Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
If you are going to condemn Reagan for not vetoing everything Congress sent to him, how in the name of all that is holy are you pro-Trump? Trump is considerably less interested in limited government, has a long record of working with democrats, and is focused on a fiscal stimulus plan.
This election cycle it DID look like the GOP’s best offering was half a socialist vs. Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit. While that was not that hard of a choice, I don’t see how Trump is the greatest conservative ever and it remains to be seen if he will cut deals with the democrats.
I suppose this means I am a knee jerk conservative in your view. I honestly do not care what you think of me. However, I will say that I’ve been trying to listen to your podcast to get some pro-Trump balance to the many other podcasts here, and it has been more and more frustrating to listen to.
I would say O.P. (speaking only for myself) that I would not say Trump is more conservative than Reagan (or Cruz) – though I think his immigration stance is the more conservative one by far – nor that he will not cut a deal to advance his priorities, as Reagan did.
But I think there is something that is really genius in what Trump is doing. Maybe it is inadvertent, but I think that some of it at least is intentional.
He says the system is rigged – and it is. He is outraged that the strongest country in the world allows its borders to be trampled for a generation – how can one not be outraged? He looks at the asphyxiated rust belt and he feels, at least, that something could and should be done for the people there…and that he will be their voice.
I, for one, did not choose Trump because he was the lesser evil. I chose Trump because he is the one person who is bigger than the job – or at least potentially so in that he just doesn’t give a darn what he says and he has an instinct and a moral compass that keeps him seeing the lies that are part of our system.
I am truly excited about where this presidency is going and I expect to be more excited as the outrage to Trump’s directness from the left just explodes next year.
One thing. It’s kinda hard to debate the validity of a comparison of a former President and a President-elect. I have hopes for the latter, but he has no accomplishments yet to make such a static, end-all comparison.
A great as President Reagan was as a leader, it si also true that he did not reverse but merely slowed the unholy growth of government. He was far from perfect, but he was certainly better than the one before him and every president after him, so far.
I am cheered by many of the President-Elect’s announced appointments and first 100 days planned efforts. Not all, but many.
What utter cowardice on the part of @michaelstopa. Hiding from my withering critique of his musical taste behind his daughter. Her talent and good taste (inherited from her mother, no doubt) is beside the point!
I’m about to listen to this edition of the HLC with a certain curiosity: I wonder if Todd is going to talk over and interrupt every time Michael is making a point.
I enjoy conversation. If you ask a question, however, it’s polite to allow the person to whom you are speaking the opportunity to answer. Over-talking is funny in “His Girl Friday,” but I don’t recommend it or like it for this format.
This podcast is usually long enough – perhaps too long? – that Todd should be able to exercise a little oral restraint, no matter how clever he thinks he is.
Let’s see…
The comparison to Reagan is fatuous. In 1981-89, the Eastern Bloc still stood, there were still Dems who loved America and Capitalism, (George McGovern and Scoop Jackson come first to mind) and American politicians were still capable of negotiating to a compromise.
I don’t think anyone foresaw that the collapse of the Eastern Bloc would lead to the Dems becoming a bunch of proto-Commmies, quite the opposite. Reagan did get skunked on a couple of deals, immigration and taxes being chief among them, but Mr Feinberg is simply wrong to call him a failure. The worst failure was in the Bush 1 years and in the remarkable growth of government under Clinton and Bush 2.
Just trying, little by little, to broaden your musical horizon Dick. Randy (and Hiromi) thank you for the compliment.
I took Todd out behind the woodshed for a wuppin. This week (and hopefully last week) should be much better in this regard.
Todd Feinberg should get a dose of reality.
Reagan was fighting the Cold War and could not afford to antagonize Democrats whose primary instinct was unilateral disarmament. He had to rebuild our armed forces after the post-Vietnam funk and the disastrous Carter presidency. He needed their collaboration. He did not have the luxury of confronting Dems on their tax and spend mania. His achievements are hugely consequential, he brought down the SOviet colossus without fighting a major war. People see Russia now as a weak country. A few episodes of The Americans will set them straight as to how powerful the USSR was. He also cut taxes and continued the trend of deregulation set in motion by Alfred Kahn ironically during the Carter years. He worked with Paul Volcker to contain inflation. Reagan set up the como if boom of the 90s from which Bill Clinton benefited.
I expected a better sense of perspective from Todd.