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.
Quote of the Day: Fighting Back
“Christine Blasey may have been sexually assaulted, he said, but not by him, adding that he intended no ill will to her or her family. ‘The other night Ashley and my daughter Liza said their prayers, and little Liza—all of ten years old—said to Ashley, ‘We should pray for the woman.’ That’s a lot of wisdom from a ten-year-old. We mean no ill will,’ he said, choking up. The hearing room was full of people crying. Kavanaugh’s parents were there to support him and could barely maintain their composure. Watching their anguish over their only son’s ordeal was brutal for the other members of Kavanaugh’s team.” — Justice Brett Kavanaugh, from Justice on Trial, by Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino
The last thing that most of us would wish for is to re-experience that moment when we watched the devastation that the Democrats tried to inflict on the life of Brett Kavanaugh. When he choked up, I felt tears in my eyes. My heart ached for him, for his family and friends and even for the country. How had we come to this moment?
I’m posting this quotation because I think many of us could be reaching a saturation point: how can the ugliness, lies, and irresponsibility of the Left and the Democrats possibly get worse? It’s so tempting to just shut it all out, to inure ourselves to the nightmares that are called “politics” in the 21st century. But we simply can’t.
The next year will be a spiritual and ethical test for those of us who believe in this country and its values. We can either cave in, walk away or throw up our hands—who could blame us?
Instead, we have to stay united against hatred, evil and lies. We have to speak to truth and justice. If we hang together, we will remain strong. Do it for Brett Kavanaugh and his family. Do it for your family. Do it for the country. Do it for the next Supreme Court justice nominee.
Don’t give up.
Published in Politics
Very insightful, @skipsul. I honestly don’t know how I could remain ethical and get anything done in D.C. It must be nearly impossible, if not completely impossible. And I see no way to change it. Are we to vote for people who are “less likely” to be corrupted, rather than try for someone who is honorable? I suspect so.
The Lewis quote is frightening, because it rings true. I do think that it is easy for many to be drawn in, with all kinds of excuses, perceptions and goals. I’m glad I don’t have to make the choices that others do, or when I do, I pray I make the right ones. Thank you.
Well, I believe freedom of religion — or, better, freedom of conscience, which is best formed within a religious context (Judaism and Christianity) — is extremely important in our politics. But, you’re right, I’m not thinking about how our politics might save souls (or not). It’s more the case that, given the choice between a boorish NY jackass and the devil? I’ll take the jackass every time.
Trump is not the devil. He’s a flawed man with the impressive talent of making the Left expose itself for the devil it is. I’m grateful for that, and am pleasantly surprised by his courage in breaking the PC stranglehold and accomplishing policy victories despite the vast array of entrenched forces aligned against him.
I think we should be worried about who comes after Trump, whether it’s in 2020 or 2024. Where will we find such a fighter after he leaves office? A lot of Republicans seem to be waiting to return to “normal” after Trump is gone, instead of learning the combat techniques of his time in office. The Democrats (Left) have a say in what’s “normal,” and I’m pretty sure we’re never going back. There won’t be a uniter coming from either direction.
Judicial nominations were once pretty civil. Home state senators had a lot of influence over selection. The opposition party generally approved the President’s choices unless there was some substantive reason not to. For example, Dixiecrats bolted on LBJ’s selection of Abe Fortas to replaced Earl Warren as chief justice on the theory he was too liberal but there was wider concern that he was corrupt (some troubling transactions) and too much a crony of the President (true).
Moreover, there was once some quaint notion of deference and dignity with respect to the Third Branch (that all went into the crapper with ted Kennedy’s assault on Bork and the slimeweasel swarming of Clarence Thomas.)
The developments that continue to make the process worse:
— I wouldn’t give Cronkite so much credit.
Other than that, agree entirely.
Only “Cronkite-like” in terms of persona and perception. I agree that the reality was quite different.
This can’t be said enough. Almost everyday in my job in a middle of Ireland town involves a poorly informed yet very opinionated rant from some colleague or other about how scary Trump is. If TDS has trickled down so far as to light such a fire under the lazy arses of Irish civil servants then it must be unbearable altogether in the US.
Mark me down as someone who also doesn’t think of Trump as the devil.
Who doesn’t spend much time thinking of Trump the individual at all, but is more curious about what the fault lines surrounding Trump (fault lines which a single person, no matter how powerful, rarely causes, even if all of us as individuals have some power to make the fault lines better or worse).
Of course, you might say one of my problems is, I tend to think of no human as the devil. Which is why, when people appear to me to be standing on either side of a fault line, calling each other the devil, I get curious.
If we listen to a progressive Christian like Mr Boot Edge Edge give his “I thank God we are not like those other Christians — haters, hypocrites, deplorables” spiel, we immediately see what’s wrong with it. But what about when a guy like Sorhab Ahmari appears to thank God for not being like those other Christians?
I can’t know what’s in Ahmari’s heart, but anyone is free to assess what his recent rhetoric sounds like, and it does seem to be saying, not only that Christianity requires an illiberal society, but that those other Christians, who still believe a liberal order is possible, aren’t just fellow Christians who happen to have gotten it wrong, but are perniciously leading Christendom astray — they’re not just enemies, but in league with The Enemy.
Calling the other side “devils” in politics is often humorous exaggeration, but increasingly the name-calling seems dead serious. I don’t mean to pick on Ahmari personally here, he just made himself a convenient trope for this when he chose David French (for some reason) as his convenient trope. (I know not everyone here might believe French’s claim that French doesn’t thank God he is not like those other Trump-supporting Christians, but I do.)
Perhaps the problem is we’re getting used to calling those not sufficiently with us not just against us, but actually in league with The Enemy. Or perhaps the problem is we’re not calling each other in league with The Enemy, we’re just getting used to rhetoric extravagant enough that reasonable people can be forgiven for thinking that’s what we’re doing. Either way, “You and yours are of the Devil” is a pretty good means of alienating people one might have otherwise found common ground with.
At the root of leftism is coercion and self pity. When I speak of the devil leftism, that’s what I’m talking about, not any one person. People are a mix, but the ideas behind leftism are destructive to human flourishing.
Or Cthulhu.
@susanquinn
You made the Ace of Spades HQ overnight thread: http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=382865
Thanks, @lowtech-redneck for letting me know! Very cool!