Hurricanes, Knees, and Dr. Suess

This week, we call of a couple of our most popular podcasters to help us parse the week’s events: Michael Graham, the Boston based host of or daily podcast Michael in the Morning sits in for Peter Robinson, while Michael Stopa from the Harvard Lunch Club podcast stops by to talk about how the President is doing so far (and yes, he and Rob Long get into another one of their epic rap battles). Then, the WSJ’s Jason Riley joins to discuss kneeling in the NFL and his new book False Black Power? Finally, a librarian in Massachusetts doesn’t like Dr. Suess. Well, that’s not really true, and a hearty “so long, Hef!”

Music from this week’s show: Puerto Rico by Vaya Con Dios

 

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.

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. Michael Graham Member
    Michael Graham
    @MichaelGraham

    So, “The joke….”

    If you’ve listened to the new Ricochet podcast you know that:

    A-They made the incredible mistake in judgment of having me fill in for Peter Robinson;

    B-Lileks, for reasons unknown, waxed poetic upon the topic of gaseous canine emissions. (And not in a good way.)

    His homage to household-pet flatulence called to mind what comedians call a “street joke”–a joke you pass around the office or via email. Being that I was in the podcast company of a comedy great, Rob Long, I quipped (aside: what an awful, pretentious verb) “Hey, Rob–I bet you’re thinking of the same joke I’m thinking of: The guy on the first date waiting in the living room with the girl’s dad?”

    Rob drew a blank.  Never heard the joke.

    Because I was a guest on the Ricochet Podcast and didn’t want to cross any lines of crudity, I declined to share the humorous anecdote on the air but promised to post it here:

    A young man is on his first date with an extremely beautiful girl. He shows up, she’s not ready, so he’s stuck waiting for her in the living room with a not-particularly-happy-to-see-him father and the family dog.

    Suddenly he’s stricken with painful intestinal distress of the gaseous kind. He’s literally sweating, he’s struggling so hard to keep it in.  Finally, out of fear that he might have an even more embarrassing discharge, he allows a bit of the offensive air to quietly escape.

    The father looks over at the dog, who’s on the floor at the young man’s feet and shouts “Rover!”

    The young man is startled. He lets a bit more into the wind. Again the father shouts, even more loudly, “ROVER!”

    The suitor is saved! He sighs with great relief as he allows all the noxious fumes to flow freely, at which time the father jumps to his feet and cries “Rover! Get away from that idiot before he [bleeps] all over you!”

    ***

    Remember: Lileks started it.

    • #1
  2. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Michael Graham (View Comment):
    So, “The joke….”

    If you’ve listened to the new Ricochet podcast you know that:

    A-They made the incredible mistake in judgment of having me fill in for Peter Robinson;

    B-Lileks, for reasons unknown, waxed poetic upon the topic of gaseous canine emissions. (And not in a good way.)

    His homage to household-pet flatulence called to mind what comedians call a “street joke”–a joke you pass around the office or via email. Being that I was in the podcast company of a comedy great, Rob Long, I quipped (aside: what an awful, pretentious verb) “Hey, Rob–I bet you’re thinking of the same joke I’m thinking of: The guy on the first date waiting in the living room with the girl’s dad?”

    Rob drew a blank. Never heard the joke.

    Because I was a guest on the Ricochet Podcast and didn’t want to cross any lines of crudity, I declined to share the humorous anecdote on the air but promised to post it here:

    A young man is on his first date with an extremely beautiful girl. He shows up, she’s not ready, so he’s stuck waiting for her in the living room with a not-particularly-happy-to-see-him father and the family dog.

    Suddenly he’s stricken with painful intestinal distress of the gaseous kind. He’s literally sweating, he’s struggling so hard to keep it in. Finally, out of fear that he might have an even more embarrassing discharge, he allows a bit of the offensive air to quietly escape.

    The father looks over at the dog, who’s on the floor at the young man’s feet and shouts “Rover!”

    The young man is startled. He lets a bit more into the wind. Again the father shouts, even more loudly, “ROVER!”

    The suitor is saved! He sighs with great relief as he allows all the noxious fumes to flow freely, at which time the father jumps to his feet and cries “Rover! Get away from that idiot before he [bleeps] all over you!”

    ***

    Remember: Lileks started it.

    I think I get it. But why does the girl have to be extremely beautiful?

    • #2
  3. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Because this is the World Wide Web, I must comply with a new French law regulating Photoshopping. Because so many aspire to be James, Rob, Peter or various guest hosts I have to tell you that this image is “photographie retouchée,” or face a fine of €37,000.

    In this case, the black silk pajamas are Rob’s but the hat was borrowed from Sonny Bunch. Thank you.

    • #3
  4. J Ro Member
    J Ro
    @JRo

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Michael Graham (View Comment):
    So, “The joke….”

     

    I think I get it. But why does the girl have to be extremely beautiful?

    It raises the stakes in the risky game of dating. I might have added that she was a cheerleader.

    • #4
  5. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Gentlemen,

    It seems that I can’t make it through one of your Ricochet podcasts — or, in this case, through the first five minutes — without encountering something objectionable, if not deeply offensive. In this case, it was your guest Mr. Graham (whose podcasts I enjoy) who crossed the line, when he used “effort” as a verb.

    Otherwise, another great show. “Blogosfeldt” was particularly excellent.

    H.

    • #5
  6. Michael Graham Member
    Michael Graham
    @MichaelGraham

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gentlemen,

    It seems that I can’t make it through one of your Ricochet podcasts — or, in this case, through the first five minutes — without encountering something objectionable, if not deeply offensive. In this case, it was your guest Mr. Graham (whose podcasts I enjoy) who crossed the line, when he used “effort” as a verb.

    Otherwise, another great show. “Blogosfeldt” was particularly excellent.

    H.

    I can only plead “irony” and throw myself on the mercy of the court.

    • #6
  7. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Michael Graham (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Gentlemen,

    It seems that I can’t make it through one of your Ricochet podcasts — or, in this case, through the first five minutes — without encountering something objectionable, if not deeply offensive. In this case, it was your guest Mr. Graham (whose podcasts I enjoy) who crossed the line, when he used “effort” as a verb.

    Otherwise, another great show. “Blogosfeldt” was particularly excellent.

    H.

    I can only plead “irony” and throw myself on the mercy of the court.

    Ah, of course — a cultural reference I missed. Hardly surprising: I sometimes wonder if I’m as groovy as I think I am.

    Regular listener to your morning show, Michael. Keep it coming.

    • #7
  8. Max Ledoux Coolidge
    Max Ledoux
    @Max

    Rob and Lileks complained mightily about Trump’s “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer, but failed to actually define it (at least up to the point where I am in the podcast currently). What was the so-called deal? It was to provide hurricane relief to hurricane victims.

    The alternative was for Republicans to hold hurricane relief hostage to a fight over the debt ceiling that Republicans have never been willing to fight. Which means that eventually the Republicans would have caved, having gained nothing, but having held hurricane relief hostage and given a huge coup to the media. How do you think coverage of Puerto Rico would be going, had Republicans in Congress spent several weeks trying to prevent funding for hurricane victims?

    Furthermore, since Pelosi and Schumer are in the minority, it doesn’t matter what they agree to with the president if the majority disagree. But Republicans didn’t disagree. The “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer was actually an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill that passed with huge super-majorities in both houses.

    Trump didn’t make “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer. He got them to vote for something that almost all Republicans wanted anyway. It was a huge win. But people who, uh, Never have liked, uh, Trump, can’t take yes for an answer and refuse to accept victory.

    I do join Mike Stopa in feeling uneasy about Trump’s flirtation with amnesty. (“We’re not talking about amnesty — we’re just going to let them stay here.”)

    • #8
  9. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):
    But people who, uh, Never have liked, uh, Trump

    LOLing out loud. ;)

    • #9
  10. Rightfromthestart Coolidge
    Rightfromthestart
    @Rightfromthestart

    I understand the reason dog flatulance doesn’t make noise is because they don’t have  cheeks in that area.

    • #10
  11. JuliaBlaschke Lincoln
    JuliaBlaschke
    @JuliaBlaschke

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):
    Rob and Lileks complained mightily about Trump’s “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer, but failed to actually define it (at least up to the point where I am in the podcast currently). What was the so-called deal? It was to provide hurricane relief to hurricane victims.

    The alternative was for Republicans to hold hurricane relief hostage to a fight over the debt ceiling that Republicans have never been willing to fight. Which means that eventually the Republicans would have caved, having gained nothing, but having held hurricane relief hostage and given a huge coup to the media. How do you think coverage of Puerto Rico would be going, had Republicans in Congress spent several weeks trying to prevent funding for hurricane victims?

    Furthermore, since Pelosi and Schumer are in the minority, it doesn’t matter what they agree to with the president if the majority disagree. But Republicans didn’t disagree. The “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer was actually an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill that passed with huge super-majorities in both houses.

    Trump didn’t make “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer. He got them to vote for something that almost all Republicans wanted anyway. It was a huge win. But people who, uh, Never have liked, uh, Trump, can’t take yes for an answer and refuse to accept victory.

    I do join Mike Stopa in feeling uneasy about Trump’s flirtation with amnesty. (“We’re not talking about amnesty — we’re just going to let them stay here.”)

    Wow, you win the Trumpslaining Trophy for today. Go claim your reward and have Trump pat you on the head.

    • #11
  12. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    It seems that I can’t make it through one of your Ricochet podcasts — or, in this case, through the first five minutes — without encountering something objectionable

    Yeah, like when they quote that Henry Racette guy.

    • #12
  13. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):
    Rob and Lileks complained mightily about Trump’s “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer, but failed to actually define it (at least up to the point where I am in the podcast currently). What was the so-called deal? It was to provide hurricane relief to hurricane victims.

    The alternative was for Republicans to hold hurricane relief hostage to a fight over the debt ceiling that Republicans have never been willing to fight. Which means that eventually the Republicans would have caved, having gained nothing, but having held hurricane relief hostage and given a huge coup to the media. How do you think coverage of Puerto Rico would be going, had Republicans in Congress spent several weeks trying to prevent funding for hurricane victims?

    Furthermore, since Pelosi and Schumer are in the minority, it doesn’t matter what they agree to with the president if the majority disagree. But Republicans didn’t disagree. The “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer was actually an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill that passed with huge super-majorities in both houses.

    Trump didn’t make “deal” with Pelosi and Schumer. He got them to vote for something that almost all Republicans wanted anyway. It was a huge win. But people who, uh, Never have liked, uh, Trump, can’t take yes for an answer and refuse to accept victory.

    I do join Mike Stopa in feeling uneasy about Trump’s flirtation with amnesty. (“We’re not talking about amnesty — we’re just going to let them stay here.”)

    Wow, you win the Trumpslaining Trophy for today. Go claim your reward and have Trump pat you on the head.

    Can you point to anything qualitatively wrong with his analysis?

    • #13
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.