In this episode, Dave Carter sits down with Ricochet Member Mike LaRoche to discuss Mike’s journey from loyal Republican supporter to ex-Republican and ardent supporter of President Trump. Along the way, the good professor hands out grades to the Trump Administration on everything from Foreign Policy to the Veteran’s Administration, Border Security and more, all with the birds chirping in the background as Mike chats from outside his home in beautiful Texas hill country.

As Dave said, “I have a feeling lots of members and contributors will want to listen in.”

Subscribe to The Dave Carter Show in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

The post A Conversation with Mike LaRoche was written by Ricochet member Ricochet Audio Network and recommended by members to be considered by an editor for promotion to the Main Feed. Become a member to get your posts published on the home page as well.

There are 46 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Matt Bartle (View Comment):
    I thought it was like “La Roach” or La Roash.” It’s funny that half the comments here are about pronunciation!

    Also, I was listening in my car, and I kept thinking that it was making a new squeaking sound. So I’d turn off the podcast and the squeak would go away. I finally decided it was birds in the background!

    Frankly, between thinking “La Rush?? ” “What was that sound??” I don’t remember much of the content.

    My backyard is like a giant aviary during the summer. Lots of white-wing doves, mourning doves, sparrows, cardinals, blue jays, grackles, woodpeckers, and mockingbirds. The blue jays and mockingbirds love to fight. It all makes for some noisy days outside.

    • #31
  2. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    I read the other day that the wild parakeet population in Texas is growing. Maybe next time Dave has you on, everytime you say “Democrat” a parakeet will echo some curse it has heard a thousand times. A spitting noise would be sufficient.

    We use to have a bird in my neighborhood that would sing “Rumor Has It” by Adele.

    • #32
  3. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    I read the other day that the wild parakeet population in Texas is growing. Maybe next time Dave has you on, everytime you say “Democrat” a parakeet will echo some curse it has heard a thousand times. A spitting noise would be sufficient.

    We use to have a bird in my neighborhood that would sing “Rumor Has It” by Adele.

    Ha ha! I love it!

    “…and so the Democrats are…”

    “BWAAAKK! Democrats!” (Spitting noise)

    • #33
  4. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Dave, the real question I wanted you to ask Mike was,”How big is your cheerleader picture collection?”

    Followup question:

    “Will you send us the files?”

    • #34
  5. Jimmy Carter Member
    Jimmy Carter
    @JimmyCarter

    LaRoche,

    You were on vacation. On Padre Island. In a condo….. watching Fox News?!

    I can think of a million other things to be doing on vacation… on Padre Island… in a condo.

    • #35
  6. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Stad (View Comment):
    Dave, the real question I wanted you to ask Mike was,”How big is your cheerleader picture collection?”

    Followup question:

    “Will you send us the files?”

    Haha!

    • #36
  7. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Jimmy Carter (View Comment):
    LaRoche,

    You were on vacation. On Padre Island. In a condo….. watching Fox News?!

    I can think of a million other things to be doing on vacation… on Padre Island… in a condo.

    Hey, I can multitask! ?

    • #37
  8. Sal Reagan
    Sal
    @Sal

    Professor Mike, consider the ultimate implication of the theory of trade you propose. If I understand you correctly, companies do not have the freedom to decide where they can most cheaply produce products they hope to sell in the United States. They need to conduct the entire production process exclusively in America. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, it means that all manufactured goods must be completely made in America without any concession to particular expertise or resource needed for production.

    I lived in a country that attempted to do this, Argentina. Under the banner of “desarollismo” (something like “developmentalism”) it imposed stiff barriers on entry of imports into the country.  Local manufacturers and labor unions loved it; consumers hated it. The problem was that being spared international competition allowed local producers to sell shoddy or outdated goods at outrageously high prices.  Argentines flocked to neighboring Paraguay, Brazil or far-off Miami to buy all types of things.

    We underestimate how good the American consumer has it. There is no place in the world where the average consumer has more choice and purchasing power. We should not take it for granted. Also, let us not forget that a lot of US jobs depend on exports to other countries (Boeing). If our producers can only buy American goods, they will not be able to compete in export markets. High-paying export jobs will be lost. In markets there are no free lunches, only trade-offs.

    I think there are constructive things we can do to make the American worker more competitive in the world that do not entail dictating to companies where they may or may not produce. These include (1) continuing to drill for every type of fuel so that American energy costs go down (low energy costs keep jobs here and give the average Americans more buying power) (2) improve the choice of schooling available to Americans by breaking the public school/teachers union monopoly through educational tax credits, (3) deregulate, (4) deregulate, (5) deregulate, (6) lower US corporate taxes, which are among the highest in the world, no longer drive corporations out of the country, and, hardest of all but crucial, (7) try to rebuild the American family so that every kid has a mom and a dad. If somehow we implement these, the American worker will become unbelievably competitive and therefore grow wealthy again.

    • #38
  9. Dave Carter Podcaster
    Dave Carter
    @DaveCarter

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):
    Dave, the real question I wanted you to ask Mike was,”How big is your cheerleader picture collection?”

    Followup question:

    “Will you send us the files?”

    Haha!

    Far be it from me to complain that a conversation thread as been hijacked…

    • #39
  10. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Sal (View Comment):
    Professor Mike, consider the ultimate implication of the theory of trade you propose. If I understand you correctly, companies do not have the freedom to decide where they can most cheaply produce products they hope to sell in the United States. They need to conduct the entire production process exclusively in America. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, it means that all manufactured goods must be completely made in America without any concession to particular expertise or resource needed for production.

    I lived in a country that attempted to do this, Argentina. Under the banner of “desarollismo” (something like “developmentalism”) it imposed stiff barriers on entry of imports into the country. Local manufacturers and labor unions loved it; consumers hated it. The problem was that being spared international competition allowed local producers to sell shoddy or outdated goods at outrageously high prices. Argentines flocked to neighboring Paraguay, Brazil or far-off Miami to buy all types of things.

    We underestimate how good the American consumer has it. There is no place in the world where the average consumer has more choice and purchasing power. We should not take it for granted. Also, let us not forget that a lot of US jobs depend on exports to other countries (Boeing). If our producers can only buy American goods, they will not be able to compete in export markets. High-paying export jobs will be lost. In markets there are no free lunches, only trade-offs.

    I think there are constructive things we can do to make the American worker more competitive in the world that do not entail dictating to companies where they may or may not produce. These include (1) continuing to drill for every type of fuel so that American energy costs go down (low energy costs keep jobs here and give the average Americans more buying power) (2) improve the choice of schooling available to Americans by breaking the public school/teachers union monopoly through educational tax credits, (3) deregulate, (4) deregulate, (5) deregulate, (6) lower US corporate taxes, which are among the highest in the world, no longer drive corporations out of the country, and, hardest of all but crucial, (7) try to rebuild the American family so that every kid has a mom and a dad. If somehow we implement these, the American worker will become unbelievably competitive and therefore grow wealthy again.

    Point taken, and I agree with most of what you wrote. As I mentioned toward the end of my response to Dave’s question about trade, my general anger at corporations stems from how many of them have acted in response to state resolutions such as Indiana’s initiative to protect business owners from harassment by the gay lobby and North Carolina’s attempt to protect children from perverts in public bathrooms. Something similar is unfolding here in Texas in response to a proposed bathroom bill (similar to North Carolina’s), where organizations like the NCAA and the NFL are threatening to withdraw planned events like the Final Four and the Super Bowl from the state should the law pass. These corporations are attempting to subvert the democratic process and dictate policy via the almighty dollar. It is my hope that Governor Abbott (and the legislature) will tell them to get stuffed.

    • #40
  11. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):

    Sal (View Comment):
    Professor Mike, consider the ultimate implication of the theory of trade you propose. If I understand you correctly, companies do not have the freedom to decide where they can most cheaply produce products they hope to sell in the United States. They need to conduct the entire production process exclusively in America. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, it means that all manufactured goods must be completely made in America without any concession to particular expertise or resource needed for production.

    Point taken, and I agree with most of what you wrote. As I mentioned toward the end of my response to Dave’s question about trade, my general anger at corporations stems from how many of them have acted in response to state resolutions such as Indiana’s initiative to protect business owners from harassment by the gay lobby and North Carolina’s attempt to protect children from perverts in public bathrooms. Something similar is unfolding here in Texas in response to a proposed bathroom bill (similar to North Carolina’s), where organizations like the NCAA and the NFL are threatening to withdraw planned events like the Final Four and the Super Bowl from the state should the law pass. These corporations are attempting to subvert the democratic process and dictate policy via the almighty dollar. It is my hope that Governor Abbott (and the legislature) will tell them to get stuffed.

    Our Great Governor Abbott? He Tweets pictures of his daughter’s latest hunting kills. I am sure he will not have an issue with telling them to suck eggs. I don’t think he has a problem telling ANYONE to get stuffed.

    • #41
  12. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Member
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer
    So, I got this somewhat late and just listened and am glad for it. It’s always interesting to hear about members’ political journeys, both for the similarities and the differences they reveal.
    • #42
  13. Dave Carter Podcaster
    Dave Carter
    @DaveCarter

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):

    So, I got this somewhat late and just listened and am glad for it. It’s always interesting to hear about members’ political journeys, both for the similarities and the differences they reveal.

    Rush Limbaugh once said that Ricochet people don’t have to prove they are the smartest people in the room,…because they simply ARE the smartest people in the room.  I agree, and would add that Ricochet people are among the most interesting as well.

    • #43
  14. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Dave Carter (View Comment):

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):
    So, I got this somewhat late and just listened and am glad for it. It’s always interesting to hear about members’ political journeys, both for the similarities and the differences they reveal.

    Rush Limbaugh once said that Ricochet people don’t have to prove they are the smartest people in the room,…because they simply ARE the smartest people in the room. I agree, and would add that Ricochet people are among the most interesting as well.

    Right on. I’d rather hang here than just about anywhere else.

    • #44
  15. LibertyDefender Member
    LibertyDefender
    @LibertyDefender

    Dave Carter (View Comment):

    MJBubba (View Comment):
    Gee, Mike and Dave talked about leaving the GOP like it was akin to coming out of the closet or something. [Emphasis Dave Carter’s]

    I have quit the Republican Party on three separate occasions.

    I really wish I thought they were interested in keeping me. (From their mail you might think so.)

    Ya know, I’d never thought of it quite like that before. … I had registered as a Republican when I turned 18 and my first vote was cast for Ronald Reagan, and I stayed in the party until, as I said while chatting with Mike, until a Republican president and congress found a heretofore unknown constitutional right for a federal prescription drug program. It wasn’t earth shattering, by any means, I mean it’s politics after all. But it was sobering and no cause for celebration.

    Superb therapy session, doctors.

    I am not alone!

    I too registered Republican at 18 and cast my first presidential vote for Ronald Reagan.  I too remember being a very lonely Republican voice complaining about GWBush adding a new prescription drug entitlement (benefiting the wealthiest demographic group in human history) to an already unsustainable federal entitlement system.  And Mike LaRoche, you and I reacted the same to McCain’s pick of Sarah Palin to be his running mate – surely the best move he made in the entire campaign.  I wished at the time that McCain and Palin could trade spots on the ticket.  It was a thrill to attend in person the first public appearance of the McCain-Palin team, at Van Dyck Park in the fair City of Fairfax VA (where our mayor got busted in a meth-for-gay-sex sting, but that’s another story for another thread in another deplorable podcast).  Exactly as Mike described, the way she was treated by the Republican establishment – sheesh.  With friends like these, …

    In the 2016 primaries, there was no doubt in my mind that Ted Cruz, constitutionalist to the core, was the best choice for Republicans.  I’m still disappointed that the early Trump supporters couldn’t see that Ted Cruz was every bit the outsider/protest candidate that Trump was, with the added bonus that Cruz knows about the Constitution.  Just as reluctantly as you guys did, I boarded the Trump train – the alternative of a serial felon in the White House was unconscionable.

    One thing neither of you mentioned was the overwhelming sense of relief that set in immediately after November 8, 2016,  as we realized that neither Merrick Garland nor a Hillary Clinton nominee would be appointed to the Supreme Court.  Looking forward, if we can only convince the never-Trumpers to acknowledge Trump’s federal executive substance, and place that in proper perspective next to his bull-in-the-china-shop style.

    Exhale.  I’m not alone.  There are others who share my views.

    Party on, Wayne and Garth.

    • #45
  16. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):

    Sal (View Comment):
    Professor Mike, consider the ultimate implication of the theory of trade you propose. If I understand you correctly, companies do not have the freedom to decide where they can most cheaply produce products they hope to sell in the United States. They need to conduct the entire production process exclusively in America. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, it means that all manufactured goods must be completely made in America without any concession to particular expertise or resource needed for production.

     

    …..I think there are constructive things we can do to make the American worker more competitive in the world that do not entail dictating to companies where they may or may not produce. These include …..

    Point taken, and I agree with most of what you wrote. As I mentioned toward the end of my response to Dave’s question about trade, my general anger at corporations stems from how many of them have acted in response to state resolutions such as Indiana’s initiative to protect business owners from harassment by the gay lobby and North Carolina’s attempt to protect children from perverts in public bathrooms. …..

    In addition to Mike’s clarification and aside from Sal’s list of constructive things, I’d also suggest that our general economic policies over the last several decades has favored inflation, consumption, mechanization, and moving overseas. Not only do we have too much regulation, too much public debt, a questionable default preference for mild yet continuous inflation, we also have high income taxes and a payroll tax. Perhaps a sales tax or tariff – replacing one or both of the former taxes – would set policy which is more favorable to savers and labor.

    • #46
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.