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.
Trump used a Sharpie on Hurricane Dorian’s tracking map; time for impeachment? Also, David French and Sohrab Ahmari debate federal policy on library drag queens.
The intro/outro song and Jon’s song of the week is “Topographe” by Corridor. Stephen’s song of the week is “Someone to You” by Katie Toupin. To listen to all the music featured on The Conservatarians, subscribe to our Spotify playlist!
Subscribe to King of Stuff 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.
C’mon! The How to Train Your Dragon (book) series is fantastic! Easy to write it off as a silly story for grade-school boys with the first few books, but . . . it turns into something amazing (and quite moving) by the end. Cowell certainly did a better job than that Rowling lady when it came to giving her series a satisfying conclusion. I got . . . rather emotional. snf.
RE: Farming
There’s a saying: “You can make a small fortune as a farmer so long as you start with a large fortune.”
I’ve heard the same joke about real estate, “How do you make a small fortune in real estate? First, start with a large fortune…”
I love the word “chippy”.
As far as Drag Queen Story Hour goes, for the love of Peter Rabbit, truth in advertising should be a prerequisite! Both my children had outsized fears of clown makeup. An accidental visit at that event would have caused weeks of nightmares.
I have been thinking about starting an S&M story time at my local library. I wonder if anyone will complain. I plan to read Hansel and Gretel by the Brothers Grimm.
What do you have planned to expand the horizons of kids in your hometown?
Sharpiegate isn’t like the crowd sizes it’s like the 2 scoop thing.
Lord Almighty sharpiegate is tiring. You all needed to ignore it, not cover it.
Thanks for allowing me to support whom I want to Stephen. I was worried you would forbid it.
And thank you, Patrick, for not grossly mischaracterizing Stephen’s position and attitude on this score.
There are certain kinds of people — most of them Populists; all of them anti-intellectual — who would do that very thing.
Thank you for avoiding that pitfall.
Ugh. Aren’t populists the worst? Why can’t they just do as they’re told and bow to the oligarchy? The elites know what’s best for the proles, don’t they?
I’m more interested to learn that only “anti-intellectuals” ever “grossly mischaracterize” anyone’s position on a issue.
“Anti-intellectual” is the word self-proclaimed intellectuals use when they really want to say “rednecks.”
Hmmm. The worst? Nah. Communists, Klansmen, neo-Nazis, the campus Left, etc., all rate higher on the destructiveness meter, as far as I’m concerned.
But populists, let’s face it, are part of the angry, torch & pitchfork carrying mob.
Y’know the western cliche of the noble lawman facing down the angry, unthinking mob in front of the local jail? He’s usually played by Gary Cooper or Henry Fonda, and has dialogue like: “Luke Bishop might be guilty — hell, he probably is — but that’ll be for a jury to decide. Not get on back to your homes!”
That mob?
Well, that’s a mob of populists.
No, the Left does it too. All the time, in fact. All it takes is proper motivation and very little brains.
It certainly can mean redneck, no question. But anti-intellectualism is hugely prevalent on the Left as well. I mean, big time.
In other words, anti-intellectualism abounds in the ghetto, on college campuses, in the media, and in South Texas.
Is a prole the same as an anti-intellectual? Being an anti-intellectual, I didn’t understand what @filmklassik was saying. Stephen’s statement that he is OK with people supporting the President still gives me comfort though. So I got that going for me.
Nope.
Persuasive.
Can’t tell you what a treat it is to talk to people who can state their positions clearly and eloquently, instead of acting like infants in their high chairs, banging their plastic spoons and throwing their juice cups. “No no no NO!!!!”
Persuasive.
OMG, I’m sure Stephen’s okay with a lot of unreasoning, feelings-based positions that you hold.
Which means you have a lot going for you!
So, you’re saying I’m better off than I thought?
However I have come to my conclusions, through thinking, feeling, gut instinct, or being convinced by cogent arguments, I do not need approval or disapproval from Stephen, you, or anyone. If Stephen, you or anyone want to convince me that my beliefs should change, talking down to me will result in snark and condescension in return. I believe I am not the only person who will respond in such a manner. I recognize that there are other people who hold the same opinion that Stepen does regarding the President. None of them need my approval for their opinion. I get just a little tired of people who do not agree with me thinking I need their approval for my opinions. No matter how I came to them. So, yes, I will exaggerate their position to point out how ridiculous it is.
Fine. But I’m not sure if Stephen saying that he is okay with people supporting Trump is any more meaningful (or less benign) than someone who supports Trump saying: “I am perfectly okay with Conservatives who cannot bring themselves to vote for the guy.”
In other words, I doubt if either person — Stephen or our hypothetical Trump supporter — is saying, essentially: “I hereby grant permission for people to disagree with me.”
I think it’s more along the lines of: “The American Right is a big tent, and can accommodate people with views different from my own.”
So I don’t feel Stephen was saying what you think he was. But I do appreciate your thoughtful reply. (No kidding)
Wow, Jon, that was about the worst characterization of the the French-Ahmari debate I’ve heard. Must be nice to be so simplistic. And look where all those free-speech victories have gotten us. There are more reasons not to sympathize with French other than his never-Trumpism. Stephen, Nikki Haley will never be the leader of any faction. She won’t have the stomach for it and will want to make everyone happy and so please no one. Some people learn nothing from even recent history and only see what they want to see. Because the next Democrat president surely will not try to impose his viewpoints on citizens as long as we don’t propose alternate solutions. Great job creating straw men out of your half-informed knowledge of the past and present.
Miller’s consistently articulates across a year of listening that he simply doesn’t like Trump and doesn’t like that he is president. I am actually in agreement on these issues, but I am a tepid Trump supporter. So, I look at Miller and see someone who shares my views but is entirely superficial. It is superficial to be fixated on the fact that Trump has a weird personality (he does), he tweets dumb but sometimes very effective tweets, he gets drawn into insane contests of will over nothing. The bottom line, is so what? We view most the never Trumpers as essentially unserious and its amazing how many of them are supposed thought leaders on the right and they are interested in the superficial not the policy. On policy Trump has aligned more with my views than nearly any politician in my lifetime. So, I get over his weirdness because it doesn’t impact my life in any way.
Today listening to the podcast was the first time I heard about Sharpies. It sounds typical of Trump and media. And it makes no difference in my life.
What makes a difference? Illegal immigration. Please don’t refer to Trump as nationalist without talking about immigration. Americans are sick of lawlessness. Its hardly nationalist to want borders enforced.