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.
This week on the Big Show, we start in frigid Minnesota, home of one James Lileks, who describes life in a Polar Vortex for those of us who live in more temperate climes. Then, we’re off to the swamps of Jersey for a visit from Commentary’s Noah Rothman to talk about his fascinating new book Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America. Then, it’s off to Venezuela where Annika Rothstein is on the ground in Caracas reporting on the collapse of a revolution. Finally, we end up back in the good old U.S. of A for some Super Bowl picks from the hosts. Who ya got?
Music from this week’s podcast: Not as Much as Football by Mojo Nixon
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.
I don’t want to be ruled by anyone. I am old enough to rule myself.
And once the Mona haters bring her in, when she has nothing to do with thread.
No one gets any power by having any libertarian sensibilities like the three guys I mentioned. Trump gets in the office, the GOP controls everything and it turns out that three senators and 100 representatives from the GOP lied about repealing Obama care. What is he supposed to do?
The problem is the Fed and the financial system. It favors everything going left. I keep posting links about it, and literally only one guy has responded. Then there is O’Sullivan’s law. Look it up. Trump is netting out so far.
I have some news for you…
George, you baffle me. By your reasoning, if Trump eats peas and beans but not carrots and cauliflower, therefore he doesn’t eat vegetables. I am not sure of the name of this particular logical fallacy.
Besides, what Republican President has done anything about entitlements, other than strike a pose?
The difference is that they usually say they’ll do something and don’t. Trump is more honest in saying, “We’re not touching that.”
There isnt a political movement to cut entitlements, IF anything like that gets done – it would be in the second half of his second term. If he where to try sooner, there would not be a second term. Even then Iam not sure he would even try – there is a very limited Overton Window on what could be done. Maybe means testing for social security?
Cutting regulation is a great place to start, as the overall burden of the regulatory state is far greater than all taxes paid.
I’ll answer this, and that’s all: You are making comparisons again. Comparisons are silly. I never said that others did the right thing. I even wish that Reagan, whom I revere, could have done better.
Why did our fellow Republican have to choose Trump to run against Hillary? He and Mike Huckabee were the only ones who pledged not to do anything about entitlements. What a wasted opportunity. I still believe that Marco Rubio, my first choice, could have done as good a job, on judges and other things (he is great on foreign policy) as Trump on policy, without all the crazy ego-boosting tirades.
People/voters often believe their favorite candidate would do a great job. And in the past, most/all of them wound up being disappointments. It’s quite possible that Marco Rubio would have been another disappointment, as it was also possible for Ted Cruz who I voted for in the primaries. The bottom line is that Trump has done/is doing a lot of things that past candidates – and past presidents – said they would do, but then didn’t. Including moving the Israel embassy, which has been official US policy for years without ever being even seriously talked about getting done. I can admit that Trump is probably being more effective than Cruz would have. And perhaps Rubio too.
Just need to emphasize this.
I think you may have a point regarding the embassy. Though I can’t stand Trump, I believe in honesty. and Rubio may have “gone wobbly” on that (to borrow a Margaret Thatcher phrase). Bu,t in all other areas, I believe that Sen. Rubio would have done many of the policy things that Trump did.
“Comparisons are silly.”—George Townsend.
Perhaps George will find it ill-mannered of me to point out that he constantly compares Trump to other Republican presidents.
Here’s another “silly” comparison to think about — or dismiss without thinking. If we condemn Trump for “merely” taking a meat axe to regulations but not entitlements, what should we say about Bush II, who created a whole new entitlement?
Just as the Brits can’t get their act together and appear to be heading for a “hard Brexit”, the US is probably headed for “hard entitlement reform“. For example, as the fund runs out, social security checks will be cut by some percentage (in theory, as high as 25%), across the board.
I get the impression this was the moment the a lot of smart finance guys that were Republican got really cynical and changed their minds on a lot of things. Medicare Part D, the instant $9 trillion unfunded liability. So Bush could finish off Iraq.
We are where we are for actual reasons.
If you believe Rubio would have done MANY of the same policy things, which things do you think he WOULDN’T have done? And aren’t those wouldn’t-have-dones of any importance?
Do you think Rubio would have stood up for/stood behind Gorsuch and especially Kavanaugh and gotten them through? I could easily see both Rubio and Cruz “going wobbly” there too.
First of all, I am not a suspect. I will not be interrogated, as if I committed a crime. People like you think it is a crime not to like Mr. Trump. It is not. He is a disgusting individual. Now, let it go.
Nice little escape hatch you’ve got there.
You’re the one who brought it up, George. Seems like fair questions in response.
While I have to defend myself, I will say two things:
@georgetownsend — Why do you think you should get the last word? Only fake Native American Vietnam veterans get that kind of privilege!
I just don’t understand, if even George is apparently admitting that Trump is doing more things that George supports than Marco Rubio – or Ted Cruz – would have done, why isn’t it better to have Trump? Especially since the alternative was not Rubio or Cruz, it was Hillary.
And George apparently forgets that I just said again, I voted for Cruz in the primaries. I don’t “worship” Trump, but I can admit that he’s doing more things that I support, than Cruz probably would have done. And I don’t vote for a Pastor In Chief, or whatever.
Orange Man Bad.