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.
With the Kavanaugh-Ford sexual assault controversy reaching a climax in the next few days, Steve Hayward decided to check in with “Lucretia,” Power Line’s “International Woman of Mystery,” and Julie Kelly, frequent contributor to American Greatness and other sites, to see what they make of the situation. To say they are “not impressed” with Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh would be a Cat 5 understatement. Hoo-boy are they unimpressed! Just listen and you’ll see what we mean.
New opening bumper music this week: the studio version of “Mexico” by moe., and ending with Helen Reddy’s most expected song for this particular moment.
Subscribe to Power Line 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.
This is the tale of two podcasts. The first half dealt well with the Kavanaugh nomination.
The second half was a screed against any person who has ever indentified as being NeverTrump, including Jonah Goldberg, who like me identifies as more of a Severe Trump Skeptic. When they questioned the wisdom of Jonah’s wife being associated with Jonah, I turned off the podcast in disgust! It is bigots like this who tempt me to vote for more Democrats to teach my party a lesson. (Then I hear from Hawaii Senator Mazie”Shut Up” Hirono, and I am back in the fold.)
I have never rated a podcast before, but based on this bigotry, I would be tempted to give this podcast “zero” stars. (I have listened to Powerline before, and it has never had such hateful people there.)
I have listening to dozens of Ricochet podcasts while I have driven 3,020 miles in the last 8 days. This was, by far, the worst podcast.
It wasn’t a screed, it was a straight forward discussion of the implications of some conservatives being easily lured to jump on any issue that can be turned against President Trump. The subjects they discuss are directly related because the never trump drum beat plays into the Democrat’s insanity and their drift now gallop to totalitarianism.
@garyrobbins – Methinks thou protest too much. You heard attacks on Never Trumpers, and specifically on Jonah Goldberg, that weren’t really there. (Maybe you hit a noisy patch of highway!)
The Democrats who dominate the Federal agencies already ignore the Constitution much of the time, as do Democrat elected officials. If they finally get their fifth vote on the Supreme Court, then all bets are off. They could change the Constitution in such a way as to ensure permanent control of the government by the Left; for example, by opening the borders, and declaring that non-citizens must be given the right to vote.
I think that they were a little hard on National Review. For me, most of the people there are in the agree to disagree range. Mona Charon (an NR contributor), and the Weekly Standard folks have just gone nuts regarding Trump.
As for the comments on Jonah Goldberg’s wife, nothing was meant by it. Hayward probably knows her, and from what I’ve gleened from various podcasts, Hayward and Goldberg are probably friends.
Regarding the comment of letting these people back into the Republican Party, most of those pundits could care less if they’re “let back in” or not. They rarely actually run for office, and their direct associations with political parties are not strong. Kevin Williamson makes it a point to say he’s not a Republican.
Lastly, let’s talk Scott Pruitt. I personally don’t care if members of the cabinet fly first class at government expense. But apparently it’s against the rules. Pruitt continued that behavior when he was called on it. He wouldn’t stop. Though he was effective at the EPA, no one is indispensable. In the end, he had to go. Government service should be treated as an honor, not an entitlement.
I accept that the attacks were unfair, that probably his predecessor did the same thing and wasn’t called on it, and of course the attacks on Pruitt’s family are unconscionable, as are the attacks on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai (which include demonstrating at his house).
It does somewhat justify Trump’s own take no prisonors style.
I think that they were a little hard on National Review. For me, most of the people there are in the agree to disagree range. Mona Charon (an NR contributor), and the Weekly Standard folks have just gone nuts regarding Trump.
As for the comments on Jonah Goldberg’s wife, nothing was meant by it. Hayward probably knows her, and from what I’ve gleened from various podcasts, Hayward and Goldberg are probably friends.
Regarding the comment of letting these people back into the Republican Party, most of those pundits could care less if they’re “let back in” or not. They rarely actually run for office, and their direct associations with political parties are not strong. Kevin Williamson makes it a point to say he’s not a Republican.
Lastly, let’s talk Scott Pruitt. I personally don’t care if members of the cabinet fly first class at government expense. But apparently it’s against the rules. Pruitt continued that behavior when he was called on it. He wouldn’t stop. Though he was effective at the EPA, no one is indispensable. In the end, he had to go. Government service should be treated as an honor, not an entitlement.
I accept that the attacks were unfair, that probably his predecessor did the same thing and wasn’t called on it, and of course the attacks on Pruitt’s family are unconscionable, as are the attacks on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai (which include demonstrating at his house).
It does somewhat justify Trump’s own take no prisoners style.
I seemed to have botched the editing. There are spelling and syntax corrections between the two almost identical posts.
I still like some of Jonah and Bill Kristol’s podcasts. They often seem quite sane when the word “Trump” doesn’t come up. However, their podcasts aren’t particularly brave. How many Trump-hostile Republicans can they find and interview? That gets boring after awhile. After a bitterly-fought primary even some of Trump’s harshest critics like Rick Perry, Rand Paul, and Lindsey Graham have found ways to work with him.
Jonah’s wife being associated with Jonah? I don’t even know what that means. Should a person’s wife be associated with the person.
I try not to call people bigots myself. Dead historically figure maybe, but I’m not really fond of that word as some Leftist might wish to use it to describe all the Founding Fathers, all white men, etc.
When I hear that word I typically think of racial matters. Apparently the Internet describes bigotry as “intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.” Heck, that could be anybody.
I think they are just expressing their opinions. Perhaps they are correct about the future, perhaps the future will be altered, or perhaps they are incorrect about the future. It is difficult to claim victory against a war or battle which ends up not actually being fought or being fought in a different time in a completely different way.
…
Don’t worry Gary we’ll defend you when the Leftist mob decides to come after you for looking or saying the wrong word to a woman (or supposedly doing so) a quarter or a third of a century ago after memories have faded. Perhaps people like Roy Moore, Herman Cain, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Eric Greitens, Pete Domenici, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich, Robert Livingston, Dan Burton, Bob Barr, and Donald Trump will be willing to defend you too.
I agree entirely. I don’t even see how that’s very refutable.
Listen again and they actually blamed anyone who has ever been identified as “Never Trump” for creating these ridiculous attacks on the judge, despite the fact that these types of nuclear bombs have been launched for years from the Left.
They said they hate those “Never Trump” pundits more than the people who are currently machinating this absolute travesty against justice.
If I’m to take their thoughts seriously, somehow what a weak woman has created in her mind to make herself feel “empowered” to bring down what seems to be on every count a very good, very decent, very brilliant, extremely accomplished judge can be put at the feet of The National Review. (!!!) And anyone who questions the character or politics of President Trump is not welcomed in the Republican tent?
That’s… not productive.
I am not a fan at all of President Trump, though I like some of his policies. I can separate my distaste for the man and my support–and loud cheering–for his support of originalist jurists. I can say I find his Tweets stupid while approving his tax cuts. I can note that I didn’t think his trip to North Korea accomplished anything good/worthwhile in the macro, while being absolutely glad that Americans were released from that dystopia. I can say that I think it’s gross to sleep with a porn star after your wife’s had a baby–and hold that against someone–and then be much, much MORE disgusted by accusations hurled in the dark at a man whose reputation shows no such character defects.
I am lukewarm on Ted Cruz, but I will walk over broken glass to vote for him in November to counter this craziness. I’ll drag my very apolitical husband by the scruff of the neck to do the same because there are only Beto signs and t-shirts ANYWHERE I look. (Like, seriously. I haven’t seen a SINGLE Cruz sticker.)
Why?
Because I have a son. This is dangerous. Both the women are totally right when they say this also makes a mockery out of credible accusations. And that also goes for the woman who is now up in arms for (supposedly) seeing a guy at a dorm party turn into a streaker. OMG!
But when people keep saying over and over and over again that people who criticize Donald Trump on any level can’t be on their team? Should be exiled forever for that sin?
Eventually, we’ll listen and just not play.
Geez.
It’s like they don’t understand my Cruz vote helps Trump.
Yes on all of this, too.
Finally, I can say that I’ve thought President Trump’s positioning on all of this has been spot on. He has played the politics really well, and I recognize this, as I think the pundits named as “the problem” in the Powerline podcast do as well, though I have not heard all of their opinions.
I hope to goodness that the Republicans in general simply stand up and stop this nonsense this week.
The whole confirmation hearing has been disgusting.
I wonder if the Republicans are playing a dangerous game themselves of trying to invigorate their voters to go to the polls in the midterms by putting all of this on display.
That was at least what I thought Grassley was doing, though I will have to wait and see how he handles this second woman.
I will lose patience if this isn’t wrapped up this week.
The goal is to him approved AND to get more (or limit the losses) of Republicans in Congress.
That’s a very difficult game with a narrow Republican majority. I wish one Democrat would step up to support him.
Eleven Democrats voted for Clarence Thomas.
Four Democrats voted for Samuel Alito.
Three Democrats voted for Neil Gorsuch.
Two Democrats voted for Robert Bork.
One Democrat voted for Jeff Sessions for Attorney General.
(Only six Democrats voted against Rod Rosenstein.)
…
The vote might even have to take place in January after the election, if some Republicans go wobbly. We could get 4 more months of this…