Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
Tough choice for Democrats. Amazing that the NYT is even acknowledging the problem. Should they:
- Continue to pursue the civilization-destroying green agenda favored by the wealthy and social media-intensive left while pretending to care about the horrific costs and adverse impacts on average and low-income Americans?
- Return to realistic fossil fuel production and consumption while pretending to care about the sensibilities of privileged green leftists?
- Or just Spanberger the issue, try to mollify both sides before doing what is immediately politically and financially advantageous, such as continuing subsidies for alternative energy providers and climate change activist groups while slowly backing away from mandates and timetables while trying to make the issue invisible to critics.
Most Democrats would prefer option 3, but the ascendant hard left will insist on 1. (You would think that Republicans would press hard with a very detailed, highly publicized energy agenda as a mid-term campaign and 2028 issue.)
It remains to be seen how much longer the sheer volume of near-monolithic media and academic messaging can help the political party on the wrong side of so many 80-20 issues remain competitive even as those institutions themselves face continued decline.
Sometimes I imagine an America where the entire media is diverse, even with diverse views within every newsroom, where universities studied Marxism as a uniquely unhappy historical phenomenon and not as an ideal, where voters could safely place integrity and competence above nominal ideological positions because there would be dialogue and a lot of practical bi-partisan solutions that reduced the significance of party or ideology, where violent criminals were rarely given a chance to be repeat offenders, where substantive education was actually valued and promoted at all levels, where we all share and respect our American heritage and only disagree about the best ways to make use of that gift and where we welcome lawful new arrivals and firmly and mostly politely repel the rest…
Then I look at almost any headline, and I’m back. Our politics is tiresome.
Discussion (8)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
"Sometimes I imagine an America where the entire media is diverse, even with diverse views within every newsroom, where universities studied Marxism as a uniquely unhappy historical phenomenon and not as an ideal, where voters could safely place integrity and competence above nominal ideological positions because there would be dialog and a lot of practical bi-partisan solutions that reduced the significance of party or ideology, where violent criminals were rarely given a chance to be repeat offenders, where substantive education was actually valued and promoted at all levels, where we all share and respect our American heritage and only disagree about the best ways to make use of that gift and where we welcome lawful new arrivals and firmly and mostly politely repel the rest…"
Imagine yourself in 1955.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Climate Change does two things for Democrats: 1) a grift opportunity for friends and family; 2) a universal excuse for failure. When L.A. or Hawaii burns down, it is not the fault of bad fire preparation, it is climate change. Persistent homeless junkies in the streets? Climate Change. The cost of housing or student loans? Climate Change! Potholes? Climate Change!! The Dems cannot drop the issue, because they use it deflect blame for their Lefts failures.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
We have student loans while other nations offer free higher education to their young people because in the USA, without the onerous student loans, many of those who sign up for the military would not do so.
It's a main motivating factor: serve your tour of duty and then and only then will the US government pay for your education.
As far as the Dems and their support for Net Zero Carbon, it has been fun over the years to watch as the Green Brigade of Experts arrive at Congressional hearings. When then they encounter some smart ass like Sen John Kennedy who asks pointedly if they can answer a simple question, they can't do it.
The question is this one: how much carbon dioxide is currently in the earth's atmosphere?
Even if some Congressional critic offers the answer in multiple choice form, they flunk out. They will choose 2.5% or 5%, 15% or even 50%!
When the actual answer is much much less than one percent.
####
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Jeez. "Climate Change as Class War: Building Socialism on a Warming Planet." Not trying to hide it, are they.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
America has been fighting an ideological war for more than 250 years.
Our goal should be “We win, they lose”, to quote Ronald Reagan.
An ideology is nothing more or less than a set of universal and timeless ideas. For the last century the enemy’s idea—a Godless ruling State peopled by a self-appointed elite with
and (as follows necessarily from that)
—has been winning this war because their intellectual leadership has a uniform, well understood goal, a strategy that supports the goal, and a tactical doctrine that supports the strategy. They are pursuing the goal with ruthlessness, persistence, and fanatical dedication.
Those who are willing to permit political leaders to take power without any ideological restrictions have been duped into taking up arms for America’s enemies.
You're seeing five of eight comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.