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.
Returning from giving the keynote address at the annual Mensa International Symposium in Reykjavik, Iceland, I woke up on the third bounce of the Icelandair Boeing 757 on the main gravel runway at LaGuardia.
I nudged my personal sommelier and bodyguard, Vino Diesel, who had consumed 36 liters of Reyka, Iceland’s premier vodka, during our four-day stay, rendering him somewhat less effective as a bodyguard.
I’m surprised no one here has written about Ben Rhodes, “The Aspiring Novelist Who Became Obama’s Foreign-Policy Guru,” and his startling profile in the New York Times Magazine. (By “startling,” I mean, “Sadly, not the least bit surprising.”) I’d love to write a searing piece about he, Jonathan “stupidity of the American people” Gruber, and the […]
No one lectures the United States Supreme Court quite like the New York Times. Their penchant for talking down to (face it) the conservative members of the court has transcended numerous personnel changes at the paper. And when it comes to the issues that define the twilight of modern liberalism, the Times does not obsess (as other, lesser news organizations might) about the distinction between news and opinion pages
A recent article by Robert Pear in the Politics section provides a priceless example. The Times recognizes, of course, that Obamacare represents the high water mark of statist ideology in the past 100 years of the U.S. Congress and that, should the law be forced back to Capitol Hill for repair of one sort or another, it has no chance at survival. As I have written elsewhere, the liberal cognoscenti view their task as pushing forward the great ratchet of history to lift us, the barbarians, out of chaos and onto the plateau of utopia.
Nothing is more agonizing to them than to see the ratchet slip a hard-won notch.
Nearly 15 years ago, Walter Russell Meade wrote a famous essay about the Jacksonian Tradition in American Foreign Policy. A key point in it is that much if the American electorate views foreign policy primarily as a matter of honor. Those countries who comport themselves honorably are to be left alone, or worked with as appropriate. Trade agreements and peace treaties are all wonderful things, and even wars are not necessarily bad — honest disagreements require a frank airing of the issues — but in the end, honorable nations shake hands, sign the peace, and live by it. Dishonorable nations are to be left alone to rot unless they directly threaten us, at which point they are to be obliterated. As Meade put it:
Once the United States extends a security guarantee or makes a promise, we are required to honor that promise come what may. Jacksonian opinion, which in the nature of things had little faith that South Vietnam could build democracy or that there was anything concrete there of interest to the average American, was steadfast in support of the war — though not of the strategy — because we had given our word to defend South Vietnam. During this year’s war in Kosovo, Jacksonian opinion was resolutely against it to begin with. However, once U.S. honor was engaged, Jacksonians began to urge a stronger warfighting strategy including the use of ground troops. It is a bad thing to fight an unnecessary war, but it is inexcusable and dishonorable to lose one once it has begun.
Something about Jonathan Gruber has been ringing a bell with me. Maybe it’s because I took a few courses at MIT. Maybe it’s because I’ve known a lot of people who look and talk and act like him, and share a similar disdain for anyone deemed less intelligent. Yet there was still something more specific gnawing at me. […]
Ask any conservative why their fellow Americans elected Barack Obama President of the United States not once but twice and you’ll usually get a variation on the theme that includes the phrase “low-information voters.”
In other words, your countrymen are stupid — exactly what MIT professor Jonathan Gruber has been saying very publicly since he helped engineer the beginning of the end to private healthcare in America. This doesn’t necessarily put us on his plane, because we decry the situation while he believes in celebrating it and taking advantage of it. Still, we too should be ashamed — ashamed because we’re not doing a helluva lot to counteract that ignorance, neither as individuals or collectively as members of the center-right.
Sure, we blog. In the almost five years that this site has been up and running there isn’t a topic I haven’t opined on or scrawled my electronic box of crayons over. Yet I do so mainly for the amusement of the choir. (Like the church I’ve accepted that “like” is the new “amen.” Retweets are a “hallelujah!”)
Earlier this week, a reporter asked President Obama about MIT Prof. Jonathan Gruber. Specifically, the reporter asked whether the Obamacare architect was correct that the law passed only through deception. The president answered, We had a yearlong debate. I mean, go back and look at your stories. The one thing we can’t say is that, […]
One result of the progressive government ushered in by Barack Obama’s victory in 2008 is that the power of the government has been placed in the hands of people like Jonathan Gruber. Gruber is annoying, to be sure, with his pet parrots and the prissy intonation his voice finds right at the moment he’s going to say something especially arrogant, but, let’s face it, those are not the issues. We forgive odd personalities when they are harmless, and well we should.
The real point is that Gruber gestated in that special polis-within-a-polis that is the technocratic academy-bureaucracy-media nexus. (I love using that word ‘nexus,” by the way. It’s so recreationally paranoid.) His father was a professor at the New York University Stern School of Business. Raised in the NYC suburb of Ridgewood, New Jersey, he earned degrees at MIT and Harvard, and began his career teaching at MIT.
This is reverse provincialism: there’s no evidence Gruber has ever mixed socially or professionally with the very voters he so glibly dismissed as “stupid.” Although, let’s be fair: the only voters “stupid” enough to fit Gruber’s description are those who believed the lies and voted for Barack Obama.
In this, my first post on Ricochet, I wanted to share a little image I put together over my morning coffee. After reading article upon article about Jonathan Gruber and coverage of his now infamous admission(s) of what we already knew, something occurred to me. Jonathan Gruber is like all the other Grubers before him. From […]
By request, I’m reposting a thread from November, with only minor edits. The big news then was Obamacare’s trainwreck of a rollout — especially healthcare.gov, and the Obama administration’s desperate efforts to have health insurers re-offer cancelled plans that Obamacare had outlawed. (Can you remember when Obamacare was the mistake that was going to sink […]