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.
Our deepest apologies for the delay in getting this show out the door. A lot of factors conspired in this show being a day late (but not a dollar short). And let’s also say this up front: for reasons that will become apparent to you when you listen to it, this is one of the quirkiest Ricochet Podcasts we’ve ever done (and not just because of the occasionally iffy audio). OK, enough of the caveats, let’s talk about the show.
First off, we’re down a host (although he does make a cameo appearance late in the show). Second, one of the hosts is podcasting while driving (you’d think he would have learned a lesson from the last time he attempted this, but apparently not). Our third host is ensconced in small town hotel room with less than ideal internet service and well, we struggle a bit with that too (we don’t do this very often, but you’ll definitely want to listen to the very end of the show if you like hearing Ricochet Podcast bloopers). All that being said, we did manage to put together a very interesting show featuring two guests from opposite sides of the aisle.
First up: columnist, author, and cultural critic (yes, we ask him about that) Joel Stein. The title of his new book In Defense of Elitism: Why I’m Better Than You and You Are Better than Someone Who Didn’t Buy This Book certainly got our attention and he’s also a listener, so we wanted to have him. It’s an interesting –but civil!– conversation that points up some fundamental differences in the way liberals and conservatives view the issues of the day. Then, we swing 180 degrees the other direction and have a chat with our old friend, David Limbaugh because the title of his new book also got our attention: Guilty By Reason of Insanity: Why The Democrats Must Not Win. We have a typically, shall we say, enthusiastic chat with David and yes, he schools a certain host on his propensity for all things squishy.
Then, Lileks checks in to award the highly coveted, much sought after Lileks Post of The Week to @garyrobbins We keep losing with Trump. Mazel tov, Gary.
Finally, today is the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and luckily, we have a host who knows a thing or two about that event. We talk about that day and why it was one of the most important historical moments of the 20th century.
Music from this week’s episode: Crumblin’ Down by John Mellencamp
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 just ran the numbers for the 2020 Presidential Cycle. Including contributions to right of center websites, my giving this cycle is 26.7% moderate Democrats and 73.3% Republicans and right of center websites. http://ricochet.com/695328/my-presidential-contributions-2020-cycle/
I have been in touch with Scott and he will be on the show in the next few weeks.
What a preposterous podcast! I knew Rob was a squish but Peter?! You like Bloomberg? The man who has Beto’s stance on guns, but is effective and might actually confiscate your guns when he isn’t too busy to regulate the size of your soda cup. Sounded like two fanboys!
Awesome! Scott is always a good guest.
Thanks for the sharing the link! @annefy
Re: Joel Stein and the horror of being ruled by the first 2,000 people in the Boston Phonebook rather than the 2,000 professors at Harvard:
“BOSTON (AP) _ A former Tufts University professor who admitted killing a reputed prostitute four years ago has married while serving his prison sentence, says his lawyer.
. . .
Douglas admitted killing Miss Benedict, a 21-year-old graphic artist who police said was a prostitute, at his former home in Sharon. He said he dumped the slain woman’s body in a Rhode Island landfill, but it was never recovered.
Douglas, who was an anatomy professor at Tufts, said he met Miss Benedict in 1982 in Boston’s so-called Combat Zone, an area frequented by prostitutes. He said she charged him $100 whenever they were together.
Douglas also pleaded guilty to stealing $67,000 from Tufts to support Miss Benedict. Her family has filed a $29.5 million lawsuit against Douglas, who becomes eligible for parole in nine years.”
“elite” just means “wannabe aristocrat.” The two features that define an aristocracy are that they pass rule others and that they control admittance to their ranks. An aristocracy is not a meritocracy. The people who support a meritocracy ain’t any better than anyone else.
One? I think I heard two or three ad-read resets…
Ricochet Podcast #469
The Policy, Not the Mouth
Comments page 2
(continued…)
Point ‘em out (the ads were recorded the day after we recorded the podcast, so it’s entirely possible I missed resets in them).
Great news.
Well I guess it wouldn’t kill me to listen to it again, and I already have the “RAW!” version so if you want to “clean it up for the masses….”
16:50 when Rob is introducing Joel Stein, you got that one.
Rob’s VPN ad read at 33:15. (That’s in my version. It will be “earlier” if you’ve already removed the previous one.)
But please don’t make these too perfect, right away. Let us who like the “unclean” version get them first, for a day or two. THEN clean them up for the rest!
I think if you listen again, you might find that they were saying Old Bloomie is effective and moderate on some issues for a Democrat. That isn’t the same as their intending to vote for him or wanting him as President.
Good. Hope there is enough time for Rob and Scott to trade New York hotel stories as well.
I did not recognize this guy until he mentioned Scott Adams. Adams mentioned him as a guy he spent time with but seemed to read his own internal movie and not what Adams was trying to tell him and got about 90% of it wrong. He was amused.
Thanks. Will get to this at some point in the next 24 hours.
It’s not just what Adams told him during their “interview” (or whatever) time. Stein also apparently misreported/misrepeated in his book, things that Adams had written previously/elsewhere. Such as “25% tax on top 1%.”
If he is misreporting Adams, is he properly reporting anyone?
I recommend listening to the whole thing. Adams has some very interesting things to say about Turkey and the Kurds. (The headline to the previous podcast was “Kurds in the Way”!)
Also, I was intrigued by his idea, that President Trump has a Constitutional duty to investigate whether his possible successor, Joe Biden, is directly or indirectly* blackmailable by Russia or by pro-Russian Ukrainians.
Certainly, Trump has better grounds to investigate Biden, then Obama had to investigate him.
Getting to the subject of Joel Stein, Adams certainly supports the idea that his book is poorly researched.
*In other words, they have information that could put Hunter Biden in prison.
Aren’t most “moderate Democrats” really liberal Democrats pretending to be moderate?
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer pull the reins and – the moderation goes right out the window!
That’s one of the points Adams makes in the previously-mentioned podcast/video. When someone who knows about a subject or an event, reads or sees or hears a reporting of that, they might know that the reporting is wrong. But when they don’t know about a subject themselves or were not actually present at an event, they tend to assume that reporting on it is accurate/correct. However when it seems to be so common that if you know a subject or event, you realize that it’s being reported incorrectly; shouldn’t we also assume that subjects or events we DON’T have personal knowledge of, are ALSO being reported incorrectly? That is, after all, what our own experience shows us.
“Moderate” Democrats are also the ones that Chucky and Nancy will allow to occasionally vote against the party line because they face election challenges, and their votes aren’t required at a given time because there is already a sufficient majority to pass whatever. But at other times, the whip is cracked and they fall in line.
I was just making a convenience for those who wanted to get to the Joel Stein part, and indeed to make sure that was the correct one that included the Joel Stein part.
The part about Turkey and the Kurds was a bit over-simplified, I thought. Adams talks about how foreign policy should never even be dreamed/whatever to be “forever” like marriage. But while some people who say Trump was just being “impulsive” would be against anything he did, it’s possible to argue that it doesn’t matter how long Trump himself thinks about something; it’s still “impulsive” if he doesn’t consult with military leaders, etc. Although they might still call it “impulsive” if he doesn’t go along with them.
Yeah, Adams is a bit out there. There would be no reason to misreport to make him look odd.
Adams might have some unusual ideas at times, but he explains them well so that they make sense even if you disagree with them. Joel Stein misrepresenting Adams into being some kind of total whacko, is still not right.
I watched Adams’ rebuttal video last night. I must say, Stein embarrassed himself. Let’s just stick to the 25%/1% proposal. I am familiar with what Adams originally said and wrote about reparations. Stein made up an entirely different proposal. I’m guessing Rob was doing a favour for a friend…but Stein has no business being given legitimacy by appearing on the podcast.
Not when Stein has so thoroughly – to use a term I’ve seen on Ricochet before – beclowned himself.
Don’t publishers usually check with sources of quotes to make sure they’re accurate? If the publisher accepted whatever Stein gave them without verification, they share the blame. It appears that Stein’s book, as presented, should never have seen the light of day.
One would think:
https://www.grandcentralpublishing.com/
What really should have happened is that Peter or Rob should have read the book, checked to find out it was more or less all crap – starting with his misrepresentations of Scott Adams – and said so to Stein’s face, and then “NEXT!”
If seeking entertainment, I would read the back of my box of Special K before I would spend a second reading Joel Stein. It would never dawn on me that he would ever be a source of facts. I wonder how many books he’s sold to people who think he’s factual?
I’ve got a few friends – even a few that are authors – who vote very differently than me. One in particular places no value on truth or accuracy. Actually two, now that I think about it.
I wouldn’t even mention either of them in a comment on Ricochet, and I would certainly never do anything to promote their efforts.
Maybe we can figure that “TV’s Rob Long” knew that nobody on Ricochet would be fooled by his “friend” Joel Stein, so he could appear to be doing a favor for his friend without causing any real damage?