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.
Republicans Are Stupid
Last year, Democrat Senator Mazie Hirono said, “…we Democrats have a really hard time is connecting to people’s hearts.… But we have a really hard time doing that and one of the reasons it was told to me at one of our retreats was that we Democrats know so much, that is true. And we have kind of have to tell everyone how smart we are and so we have a tendency to be very left-brain.… That is not how people make decisions.”
So while Republicans don’t believe in science, the Democrats are the party of pure logic and reason, and they struggle to understand how the common people use emotions to make irrational decisions. Democrats consider themselves to be the party of intellect.
When Democrats hired an elderly Robert Mueller to investigate the President, it became obvious that Mr. Mueller was confused about the entire proceeding, and he didn’t understand what was in the report that bore his name. Then, they use an autistic teenager to explain climate science to us, and a Florida schoolchild with a learning disability to explain the social impact of gun control legislation. Democrat Congressman Hank Johnson expressed concern that Guam might capsize if development made it too top-heavy. And then was re-elected by intellectual Democrats. You might ask the Democrat presidential nominee why they keep using people with limited mental faculties to promote their agenda, but he doesn’t seem to know where he is. He’ll just get confused by your question, and call you a dog-faced pony soldier.
And if he wins the election in November, he’ll be in charge of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world.
You would think this dichotomy of their claimed brilliance, compared with their apparent cluelessness, would bother some Democrat voters. And it may. But I don’t think so.
With Democrats, if your heart is in the right place, then the details really don’t matter that much. I think. But honestly, I really don’t know. I don’t get it. You would think that a party of highly intelligent scientific geniuses would prefer to be represented by someone with a more dazzling intellect. Or, at least, with an intellect. But I don’t think it matters to them. At least, it appears not to matter to them.
Perhaps CNN’s intellectual Don Lemon could do a segment on this, and host a discussion with a guest from each party. Say, Lori Lightfoot and Ted Cruz. I don’t watch much CNN, but I’d watch that, even if I weren’t in an airport.
And it’s not just Democrat leaders. It’s the movement itself.
Conservatives can read Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley Jr., or any number of other brilliant thinkers to learn about conservative thought. Meanwhile, the left has, um, Ta-Nehisi Coates? John Cusack? The only real thinker the left has is Karl Marx, and none of them have read him anyway. Which is ok, because he doesn’t make any sense and he died 140 years ago.
But Democrats are the intellectuals, and Republicans are stupid.
Right.
Published in General
But, but…Oprah!
Citation?
But it is too dangerous to risk. Just clear out the whole lot. I hear China is very fond of them, sounds like a market opportunity to me.
You are correct. I grew up in DC and it is deep, deep Blue and always has been. The Red press like the South Korean owned Washington Times was a weak counter to the Post. Everyone on both sides of the aisle was deeply concerned with what the Post and New York Times had to say. On the other hand, for most of that period the parties were less ideologically coherent than they are today. McGovern lost the election but won the party in 1972 and the ideological sorting process and purity-driven purges began.
Blue tries to tamp down feminist dissent on transsexual issues while banishing pro-lifers into the outer darkness. Obama lost the House over that with his betrayal of Bart Stupak and his 20-some odd pro-life Democrat caucus on Obamacare abortion coverage. They were replaced to a man by Republicans in the next Congress.
There is a species of Red thinkers that still define electability as gaining the endorsement of the New York Times and Washington Post. The results of that include a Republican presidential nominee whose scalp is proudly on display in Candy Crowley’s office. And, of course, the kind of broad disgust that leads to a populist anti-politician in the White House. DC is a very strange fishbowl.
There is more corporatism than freedom loving in the Republican caucus. Big donors rule both sides and receive scented oil rubdowns for their shekels. The little guy gets lip service and free bumper stickers. Which is why Trump’s message of funding his own darn campaign and America first not donors first resonated, especially against the Queen of Paytoplay in 2016. I was ready to kick Trump to the gutter when he slandered Ted Cruz’s father and reviled Gold Star families, but when it’s Frankenstein’s monster vs. bride of Dracula, the bride’s truly monstrous organization and proven track record of perverting the process and the polity makes her the scarier option by far.
Very true!
The paradigm of us Jews and Christians is that it is God who created us, and not we ourselves, and that therefore our only purpose is to do his will, and that therefore to act in defiance of his will must be evil and to act in accordance with it, and only that, must be is good.
Likewise, those who believe that it is we who created ourselves and not God (for example, that we evolved from a meaningless, purposeless, randomly appearing world), must believe that our only purpose is to do our will, and that therefore to pursue our will and only that is good, and that it is evil to act in obedience to “God’s will”, which they declare to be in violation of our true purpose as they have declared it, by their own randomly self-assigned authority: to pursue the lusts of our bodies wherever those lead us.
At the risk of lowering the discourse a bit: Would the Incredible Hulk be a better stand-in for Trump?
He would need a lot of bronzer.
Apparently there’s already an orange hulk.
No one vilifies Father Damien of Molokai without a genuine dedication to evil. It is only a short step away from vilifying Jesus. Apparently, her Catholic upbringing didn’t get as far as “judge not lest ye be judged.” Or “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?”
Yes, but so are we. Motes and logs. We are inured to Trump’s horrific Tweets and ludicrous narcissism because the alternative was the Hag Queen Paytoplay and her Quid Pro Quo Band. And now he is running against Xi and His Amnesiac Friend. While a Republican Senate is looking to approve a huge multiple of the record for annual federal spending to support an unnecessary but useless lockdown.
There is a lot of evil to go around, let’s not pretend there isn’t. Just because the opposition is prone to spurious charges doesn’t mean there aren’t serious charges to be considered.
Perhaps no better articulation of what I think about recent politics has ever appeared here!
Thanks, Sisyphus.
Mark
A cross-over between Marvel and MGM might play big, but I don’t have the budget required to even begin negotiations on a thing like that.
I’m thinking Benjamin Grimm.
He finished off-Broadway.
It’s fair to say that Trump violates “democratic norms” and niceties.
That seems like a fancy way of saying he has bad manners, that he’s a bit of a jerk, and that he (sometimes) flirts with unConstitutional ideas.
I don’t like that stuff. But why on earth am I supposed to categorize that as ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE?
And why should I categorize Democratic corruption, flirtation with anarchism and Marxism, disdain for the free exercise of religion, disregard for the rule of the written Constitution as supreme law, and so on as TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE?
I am at a loss as to how your response is connected to my comment, but both sides are unacceptable and the voter is left to choose the magnitude and variety of unacceptable to accept by selecting the lesser of two weevils. Trump is less inclined to render the US a vassal state to the CCP, and that endears the preposterous oaf to me.
From your response, I suspect you are responding to some Jonah somewhere. Godspeed.
On Ricochet, we traditional Republicans long ago were pressed into silence and acceptance of this answer: why bother? Conservatives are just as disgusted as ever by Trump’s daily ludicrous, contemptible behavior, but we learned the drill three years ago: comment on it, and get the same inane rote reply from the Trumpists: “Well, whattabout when Hillary did blah-blah….?
If we wanted an inane rote reply, we could simply ask Max to implement a “Whatabout Inane Reply” button. He would ask, “why would anyone want that?…The Computer doesn’t do that, therefore it is not a valid requirement! And anyway, I don’t want it, so it’s not a valid requirement in any case” and we would be right back where we started.
Yeah. After the thousandth iteration it loses its freshness.
It was just another version of the same sort of analysis you’d just made.
Not really. Goldberg won’t vote for Biden. I’m responding to the people who think we should totally vote for Democrats because Trump violates norms and niceties.
See, I don’t believe any of that. I have a cosmology in which God came before us in some sense, ok, and I suppose “created us” is the fundamentalist view on that arrangement. I don’t know his will and neither does any other single thought within his mind, like you or my bike. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
She appears to be a contrived thinker; that is, one who has been taught and learned to parrot back dogma. When she is asked a question that takes more than a pat superficial understanding of the subject matter, you can see her trying to recall what she’s been taught, and synthesize new information on the spot and create a slap-dash answer. I don’t think she has actually ever thought personally and deeply about what she says, or what she’s been taught. After all, she is an economics graduate who doesn’t understand economics, then a bar tender, and then the winner of a political beauty contest, which led to her being groomed for a congressional campaign. She really knows nothing.
Saint,
I wasn’t going to say I Like this, but then you did, so I thought it was ok. Let this be the only time I disagree with you this year. (I think you disagreed with me today or yesterday on something. So maybe you owed me.)
Sinner
Yeah, I know. I thought I should say it anyway, because I do.
Meaning that we we disagree on whether Sisyphus’ disagreement with Jonah Goldberg is likable?
So . . . you’re friendlier to Goldberg than Sisyphus, right?
Ok, I dig. I still like Goldberg. I just think he’s making the wrong call on Trump.
Yeah, that’s me.
It’s after 10. I have to massage somebody’s feet, and anyway my brain is off the clock. It seems I have some reading and thinking to do tomorrow. Although His Highness my Governor has repealed his order preventing me from worshiping (i.e., from living, but not completely), My pastor has decided to keep the order in effect, in order to make me repent for what he has decided, with no evidence, is my systemic racism. In hopes that the violent, atheist, Marxist revolutionary groups Antifa and BLM will regard his acts of appeasement kindly.
So maybe I will have some free time. (But I’d rather be in Church, singing praises and testimony, and praying.)
Maybe spend the newly found time checking out other churches?
If your pastor is pro-BLM, then I think that either your church needs a different pastor, or you need a different church. It is a tough situation.
Agreed. But as a member of the premier legislative body of the greatest nation in history, she must be held to appropriate standards and rebuked when she falls short or rebels against those standards. The whole Xi in drag thing is beneath contempt. The recent farce where where Pelosi granted her an hour of floor time to rebuke another member of the New York delegation for saying things that the only witness says he never said is a classic example of abuse of power. Slander and punishment is the proposed new political order, with the pathetic Lyin’ Biden at the helm.
How can America refuse?
I’m still trying to work through just what happened here, but I’m sure I’ll have it sorted soon.