June 30, 2013
Sarah Palin has responded to a tweet calling for a new political party, ostensibly dubbed the Freedom Party. The tweet suggests Palin team up with radio talk show host Mark Levin.
— Josh Painter (I-TX) (@Josh_Painter) June 29, 2013
“I love the name of that party — the ‘Freedom Party,’” Palin said. “And if the GOP continues to back away from the planks in our platform, from the principles that built this party of Lincoln and Reagan, then yeah, more and more of us are going to start saying, ‘You know, what’s wrong with being independent,’ kind of with that libertarian streak that much of us have. In other words, we want government to back off and not infringe upon our rights. I think there will be a lot of us who start saying ‘GOP, if you abandon us, we have nowhere else to go except to become more independent and not enlisted in a one or the other private majority parties that rule in our nation, either a Democrat or a Republican.’ Remember these are private parties, and you know, no one forces us to be enlisted in either party.”
Palin’s Freedom Party would undoubtedly advocate neocon foreign policy. It might be mildly libertarian on some social issues and continue the Republican mantra supposedly aimed at eliminating large government, but overall it would be a reflection of the tea party-esque Republican faction of the establishment.
The high priest of the neocon faction, William Kristol, supported Sarah Palin, although he was nervous about her endorsement of Rand Paul.
In addition, Palin gave money to one of the top neocon warmongers in the Senate, Lindsey Graham. Back in 2010 she warned that Iran will get a nuke and this will “lead to Armageddon” and a Third World War.
Palin more or less admitted she would green light an Israeli attack on Iran.
“We are friends with Israel,” she told Charles Gibson in 2008, “and I don’t think that we should second-guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.” Palin said twice more she would not “second-guess” Israel if it attacked Iran.
Radio talk show host Mark Levin has consistently trashed Ron Paul, who is a real libertarian, not a re-modified Tea Party libertarian with selective memory on issues constitutional.
“I would have to write somebody in because Ron Paul’s foreign policy is so antithetical to traditional conservative foreign policy — whether it’s [Sen. Barry] Goldwater, whether it’s [President Ronald] Reagan,” Levin told The Daily Caller last January.
“I have other problems with him. I don’t think his interpretation of the Constitution is always accurate,” Levin added.
Levin believes a president can bypass Congress and the will of the American people and go to war wherever he pleases.
“We’ve been involved in many military engagements; we’ve had very few declarations of war,” Levin said on his radio show. “And I’m including military engagements that were involved in by people you consider Founders of this nation. It’s because they’ve never, ever, required as a requisite – to defending this country, or even certain military actions – of getting Congress’ approval.”
“I have shown that there is zero — ZERO — evidence that the Constitution allows” for non-defensive wars, Thomas Woods wrote after he challenged Levin to provide evidence to the contrary. “Levin’s position is that the president may launch offensive operations without consulting Congress. I deny that this was any part of the original constitutional intent.”
Any political configuration formulated by Mark Levin and featuring Mama grizzly Palin will trounce the Constitution and embrace the neocon forever war precept predicated on the illusory threat of distant Muslims in caves.
On that count, it will not be significantly different than the Republicans or, for that matter, the Obama administration.
This article was posted: Sunday, June 30, 2013 at 10:23 am