Interesting Perspective!! Levin: Tell ABC's Ross To 'Find Out Who Obama's Drug Pusher Was'

Please put this inquiry into perspective, as it relates to the attempted and failed lynching of Newt by his ex-wife.

Last night, Mark Levin asked his producer to call Brian Ross at ABC News to find out who used to be President Obama’s “ex-drug pusher.”

Remember that Obama has admitted to marijuana and coc aine use in his past. Some suggest his coc aine use was also prevalent during his years in Chicagoland.

Levin’s request was prompted by a caller who said that the best ways to choose someone for the job of the presidency is to look into that person’s history. The caller was defending the ABC News interview with Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife and her revelations concerning their love life.

Levin asked the caller if he would also “want to know about Obama’s drug dealer.” The caller answered, “No” – to which Levin replied:

“I want to know all about Gingrich’s love life, his wife, the cheating, this and that-you want to know about Obama’s drug dealer? No. Now he doesn’t want to know who Barack Obama’s drug dealer was…and we know Obama used drugs, he said so in his book.”

cnsnews.com...

Makes sense to me. While were at it... let's examine Obama's college records as well. His campaign remains mum on that subject. Still. I guess it all goes to show the intent of the MSM as they continue to pick and choose which leads to follow and which stories to post.

I am all for a proper vetting of all candidates in matters relevant to the office. This "new scoop" is nothing new at all about Newt and yet we still have so many unanswered questions about Obama as he pushes for yet another term. Tis our circus like political structure that has been co-opted by the MSM which is dominated by the left.

Cheers!!

reply to post by jibeho


Maybe not in your book, but definitely in mine, repeatedly cheating on your wife (wives), and leaving one while she was being treated for cancer, is much worse than using pot and coke for recreational purposes. And I believe the former is much more likely to predict unfavorable behavior of a president than the latter, i.e. I would rather have a president who is willing to try on a new perspective than one who is a scumbag adulterer (repeatedly).

Now, all that said, I am NOT saying that Obama is a good president. I voted for him, but likely will not again, I will write in Ron Paul if I have to...and I am a psycho tree hugging liberal! But I have seen the light...cheers

Mark Levin is such a tool!

He called Ron Paul a Marxist the other day, how can anyone take him seriously?

reply to post by UdonNiedtuno


Thanks for you response. I certainly do not advocate Newt's past adultery and I definitely do not support Obama's self described drug adventures either. However, Newt's message and political stance has been the only true constant in his life for the past 30 years whereas Obama and others shift, waffle and wave in the breeze of the political poll of the day.

Newt has come to terms with his past and has faced it head on and sought redemption. Obama is still dealing with the demons that he detailed in his books "Dreams" and "Audacity" Obama is plagued by an identity crisis that chased him in High School and all throughout College and onto the WH. Obama answers to no one and only apologizes to foreign nations.

reply to post by Rockdisjoint


Funny how the Paul supporters call Mark Levin "Marxist" Levin. Silly kids. I would safely compare Paul to the hard left/Marxist stance with regards to his stance on defense.

Paul and many libertarians think that they can somehow achieve their goal by working side by side with the left while the Marxist and Leninists in the bunch see the Libertarians as a means to an ends in their undying effort to destroy the Defense structure of the United States.

Hence the growing support of Paul coming from this distinct group.

If you dig deeper into Paul you can look for his contributions to the Sustainable Defense Task Force. For example, the Taskforce’s proposals included cutting nuclear deterrence, reducing our fleet by 57 vessels, canceling the Joint Strike Fighter, retiring four Marine battalions, reducing the military by 200,000 personnel, cutting defense research spending by 50 billion over ten years, and increasing health care fees for military personnel.

www.keywiki.org...
newwars.wordpress.com...

Many people associated with that task force have direct ties to the radical element and essentially dominated it and Paul was right there in the middle of it all.

Its a Who's Who of the left (especially, Hellman, Hartung, Hulburt, Martin, Olson etc)

The Sust ainable Defense Task Force
Carl Conetta, Project on Defense Alternatives
Benjamin H Friedman, Cato Institute
William D Hartung, New America Foundation
Christopher Hellman, National Priorities Project
Heather Hurlburt, National Security Network
Charles Knight, Project on Defense Alternatives
Lawrence J Korb, Center for American Progress
Paul Kawika Martin, Peace Action
Laicie Olson, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Miriam Pemberton, Institute for Policy Studies
Laura Peterson, Taxpayers for Common Sense
Prasannan Parthasarathi, Boston College
Christopher Preble, Cato Institute
Winslow Wheeler, Center for Defense Information

www.comw.org...

Paul would be better of better use as Treasury Secretary not POTUS. I can appreciate Paul for what he is and I realize that he would not be a good Pres.