Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Boot, the President, and 9/11
A thought experiment:
What if the President (not Donald Trump, just anybody) appeared in public with a boot on his head.
Just one day, there’s a press conference in the White House Rose Garden, and for some reason, the President shows up wearing a boot on his head. It would cause talk, to be sure. (Side note, the only person who would probably think that’s perfectly normal is @jamesofengland.)
But America is a pretty chill place, so people let it slide. And then he starts wearing that boot on his head in cabinet meetings. Then every day. (I imagine he might remove it when he boards Marine One, but then again, maybe not.) And soon the boot-on-the-head is a normal thing for him. There’s even word that he sits by himself, in the residence, with the boot on his head.
That’s still a problem, right?
Generally speaking, a normal, stable, sane adult does not wear a boot on their head in public, except on special occasions. If you had a friend, or a coworker, or saw a guy on the street with a boot on his head, you would have serious questions about that person’s mental stability.
That’s kind of worse when it’s the President, right? In theory, the President makes important decisions. He has the authority to launch nuclear strikes. If a guy’s wearing a boot on his head, maybe that’s not the best job for him to have.
But it’s okay because he has staff and people around him who keep his craziness under control. Sure, he can’t really make good decisions, and he yells and screams and stuff behind closed doors, and his public statements are rambling and erratic, and … yeah, the boot, but the staff has things under control.
There are whispers among staff inside the White House about invoking the 25th Amendment, and possibly removing him from office, because it’s probably not a great idea to have a President who wears a boot on his head. But not wanting to provoke a constitutional crisis, they instead for a “two-track” presidency. The staff, through their diligent efforts, are able to mitigate the fact that the President wears a boot on his head. They steal papers off his desk. They hide things from him. They ignore his decisions. Because if they don’t do these things, the guy with the boot on his head will probably make a mess.
But then one of those staffers writes an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times explaining all the stuff they’re doing to mitigate the fact that the President wears a boot on his head and so now everybody knows about it. We all already knew about the boot. There have been press stories, and expose books, and secret recordings, and all those times where the President has gone out in public with the boot on his head.
The President denies it all, of course, and rages at the unknown staffer, but things continue.
I need to pause here and point something out: It’s a problem if the President wears a boot on his head, right?
Now, some people here may shrug it off and say “Well, there’s 4% GDP growth, the boot thing must be working.”
Yeah, but the President wears a boot on his head. You know something isn’t right there.
“Yes, but unemployment is low.”
Yeah, but the President wears a boot on his head.
“I care about his policies, not the boot on his head.”
Yeah, but the President wears a boot on his head.
“Yes, but he was lawfully elected.”
Yeah, but the President wears a boot on his head.
“Can you point to a plausible immediate danger from allowing this man with the boot on his head to continue serving as President?”
And I have to throw up my hands, because, no, I can’t. The staff is mitigating a lot of the damage the guy with the boot on his head might do. But here’s the thing, having a President with a boot on his head might work just fine.
You know, unless there’s a crisis.
When there’s another 9/11, the guy with the boot on his head ain’t the guy you want in charge. The President of the United States needs to be able to handle a major crisis if it happens. That’s his job. And he cannot discharge the duties of his office if he walks around with a boot on his head.
It doesn’t matter that 20 percent of people pretend the boot doesn’t exist. It doesn’t matter if there’s 4% GDP growth. It doesn’t matter if black unemployment is at it’s lowest level since whenever. The boot is still a problem because it shows the guy isn’t stable. When and if the bean dip hits the fan, you want a guy who doesn’t use a boot for a freakin’ hat.
And that’s the thing, you might be able to limp along while things are smooth with the boot guy as President, but if there’s a major crisis, things are going to go south very quickly. If he wears a boot on his head, he clearly isn’t up to the job.
Now, 9/11’s are pretty rare. Maybe there won’t be a major crisis. Maybe there will just be hurricane responses for him to bungle. But that doesn’t mean the boot isn’t still a problem. So if there’s a means to remove a President who wears a boot on his head from office, we should take it, because a guy like that is really unfit to be President.
Published in General
A thought experiment. What if people had to gather likes before they were allowed to post to the main feed?
Preemptive coup d’etat. I like it.
Since the President does not wear a boot on his head, what is the specific thing to which your metaphor references?
It has been already done before, lets try a new
hatboot on this thought experiment.He is linked to in the OP.
Yes
Now you are trolling.
Are you saying he should get the boot?
President George W. Bush dealt with the poor remains of the Clinton administration, the terrorist attacks in September 2001, and multiple hurricanes in 2004, followed in 2005 by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. He had an unusual presidency in terms of modern-day crises. He worked very hard every single day.
Do I care what the New York Times thinks of Donald Trump after the way they beat up George W. Bush constantly? Not for a second. Bush was and is a good person.
Historians will rank GW as one of the best presidents we have ever had the privilege to have. But you would never know that from reading the New York Times.
Stop trying to make me defend Trump, Fred.
Heh.
No. I really do value the free exchange of ideas here on Ricochet. But this post shouldn’t be on the Main Feed. I try not to post things that I think will reflect badly on Ricochet, and I certainly try not to post them directly to the Main Feed. This self-indulgence, this insistence on posting weak but highly divisive pieces that are almost guaranteed to bring out the worst and least civil responses, is demoralizing.
I would like the editors to give more thought to the platform and its success, and to exercise more discretion.
It’s weird. But unless he’s also talking to the invisible bird on his shoulder, I’m just gonna shrug and say “It’s DC, what do you expect?”
“When everyone in the room says you’re drunk, sit down.”
Isn’t the guy with the boot on his head libertarian anyway?
Hold on, everyone. Good grief. I don’t share Fred’s views on Donald Trump. However, his views are held by people all over the news. It’s all over the Internet. Someone in Congress is trying to assemble a board of psychiatrists to examine Trump’s head.
If Ricochet is to remain relevant, we cannot become closed off to the rest of the world.
Fred is the rest of the world. He’s saying what a lot of people are thinking.
I think calling Trump insane is being done by people who never spent five minutes with a psychotic person. But, hey, they are getting a lot of attention.
Don’t ban people or keep them off the Main Feed or de-contributor them. Let’s stop thinking that way. None of us will grow intellectually if we are closed off from the world of disparate opinions.
Yeah, Fred, you are right about 9/11/2012.
We can find Fred’s views everywhere. R claims to be a center-right website.
What color is the boot?
I’ll grant that there’s something not right with Trump. I have a very, very low opinion of his character and of his ability to successfully lead the nation. However, I have strong faith in the institutions of this nation because they are so much greater than any one man. If, and it’s a really big if, he goes far enough or gets bad enough to threaten those institutions it will be obvious, and those institutions and the men and women of character in them will take the necessary and appropriate actions. Until then, you’re basically pissing into the wind. We survived Wilson. We survived FDR. We survived Nixon. We survived Cater. We survived Obama. Trump is not an existential threat to the nation because no individual can be. Our system is designed specifically to prevent that. We’ve gone a long way at eroding the foundations of the bulwarks, but they’ve not yet fallen. Trump can flail against them all he wants, but they will hold. We’ll survive him, and hopefully we’ll learn from the experience.
You did it. You made me defend Trump. I hope you’re happy now.
Some of the most insistent Trump detractors are on our side.
This is not new. We are, and have been for a long time, a divided party. So a center-right website should broadcast all of those views.
Not sure about that.
I pictured it as like a greenish grey. Something of like a darkish color. Something that blends appropriately with a suit.
Obviously it’s not like pink with polka dots or something. That would just be crazy.
Trump has helped strengthen our Constitutional institutions more than any POTUS since Reagan. You’re not wrong.
It’s meant to represent obvious unfitness.
I mean, there’s endless example of Donald Trump’s bizarre public statements that would qualify as a boot.
This leaps to mind:
But I’m sure if I watched the most recent rally there’s plenty of example.
Not to speak for Fred but we are not limited to merely surviving Trump. He serves a four year term. The right can and should revisit the issue next primary season. I would gladly consider nominating someone other than Trump.
People want a more ordinary Republican POTUS. They want him to spend less.
Supposedly Medicare Part D was a 9 trillion unfunded liability that got Bush reelected so he could finish off Iraq.
The media.
The cultural marxism.
The centralization.
The unfunded liabilities.
We can’t win a war.
Anyone have a plan?
No.
Right, if talking about the Constitutional remedy to an impaired president is off limits on a supposed center right website, what have we become? A trump propaganda machine?
Don Rickles is the greatest human being that ever lived.
Fred I have long since stop seriously reading your OP’s, it would be the equivalent of putting a boot on my head.