Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
No sooner do we have a "reunion" episode last week than travel schedules blow it all up again. With John Yoo away on another junket (supposedly teaching a summer law seminar somewhere, but really in search of more elusive McRibs), Lucretia and Steve decided to do a live episode where they pondered what might be called the "meta-narrative" (that would be "McNarrative" to John Yoo) behind the sharply differing constitutional views of left and right.
Steve argues that behind the left's primal drive for power that can explain the outcome-oriented constitutionalism of the left on display since the Progressive Era lies a more sinister but less recognized aspect of leftist politics: American leftists are basically socialist revolutionaries, but rather than conduct direct revolution (with certain isolated exceptions), they prefer to use the rule of law to subvert the rule of law. Steve thinks an important clue to understanding this dynamic (about which too many conservatives and Republicans are clueless) can be found in a reconsideration of . . . the Spanish Civil War. (See Nathan Pinkoski's fine essay reviewing the revisionist literature that essentially says everything you think you know about the Spanish Civil War is wrong, and just imagine what Franco could have done if only he'd had some helicopters.)
Lucretia as always is less convinced by Steve's historical analogies and, having had three espressos after lunch and before taping, offers her own special sauce to understanding the problem, yet somehow omitted the usual snark about Steve's whisky of the week, Laphroaig Quarter-Cask.
Finally, in honor of Pride Month, some topical exit music this week from the great Jonathan Richman.
And thanks to the many Power Line readers who tuned in for the live taping. Sorry we didn't get to more of your questions and comments.
John Yoo
'Lucretia'
Steve Hayward
Discussion (6)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Lucretia was spot on in amplifying on Steve's point about the left wanting the court to do what it can't do democratically/electorally and constantly changing rules to their benefit.
And speaking of Giorgia Meloni, I watched about 20 minutes of her press conference on X today, and during the time I watched, no one asked her about Biden wandering off. The left is claiming he did not wander off but went to give thumbs up to another parachutist. He may have given thumbs up to the other parachutist, but he also wandered off to do it. He broke away from the group, and you can see in the body language of all of them that they were confused and concerned. Meloni quickly moved to retrieve him as nonchalantly as possible. Not normal behavior.
Also, the Washington Post reporter's question at the press conference? About trans rights.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I was surprised to hear about the horses at Arlington Cemetery, just because such a high profile command is likely to get the best of the best when it comes to resources.
Googling around I found an AP article on it, with no indication on who was responsible. The Army used to have a horse cavalry, but since soldiers lost that expertise in caring for them, they should have hired a civilian to do that, since a civilian doesn't get transferred out every 2-4 years.
Or maybe they have had a civilian and no one knew how to evaluate whether he was doing a good job or not.
In any case, for a command like that to screw up like that is very unusual.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Stags Leap...I had a late 90's Cask 23 and it was one of the 2 or 3 most delicious wine experiences in my life---If folks out there never had a Cask 23, learn about it and splurge....
Thanks, Steve for mentioning it. (I did not know Jude Winiarski died...R.I.P.)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I must confess to being captivated by Meloni at this G7 meeting. She's lovely, in a non-conventional way. And she has a presence, motherly and normal, surrounded by weirdos.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
On how court decisions get reported, I noticed as long ago as 15 years ago that the legal newsletters I get (I am a lawyer) transitioned from reporting decisions in terms of the laws affected and the legal reasoning toward reporting decisions strictly in terms of which group or political side won and which group or political side lost, often with no substantive description of the law involved or the court's reasoning. The general press has reported court decisions with no useful information for a long time, but when the legal press gave up on providing useful information on court decisions I stopped paying attention to the legal press too.
You're seeing five of six comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.