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.
Another in a seemingly endless series of very busy weeks but we’ve got you covered. First up: The Oracle himself, Governor Haley Barbour. He’s got a perspective of 50 years in politics, so we thought we have him on to see what he thinks of the last few months. Prepared to get schooled. Then, as freedom of speech on digital platforms –like the one you’re reading right now– is now one of the most important issues facing society, we thought we have on someone who is on the front lines of the debate. Meet Venture Capitalist and fierce 1st Amendment advocate David Sacks (and be sure to watch the extended cut David’s segment in our new members only feature, Rob Long’s Six Dumb Questions which can be found here). Also, impeachment, Pelosi, and yes, Rob Long predicts the coming re-unification of the Republican Party. You heard it here first.
Music from this week’s show: Man Out of Time by Elvis Costello
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast 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.
Boll & Branch
Use Code: RICOCHET
The right sheets can take your sleep and your style to the next level. With Boll and Branch, that upgrade has never been more affordable. Go to BollandBranch.com and use promo code RICOCHET to get $50 off your first set of sheets plus free shipping in the U.S.
I’ve seen both of the Frontline interviews too and I recommend them as historical time capsules. But we have no interest in amplifying his views on current events. Plus, he has his own show and doesn’t need our help.
Barbour’s right that a lot of what Trump did right was lost in his other messaging, a flood of other information that drowned out his talking about the accomplishments (how the economy was cranking before Covid hit, his foreign policy successes with China and Israel, regulatory reductions, etc). But to say he wasn’t talking about them isn’t accurate, it just isn’t something that he did enough of and he wasn’t exactly receiving adulation for his accomplishments, unlike other less accomplished presidents (*cough* Obama *cough*).
He was being skewered for a Russian hoax, for 2 years, one ginned up by the exiting administration. It’s hard to do policy or idea promulgation when you’re punching back at both the gov’t you’ve inherited, and the media, as an example of how messaging, at best, is a much more uphill battle for Republicans than Progressives/Democrats.
Secondly, those calls for limited gov’t, regulatory reform, etc, are the right arguments, but all of those Republicans (or most of them) that Haley was talking about themselves are only, at best, slightly less in favor of the ratchet the Democrats are turning with all their might in one direction. The debt and deficit only ratchet in one direction. Any serious discussion of entitlement reform sends Republicans scurrying back to their offices in case they get asked hard questions, because every one of them wants to come back to DC after their next election. As an example. When Republicans run with the message of that kind of change (repealing Obamacare), that dies the second after the election tallies are in, then it’s back to the same-old, same-old.
Trump’s not the only Republican with access to Twitter (or at least had access). Not a single person would be stopping any Republican who’s running from making those same policy arguments that Haley described. Are they? Maybe some are, and it’s working, considering how well Republicans did in November, but you really wouldn’t know that from the news.
But historically any talk of reform, which is what would be required for smaller gov’t (which Haley mentioned), is almost anathema. The fact is that you can talk about what the right things are to do, and how to do them, but it took an iconoclast (a massively flawed one) to show what you can do if you cast aside the sclerotic rot from the institutions (China, Israel, regulations), partner with the private sector (because the gov’t can’t build a thing on its own without contractors), and actually get something done.
I remember the discussion around the strong Republican bench during the last couple of election cycles. We’re hearing it again now. The only change I saw happening was when Trump was elected. I don’t expect change in 2021.
The GOP.
Fair enough.
They have to get sophisticated about all of this.
It’s much easier to be a Democrat.
Of course it’s easier, because as a Democrat you let others do your thinking FOR you.
And sometimes your working, too. While you sit back and play video games.
Yeah. Hit the road, HB., you and your broken record of a party whose only idea is to do nothing. Broad generalization on my part, of course, but any further detail isn’t worth my time.
Realistically, the GOP has to go left on a few things to just try to move things right like we would like to. Part of it is structural due to globalism and monetary policy. They have to have an integrated view.
She probably means because they DIDN’T shut down Trump SOON enough.
To me, Steve Bannon seems a bit out there, and I like Haley. He’s a good old boy. But, I second Rufus’s recommendation. Let’s spice it up a little bit. I’m really old, but Haley is older. Does he really know what time it is?
I don’t know. I kind of admire someone who can make money out of other people’s cat poo. As long as China is not involved.
So let the large medical facilities get the Pfizer and give the Moderna to pharmacies.
I was just thinking how much better he sounds than Biden.
How can China NOT be involved, really? If people are doing that for minimum $15/hour it would cost a lot more.
Foghorn Leghorn sounds better than Biden.
Thanks for the suggestion. With all due respect, I think we’ll pass on this one:
Steve Bannon Reportedly Encouraged Facebook Followers To ‘Take Action’ Day Before Capitol Riots
I’m not a Bannon fan, but that’s weak. Forbes says Bannon said to “take action.” Damning!
BTW, did you know that Forbes has threatened business leaders who question the integrity of the election? I wouldn’t cite them as an authority on what Bannon meant by that.
In the actual text of the article, Bannon’s Facebook page is quoted as follows:
Later in the article, Bannon is quoted again:
Pretty clear what he meant. That’s damning enough for me.
I think just about anything would be enough for you.
Forbes Op-Ed
“Let it be known to the business world: Hire any of Trump’s fellow fabulists above, and Forbes will assume that everything your company or firm talks about is a lie. We’re going to scrutinize, double-check, investigate with the same skepticism we’d approach a Trump tweet. Want to ensure the world’s biggest business media brand approaches you as a potential funnel of disinformation? Then hire away.”
I don’t recommend quoting Forbes favorably. They’ve become part of cancel culture. Absolutely abhorrent.
I’m basing my comments on Bannon’s quotes in the story, which have nothing to do with Forbes’ policy or with me. Are you suggesting that Forbes made the quotes up?
I’m skeptical of much of the media as well. But quotes are quotes and words matter. To me, at least.
I don’t doubt the quote is accurate, but what action? I would not rely on Forbes to accurately convey the context or meaning.
Anyway, I was not really hard over on the question of whether putting Bannon on your podcast was a good idea, or not. I thought Rufus’ suggestion was interesting, and would not reject it out of hand if I were you. I, for one, would like to see him come on and be challenged.
My major issue is the de-platforming of people (even slightly nutty people) who question the integrity of the election. These issues need to be aired fairly, even if you may think they have no merit. Millions of people think otherwise, and they are not going away. Sunshine is the best policy.
Now, you and the Ricochet leadership can certainly make an editorial decision not to put on someone of Bannon’s character – and I don’t think you ever have put on such a shady type. Maybe you can get Josh Hawley or Ted Cruz. They think action should be taken, too.
In my view there are a couple of problems with an antitrust approach to free speech: 1) US antitrust law has always been idiotic even limited to business; the object should NOT be to prevent monopoly or price collusion, but only to ensure that there are no arbitrary barriers to entry, a principle that takes care of the other two things for free. 2) Nothing in the current situation falls outside existing principles. If the current incumbents want to be publishers pretending to be platforms, it only sets up an opportunity for someone to provide an honest-to-God platform. Which you’d think would be profitable, even if you or several other yous had to supply support all the way up to the common carrier (although this is still Capitalism and you just never know). So strictly enforce section 230 or don’t, as long as SayWhatYouWantButNOChildPornography.com is possible, no worries.
The basic problem is that you have a conflict between a property right and an expression right. Milton Friedman suggested leaning heavily on the property right as support for the expression right for the practical reason that the ability to make a living is the one that lets you weather the storm. Having it impaired can shut you up faster than Jack, Mark, and 100,000 cantankerous employees. I believe I agree. (His example FWIW was the Hollywood Blacklist, a dishonorable ten-year departure from liberality).
Has everyone given up on free markets?
Well, that’s the point isn’t it? He’s just vague enough to leave enough wiggle room so he can wink and say, “what me?” I’ve had enough of that BS.
I’m open to this down the road a bit. Not now. Too soon.
Bannon has his own show and apparently, a Facebook page that he uses to claim that “THEY ARE STEALING THE ELECTION” and exhort people to “TAKE ACTION” in all caps. So he’s got a platform and doesn’t need any help from us.
Who’s shady and who isn’t is a subjective call. I’m quite sure that every week there are people who think we’ve booked someone shady. To that end, we’ve had Cruz on a couple of times (not in several years) and Hawley has been on some other shows (including Uncommon Knowledge).
I’m not in a big hurry to have either of them on, and based on their sudden disappearance from the media landscape, I’m certain they wouldn’t come on if we asked.
Again, I’m not opposed to having Bannon (or Cruz or Hawley) on in the future, just not right now.
How about former Marxist Thomas Sowell? He can remind everyone how Totalitarians work, a topic that seems the fly over the heads of most Ricochet hosts these days. I’ve been continually surprised these last few months how few seem to understand the foundation of what’s going on.
Ask Sowell outright: “Is the Democratic party now a totalitarian party? And is the GOP as currently constituted equipped to deal with them?”
Anyone paying attention knows how he will answer.
We are past politics as usually, and the GOP is asleep in the passenger seat.
Oh wait… I’m just a dumb Trumper. Nevermind…
I’m not sure what your point is: by booking Bannon, Cruz, or Hawley we’d be defeating Democratic totalitarianism? How many Democratic totalitarians do you think are listening to the Ricochet Podcast?
For the record, we’ve had Thomas Sowell on many, many times over the years, most recently last June. He’s appeared on on our show more than any other podcast, I’d guess (he and Peter are old friends). I’d have him on every show if I could. In fact, one of these days, I should pull together a Sowell clip show.
I say, I say …. I agree.
Sacks pointed out something that has been on my mind. If the Masterpiece Bakery just took a few minutes to come up with Terms of Service, would he have been bulletproof in court?
Is there a monopoly out there flying under the wire? Hosting services? Should Parler have been able to move to another platform the day after being cut off by Amazon? If not, why not?
Gazpacho, I am with you. I care about the government only insofar as it affects me. Trump’s policies related to China, regulations, taxes, ISIS, foreign wars, etc. matter to me. The tweets and resulting outrage are soap opera crap. As Barbour said I don’t have to think too hard about Trump or Biden based on any version or any timeframe of accomplishment.
In re Rob’s comment about the impeachment being invalid because it it between two Congresses, I am confused. The new Congress started on 3 January at 12:01 PM. Even if power in the Senate changes hands (or the House for that matter) it doesn’t start a new Congress. Congress itself can “reboot” and start a new Congress (it requires a law, not a rule change, so it’s got those hurdles) but otherwise all Congresses align to 3 January, to stay aligned to when terms begin and end. So not sure what Rob meant