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.
Yes, we discuss that phrase, but no, we don’t say the word. Instead, we do a deep dive on immigration with two of the sharpest minds on the issue: the Center for Immigration Studies’s Mark Krikorian and our good pal Mickey Kaus. Dig in.
Music from this week’s podcast: Dreamer by Super Tramp
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
If reports are accurate, our President was certainly intemperate in the way he referred to certain countries.
There is, however, a 100+ year old tradition in this country of referring to immigrants as miserable garbage*. Yet I have seen no calls to tear down the offending monument – or even to remove the offending words.
* “The wretched refuse of your teeming shore”
The New Colossus, line 12.
I may have misunderstood you, Charlie, I’ll concede that. But I think your analysis is just wrong.
First of all, Reagan didn’t give them anywhere the ammunition Trump gives them. Unless you mean his policies? Other than that, I honestly don’t recall any ammunition he gave them. If you’d care to enlighten me, that’s fine.
If you do mean by ammunition, policy, well, that’s a whole new post. I personally think much of the media have forgotten their job. They are reporters. I think Jim Acosta, for example, should be fired. Arguing policy at a new conference. It’s disgraceful. And, instead of at least lecturing him about it, CNN promotes him!!!?? So I have no brief for CNN, or most of the others.
The White House is doing us all a disservice by engaging in this. Throw Acosta out. Sure, there’d be a stink. Explain to the American People why, and let us be the judge.
What I mean by ammunition is tweeting that they are enemy; by retweeting a silly thing about pummeling CNN; by going head to head with Meeka and Joe. And on. Ignore them. You are president, I would tell Trump. Have a little dignity.
Charlie, you may disagree me all you want. There is another Charlie who does: Charlie Hurt, often on Fox. He seems to think there is nothing wrong with Trump being our Entertainer-in-Chief. I think you both are wrong. If I want a ringmaster, I’ll go to the circus. I want a grown-up as my President!
Moderator Note:
Thank you, Bryan.I am not a “devoted fan” of Trump, but I do want him to do well. Second, despite explaining what happened, you made the decision I was acting against you somehow, and ran with it, regardless of my talking about how I screwed up a post. How saying I messed something up means I am claiming “It is never your fault, is it?” can only be explained that by you starting a priori that I am operating in bad faith.
However, I am prepared to offer grace to you, regardless, and assume that it is more the toxic environment than anything else, and see how we do on other things in the future.
Not necessarily. There are too many factors. I’ve known some people who were pretty bright, but insecure in it, who would say things about it. I also know that a lot of the stuff Trump says is a form of affirmation, a prophecy spoken to become self-fulfilling. In the New Thought Movement, we use affirmations and denials to change ourselves and tune ourselves into higher spiritual conditions and reality. Scott Adams also picked up on this from Trump, although I believe he attributed it to the influence of Norman Vincent Peale, whose church Trump attended. (And after a quick read, Trump seems to accord much more closely to Peale’s version than to the New Thought version.)
This also takes us to the Tall Poppy Syndrome. The reason that most people who are smart do not go around discussing how smart they are is that it is general human nature to strike out at they who stick up above the crowd. We are told, “Don’t brag.” (But, Mama, it ain’t braggin’ if I can do it!) Some people learn that lesson quickly in life; others take a bit longer. But some actively resist the tall poppy syndrome. They don’t care much what others think, sometimes because they are playing a different game. I think that is certainly Trump’s case. Going back to the previous paragraph, when Trump is saying things like this, he isn’t bragging, he is trying to change the reality around him, the reality perceived by other people.
This is not a matter of the proverbial four-dimensional chess, either. I think part of why he rubs people the wrong way on so many things is because he is operating under a different set of rules for reality, again, going back to his upbringing in NVP’s church. He isn’t playing some difficult game that requires brilliance, just a game most people don’t even know exists.
So, is Donald Trump truly bright or even a genius, a stable genius, and the most geniusy genius you’re ever going to see on television? Well, he probably is bright. He’s probably bright as most Presidents are bright. Not many, if any, have been geniuses, but I doubt that many were merely average, either. Most are probably in the 120-135 range. Nothing to sneeze at, but also nothing to brag about as bragging. Using affirmations about it, on the other hand, is another matter.
I am connected to the infinite intelligence of God.
We are all connected to the infinite intelligence of God.
Which is what I said.
To give just one example that had people on our side criticizing Reagan because it gave the press ammunition, “The bombing starts in five minutes.” Or, do you remember the whole “Trees cause pollution” brouhaha? You may say, that was just a joke for the former, or he was right for the latter. But that is not the point we are talking about. There were people on the right at the time who were embarrassed by these incidents and thought Reagan was handing the press ammunition against him (and all Republicans, since the brouhahas were extended to reflect on all Republicans).
For any Republican, they are either going to get the evil or senile/dummy treatment from the press. Ike and Reagan and both Bushes got the dummy treatment. Bush 43 and Nixon got the evil treatment, although it was mare Cheney in the former case. Trump gets both. He’s an evil, racist idiot.
Any Democrat gets the genius or dreamy treatment. Bill Clinton was such a genius and he’s dreamy! Barack Obama was such a genius and what a dreamy pant crease he has! LBJ was such a…well, LBJ got things done and signed the Civil Rights Act, etc. JFK was…just so dreamy.
I would submit that going along with the press on any of these assessments shows a certain lack of perspicacity.
Well, I certainly do not go along with them. Since you don’t mind bragging, if you can do it, let me say that I think I am perspicacious as the next guy!
I would submit that it is not their job to make these, or any assessments. Analysis is fine, but not when you don’t label it as such. And when you incorporate it into a regular news story. I find that doing analysis, by the way, is very hard for most people. They confuse with opinion, which it is not. I made further comments in my last answer to you, which more than suggested the contempt I have for many so called journalists. I like it when people do what they are getting paid to do, and I find that reporters are not doing that. I like what I heard David Brinkley said once: That reporting is just telling people what happened. If reporters would do that, it certainly would make me happier.
I remember those incidents you wrote about. Reagan was just having fun, at a time when he thought the microphone was off. Listen, I said I wanted a serious, grown-up person as President. But he or she needn’t be a stick-in-the-mud, or a sober judge, sucking on a lemon, to appear to be fair.
Reagan’s attempts at humor, to be a caring, assessable human being, are as far from Trump’s antics as I am from that clown at the circus – or a nuclear physicist.
?
The issue here is that the modern journalist does not see himself as a reporter. He is on a mission to reshape the world. Good luck getting such folks to do their job as you see it. They have a new gospel to preach.
We need to ensure that everyone has a great deal of skepticism regarding these evangelists.
Thanks. Nice disagreeing with you. :-) (Emojis are not my strong suit)
If I may…..?
Missions should only be made by people like Mitt Romney, who belong to churches that see it as their duty to go out into the world and truly help people! (Nothing to do with politics here. His is the best example I could think of at the moment, of people who do that sort of thing.)
I’ll be happy to let you borrow my old college textbooks on nuclear physics. It’s never too late.
I agree with you, George, but those journalists do not agree. Don’t tell me and the people on Ricochet, who all or most agree with that. Go tell the journalists who are doing it.
You never fail to bring a smile. Thanks. If I become interested, I’ll contact you.
I’d be happy to. I seem to have mislaid Jim Acosta’s number. (Don’t bother to give it to me. Guys like those never listen. They have their own perspicacity.)
I will go back on what I said just once, in the hopes that some Ricochet will understand what you are not prepared to.
The above reminds me of an erstwhile friend of mine. Who is erstwhile because, during his entire so-called friendship, he behaved like a jerk, constantly lecturing me on what I must or must not do. When I finally had enough, and ended it, he never knew he did anything wrong. He wrote a Facebook post to me, saying that his door was always open, and that I could be forgiven!
You never used the words Screwed Up. I asked for an apology because you implied that I write what I write because I am unhappy, never considering the fact that, because I love my country, I write what I do. This is perhaps the worst feature of the Trump defenders: They always – and I mean always – presume to tell me why I think what I think. This is why I compare them to the left: The Left always presumed to know how rotten the people who disagree with them. This, frankly, enrages me. This, the apology request.
I wrote that because of the way of answered me in a previous comment. You implied that it was my fault, that somehow I did understand, that it was too complex for me, you being my superior.
I joined Ricochet to engage with well meaning people, in the hopes that we might have enjoyable exchanges. I don’t need to converse with someone for any other reason. And I won’t.
It is also true that on the Statue of Liberty the words are engraved to the effect of “Give me your poor, your wretched masses yearning to be free” But no where on that statue is there any allusion to an idea that the most newly arrived deserve the other more established people to work long hours to pay considerable taxes to a system that offers the immigrants housing vouchers, or food stamps, immediate medical care, etc. (In Calif, we tried to stop all this through voting for Prop 187, only Supreme Court Justice Rose, a Brown appointee, said that would be denying the immigrants their civil rights.)
I see pro-immigrant spokes people and supporters using those words all the time. But apparently they do not at all understand that when the established citizens are expected to assimilate to the demands of the newer culture, rather than the other way around, there will always be hell to pay.
@arahant
Please read up on the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership.) If by change the world, you mean that Trump would like to ensure that our nation is to remain a sovereign nation, free from the NAFTA style agreements that have put so many of our jobs off shore, then I and many others will remain a Trump supporter.
I am aware and very happy with this situation, but the “mission” referred to above was that of the modern “journalist,” AKA Democrat Party operative.
OK.
A good discussion. The only fundamental disagreement is with the comment that the Democrats actually mean well. They don’t and that should be obvious.
Actually, I’ve read that something like 25% of immigrants back then did end up returning to the home country.
So I’m guessing we should put you down as a no vote?
Someone’s not going to be getting a White House Christmas card next year…
Yes Peter Robinson also let me know that 50% of Italian immigrants ended up returning. The difference is now, I think nearly all immigrants return home. (at least all that I know – have returned home) Either for an extended vacation or to take care of some family business for a few years. Intercontinental travel is far easier now, than it was even just a generation ago.