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.
Today, Jay turns “Q&A” into an old-fashioned “Need to Know,” with his “friend, colleague, heroine, and podcast partner,” as he puts it: Mona Charen. They talk Trump-Ukraine-impeachment, of course. And then Greta (the teen climate-change activist), China, Turkey, Egypt, etc. A lot of laughs, a little yelling, and some keen analysis.
At the beginning, Jay asks Mona a potentially sensitive question: What is your middle name? He has never known …
Subscribe to Q & A, Hosted by Jay Nordlinger 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.
Sure, but we have 3 other candidates in the GOP primary. And I’m supporting Mark Sanford. And Trump’s latest scandal should help Sanford’s cause. So, I have zero interest in bailing Trump out. And so Trumpers call me an enemy, even though I’m very conservative. Oh well.
I’m not sure what a Trumper is. I am a Trump supporter, and I would not call you an enemy.
But I think, if we successfully primary Trump, we will certainly lose the general. I think it’s preposterous. So unless you favor a Democrat over Trump, I think it’s a very bad call.
Fortunately, I expect it to go nowhere.
@rgbact — Wait a minute. This is what you said about Prof. Richard Epstein‘s argument against impeachment yesterday:
Well, that was pretty pathetic. Evidently, Trump is Ok because what he did doesn’t rise to impeachable……but Biden has to worry about his shady ethics (which of course Trump never has to worry about, Epstein just handwaves that away totally). So Congress is going to have many witnsesses [sic] testify on all of this….and Epstein doesn’t care one bit about what they’ll have to say. Cuz Trump fights!
Yep. His podcast was very weak, especially for an academic. He must’ve felt bad about his flippant analysis on an issue so big in the podcast, so took a couple days to do a deep analysis write up. So, I’ll give him points for at least having substantive arguments now, unlike before.
Republicans that hate Trump don’t think hard enough about this
They don’t gather data and think it through, so they lash out.
Isn’t it clear by now that rgbact will accept no defense of the President regardless of the source? All his talk about wanting to find someone intelligent to defend the President is just a smoke screen. As soon as his chosen “intelligent person” defends the President, he determines that person is no longer allowed in the “intelligent” category.
I submit that such an approach is not very . . . intelligent.
Drew, I don’t know rgb — though I do appreciate the fact that his/her chosen appellation is the acronym for the simple red/green/blue additive color model.
I don’t know rgb, and I don’t know what degree of analysis and consideration rgb brings to his/her posts. But that doesn’t matter to me, because — I’ll say it again — the most productive approach to engagement in a public forum is to think of the audience and talk to them.
None of us is perfect, and sometimes it’s hard to avoid the temptation to make a critical personal comment. And, honestly, it’s fun. But I think people, especially normal (i.e., relatively non-political) people, tend to tune out both sides when it happens.
The trouble is, the day after you attacked Prof. Epstein (on Sept. 29), you pretended he didn’t exist (Sept. 30):
I’ll take David French over Robert Jeffrees and Diamond and Silk and any other “trump intellectuals” anyday. Trumpism truly is a movement to remove all intelligence from conservatism. FOX evidently can’t find intelligent people to defend Trump, if they are down to the likes of this know nothing pastor. Still waiting for an intelligent conservative that actually defends Trump.
Epstein’s Wikipedia article has a lot of information on his enormous stature within his field: “A study of legal publications between 2009 and 2013 found Epstein to be the 3rd most frequently cited American legal scholar, behind only Cass Sunstein and Erwin Chemerinsky.”
I said that the latest Epstein writeup defense was pretty decent. Much better than Robert Jefrees or Charlie Kirk or even VDH (who I read and crtitiqued) or Mark Levin. But I’m still curious about how many more conservative intellectuals besides David French you want to chase out of conservatism and be replaced by???? Epstein?
I have an idea. Listen to the interviews of David Stockman on the Tom Woods show and Contra Krugman around September 2016. The economic problems he describes are what GOP never deals with while they babble about “the dignity of work”.
Read the spectator article by Angelo Codevilla about the ruling class. Rush Limbaugh famously read all 18 pages on his show.
Then tell me why David Horowitz is wrong about anything.
If you don’t want anymore Donald Trumps taking over the GOP that’s what you have to consider.
Also, we need to finish a war once in a while.
***EDIT***
Listen to the interview of Angelo Codevilla on the Tom Woods Show, too.
***EDIT***
Get a real vision pass and watch the 90 minute interview of David Stockman. People have all this stuff in their head about what Ronald Reagan was like and when the GOP used to be conservative. It’s all nonsense. Freaking out about Trump isn’t going to make things better.