David and Reihan battle it out over populism while Charlie goes on a rant about the unconstitutionality of presidential declarations of emergency on today’s gripping edition of The Editors.

Editors’ picks:
• Rich: An article in the new issue on conservatism by the late Charles Krauthammer.
• Reihan: Fred Bauer on a unifying agenda.
• Charlie: Kyle’s article on morality clauses in contracts.
• David: Andy’s piece on Trump giving Mueller reasons to pursue the collusion probe.

Light items:
• Rich: Commentary Magazine.
• Reihan: Liberty Lane, a conservative children’s book series by Josh Bansal and Amalia Halikias.
• Charlie: Hamburgers.
• David: The Great Aquaman War of 2019.

The Editors is hosted by Rich Lowry and produced by Sarah Schutte.

Subscribe to The Editors 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.

There are 17 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. dicentra Member
    dicentra Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    When discussing the dominant culture in Utah you need to address the fact that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a LAY CLERGY. You can’t choose a career in church leadership, and so it’s a little strange to hear about our “elites” being more sensitive to their social responsibilities.

    We don’t have “elites”; we just have neighbors who by turns are chosen to serve in leadership positions for a few years and then return to the rank and file. We also have a scripture that warns strongly against the abuse of power (D&C 121):

    36 [T]he rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and … the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

    37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

    You cannot transfer our success elsewhere unless its to a community that is as organizationally and ideologically homogeneous as we are. Any self-styled “elites” who would assess their community sensitivity as sufficient to govern like we do in Utah is deluded.

    • #1
    • January 9, 2019, at 5:45 PM PST
    • Like
  2. DonG (Biden is compromised) Coolidge

    dicentra (View Comment):
    You cannot transfer our success elsewhere unless its to a community that is as organizationally and ideologically homogeneous as we are. Any self-styled “elites” who would assess their community sensitivity as sufficient to govern like we do in Utah is deluded.

    What I heard Reihan trying to say is that during the financial crisis of the Great Recession, the Salt Lake City government changed their priorities to help the community while the government in D.C. shoved $1T to the bankers that caused the problem.

    The general idea is that elites, which includes the ruling class (and those that hang out with them, fund them), big media, and big tech make a lot of decisions that affect nearly every aspect of commerce. Those decisions often involve trade-offs and picking winners/losers and for the last 2 generations the losers in the decisions were working class folks and not the elite class. Only 20% of students graduate college and enter a corresponding career and the ruling class sends them $600B/year in college subsidies, while the other 80% (the future working class) gets no subsides for post high school training. That is a choice. 

    The podcast featured a lot of David “Haystack” French creating strawman to defend the elites. “Tucker said everything is the fault of the elites, but there were other factors too. Therefore Tucker is wrong.” It seems clear to me that Haystack did not listen to Tucker to understand him, but to find things to warp into strawmen. I don’t understand the need to defend the ruling class over their mistakes. Smart people recognize and learn from mistakes. 

    • #2
    • January 9, 2019, at 8:03 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  3. Joseph Eagar Member
    Joseph Eagar Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I’ve always loved the “We can’t do X because of recent history: the civil rights movement, feminism, globalism, etc meant American elites could do nothing! NOTHING!”

    And I just have to point out, only one belief system in the world doesn’t make strong demands of elites in terms of giving back to society and following certain rules as elites: secular atheist neoliberalism. No Christian sect believes the upper middle class can party as much as it wants with no limits on its actions or accountability. Neither does Islam or Judaism; even socialism at least pretends to crack down on elites. Only one belief system lets elites off the hook for their actions, and frankly, the world has had enough of it. Capitalism and liberalism are symbiotic; paired with another belief system they can be very powerful, but on their own they just don’t work.

     

     

    • #3
    • January 9, 2019, at 10:54 PM PST
    • Like
  4. The Cloaked Gaijin Member

    You guys are so full of it when it come to this “wall stuff”.

    A Democrat president is never confronted and is never wrong, but a Republican president just threatening to declare a national emergency is wrong?! They are going impeach him either way.

    Let’s say that Trump builds the wall, AND that Trump is removed from office. The wall is not going to be removed. The Democrats do not want the existing walls removed.

    As Christopher DeMuth mentions in the just uploaded Powerline podcast, Trump has been much more deferential to Congress than most presidents.

    Let’s just stay calm for now and see what happens.

    • #4
    • January 10, 2019, at 3:33 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  5. Joseph Eagar Member
    Joseph Eagar Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    The Cloaked Gaijin (View Comment):

    You guys are so full of it when it come to this “wall stuff”.

    A Democrat president is never confronted and is never wrong, but a Republican president just threatening to declare a national emergency is wrong?! They are going impeach him either way.

    Let’s say that Trump builds the wall, AND that Trump is removed from office. The wall is not going to be removed. The Democrats do not want the existing walls removed.

    As Christopher DeMuth mentions in the just uploaded Powerline podcast, Trump has been much more deferential to Congress than most presidents.

    Let’s just stay calm for now and see what happens.

    Another benefit of building the wall: no ethnic cleansing. I’ve said it before: if you think America isn’t in danger of a major ethnic cleansing episode than you are not living in reality. It is literally mainstream public policy for poor whites, poor blacks, and poor Hispanics to compete with each other in a three-front race war over economic resources. History strongly suggests that if we don’t break this equilibrium then one of those three groups might try to physically expel one or both of the others from their communities, in which case we’ll have Syria-magnitude migration flows within the U.S. (or to Mexico if Hispanics are the targets).

    Building a wall is the best way to prevent this. Divide and conquer tactics of this magnitude are not sustainable in the absence of a large flow of immigrants; ask yourself, would identity politics be anywhere near as salient as it is today if blacks still made up the vast majority of nonwhite Americans? I don’t think so. At the same time, the wall would send a strong signal to elites that demographic engineering is no longer a viable long-term political strategy.

    • #5
    • January 10, 2019, at 3:46 AM PST
    • Like
  6. The Cloaked Gaijin Member

    My current issue of National Review lists Mark Levin as a contributing editor. How about bringing editor and new National Radio Hall of Fame inductee Mark Levin on a few times a year for some real fun? It’s like the people who run National Review really don’t want it to survive.

    David French is a biased observer who Bill Kristol tried to get to run against Trump. You might as well be asking Congressman John B. Anderson about Ronald Reagan in 1983. Even Anderson, an actual congressman, won 12 times the percentage of the popular vote as the dynamic Z-list team of Evan McMullin and Mindy Finn which was so popular in the Virginia suburbs.

    “…all the security around Capitol Hill. Walls. Armed men and women. Metal detectors. Bollards. … We just want to be treated well too by our government. It is left to the (federal) government not the private sector, not to the states to secure the border. The framers believed that our politicians would at least be virtuous enough to protect the sovereignty of the nation! What they never counted on were the Progressives, who actually seek to change the population … to change the country.” — Mark Levin, January 9, 2019

    I think Charles C. W. Cooke might feel differently if he had grown up in a country surrounded by hostile neighbors. Securing the people is what the Constitution is about.

    • #6
    • January 10, 2019, at 4:09 AM PST
    • 1 like
  7. Texmoor Coolidge

    Great debate between Reihan and David. It’s good to see the guys go after each other every once and awhile.

    After listening to Charlie’s love for hamburgers, I’m now convinced he will lose his accent at some point and fully transform into a red-blooded American.

    • #7
    • January 10, 2019, at 9:34 AM PST
    • Like
  8. Leslie Watkins Inactive
    Leslie Watkins Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    If David French doesn’t get why “the bankers” are loathed, he’s letting his fondness for tradition get the better of his insight. Thing is, both French and Carlson are right. But we’re all so absolutist, moralistically right/wrong in our thinking that it’s impossible to focus on effecting trade-offs that would greatly benefit the middle, which is not holding, to our detriment and great peril.

    • #8
    • January 10, 2019, at 10:32 AM PST
    • 1 like
  9. Freesmith Inactive

    It’s funny. David French has no problem with immigration, which results in the US becoming “browner,” and which stimulates changes that result in fundamental transformation of America, such as that one of our two major political parties is now for the first time effectively socialist.

    Yet at the same time he advocates for a morality and a political point-of-view that year after year has less electoral purchase. One by one states are becoming “no-go zones” for the Republican party he claims to favor. The new immigrants unanimously – black, Asian, Hispanic and Muslim – reject his nostrums (which he persists in claiming are “universal” and “the bedrocks to success”).

    By following the creed of this neo-Virtuecrat and his ilk, the GOP has been shrinking into a smaller and smaller national electoral redoubt, fighting a rear-guard action to hold onto what it has and with absolutely no strategy to try to take back what it has lost – California, New Mexico, Nevada, etc. – let alone to challenge the progressive Democrats in their strongholds, such as the inner-cities or any large city whatsoever.

    It’s almost as if David French doesn’t know anything about politics. 

     

    • #9
    • January 10, 2019, at 3:14 PM PST
    • 1 like
  10. Charlotte Member
    Charlotte Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    When I got back from my college semester abroad 25 years ago, the two things I wanted most were a classic hamburger and a big pancake-sausage-egg breakfast. Europeans do a lot of food right, but those are two things they can’t quite get the hang of.

    • #10
    • January 10, 2019, at 3:42 PM PST
    • Like
  11. Woolfolk Inactive

    Hope that time can be made to discuss the Green New Deal next podcast. If that plan gets any traction everything discussed in this podcast will be moot.

    • #11
    • January 12, 2019, at 6:20 AM PST
    • Like
  12. Joseph Eagar Member
    Joseph Eagar Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Woolfolk (View Comment):

    Hope that time can be made to discuss the Green New Deal next podcast. If that plan gets any traction everything discussed in this podcast will be moot.

    That’s been on the Democrat’s radar for years. In fact, there was a lot of talk about “green jobs” in 2009, when they had total, filibuster-proof control of the federal government. If they couldn’t do it then, I don’t think they’ll have any more luck now.

    • #12
    • January 12, 2019, at 2:56 PM PST
    • Like
  13. RufusRJones Member

    DonG (View Comment):
    Only 20% of students graduate college and enter a corresponding career and the ruling class sends them $600B/year in college subsidies, while the other 80% (the future working class) gets no subsides for post high school training. That is a choice. 

    Stunning. Education is a disaster in this country.

    • #13
    • January 13, 2019, at 2:50 AM PST
    • Like
  14. RufusRJones Member

    Leslie Watkins (View Comment):
    Only 20% of students graduate college and enter a corresponding career and the ruling class sends them $600B/year in college subsidies, while the other 80% (the future working class) gets no subsides for post high school training. That is a choice. 

    Big Finance and the Fed are a complete joke. Very few in congress care or know what to do. It will get worse. 

    • #14
    • January 13, 2019, at 2:56 AM PST
    • Like
  15. RufusRJones Member

    Freesmith (View Comment):

    It’s funny. David French has no problem with immigration, which results in the US becoming “browner,” and which stimulates changes that result in fundamental transformation of America, such as that one of our two major political parties is now for the first time effectively socialist.

    Yet at the same time he advocates for a morality and a political point-of-view that year after year has less electoral purchase. One by one states are becoming “no-go zones” for the Republican party he claims to favor. The new immigrants unanimously – black, Asian, Hispanic and Muslim – reject his nostrums (which he persists in claiming are “universal” and “the bedrocks to success”).

    By following the creed of this neo-Virtuecrat and his ilk, the GOP has been shrinking into a smaller and smaller national electoral redoubt, fighting a rear-guard action to hold onto what it has and with absolutely no strategy to try to take back what it has lost – California, New Mexico, Nevada, etc. – let alone to challenge the progressive Democrats in their strongholds, such as the inner-cities or any large city whatsoever.

    It’s almost as if David French doesn’t know anything about politics.

     

    How can you argue with this? 

    I forget where I heard this, but the civic culture of Mexico in the countries we are typically getting illegal immigrants from are just disasters, unlike say Chile. In Minnesota we have a ton of Ethiopians and you never hear any controversy with those guys even though it’s right next to Somalia. The reason is they have a superior civic culture. Much more harmony and tolerance.

    • #15
    • January 13, 2019, at 3:04 AM PST
    • Like
  16. RufusRJones Member

    The reason we are having so many social problems and people are voting for such kooky politicians, is because we don’t have free markets. Until the powers in the GOP get this, things will get worse.

    The analysis of AOC at the end was excellent. AOC and Obama are / were supported by the media because they are all statists. Screw the media.

    • #16
    • January 13, 2019, at 4:08 AM PST
    • Like
  17. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member

    I think that Mr. Cooke is incorrect in his narrow interpretation of “emergency.” Here is a list of national emergencies declared by Presidents since 1979. There were 58 of them. One example (by President Clinton in 2001) was to ban the import of loose diamonds from Sierra Leone that could fund a domestic insurgency. This is hardly an example of a major, existential emergency for the US.

    One of the potentially applicable set of statutes is 50 USC 1431-1435 (here), which seems to me broader than the narrow authorization discussed by Mr. French. It relates to national defense, but I do not know whether it is one of the specific statutes that Mr. French had in mind. This particular statute has some significant limitations — (1) it is only effective for 6 months, and (2) to spend more than $25 million under the statute, the President must inform the Armed Services committees of both houses, and then wait 60 days.

    An example of the use of 50 USC 1431 was an order by President Obama in 2014 (here) authorizing expenditures relating to an Ebola outbreak in Africa, in what appears to be a non-military situation the expenditures were by the United States Agency for International Development on a humanitarian mission. It recites a vague connection to national defense, which is not obvious.

    I should be clear that I haven’t formed a firm opinion about whether President Trump’s exercise of national emergency powers in these circumstances would be appropriate. I merely suggest that some of these laws, and the practice of prior Presidents under those laws, may be more ambigious than Messrs. Cooke and French suggest.

    • #17
    • January 17, 2019, at 4:01 PM PST
    • Like