There are 62 comments.

1. Coolidge
   Gossamer Cat

   This article brought tears to my eyes. At last, a clearly articulated response to the mob:

   What we stand for:

   • • A plurality of opinion in the public square. We affirm that the right to voice a minority opinion is equal in every respect to the right to voice a majority opinion. We therefore reject the public policing of opinion in all its forms.

   • • A full airing of available facts and data on all topics. We welcome any impartial findings that may serve to advance discussion. No objective facts are beyond the bounds of deliberation and debate.

   • • A rejection of cancel culture and all it entails. We renounce enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.

   • • Clear bright lines between speech and violence. We affirm that speech, spoken or written, and no matter how egregious, is not equivalent in any way to violence. Similarly, physical violence is not a mode of speech.

   • • An absolute rejection of political violence. We affirm that lawless violence, even in the service of a just cause, is wrong—no exceptions or excuses.
2. Member
   Hoyacon

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, considering Trump is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

3. Reagan
   Gary Robbins

   Thank you for posting this and beating me to the punch. This needs to go to the Main Feed. Here is the podcast: http://ricochet.com/podcast/commentary-podcast/a-statement-of-purpose/ John Podhoretz reads it from 1:22 to 4:35 in a most stirring manner which made me want to shout “Amen!” If you listen to one Commentary Podcast, this is it. 

4. Reagan
   Gary Robbins

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

   Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

5. Member
   Hoyacon

   Gary Robbins (View Comment):

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

   Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

   Please don’t tell me what to do. It’s an obvious question that you choose not to ask.

6. Member
   Hoyacon

   Gary Robbins (View Comment):

   Thank you for posting this and beating me to the punch. This needs to go to the Main Feed. Here is the podcast: http://ricochet.com/podcast/commentary-podcast/a-statement-of-purpose/ John Podhoretz reads it from 1:22 to 4:35 in a most stirring manner which made me want to shout “Amen!” If you listen to one Commentary Podcast, this is it.

   BTW, the fact that you would endorse this and support Joe Biden strikes me as most bizarre.

7. Contributor
   Henry Racette

   Post author

   Gary Robbins (View Comment):

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

   Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

   Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

   This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

8. Member
   Hoyacon

   Henry Racette (View Comment):

   Gary Robbins (View Comment):

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

   Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

   Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

   This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

   Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mightily exacerbate the problem.

   Please.

9. Contributor
   Henry Racette

   Post author

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   Henry Racette (View Comment):

   Gary Robbins (View Comment):

   Hoyacon (View Comment):

   It’s well said.

   So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

   From the Associate Editor:

   Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

   Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

   Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

   This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

   Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the problem.

   Please.

   Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

10. Reagan
    Gary Robbins

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Thank you for posting this and beating me to the punch. This needs to go to the Main Feed. Here is the podcast: http://ricochet.com/podcast/commentary-podcast/a-statement-of-purpose/ John Podhoretz reads it from 1:22 to 4:35 in a most stirring manner which made me want to shout “Amen!” If you listen to one Commentary Podcast, this is it.

    BTW, the fact that you would endorse this and support Joe Biden strikes me as most bizarre.

    I appreciate that you do not understand that. Let’s celebrate that and I have something in common that exceeds Trump and Biden.

11. Reagan
    Gary Robbins

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    It’s well said.

    So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

    From the Associate Editor:

    Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    We must unite arm in arm. I am going to edit out an inflammatory which does not promote this goal.

12. Coolidge
    Arvo

    Those people are awesome, whether or not I agree. They prepare me for the worst and give me hope for the best.

13. Coolidge
    DonG (Biden is compromised)

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    This article brought tears to my eyes. At last, a clearly articulated response to the mob:

    What we stand for:

    • • A plurality of opinion in the public square. We affirm that the right to voice a minority opinion is equal in every respect to the right to voice a majority opinion. We therefore reject the public policing of opinion in all its forms.

    • • A full airing of available facts and data on all topics. We welcome any impartial findings that may serve to advance discussion. No objective facts are beyond the bounds of deliberation and debate.

    • • A rejection of cancel culture and all it entails. We renounce enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.

    • • Clear bright lines between speech and violence. We affirm that speech, spoken or written, and no matter how egregious, is not equivalent in any way to violence. Similarly, physical violence is not a mode of speech.

    • • An absolute rejection of political violence. We affirm that lawless violence, even in the service of a just cause, is wrong—no exceptions or excuses.

    I like that they spoke up, but a “rejection of cancel culture” is not exactly “give me liberty or give me death”.

14. Coolidge
    Shauna Hunt

    I love Commentary! I read that today and rejoiced.

15. Member
    Richard Fulmer

    Arvo (View Comment):

    Those people are awesome, whether or not I agree. They prepare me for the worst and give me hope for the best.

    Cute

16. Coolidge
    Joshua Bissey

    The quote in the OP would make for a good t-shirt – a bit long for a hat or a bumper sticker.

    Well said.

17. Coolidge
    Joshua Bissey

     “We stand against the mob and all its aims.

    Rightly said. Reforming law enforcement is not among its aims. Justice for George Floyd has nothing to do with its aims. There may be individuals in the mob that oppose racism, but that is not what the mob is about.

18. Member
    Hoyacon

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    It’s well said.

    So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

    From the Associate Editor:

    Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the probl

    Please.

    Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

    I apologize for being argumentative and decided to step back for awhile out of respect for the post author.

    My only further explanation would be to note that John Podhoretz is the Editor of Commentary, a magazine that I’ve read for a good long time. I personally did not find it possible to reconcile that editorial–however well done– with the practical consequences of Podhoretz’ views on the candidate who might best ameliorate at least some of his concerns.

19. Contributor
    Henry Racette

    Post author

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    It’s well said.

    So can we count on the Editor to exit stage right from the N/T camp, which is pretty much the only antidote to this stuff on the horizon?

    From the Associate Editor:

    Trump Has Left the Conservative Movement Defenseless

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the probl

    Please.

    Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

    I apologize for being argumentative and decided to step back for awhile out of respect for the post author.

    That’s extraordinarily gracious of you. Thanks.

    My only further explanation would be to note that John Podhoretz is the Editor of Commentary, a magazine that I’ve read for a good long time. I personally did not find it possible to reconcile that editorial–however well done– with the practical consequences of Podhoretz’ views on the candidate who might best ameliorate at least some of his concerns.

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

20. Coolidge
    Gossamer Cat

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    This article brought tears to my eyes. At last, a clearly articulated response to the mob:

    What we stand for:

    • • A plurality of opinion in the public square. We affirm that the right to voice a minority opinion is equal in every respect to the right to voice a majority opinion. We therefore reject the public policing of opinion in all its forms.

    • • A full airing of available facts and data on all topics. We welcome any impartial findings that may serve to advance discussion. No objective facts are beyond the bounds of deliberation and debate.

    • • A rejection of cancel culture and all it entails. We renounce enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.

    • • Clear bright lines between speech and violence. We affirm that speech, spoken or written, and no matter how egregious, is not equivalent in any way to violence. Similarly, physical violence is not a mode of speech.

    • • An absolute rejection of political violence. We affirm that lawless violence, even in the service of a just cause, is wrong—no exceptions or excuses.

    I like that they spoke up, but a “rejection of cancel culture” is not exactly “give me liberty or give me death”.

    No, but it is the start of a response, an articulation of a classical liberal creed that could rally many fair minded people on both sides of the aisle.

     

21. Contributor
    Henry Racette

    Post author

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    This article brought tears to my eyes. At last, a clearly articulated response to the mob:

    What we stand for:

    • • A plurality of opinion in the public square. We affirm that the right to voice a minority opinion is equal in every respect to the right to voice a majority opinion. We therefore reject the public policing of opinion in all its forms.

    • • A full airing of available facts and data on all topics. We welcome any impartial findings that may serve to advance discussion. No objective facts are beyond the bounds of deliberation and debate.

    • • A rejection of cancel culture and all it entails. We renounce enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.

    • • Clear bright lines between speech and violence. We affirm that speech, spoken or written, and no matter how egregious, is not equivalent in any way to violence. Similarly, physical violence is not a mode of speech.

    • • An absolute rejection of political violence. We affirm that lawless violence, even in the service of a just cause, is wrong—no exceptions or excuses.

    I like that they spoke up, but a “rejection of cancel culture” is not exactly “give me liberty or give me death”.

    No, but it is the start of a response, an articulation of a classical liberal creed that could rally many fair minded people on both sides of the aisle.

     

    It’s also specific. The crisis of the moment has a theme to it — several themes, actually — and Commentary responded to them. I think that kind of specificity is critical, and I’m glad they had the guts to do it. I hope others will do the same.

22. Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    . . .

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    I like JPod in particular, and I frequently (though not religiously) listen to the Commentary podcast.

    I think that you’re right about listening closely to JPod. I find that if I listen to the Commentary podcast with the treble turned way up, in the shower where the acoustics are good, and while I’m standing on my head, his views about the President strike a kind of balance. :)

23. Member
    Hoyacon

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    . . .

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    I like JPod in particular, and I frequently (though not religiously) listen to the Commentary podcast.

    I think that you’re right about listening closely to JPod. I find that if I listen to the Commentary podcast with the treble turned way up, in the shower where the acoustics are good, and while I’m standing on my head, his views about the President strike a kind of balance. :)

    So I assume you don’t wear that MAGA hat in the shower. Sleeping in it is fine.

24. Member
    kedavis

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the probl

    Please.

    Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

    I apologize for being argumentative and decided to step back for awhile out of respect for the post author.

    That’s extraordinarily gracious of you. Thanks.

    My only further explanation would be to note that John Podhoretz is the Editor of Commentary, a magazine that I’ve read for a good long time. I personally did not find it possible to reconcile that editorial–however well done– with the practical consequences of Podhoretz’ views on the candidate who might best ameliorate at least some of his concerns.

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    This time even more than 2016, it’s important to win the popular vote too. For that, EVERY vote DOES count.

25. Contributor
    Henry Racette

    Post author

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the probl

    Please.

    Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

    I apologize for being argumentative and decided to step back for awhile out of respect for the post author.

    That’s extraordinarily gracious of you. Thanks.

    My only further explanation would be to note that John Podhoretz is the Editor of Commentary, a magazine that I’ve read for a good long time. I personally did not find it possible to reconcile that editorial–however well done– with the practical consequences of Podhoretz’ views on the candidate who might best ameliorate at least some of his concerns.

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    This time even more than 2016, it’s important to win the popular vote too. For that, EVERY vote DOES count.

    I think that would be lovely. However, I will be content to win the electoral college.

26. Coolidge
    Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Please don’t go there about Trump. This is a rejection of Cancel Culture. Please let’s unite on that binds us together.

    Thank you, Gary. That was exactly my thought.

    This is bigger than any particular candidate. The failure we’re witnessing — of businesses, media, educators, and individuals everywhere — is systemic, and something that we have to oppose within the spheres of our own influence.

    Right. It’s “bigger than any particular candidate” in an election year where a particular result will mighty exacerbate the probl

    Please.

    Okay. Make it about Trump if you like. I’m not telling you what to do.

    I apologize for being argumentative and decided to step back for awhile out of respect for the post author.

    That’s extraordinarily gracious of you. Thanks.

    My only further explanation would be to note that John Podhoretz is the Editor of Commentary, a magazine that I’ve read for a good long time. I personally did not find it possible to reconcile that editorial–however well done– with the practical consequences of Podhoretz’ views on the candidate who might best ameliorate at least some of his concerns.

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    This time even more than 2016, it’s important to win the popular vote too. For that, EVERY vote DOES count.

    I think that would be lovely. However, I will be content to win the electoral college.

    Oh, you naive newbie.

27. Contributor
    Henry Racette

    Post author

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    . . .

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    I like JPod in particular, and I frequently (though not religiously) listen to the Commentary podcast.

    I think that you’re right about listening closely to JPod. I find that if I listen to the Commentary podcast with the treble turned way up, in the shower where the acoustics are good, and while I’m standing on my head, his views about the President strike a kind of balance. :)

    JPod in the shower….

    *shudder*

28. Lincoln
    Jon1979

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

     

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    JPod often ends up — sometimes by default — as the Trump defender on the GLoP podcast (Rob tends to moderate himself more in terms of his feelings about the president with Peter and James than he does when he’s on with Jonah). On his own podcast, John is positioned somewhere between Noah and Abe, with Christine and Noah in recent months taking turns as the most Trump-skeptical of the group (JPod’s Trump support/opposition tends to rise and fall more based on if there’s any other inanity of the day on the Democrats’ side to focus on, and at the same time to remind everyone that Nov. 3 is a binary choice).

     

29. Reagan
    Gary Robbins

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I listen to pretty much every Commentary podcast. I like the guys (and gal), but they drive me a little crazy with their habit of blithely extrapolating from the moment far into the future, and usually in the most morose (to coin a phrase) way. Noah’s reflexive arrogance — it’s a matter of tone for him, and I blame it at least in part on youth — irritates me; it’s always a pleasant surprise when I find myself actually agreeing with him about something.

    But I think, if you listen closely, you’ll find that John manages to strike a kind of balance about the President. John’s morose about everything, of course; he’s a caricature of a hand-wringing New York jew in that regard. I suspect he revels in it. Abe is even better, often gently defending the President against criticism, trying to maintain some perspective. Christine clearly doesn’t like Trump, and can be a little caustic, and Noah is in the same camp, only more so. But none of the four sounds like a typical right-wing “never-Trumper” to me. I don’t know how they vote, of course, but I’d be surprised if learned that most or all of them wouldn’t vote for Trump — if they lived in places where their votes actually mattered, which they don’t.

    JPod often ends up — sometimes by default — as the Trump defender on the GLoP podcast (Rob tends to moderate himself more in terms of his feelings about the president with Peter and James than he does when he’s on with Jonah). On his own podcast, John is positioned somewhere between Noah and Abe, with Christine and Noah in recent months taking turns as the most Trump-skeptical of the group (JPod’s Trump support/opposition tends to rise and fall more based on if there’s any other inanity of the day on the Democrats’ side to focus on, and at the same time to remind everyone that Nov. 3 is a binary choice).

    Hi Henry and Jon1979,

    I really appreciate your ability to pick out nuances. Trump is not Mother Teresa, nor is he Adolph Hitler. Trump is a complex human being with strengths and weaknesses. No one should be in 100% total support of Trump, and no one should be in 100% opposition to Trump. If the race were, say, a member of “the Squad” against Trump, I would have to hold my nose and vote for Trump. Being a “Trump Skeptic” is not monolithic, there are shades of difference. Thank you so much.

    Gary

30. Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

     

    What we stand for:

    • • A plurality of opinion in the public square. We affirm that the right to voice a minority opinion is equal in every respect to the right to voice a majority opinion. We therefore reject the public policing of opinion in all its forms.

    • • A full airing of available facts and data on all topics. We welcome any impartial findings that may serve to advance discussion. No objective facts are beyond the bounds of deliberation and debate.

    • • A rejection of cancel culture and all it entails. We renounce enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.

    • • Clear bright lines between speech and violence. We affirm that speech, spoken or written, and no matter how egregious, is not equivalent in any way to violence. Similarly, physical violence is not a mode of speech.

    • • An absolute rejection of political violence. We affirm that lawless violence, even in the service of a just cause, is wrong—no exceptions or excuses.

    I like this statement, but the devil’s in the details. Even the rejection of political violence, taken literally, would invalidate the American Revolution.

    I want to focus on the ideas of supporting a plurality of opinion in the public square, and the rejection of “public policing of opinion,” and the “rejection of cancel culture and all it entails” including a renunciation of “enemies lists, online/media mobs, and professional scalp hunts.”

    How far does a criticism have to go before it runs afoul of these principles? Is “calling someone out” for public censure part of “cancel culture”? Is criticizing someone for liking something said by someone that you find reprehensible equivalent to an “enemies list” or an “online/media mob”? Where are the lines on this?

    As an example, what about Bethany Mandel’s post today (here)? The point seems to be how dare you favorably quote Louis Farrakhan. He’s an anti-Semite. It is apparently wrong to make a favorable comment about anything that he said, even if the statement had nothing to do with Jews or Judaism.

    The idea behind Bethany’s post does seem to be the public shaming of anyone who thought that Farrakhan had a good point about something. (Personally, I doubt that I’d be in agreement with Farrakhan about much of anything, but perhaps he’s pro-family.)

    How are the targets of Bethany’s ire supposed to know that Farrakhan is a persona non grata? Consult the ADL’s list of anti-Semites? Yes, there is an entry on the Nation of Islam (here) identifying Farrakhan as “America’s Leading Anti-Semite.”

    Which is probably correct, by the way. I personally find Farrakhan to be quite reprehensible. How do we deal with him, or others like him?

    This is a serious question. I want to understand how we can actually implement these lofty-sounding principles.