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.
Hillary Clinton and the Perils of Inevitability
To those who say that it is inevitable that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Party nominee, I have a two word rebuttal: Paul Martin. My American readers will respond “Who?” My Canadian readers will immediately know what I am talking about.
To understand my allusion one must look back 10 to 15 years in Canadian history. In the late 90’s, Paul Martin was Canada’s finance minister. He became a national hero for balancing the budget and was the most popular Liberal politician in Canada. His boss, the wily Jean Chretien hated, him. In the early 2000’s, when it was clear that Chretien’s time was coming to an end, the Canadian news media played-up Paul Martin the way the US media played up Barack Obama in 2008.
As the press told it, Paul Martin was the colossus that bestrode the Canadian body politic. He is fiscally conservative and socially liberal, just the way we like our politicians. In a word, Paul Martin was inevitable.
Yesterday, Texas Senator Ted Cruz announced his candidacy for US President at Liberty University in Virginia. He characterized his candidacy as being one of restoring American ideals and values. He characterized his candidacy as a call to arms to conservatives — young and old alike — to defend the notion of freedom in the United States. And before the crowd (supposedly forced to be there according to some) filed out of the auditorium, the denouncing of his candidacy could be heard far and wide among the very people who claim to seek the very same thing that Cruz does: a return to a proud, strong, and free America.
Sean Davis 
What can be said about the 
I would like to pose two questions to my follow Ricochet members: What should be the conservative answer be to unwed single mothers? How should the GOP/Conservatives support existing single mothers (to include widows, separated, divorced, unwed)?
Yesterday was the Ides of March, which leads us in one of two directions: 1) Watching the so-so 2011 
I recently had a discussion with an older cousin of mine in his 50s. He was telling me he would like to see the welfare state gone, deregulation, smaller government, and all the other standard stuff Conservatives want for the future. Then he was telling me how my generation is footing the bill and tough luck for you guys. Live with it while I benefit because you guys didn’t vote the other way in very large numbers. I have heard this same line of argument or reasoning multiple times before. And I explained to him that this position towards millennials as on the hook for paying for the Boomers’ and Gen-Xers’ tab is immoral.
If the Founding Fathers failed in any regard, they failed to make governance sufficiently horrible, thankless, difficult, rancorous, disagreeable, and ineffective. No doubt once they found themselves in it, they discovered just how awful it really was, but they failed to keep it that way.
Hillary Clinton bowed to 
Hillary acknowledging that it would have been better to use two e-mail accounts is about as close to an apology from the Clintons you’ll ever get. But the matter of “convenience” is just nonsense, as everyone knows. Even a tech dinosaur like myself has two e-mail accounts, which I now access on my spiffy new iPhone 6 Plus. (By the way, instead of that old Blackberry, Hillary should have had an iPhone.)
I’m curious how dangerous the tech-savvy Ricochetti believe that clintonemail.com was. Perhaps a better way to put it: What is the scale and scope of that danger?
Yes, the great C. S. Lewis died in 1963. And that makes it all the more amazing that he provides a crystal clear portrayal of Hillary in The Magician’s Nephew. You may recall the scene where Hillary… excuse me, Jadis of Charn — the evil sorceress who eventually kills Aslan — explains to Digory why she must possess complete power, and why she must be above the law.