That’s what Warren Harding promised. Is the Trump Administration approaching something like it? Jay and Mona discuss Trump’s UN speech, Medicare for all, the Alabama senate race, and whether conservativism and crudeness are now coterminous.

Music is Jean Sibelius, Karelia suite.

Subscribe to Need to Know 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.

Please Support Our Sponsor!

Zip Recruiter

Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 13 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Saint Augustine Member

    Good work, as always!

    Now did I hear you rightly–that there is tension and maybe even a contradiction between the position that American and other countries are sovereign and the position that North Korea and Venezuala are exceptions?

    That seems perfectly consistent to me, and probably even perfectly necessary.

    The thesis of the Declaration of Independence is that the people are sovereign, answering only to God; that governments answer to the people and exist to protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (i.e., property rights); and that governments are illegitimate when they do not do so.

    Accordingly, a rotten government has no authority and ought to be deposed, but a nation (i.e., a sovereign people) acting through a legitimate government is sovereign.

    • #1
    • September 25, 2017, at 4:17 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  2. George Townsend Inactive

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good work, as always!

    Now did I hear you rightly–that there is tension and maybe even a contradiction between the position that American and other countries are sovereign and the position that North Korea and Venezuala are exceptions?

    That seems perfectly consistent to me, and probably even perfectly necessary.

    The thesis of the Declaration of Independence is that the people are sovereign, answering only to God; that governments answer to the people and exist to protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (i.e., property rights); and that governments are illegitimate when they do not do so.

    Accordingly, a rotten government has no authority and ought to be deposed, but a nation (i.e., a sovereign people) acting through a legitimate government is sovereign.

    I have not heard the podcast as of yet. I love Need To Know. It is my favorite podcast. I am surprised, though – pleasantly – that they did this on a Sunday.

    I do want to quibble with you, though, Saint Augustine, not because I disagree with what you wrote about our country. It is as you state, of course. But our country is unique in the way we view our people. So I believe there is tension between our sovereignty and that of a now despotic country like Venezuala. You really can’t compare the two lands. There are too many despotic countries, but they are sovereign.

    • #2
    • September 25, 2017, at 6:04 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  3. Saint Augustine Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good work, as always!

    Now did I hear you rightly–that there is tension and maybe even a contradiction between the position that American and other countries are sovereign and the position that North Korea and Venezuala are exceptions?

    That seems perfectly consistent to me, and probably even perfectly necessary.

    The thesis of the Declaration of Independence is that the people are sovereign, answering only to God; that governments answer to the people and exist to protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (i.e., property rights); and that governments are illegitimate when they do not do so.

    Accordingly, a rotten government has no authority and ought to be deposed, but a nation (i.e., a sovereign people) acting through a legitimate government is sovereign.

    I have not heard the podcast as of yet. I love Need To Know. It is my favorite podcast. I am surprised, though – pleasantly – that they did this on a Sunday.

    I do want to quibble with you, though, Saint Augustine, not because I disagree with what you wrote about our country. It is as you state, of course. But our country is unique in the way we view our people. So I believe there is tension between our sovereignty and that of a now despotic country like Venezuala. You really can’t compare the two lands. There are too many despotic countries, but they are sovereign.

    So what if the USA is unique in how it views things? What matters is whether the USA is correct. In the Declaration we pronounced universal principles.

    The USA could be unique in how it views things. But if it views things correctly, the basis of its sovereignty is not unique.

    • #3
    • September 25, 2017, at 7:52 AM PDT
    • Like
  4. George Townsend Inactive

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good work, as always!

    Now did I hear you rightly–that there is tension and maybe even a contradiction between the position that American and other countries are sovereign and the position that North Korea and Venezuala are exceptions?

    That seems perfectly consistent to me, and probably even perfectly necessary.

    The thesis of the Declaration of Independence is that the people are sovereign, answering only to God; that governments answer to the people and exist to protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (i.e., property rights); and that governments are illegitimate when they do not do so.

    Accordingly, a rotten government has no authority and ought to be deposed, but a nation (i.e., a sovereign people) acting through a legitimate government is sovereign.

    I have not heard the podcast as of yet. I love Need To Know. It is my favorite podcast. I am surprised, though – pleasantly – that they did this on a Sunday.

    I do want to quibble with you, though, Saint Augustine, not because I disagree with what you wrote about our country. It is as you state, of course. But our country is unique in the way we view our people. So I believe there is tension between our sovereignty and that of a now despotic country like Venezuala. You really can’t compare the two lands. There are too many despotic countries, but they are sovereign.

    So what if the USA is unique in how it views things? What matters is whether the USA is correct. In the Declaration we pronounced universal principles.

    The USA could be unique in how it views things. But if it views things correctly, the basis of its sovereignty is not unique.

    I’ll have to hear the podcast to see how this point was made. But I still don’t see your point. Are you saying that if this or that country does not view its own people as sovereign than that country is illegitimate? I don’t think I’ve ever read such an extreme version of isolationism. Are you saying we shouldn’t have anything to do with another land, if they don’t meet our standards? Even England does not measure up to our freedoms. No one does.

    • #4
    • September 25, 2017, at 8:59 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  5. filmklassik Member

    While I share Jay and Mona’s contempt for our sitting president (big time; I cannot wait until that intellectually incurious lying huckster is out of office) I confess to being somewhat confused by their revulsion at Trump’s decision to call out the oppressive governments of North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran.

    The difference between Donald Trump and Winston Churchill in terms of eloquence, integrity, and intellectual firepower is as the difference between a bottle of Evian and the Pacific Ocean, but are you really telling me that if Churchhill were alive and in power today, he wouldn’t be standing up in Parliament and denouncing North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran at the top of his lungs? Give me a break.

    These are three of the most destructive and inhumane regimes in the world, so why would holding them up as examples of such provoke Jay and Mona’s ire?

    That part really threw me. (And I hope they will see fit to respond to my inquiry)

    • #5
    • September 25, 2017, at 10:04 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  6. Saint Augustine Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good work, as always!

    Now did I hear you rightly–that there is tension and maybe even a contradiction between the position that American and other countries are sovereign and the position that North Korea and Venezuala are exceptions?

    That seems perfectly consistent to me, and probably even perfectly necessary.

    The thesis of the Declaration of Independence is that the people are sovereign, answering only to God; that governments answer to the people and exist to protect their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (i.e., property rights); and that governments are illegitimate when they do not do so.

    Accordingly, a rotten government has no authority and ought to be deposed, but a nation (i.e., a sovereign people) acting through a legitimate government is sovereign.

    I have not heard the podcast as of yet. I love Need To Know. It is my favorite podcast. I am surprised, though – pleasantly – that they did this on a Sunday.

    I do want to quibble with you, though, Saint Augustine, not because I disagree with what you wrote about our country. It is as you state, of course. But our country is unique in the way we view our people. So I believe there is tension between our sovereignty and that of a now despotic country like Venezuala. You really can’t compare the two lands. There are too many despotic countries, but they are sovereign.

    So what if the USA is unique in how it views things? What matters is whether the USA is correct. In the Declaration we pronounced universal principles.

    The USA could be unique in how it views things. But if it views things correctly, the basis of its sovereignty is not unique.

    I’ll have to hear the podcast to see how this point was made.

    I was a bit puzzled by it myself, even while hearing it! Perhaps this thread will clear things up.

    But I still don’t see your point. Are you saying that if this or that country does not view its own people as sovereign than that country is illegitimate?

    Indeed you don’t. First, this is about governments, not countries. Second, it’s not so much about whether it views them in any particular way, but about how it treats them.

    I am saying that according to the principles in the Declaration of Independence any government which is not, in practice, subservient to its people is not legitimate, and also any government which fails to protect their freedoms.

    I don’t think I’ve ever read such an extreme version of isolationism.

    This has nothing to do with isolationism. Nothing at all.

    Are you saying we shouldn’t have anything to do with another land, if they don’t meet our standards?

    No. I don’t see how that notion has any connection at all to anything I’ve said.

    • #6
    • September 25, 2017, at 10:24 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  7. filmklassik Member

    On a more macro level, it’s obvious that Jay’s disdain for Trump and his supporters (which I share, by the way — in spades) has made him marginally more tolerant of certain Left wing ideas, institutions and people than he was, say, 24 months ago, or at least marginally less quick to condemn them.

    The difference may only be 5 or 10 percent, but it’s definitely there.

    And it shouldn’t be.

    • #7
    • September 25, 2017, at 10:51 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  8. George Townsend Inactive

    filmklassik (View Comment):
    While I share Jay and Mona’s contempt for our sitting president (big time; I cannot wait until that intellectually incurious lying huckster is out of office) I confess to being somewhat confused by their revulsion at Trump’s decision to call out the oppressive governments of North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran.

    The difference between Donald Trump and Winston Churchill in terms of eloquence, integrity, and intellectual firepower is as the difference between a bottle of Evian and the Pacific Ocean, but are you really telling me that if Churchhill were alive and in power today, he wouldn’t be standing up in Parliament and denouncing North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran at the top of his lungs? Give me a break.

    These are three of the most destructive and inhumane regimes in the world, so why would holding them up as examples of such provoke Jay and Mona’s ire?

    That part really threw me. (And I hope they will see fit to respond to my inquiry)

    As you know, Filmklassik, I share your revulsion of Trump, and complete devotion to Jay and Mona. Like you, though, I do not find Trump’s verbal treatment of the little NK (unmentionable word) to be that bad. In their defense, however, I think they feel a President should be more dignified, even in this face of this runt. It is a tolerable position, I think..

    • #8
    • September 25, 2017, at 11:26 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  9. George Townsend Inactive

    Perhaps I misread you. Saint Augustine. I don’t think we disagree very much.

    But I just heard this wonderful podcast, and I think what they were getting at is Trump’s UN speech was contradictory, saying that all countries have the right to their own sovereignty, while also saying that we possibly should go in, and make things right with other countries. It is a legitimate debating point, I think.

    The points of the Declaration my be universal (as I agree they are) but that does not mean we can go in and make every country respect their people. It is not that easy.

    I also want to say, as long as I here, that this entry is why Need to Know is the best Podcast on Ricochet. They touched on everything: North Korea, the Alabama election, Mona’s move, small business vs. big business, etc. It was just delightful. And if I was comment on each thing, I’d be here forever.

    Long Live Mona and Jay!! :-)

    • #9
    • September 25, 2017, at 11:41 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  10. Saint Augustine Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    Perhaps I misread you. Saint Augustine. I don’t think we disagree very much.

    Jolly good!

    But I just heard this wonderful podcast, and I think what they were getting at is Trump’s UN speech was contradictory, saying that all countries have the right to their own sovereignty, while also saying that we possibly should go in, and make things right with other countries. It is a legitimate debating point, I think.

    There’s no contradiction there. The Declaration’s (ostensibly universal) principles tell us that the people of each nation are sovereign. So we have no right to overthrow a foreign government which is the expression of the sovereign will of the people.

    That does not mean that we have no right to overthrow a foreign government which is not the sovereign will of the people. Such a government should be overthrown.

    This, of course, does not entail that we have the right to overthrow it, or that, if we do, it is a right we should exercise. That depends on many factors. But if the government is sufficiently bad or is a danger to us or our allies, it is at least plausible that we could advocate for its overthrow or lend a hand in the process.

    (How bad is sufficiently bad? Beats me!)

    The points of the Declaration my be universal (as I agree they are) but that does not mean we can go in and make every country respect their people. It is not that easy.

    No objections there!

    Long Live Mona and Jay!! :-)

    Woo hoo!

    • #10
    • September 25, 2017, at 4:16 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  11. David Guaspari Member
    David GuaspariJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Mona’s case against Bernie Sanders’ claims of efficient for Medicate leaves out an important detail: Medicare is plagued by fraud (which it devotes few resources to combatting).

    • #11
    • September 26, 2017, at 5:06 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  12. George Townsend Inactive

    filmklassik (View Comment):
    While I share Jay and Mona’s contempt for our sitting president (big time; I cannot wait until that intellectually incurious lying huckster is out of office) I confess to being somewhat confused by their revulsion at Trump’s decision to call out the oppressive governments of North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran.

    I am listening to The Commentary Podcast (which I also enjoy), and John Podhoretz brought up something I hadn’t considered: By calling the dictator in North Korea a whole butch of names might be satisfying, it really doesn’t speak to the danger that he poses to the South Koreans, and others. Those names provoke laughter, and it is well deserved, but the little runt also must be taken seriously. Maybe these were Mona’s and Jay’s thoughts also?

    • #12
    • September 26, 2017, at 9:06 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  13. filmklassik Member

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    filmklassik (View Comment):
    While I share Jay and Mona’s contempt for our sitting president (big time; I cannot wait until that intellectually incurious lying huckster is out of office) I confess to being somewhat confused by their revulsion at Trump’s decision to call out the oppressive governments of North Korea, Venezuela, and Iran.

    I am listening to The Commentary Podcast (which I also enjoy), and John Podhoretz brought up something I hadn’t considered: By calling the dictator in North Korea a whole butch of names might be satisfying, it really doesn’t speak to the danger that he poses to the South Koreans, and others. Those names provoke laughter, and it is well deserved, but the little runt also must be taken seriously. Maybe these were Mona’s and Jay’s thoughts also?

    Well, if that is indeed what Jay and Mona took exception to (not the fact that Trump was denouncing the leader of North Korea, but that he saw fit to do so in such infantile terms) then of course I would agree with them.

    • #13
    • September 26, 2017, at 4:08 PM PDT
    • 2 likes