Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
So every podcast has to attack the President. The Flagship podcast has sadly become a one-note band.
Last week: VDH
Week before that: Scott Adams
Week before that: Larry Kudlow as co-host.
Note sure that adds up to this show having become a “one-note band.”
If only Rob could have participated . . .
The referral to American Consequences was worth the price of admission. Wow! What a great magazine. And its free. Go there right now!
PJ writes such funny stuff — funny because it’s true.
The podcast was a joy to listen to. But I must say I was disappointed WRT the Arpaio pardon discussion — all four of those elderly wits focused only on the personal and political aspects of “Sheriff Joe’s” impending pardon; what about the legal issues?! He wasn’t convicted of being an odious man (he is, as Jon Gabriel convincingly argues in The Conservatarians podcast). He was convicted of violating a court order to stop profiling Hispanics. But all this discussion in the flagship podcast about his general nastiness, and the political implications of Trump’s imminent decision to pardon him is not relevant.
Jon argues that a good case can be made that the judge was not being political, but was appropriately applying the law in convicting him and in denying him his constitutional right to a jury trial. But those are the proper questions, and should have been the focus of the discussion.
Fortunately, Peter Robinson followed up later with a good post on those questions. I think he had a nagging feeling that the proper application of law is the issue; not whether “Sheriff Joe” is a good guy, or what Trump’s base needs to satisfy its passions. Although those questions are interesting, that’s not how we should be evaluating the decision to pardon.
Doesn’t the NR Cruise set sail on August 31st? Or did Lileks decide to get to Southhampton by taking the westbound voyage on the QM2?
Guys: this was one funny podcast. Even by Ricochet Flagship podcast standards.
I wish I could give this post more than one ‘like’.
Hmmmm.
What doesn’t fit in this progression of Ricochet Membership levels, as discussed in this podcast?
Ronald Reagan – Margaret Thatcher – Calvin Coolidge – Abraham Lincoln – Jon Gabriel (!)
This is why we got Trump.
Gents,
Some tough love here… that was the worst Ricochet Podcast I’ve ever heard.
First, four speakers is too much. Second, when I’m looking for cutting-edge curmudgeonly insights and perspectives, I just call my grandfather. But from Ricochet I expect more.
I first heard of the return of Squeegee kids to New York in the pages of National Review within a week of DeBlassio’s election as mayor. So the fact that people are just noticing now…
I want to congratulate the podcast and Rob Long for listening to the audience, and putting the Trump criticism at the end where the Trump people asked them to.
As far as I can tell from the website, Burning Man isn’t free. Tickets range from $425 – $1,200, plus a vehicle fee. But they do have subsidized tickets for low income people……….
Pretty much as soon as they began to discuss politics, PJ O’Rourke said that Sherriff Arpaio was like a Nazi, that Trump was psychotic and ruled by an organ lower than his gut (meaning his male member), and that Trump’s base consists of 68 people. Andrew Ferguson and Rob joined in, and all on the podcast had themselves a good laugh. They found themselves hilarious.
O’Rourke should have been introduced as someone who endorsed Hillary — that would have set up the Trump-bashing more forthrightly.
Like O’Rourke, I am in New Hampshire; there are indeed a whole bunch of “flinty New Englanders” in my rural part of the state. Many voted for Trump; more than a few — more than 68 — still have Trump signs in their yard.
More than 90 percent of the GOP voted for Trump, but Ricochet is working hard to be the go-to site for the 10 percent who didn’t. For that minority, the vicious contempt and name-calling hurled at Trump and his “68” supporters will be music to their ears. Not to me. If I want to be insulted and listen to Trump be called names, I can go about 500 other places for that. Why pay to listen to it on Ricochet?
Hi guys. I’ve explicitly thrown money at Ricochet so I could come here and say — I love the podcast, but some of the old man humor was pretty dated and cringey. Women can’t make up their minds! Hahahhaaa, fresh hot takes, there. :|
Love the podcast. Very grateful for Rob Long’s perspective and Peter Robinson’s Reagan cred. And James Lilek’s segues. Missed those this week.
(also, thrilled to hear the word “antinomianism”.)
This was when I stopped listening.
This is all you need to know about PJ O’Rourke. PJ has always been the Acela corridor elitist’s comedy relief. His attack on Sheriff Joe is just his barking seal act to please his audience.
p.s. It’s fine with me that Ricochet has lots of ardent anti-Trumpers, but I think the podcasts should be more balanced — more lean-Trump or pro-Trump podcasts to balance out the anti-Trump ones. As it stands, the anti-Trump podcasts greatly outnumber the others. Another afterthought: I did not start out as a Trump supporter. But the media hysteria and the double standard and the ongoing Trump derangement, including from plenty of “thought leaders” on the right, have totally infuriated me and made me more of a Trump supporter than I was in November 2016.
My feeling, too. And I miss the old podcast days when someone like Angelo Codevilla could freak out Rob by mentioning anal sex during a discussion of SSM. Those were the days, my friend.
I didn’t stop at that point but I was trying to figure out how they could be so utterly clueless as to the size and composition of Trump’s base and then it hit me , I’ll every one is a religious follower of the Bible of the New York Times, which, to this day, after how many condemnations, is still insisting that Trump ‘refused’ to condemn Nazis.
It’s useful to go back to the 19th century and earlier reflections on a feeling the world has lost its faith and is chaotic. We now have confused armies fighting—the Antifa and the neo-Nazis…and conservatives among themselves. There is a loss of faith among conservatives in their principles, for example the rule of law. In all the disgust with Trump’s statements, there should be mention of Senator Marco Rubio’s tweets, which in part state “When entire movement built on anger & hatred, it justifies & ultimately leads to violence against them.” That sounds like a defense of mob action. If Senator Rubio believes mob violence is justified, then if he were a contemporary of Matthew Arnold would he have found lynch mobs to be justified? The reaction to Trump is the greatest danger to conservatives. Conservatives need to sit down and think about how they respond to Trump. They failed to thoughtfully engage with Trump during the primary. For example, I never heard anyone discuss Trump’s books, interviews and comments on politics made prior to the campaign. Now we begin to see those, such as the one where he discussed North Korea. Wouldn’t a disciplined approach to Trump then have possibly resulted in a different view of him by the voters, maybe brought a different outcome? Well, it’s not too late to give up on the emotional responses that make senators sound as though they’d have supported lynch mobs.
Peter Coyote is the government agent in E.T.
All time segue by @roblong – The Great Courses: Better Than Blowing Yourself Up.
As for Bob Hope as a hippie:
I enjoyed it, gentlemen. I take people for who they are and expect that some things are baked into the cake by now.
Rob, I love your segues. You are the Terminator of seguists. James has nothing on you.
This is what has happened to me also. he was my 17th choice among Republicans. But now I like him better than I did in November.
Yeah, me too. The Podcast has had some people whom they pass off as pro-Trump. As Fred pointed out:
But all three of these persons are less pro-Trump and more anti-Hillary. Or in the case of Scott Adams, more pro-look-how-smart-I,-Scott-Adams,-was-and-you-weren’t.
Overall the best the podcast has done is have grudging Trump supporters on.
For the record, we do political commentary and conversation, not hagiography. If you seriously think that Victor Davis Hanson, Scott Adams, and Larry Kudlow are somehow just “grudging” Trump supporters, then you should probably go find Jeffery Lord or Kayleigh McEnany’s podcast.
Are you inviting me not to listen to, or comment on, The Flagship Podcast? What membership tier does being asked not to listen or comment belong in? Do we pay for that one, or do we get a refund for sacrificing the purchased privilege to listen and comment? Perhaps reluctant is better than grudging in describing what is called pro-Trump, that I’ll grant. But I didn’t know that if I didn’t tug my forelock and ask for permission to have my own opinion regarding the guests my betters have invited, I’d be told to listen to something else.
Never said anything about your ability or right to comment on what ever you want. But you seem to be troubled by hearing any commentary of the President that isn’t “he’s doing great!” We don’t do that, which is why I suggested seeking out podcasts that might be closer to your interests.
Donald Trump is the President, not a deity and he’s not above criticism. Hanson, Adams, and Kudlow are not “reluctant” supporters of the President. But they’re not sycophants either. Which is exactly why we book them.
I know. But when Rob absents himself when the three Trump supporters you mention are guests and then returns with vigah when the O’Ferguson twins are featured, I think it fair to conclude that he’s happier interacting with the anti-Trump crowd than with the pro-Trump crowd.
First off, all throughout the election, we put Rob on with Trump supporters many, many times. We (and he) do not shy away from that. Second, you are connecting two unafilliated events. With Lileks off this past week (and next), it’s very hard to find TWO guest hosts. So I asked a favor of Rob and Peter and we did a rare Saturday show this week. P.J. had been on our list for a while to promote his new website (that Andy writes for), so it was just kismet that it came together in this way.
And now you know the rest of the story….
Some folks see conspiracies everywhere. We all know it’s really a plot by the Antarans to discredit Trump and put in their lizardman candidate. Or was Trump the lizardman candidate? I always have trouble keeping track.