect from history – meaning, basically, anything that had happened before 1998. The political consciousness of most of the bloggers seemed to begin sometime around impeachment, when they had first tuned in. Whatever had gone on before then, the fight between Clinton and the liberal establishment, the very real debates inside the party over trade and taxes and defense – all of these things felt as ancient to the bloggers as the underlying causes of the Peloponnesian War, and about as useful. It wasn't just that the bloggers didn't know much about the political world before impeachment, it was that they didn't want to know, either. So burning was their contempt for "Washington insiders" and the "mainstream media" that they were moved to dismiss not just the individuals who fell into these categories, but all the knowledge such people had accumulated. In a sense, the way the netroots saw it, the more you knew about Democratic politics before 1998, the less relevant you actually were."

The libs reaction is basically to attack our right to peacefully assemble and enforce the Obama directive for conservatives to just shut up.