The Ricochet Podcast - Napoleon Dynamite

Episode Date: July 21, 2017

The President is on the record, the WSJ’s Bill McGurn talks about Charlie Gard, The Washington Post’s Bob Costa on the mood in DC, @Lileks ponders Russian history, Long wonders who’s going to get fired, and Robinson has one last question. Or three. Music from this week’s podcast: Charlie Don’t Surf by The Clash The all new opening sequence for the Ricochet Podcast was composed and produced by... Source

We have special news for you. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. Are you going to send me or anybody that I know to a camp? We have people that are stupid. Sessions should have never accused himself. And if he would, if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

It's the Ricochet Podcast with Peter Robinson and Rob Long. I'm James Lalix. Today, we talk to Bill McGurn of the Wall Street Journal and Bob Costa of the Washington Post. Let's have ourselves a podcast. Bye-bye. Welcome, everybody. This is indeed The Ricochet Podcast, number 361. How did I get that far?

Well, it was brought to you by fine people like the fine people at Bombfell. Bombfell is an online personal styling service for men that helps you find the right clothes and you only pay for what you keep and there's no charge to send returns back. What a deal. $25 off your first purchase. Bombfell.com slash Ricochet. And we're brought to you by ZipRecruiter. Ricochet listeners can post jobs

on ZipRecruiter for free. That's right, free. Just go to ZipRecruiter.com slash free trial and buy The Great Courses. Yes, you can watch The Great Courses plus anytime, anywhere, for free for an entire month. How?

Well, you go to our special URL, TheGreatCoursesPlus.com slash Ricochet. And of course, Ricochet is brought to you by Ricochet. And here's Rob to tell you how Ricochet is brought to you by Ricochet. Rob, how is Ricochet brought?

Thank you, James. Listen, podcast listeners, if you are a member of Ricochet, we thank you and we are honored and pleased to have these members along with us. And if you are not, listen closely. I'm talking to you. We always ask you for money. We always ask you to support Ricochet and we tell you all the great things you get. And some people say to us, well, you know, I don't really want to post or join the member conversations. I just want to listen to podcasts, but I do want to support Ricochet. So today we have a special tier just for you. You can join Ricochet for $2.50 a month, and you can support the site and keep this good programming going, not just us, but Klopp and the Conservatarians and all the other things you love.

You can read the entire site for that price, including the member feed, and you can comment on podcast posts. And this is for all the people who tell us they listen to the podcast, they want to support us, but they also tell us they know they'll never write a post. Well, we know better. You probably will. So eventually you'll upgrade your membership, and that's our whole business model. So if you're one of those people, you're a podcast listener who loves Ricochet and wants to support us, please do join at the podcast listener tier, $2.50 a month, which is nothing.

And we really, really, really, really do need you. It's not even funny how much we need you. How about that? We'll be rolling out a new service next year, a very special tier whereby somebody will come to your house and recite all of the posts so if you're too busy to read this person will read the posts while you're dusting or not vacuuming because that's too much to do that folks keep us going because there's always lots to talk about like this last week i was thinking guys um the the approach might be every week to look at what's going on in washington and break it down into the good, the bad, and the ugly. And this is where you add the sound effect, right?

What would be the good? What's the good thing that came out of the administration this week that we can all be happy happened? I could start a little bit. Go. I mean, I would say that I think that – I mean, I don't know whether I think this is useful or not, or ultimately is the right thing to do or not, but it's certainly a campaign promise, which is the wall, the border wall, which seems to be on its way to being funded, or maybe I'm reading on the Trump wagon or the Trump train, but I do want him to be a successful president because 80% of his policies I agree with. So I want him to be politically successful. The second thing I would say is I think Betsy DeVos at Education is doing great things trying to unpack and unfund and undo all the nonsense that has been happening in college campuses for the past 100 years. So, you know, small incremental changes.

There is some light in the darkness. Right, Peter? Yes. No, no, no. I completely agree. By the way, you're reminding me. I had a conversation just the other day with a very close friend here at Stanford who was a devout liberal. And he was mentioning the DeVos initiative to study Title IX, the Dear Colleague letter or whatever it was called that was sent out by the Obama administration that essentially stripped due process from students who were accused of sexual assault or sexual harassment. And this turns out not simply to have been a kind of crystallization of injustice and enforced injustice on campuses. It also turns out to have been an administrative

nightmare for these colleges, which find themselves for universities across the country, which find themselves between the Department of Education and lawsuits. There have been hundreds of lawsuits filed from people who've been disciplined, but by processes that eliminated any due process. Okay, so there was just this wonderful cognitive dissonance from my good friend who could hardly believe that the administration that was about to do right by higher education in america was the trump administration that's one item here's the other item and this is this falls under the large category of why i like living in northern california

instead of in washington breakfast this past week the day after the Senate vote to repeal and replace Obamacare disintegrated, broke down irretrievably. And my companions reasoned out loud over breakfast as follows. That's it. If with both houses of Congress and Donald Trump as president, Republicans are unwilling or incapable of rolling back the administrative state, then that's it. We just have to live with this thing and grant that it's always going to be getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Then the next words out of their mouths were commercial. What about Bitcoin?

What are you hearing about cryptocurrency? Because, of course, the way people think around here, they take a political fact and then say to themselves, how can we make life better? How can we use the free markets, technology, and so forth to work around this horrible behemoth? As best I can tell, Lord knows I'm not an expert in this, but as best I can tell, there are lots of initiatives taking place in this so-called blockchain space where cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, would be the best known of them all. So there's a new phrase now. Remember the old phrase?

Information wants to be free. Now the phrase is transactions want to be private. Yeah, well, I lost everything in the Dogecoin meltdown last year. All that's true, Peter. But the more – whenever somebody in government starts talking about pushing towards cashless currencies and cashless societies, that's when I doubled my desire to get precious metals and put bills under the... There's a freedom to money that is inherent in the thing itself. And the idea that... I mean, right now, for example, for all I know,

my money exists in incorporeal bits scattered on drives all over the world in my bank. But I can exchange it for something tangible anytime I want to walk in there. The days of the silver certificate may be gone, but I can still go and get some cash. When everything is in those computers, and you know me, I'm not one of those Luddites who says, I don't trust the cloud, I don't trust anything. But if there's anything easier for governments to confiscate manipulate it's the moving directly to a electronic currency and i understand that bitcoins are different

yeah currencies are different but still well cryptocurrency is much different and that's one of the reasons the blockchain works is because the government can't do that i mean right now virtual currency and virtual money well not right now but i would say 2008 that was what those were that was an enormous amount of wealth being created on paper and enormous enormous amount of liabilities being created on paper and then at some point the music stopped and everybody had to find a chair and a lot of people didn't and taxpayers had to put the bill um the great new the great thing about a decentralized any kind of decentralized system that people care about is the honeycomb structure which doesn't require taxpayers to foot the bill.

But I would say the difference here, especially when you talk about health care, is that it is a race. And the race is, can we more consumer-friendly immediate health care, I mean medical care. Well, right. We have the opportunity before us to do that at the exact moment that there is seemingly no will to open it up to allow these innovations. But hang on. I just wanted to hear Rob finish that formulation.

Can we do this, that, and the other before something happens? Well, I think that's what I'm saying. Before what happens is the wholesale adoption of what is essentially Medicare, single payer, which is what that is, for every citizen. And I think that Republicans or people or certainly free marketers have, I think we've been lying to ourselves, as we sometimes

do when we talk about giant entitlements, and thinking that these things are unpopular, that the outcomes are popular. And the sitting president who won, he won saying, I'll give you something better and cheaper. He won by basically saying, I'm going to give you more. This was the grand slam.

Remember when George W. Bush and Al Gore, if you're old like us, you'll remember when they competed to see who was going to give more free stuff to the elderly. That's Medicare Part D. And they both had competing plans, andorge w bush ran against al gore by saying i'll give you more and a lot of us republicans thought to ourselves oh and we never occurred to us that it was going to get worse and it's gotten worse and a lot of reasons that's a winning formula is because people like to complain but they don't really want to give up their free stuff so it is a race what we look people people never like to give up

what they have you can't beat something with nothing and i remember i remember years and years ago i worked on this is you tell me if i'm going on too much but years and years ago i worked on this uh the school choice um a bunch of school choice initiatives including the one in california did you really yeah i went to this big conference this Good for you. Naive man. This guy, yeah, a guy in Indiana, rich family in Indiana was running this sort of school choice think tank. And one of the things that you learn when you really dig down in the school choice movement is that you take polls and you do focus groups and you explain it. And everybody who's a free marketeer knows this is a no-brainer, right? This is a parental choice is the way, not just the way to give parents more control and a way to return the appropriate amount of authority to the family unit, but also because then you have people competing for your dollar, your education dollar. They're going to compete harder. They're going to give you better service.

We all know that. And everyone likes it, and it polls really well. And then when they go and they vote, they vote against it. And they vote against it not just because the teachers unions are liars and they put on alarmist and misinforming ads, but because most people say to themselves, well, you know,

public school systems in general are bad, but I figured out how to work mine. I figured out where I put my kids. And what you're saying to me is you're going to change that and I don't know what it's going to work mine. I figured out where I put my kids. And what you're saying to me is you're going to change that, and I don't know what it's going to look like. And so even though if you ask me in a poll or a focus group what I believe, I will tell you this is what I believe. But if you ask me to vote for it, I'm going to vote against it. Most people figured out,

okay, I figured out my healthcare system. I figured it all out. And now you're going to take it away from me? And by the way, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to say. It is perfectly reasonable to say both. The system is corrupt and debilitating to society as a whole, but I have cut my deal. I figured out my system. I've already

gotten to know my kids' teachers. I understand the way it works, and I've invested too much in this corrupt, crazy system for you to for you simply to obliterate my investment in this and i know and i know exactly and i know who the bad teachers are the good teachers are i know who i'm going to get around all this stuff like nobody expects the system to really work or be good they just have figured out their workarounds and that's that's a human thing i think but but but you what you need to do is replace it so that people start seeing people use their apps and their thing and they're getting better service and they're doing all sorts of stuff.

There's one observation. Go ahead. I just want to say, before you leave school choice, I thought you were going to say this and I'm sure you believe it. I'm sure you notice that it's true. The people who get hurt are the poor people in inner cities, overwhelmingly people of color. It's the white – here in California, of color. It's the white, here in California at least, it's the white folks. It's the white folks who say, yes, of course, I'm with you in theory, but I live in a suburban neighborhood and my school's okay and I figured it out. I mean, it's just

maddening. Yeah, well, I live in the city and my kid's school is pretty good and she's got a good education in this system and she has some fine teachers and I'd blow it good education in this system and she has some fine teachers and i'd blow it all up in a second because it has to but you're a true believer that's why well a true believer sort of says that i'm one of those fanatics spittle flecked red-eyed fanatics no that's me veins standing on my forehead tendons extended on my neck was like no but i've seen it so rail against the gumming no i would blow it all up in a second because something better has to arise from this and you have to you you've got to break the system you got to burn it down but that's unusual that's unusual thing and most

people don't mean you know it's hard to do that which is why the best thing to repeal reform replace whatever you want to call it obamacareare, is forget what you call it, forget what it's called, loosen all the restrictions. The secretary of HHS, is it still HHS? I always get it confused. That's the secretary of that department, whatever that department is, has enormous latitude. Obamacare's great Achilles heel is how little is actually in statute. Most of it is in the regulatory. regular regulatory that's right that's written by the secretary there's an enormous it's not look it's not sexy and you can't march down the street from it and i you know listen i i'm not criticizing a politician for for going for the banner but there's an enormous amount of stuff that you

can do to loosen all the regulations to make a thousand different policies available to people, which now, of course, is the whole problem with Obamacare is that you have one size fits all. And that would be a big success. Which, by the way, raises a very interesting point. Where has Tom Price been? Tom Price is the secretary of housing and hhs health and human services hhs still like hhw is what it used to be that's what yeah this is the guy who's a member of congress he's a medical doctor from georgia that was the special election to replace him that we were all reading about a few weeks ago and tom price is now

secretary of hhs this is the man who's been in was in congress for i believe three terms six years medical doctor he's the one who everybody was saying knew how to repeal and replace he was drafting the legislation i simply do not know where he has well i think this is the problem and i am not trying to be broken record here but this is the problem with an administration that does not have enough Machiavellian grown-ups in it. That's not Machiavells, but they're not grown-ups. A Machiavellian grown-up would say, would figure this out, that this is how Bill Clinton cruised to re-election in 1996 after a major drop in the midterms. Look, Trump may or may not get that

but in any case his legislative policies are stalled you simply say as the former president did we all hated but it was effective i am going to unilaterally through executive action that is truly constitutional because it's part of the law that obamacare is. No Democrats can complain. This is the law you signed. I am going to change it in regulatory, in the regulatory roles, rather than I'm not going to, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, they can play chess,

they can go square dancing. I don't care what they do. I'm going to take action. That, and then do that. That would be a bold move from an administration that had its act together, and I wish this one did.

It would also be the move of some people who wanted to solve the problem and didn't mind if they didn't get credit for it. If you went stealthily, I mean, because right now there seems to be

this public perception that Obamacare took all of these people who had no health care, not insurance, had no health care, and put them in hospitals and gave them doctors

and it's all free for them. And that if any changes are made whatsoever, that all of those people will be removed from the rooms, healthcare, and put them in hospitals and gave them doctors and it's all free for them. And that if any changes are made whatsoever, that all of those people will be removed from the rooms, taken out back and shot and dumped into graves, which they perhaps have to dig themselves first. And then their family is billed for wear and tear in the shovel. I mean, that's the way it is. If you do anything with Obamacare, 23 million people die. But so if it's possible to go behind the scenes and change these things incrementally and slowly and not tell anybody, nobody would notice because nobody knows what it is exactly.

There's the exchanges. There's the insurance. There's companies that are always leaving states, but somehow people still go to the doctor. You're right, Rob. You're absolutely right. But part of that Machiavellian grown-up attitude is that this is being done for the best of the country and for the good of the citizenry and if we don't get credit for it

it's like the nameless commando who goes behind the lines and plants the bomb that blows up the bridge but one of the smart things that Clinton did and he did it as hard as it is to believe he did it with his disorganized political crew that was constantly being reshuffled.

As he decided the last year and a half before the 96th election, he was going to run on a bunch of mini initiatives. You know, 100,000 new cops on the street. School uniforms. All those little things signal to the voter that I am not a crazy person. I'm not insane. I'm a normal person. And I believe what you believe. And there's nothing wrong with a president demanding credit, this president especially.

But this is a perfect example of how you can set yourself apart, not get entangled in congressional entanglements, and set yourself apart. Every president benefits from triangulation. Every president. It doesn't matter who's in the House and who's in the Senate. You always want to keep them at arm's length. You're absolutely right. So behind the scenes, they go and they fix things, and then they've got the guy who's

looking at the next election saying, here's the menu of options that you're going to have. Here's the small, you're right, micro-wishes that you're going to run on. And that's a great idea. It's like somebody who would pick your shirts for you or your pants or whatnot and give you a variety of options. And then you'd choose what you want and you'd be stylish and it'd be your look. That's what Bombfell can do for you. Bombfell is an easier way for men to get better clothes. I was on mute.

I had myself on mute. I couldn't even interrupt you. Good. What do you do for Bombfell? Well, you don't mute yourself. You speak up. You complete a simple questionnaire, and then you're matched with a dedicated personal stylist. Now, when you sign up, you pay how much?

Zero. Zero dollars. You'll only pay for the clothes you keep, period. Now, BombFell never charges above retail price, and you get a dedicated personal stylist, as I said, free shipping and returns, convenient home try-ons. You can look it in the mirror. You know, that's kind of important. And the ability to preview and edit your styles picks every time before the order ships. Fully personalized, BombFill is. Every piece has been handpicked for you by your stylist, and they'll mail you the selections, after which

you have 48 hours to make any changes or cancel altogether. You're in total control. BombFill is completely flexible. You can close once a month, every two months, every three months. You can pause, cancel at any time. It's simply the most simple, straightforward service around. Four simple steps in the process. One, sign up at bombfell.com slash ricochet. Answer a few simple questions about your measurements and your style preferences. They kind of need to know that stuff. Two, set up your order. Tell your stylist what you want. You need button-down shirts? Tell them you want two shirts. You need a pair of jeans? Tell them that as well. You're in control. You know what? I'm wearing my bomb-fell jeans right now. Most comfortable I ever had.

Three, get a preview email from your stylist with the individual pics. You got 48 hours to make your selections and cancel and say, never mind if you change your mind. And then four, you get your clothing. Then you'll have seven days to try it on. Pay for what you keep. Your card is not charged until you decide what you are going to keep. And shipping both ways, that's free. As I said, I'm wearing my Bombfell Supply jeans right now, and they're supple, long-lasting. They fit perfectly when I put them on. It's like they have magic clothing. Retailers, everything that I got from them feels right perfectly, and it's me. So you can be like that.

All you have to do is go to Bob. I have to say, you're a natty guy. You look sharp. You are a sharp dresser. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. Natty? Natty?

You guys accuse me of being the dinosaur on this show. Natty? What did you say? And Rob can shout out the word natty? Last week I let it pass, but last week I am making notes. When I do the intercruises with him, you go on stage with him,

he's always kind of like, he looks like James Bond. I'm disputing your adjectives. Guys, we're getting away from the CTA. And you know what the CTA is, don't you? It's not a Kingston Trio song. I've got to remind everybody that we are talking about Bonfell. And if you

want to be as netty as me, as Rob would put it, and Peter would defer, we've got a special deal. That is Bonfell.com slash Ricochet. $25 off your first order when you go to Bonfell.com slash Ricochet and sign up. That's B-O-M-B-F-E-L-L dot com slash Ricochet for $25 off your first purchase. That's Bonfell.com slash ricochet and sign up. That's B-O-M-B-F-E-L-L dot com slash ricochet for $25 off your first purchase.

That's bombshell.com slash ricochet. And we thank Bombshell, Bomphill, for sponsoring this, the Ricochet Podcast. And now we go to our guest. As much as I would love to hear what Peter and Rob have to say more about my style preferences, I think it's time to move on to pressing issues. Bill McGurn is with us. He's a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, and he writes the weekly Main Street column for the journal

each Tuesday. Previously, he served as chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Welcome, Bill. Thank you. Good to be here. Bill, Peter Robinson here. On your column in the Wall Street Journal here that you published on July 17th on Charlie Gard, you write that the giveaway is the appointment of a guardian, a court-appointed guardian, to guard Charlie Gard's interests.

Who's Charlie Gard and why is the 11-month-old over in Britain, probably the world's most famous baby now, who has a rare genetic disorder that will be fatal. He's deaf and blind now. And it comes down to this. The hospital says there's nothing they can do. The proper thing to do is to take the baby from the ventilator and let nature take its course. And the parents are saying, no, we don't want to do that. We'd either like to take them home and let them die in our arms at home. Or there's an American doctor, you know, from Columbia University Medical Center who has some experimental treatments and would like to try him. That doctor is now over there. The big problem is this is a case who gets to

decide and it's being decided in court. It will eventually be decided by a judge. And that happens a lot of times in disputes, you know, over a child and so forth. And, you know, so there's a dispute between the family and the hospital. Okay, that's straightforward enough. But what makes it so sinister is this guardian, because you almost never appoint a guardian if the parents are okay. I mean, the court documents all say it's really hard to find more devoted parents, but that's why they want to not have them be the guardian. It's just insane to appoint some third party when the parents are perfectly functional, they're united, they're not divided, and it's stacking the deck. So these poor parents are up against the hospital and against this guardian.

And then the lawyer for the guardian who actually speaks for Charlie in court is associated with some assisted suicide group. It's sinister, actually, what these poor people are up against. Bill, so the parents are saying, let us do one of two things. Let us take our infant child home to die in the comfort of the love that his parents provide, or let us take him to the United States, and it won't be any charge against the National Health Service britain because we've raised money let us take him to the united states for an experimental treatment that might help improve his life in one way or another bring him home to die in our arms or take him to the united states for

who could possibly object to either what is the objection of the british national health this is what single payer is i mean single payer deep down means single authority, you know, our way or the highway. And it's very clear. And that's what this child has exposed. They're very jealous of their authority. You know, even before this American doctor got over there, you know, he's at Columbia, he went to Harvard. You know, he's obviously not a dummy. They're all kind of making little undermining remarks about him and his authority. Let me put it this way. The last thing the British National Health System wants in this hospital is for this kid to come over here and actually have an improvement in his life and people see that.

That's what I mean by how creepy it is that so many people seem to be personally invested in this child's death. Bill, one more question here from Peter. Sarah Palin was denounced when she suggested, this goes back some years now, before Obamacare was enacted. But Sarah Palin said, no, no, no. As the government becomes more and more involved in health care, we're going to end up with death panels. That was the phrase, and she was denounced as ignorant and foolish. Isn't this something like a death panel? I mean, isn't this just what she had in mind?

And here we have it in advance. Absolutely. My colleague, Dan Henninger, said the European Court of Human Rights, which refused to take the parents' case, they're like the ultimate death panel here. And it works kind of the way Mark Stein said it would work. You know, instead of, it's not so much taking people off the plug, but saying, oh, we're not going to hook you up.

We're not going to allow you to try this life-saving treatment. Again, I don't have a problem with actually removing the ventilator on this child. It seems to me that there's a reasonable case that the parents could choose to end his life that way, let nature take its course. I do have a problem with the state forcing that decision on parents. You know, they raised about $2 million in a GoFundMe account to pay for their boy's treatment and so forth. And in the court cases in the hospital, they harranged, this was never about money. You can be sure if they hadn't raised that money, they'd be talking about money and cost all the time.

And actually, that's a legitimate point. You know, if the parents were demanding, you know, $3 million worth of treatments to keep a boy alive for another four months, I mean, that's a factor. But what's interesting about this case is none of those factors are here. We have two parents who are devoted, nothing wrong with them, that obviously love their child, even the courts admit it. They've got the money to pay for some treatment.

They've got a reputable doctor offering that treatment. All the other things that people raise are off the table. And still what this is about is power. Who gets to make the life and death decisions? And I'm very much afraid of experts. You know, I heard from a lot of doctors, some of them making snide remarks about this, you know, having a medical degree. In reply to your column?

You heard from doctors? Yeah, saying, you know, they should, the parents should shut up and these people should, you know, just listen to the doctors. You know, having a medical degree gives you no special authority in making a moral decision. It just means you know a lot of technical things. And I think properly construed, the doctor's job is to give the parents as much information so they can make an informed choice. And then there are, you know, the other factors that may weigh in. But I think we're on a very dangerous path if we're going to just let the men

in white coats backed up by the lawyers make these decisions for us. But hey, Bill, it's Rob Long. But aren't we on that path in this country? I mean, isn't that where we are? I mean, Sarah, hang on. I think we are on the path. I think we are on the path, but I don't. I think that's the only way to do this. Right. I think we are on the path.

I mean, that's a dangerous thing to pay. There's also people that are upset at this case because it is highlighting some of the dangers of this kind of system. I think it couldn't happen here because I don't, I think, first of all, people have different alternatives. You could take your baby out of any hospital at any time, right, if another hospital offered something. So I don't think we're there. I don't think it would arise here.

And that's what's kind of so sinister about the claims of the doctors and so forth. And I'm just amazed. I mean, again, I don't pretend to know what'm just amazed. Again, I don't pretend to know what's best for this baby. I don't have all the facts and so forth. But I do know if I had to choose between these doctors and lawyers stacking the system and these poor parents who have

the money. We do have a movement in the U.S. called Right to Try, meaning that if you're terminally ill and someone has an experimental thing, you could do that. I think that's a very encouraging thing. I think part of the dignity for people is letting them make their own decisions. In this case, letting the decision be made by very caring and loving parents. Once we decide to socialize the risk and socialize the treatment

and socialize the system, how much you spend on your health care and what you spend it on becomes my business, right? Because we're all in this together. Right. I mean, today I saw a great American hero, whatever you think about him politically,

a great American hero, John McCain, certainly served his country with great distinction, has an inoperable brain tumor. And I read this from Twitter, and there's a lot of little snide things saying, how much money are we going to spend in health care for that? I mean, he's 80 years old. And there does seem to be this cruelty that comes out with people who are ostensibly in favor of health care for all right this idea that well yeah i think everyone should have health care it should be human right but not too much and not if i don't want to give it to you the right way and not if you choose to use it well

i mean how are we not on that path especially given the news that obamacare reform is dead how are we not on that path in this country irrevocably? Right. Well, you put your finger on it. Absolutely. Two points. One is socializing medicine. It's about it's about allocating resources. I mean, we system, you decide if you have the money, you can get maybe a little extra treatment, which by the way, sometimes yields other benefits and people learn from that and so forth. But I think what you really put your finger on is the cruelty. I mean, I've heard from so many people, it's just amazing how many people think they know and are equipped to make end-of-life decisions for other people whom they don't know far away and then insist on it. You know, one person wrote me, say, I tell the parents they can have another child. I mean, it's just monstrous

if you look at this. And it is amazing that it seems to be the people that favor the state that have this indifference and cruelty. I mean, at some point, Charlie Gard has become an irritant simply just by staying alive to a good many people. And that's what I say. Too many people seem to be invested, not in, you know, I can understand saying, I think the hospital should prevail, and I agree with them. But so many people have just invested in having this child not only die, but die in that hospital under the doctor's care and not under his parents.

Sure. The egalitarian impulse, the logical conclusion, is that everybody should die at the age of 71 because that's equal. And it would be, you know, you don't want an unequal system where there are inequities in lifespans. And there's also, And you're absolutely right. People have a vested interest in seeing this child die because there is a management of the beginning of life and the end of life that our betters really know. And if that power is put in our hand, we will abuse it.

You know, and it's the same people, as you say, are better. The people that always think they'll be making the decision, not the people on the bed receiving the decisions, right? I mean, it's the same people that say parents can't choose the schools for their children. People are too stupid to vote. I mean, it's amazing how condescending the people who believe in government are because they believe in power, you know, and they believe in themselves. They think they're the ones that are going to be giving the directive, not receiving the directive. A lot of people are worried because the president has expressed a lot of enthusiasm and admiration of other countries' single-payer systems,

and they believe that there maybe is an ideological predisposition on the part of Donald Trump to say, yeah, let's go with that works for scotland it'll work for a country of 300 and you know however many billion people um one of the things you also wrote about this week peter did you have something else in the charlie guard issue no i was just going to say that's a great question james so bill bill has been broadly speaking pretty supportive sticking up for trump and james just raised a very interesting point on the one hand that um not wanting to get pushed around by betters everybody feels that that that's in trump on the other hand just as james said he has made

very complimentary comments about single-payer systems in other countries where does this guy come on on this bill i i don't. I don't know where he comes down. He had an offer of help. President Trump has said very contradictory things on a lot of issues. And I think in some ways that view single-payer, I mean, in some rational sense, single-payer makes more sense than what we have, right? This kind of bastard agreement. But I think the people that say that have no experience of it. Donald Trump certainly wouldn't have any experience of it because if he were sick in Britain, he would be operating outside the British national health care system, you know, and private doctors and so forth.

And I don't think, you know, all the people I know that have had experience with these things, you know, just say how grim it is to go there. Probably it's like being on Medicaid and the kind of treatment you get here for that. So I could only chalk that up to ignorance because believe me, the people that I know who have tasted that don't want it. Let's move to something similar, but based on another column that you wrote about the elites. We hear a lot of defense of elites, a lot of castigation of elites, a lot of mischaracterization of elites imagine how we should run our lives and the ones who are constantly scolding us for everything that we do for the hamburger that we eat for the child that we have for the vehicle that we drive and you wrote uh when it comes to the elites good luck with that idea that the democratic has that they can restore its relationship with middle america without addressing the identity politics that fuels it especially when it starts

from the premise that the americans they are condescending to will remain too stupid to figure it out. Is this, a lot of us see the Democratic Party moving more and more in the direction of just not understanding why it is that people rebel against the condescending attitude. And you're saying they're not going to figure it out until they're really pasted good a couple of times? Yeah, you know, I'm not sure they're not going to figure it out until they're really pasted good a couple of times? Yeah, you know, I'm not sure they're ever going to figure it out. I wrote a column and I quoted five Democratic writers, liberal Democrats with good credentials, saying, hey, you know, we got to address this. We're very unpopular.

And it was amazing the reaction to them to, you know, to shut up. I mean, basically, their prescriptions weren't that good. It really came down to hide your contempt a little better. But my point is, I think Josh Barrow is the one that talks about the hamburger culture. They're badgering you down to what hamburger you have and so forth, what car you drive, what jokes you tell, what movies you watch, whatever it is, is a bad choice. But I mean, that's the only hope for the Republican Party. I'm not as pessimistic as people thinking that if the Republicans scrub health care, which they just did,

they're going to lose the Senate and the House in a massive shift. And it's not because I have any faith in the Republicans. I just think a lot of people are looking at the Democrats and saying, my God, they're worse. I'm not sure if Republicans are in there on their merits, but over the Obama years, Democrats lost about a thousand seats across the country. And I think it's because precisely of the stuff you were saying, people don't feel, oh, I look at that guy, he's going to actually have a positive effect in my life. I think they say, these guys are obsessed with stuff that I don't care about at all. You know, I need a job.

I want my kid to be able to afford college and all this stuff. And I don't see them getting off that train. They seem to be still on it. And again, a lot of people writing in to me, that was my reaction. You know, I was saying, it wasn't my idea. It was these five Democratic writers who were just looking at reality

so you're not going to persuade people to vote for you if you insult them all the time. And I don't see that changing. You know, there's something in the progressive gene from the beginning that is just authoritarian. And I think George Will, a couple years ago, I haven't been able to re-find it, I think he said American liberalism has come down

to just bossing people around. People are tired of it. And the guy who's the manager at Home Depot or the woman who works in a supermarket, okay, maybe she's not as smart as the person, you know, that has the degree from Stanford or Yale. But they kind of know when people are insulting them and calling them deplorable and homophobic and racist and all these other things.

I mean, they kind of get that. It's kind of hard to miss. So I don't know if you know, on a less sinister level, you remember the series Yes Minister, right? Oh, sure. Right, and the real hero was Sir Humphrey, the head of the civil service. You know, he was the face of government. And he wasn't sinister, he was just sort of cheerful and bureaucratic.

And in one episode, the prime minister comes in and he has this new idea. He says, you know, I think we need reform that gives parents more say in where their children go to school. And then Sir Humphrey says nothing. And the prime minister says, you don't agree. And then Sir Humphrey says, well, and he launches into this thing

sort of educating the prime minister, leading him. And so the conclusion of the prime minister at the end of this, he says, so I see, Sir Humphrey, parents are absolutely the worst people to make this decision. And I think that's kind of where the party is going. That is, by the way, that is available on YouTube. That scene is brilliant. It's one of my favorite scenes. But, I mean, just to go back to what you were saying, I think it's sort of useful. I just want to mention two things.

One, there was a tweet I saw today. Andy Levy, TV's Andy Levy, used to be a red-eye, tweeted this, quoted a tweet from a Vox writer about the new Democratic slogan. I am paraphrasing, and I have to paraphrase because the tweet has been deleted. Right. But the new Democratic Party slogan was going to be, it's not a parody, they went um for 20 i guess 2018 2019 um better skills better wages better jobs and i have a feeling that that reveals those those the order of that is is revealing better skills always sounds like you're saying to people you don't know enough you're not good enough you don't have skills exactly something it just, and of course that tweet has since been deleted,

because I think someone re-read it and said, wait a minute, that doesn't, it sounds like us, but it's not how we're supposed to sound. And there's a great Lionel Trilling quote, which I'm now again paraphrasing, which is something like, once you've made your fellow man the object of your enlightened interest, you soon make him the object of your scorn and then your pity and ultimately your coercion. And that's kind of where we are, right? Right.

Better skills. You may be able to change the oil in your car, but can you really understand the intersectionality of work in the Wonder Woman movie? Bill, we were in this situation before at Ronald Reagan's time and after McGovern. And the difference was then being abortion, and they just alienated the entire middle class in America. It wasn't so much about race then. And Bill Clinton addressed that, you know, brilliantly. Now, I think he was more sizzled than steak in doing that, but he at least had the wit to try to gather those voters. And he was a governor.

It's not a coincidence that he was a governor where he could do some things and point to stuff. Look, don't we notice that all the last Democratic candidates have been senators, not governors? And how many governors out there? How many mayors who are Democratic mayors can say, come to my city, Baltimore, Chicago? It's a model of civility and growth and opportunity. I think that's a real crisis in the party. I'm not sure there are Bill Clintons out there. I think it's a problem for the Constitution. Yes, it is a problem because there's no opposition party then.

Right. Yes, it is a problem because there's no opposition party then. Yeah, flashback. OJ Simpson is back in the news and the Republicans are saying, oh, if only the other side would put up a Bill Clinton for the good of the country. Something's changed sometimes. Bill, thanks a lot. Bill, thank you. Thank you very much. Bye-bye. All right. Cheers. The only problem that I have with the whole elite discussion is that it tends to – and wouldn't you guys agree? We had a guest on about this. It was – who do we have?

Was it Tom Nichols? There is such a thing as good elites. You want an elite opinion when you're going to your doctor. Elites are good. I mean elites can be the people who know how to build dams. I mean, that's helped you stop, right? Where do you learn that stuff? I don't know where you learn it.

It's impossible to learn it. You could never learn it if you tried. Impossible. Literally impossible. Yes, well, sometimes a segue of a thousand steps is derailed by one kick. So I'm not going to go where I was going with that. I'm just going to help you about the great courses.

Mission accomplished. See, before he was on mute and I actually got it across this time. Nah. You know, maybe there's a course on segues, on transitions,

or something like that. It's possible with all the things they have at the great courses. Who knows? The great courses plus has these wonderful video lectures in which you can learn all kinds of things. And it's satisfying to learn from trusted engaged experts

elites about the topics that interest us like history and politics photography cooking and how you can listen and watch to the great courses plus anytime from anywhere you can stream video lectures to your smartphone to your tablet to your laptop to your tv or download them to watch offline while you're up on a plane. It's great for traveling. So here's one of the ones that we keep telling you about because it's key to these days when you want to have conversations with people. How conversations work, six lessons for better communication. And today's climate, I don't know if you've noticed, can get contentious.

So it might be useful to revisit one lecture in particular, how to maintain relationships with talk. Indeed, in this lecture, Professor Anne Curzan compares report talk with rapport talk to understand how discourse can simply relay information or build intimacy with a friend or even a romantic partner. Yes, that's right, you may find yourself canoodling after a discussion about Trump. You look at the fascinating research on how cooperative and competitive speaking styles differ, how parents model conversations for children

from infancy on, and how language alignment can predict relationship success. And how electronic communications, you know that glowing thing in your hand you're always looking at, how we'd follow as prescribed patterns, actually.

So we want you to check this out. GreatCoursesPlus.com today. You'll love it. Free, unlimited access to watch any of their video lectures for an entire month free but you gotta sign up using our special url that's the great courses plus.com slash ricochet structure free month now sign up at the great courses plus.com slash ricochet that's the great courses plus.com slash ricochet. And we thank our friends at The Great Courses for sponsoring this, the Ricochet podcast. Well, now we go to the mainstream media, the lying media, the failing media, as they have been called. And let's see, the national embarrassment, as Ace calls it over at Ace of Spades.

And I can't agree because every day I find something of interest to read in The Washington Post. And more often than not, that's Bob Costa, national political reporter at the Washington Post and the newly minted host of Washington Week in Review on PBS. How did he achieve all these wonderful things? Well, he hosted a podcast here on Ricochet once, that's all. Welcome back, Bob. Great to join you guys.

So, healthcare dead, or is this interminable drip-drip TikTok process still going on and something might result? It's quite the drama here in Washington. Whenever I'm on Capitol Hill, I feel like I'm at some kind of tense family reunion among Republicans. Everyone really feels like they have to be there going through the motions trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act. But there's a real sense privately that this is not really something they want to do. It's a promise they made, but it's become settled law. And a lot of these states' Republican governors are pressuring Republicans to not move forward with this

because they want to keep the Medicaid funding in place. And you've got a president who's really not deeply engaged in congressional affairs, is not driven by ideology. So you have this slow-moving disaster where no one's really coming up with a consensus, but they're still trying to showcase the effort to the base. Hey, Bob, it's Rob Long. When was that obvious? When in the past two weeks, three weeks, did you know for sure or did everybody know for sure this thing was just not going to happen? I think it was pretty obvious, Rob, right after the election. I think one of the most revealing comments recently has been by Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who said, he said on record on a local television show, no one really expected Trump to win in the elite ranks of the Republican Party, so they really weren't ready with a health care bill.

And then suddenly Trump wins in November, and they all huddle together in December and January and say to each other, and I was there when these meetings were taking place, what the heck are we going to do now because we actually have power and we actually have to execute? And I saw probably after the House bill passed and he had all these concerns from moderates about taking away pre-existing condition coverage at least to some extent taking away medicaid coverage right at all the senate the senate's a more moderate body and they were i just knew that the senate was going to balk at whatever the house sent over

because of those reasons you didn't join us at the very beginning. Feel free to correct me and tell me I'm full of it, which you have done in the past, so I know you're capable. But it seems to me that if you're the president of the United States and you're looking at Obamacare as a piece of legislation, you realize that there's gigantic leeway and flexibility in the regulatory portion, the portions written by the secretary,

that a lot of things are at the will and the whim and the judgment of whoever's running, whoever is the secretary of that department at any given time. Can he just grab the ball and do a bunch of cool little things, maybe five, ten things that are a first step at reforming Obamacare towards the ultimate end we all want. I mean, does it have to come from what is in fact a terrified and seems to be rudderless Congress? Can it come from the president and the secretary? There are certainly things you can be doing from the Department of Health and Human Services, but I think one of the, objectively speaking,

one of the limitations of this administration has been Secretary Tom Price, who everyone thought was an expert on health care, and he is, but he comes out of the U.S. House, was a conservative in the House, and he hasn't been able to, one, win over conservatives in Congress about this health care plan, and two, you haven't really seen a coherent strategy from this administration about how they're going to use, to use a Steve Bannon phrase, deconstruct the administrative state when it comes to health care. And that's just been a challenge for them from day one. So Tom Price, it's Peter here, Bob.

Tom Price has been present. I was just, I mean, to me sitting here in California, it's as though Tom Price didn't even exist, which is one of the odd wrinkles in this story. But he has been present. It's just that he hasn't been able to get any traction. Is that correct? That's correct. And I think you've seen Price fall out of favor a bit with the West Wing,

with the president himself. A couple sources of mine there said ever since Price really struggled to get the bill through the House, remember House Speaker Paul Ryan had to pull the bill from the floor. I spoke to the president by phone when that happened, and he said Price and Ryan, as much as he liked him, didn't come through. So you've seen Price's capital within the administration diminished. Let me ask about a few figures in the Senate, if I may. These are interesting wrinkles, and the Senate is a small enough body that you get a feel for actual personalities.

Ted Cruz, who established a just and well-deserved reputation as a breaker of furniture and a thrower of bombs, all of a sudden, the other day, the Wall Street Journal said that he had played a constructive role. What's happening with Ted Cruz? You're right. has cut a little bit of a different profile, partly because some Texas Republicans tell me he's nervous about 2018 when he's up for re-election. He wants to make sure the Trump voter comes out for him after all the drama at the Republican convention last year. But we've seen Cruz take the lead here in trying to ax some of the regulations under the Affordable Care Act.

He's come up with what they call the Cruz Amendment, which in essence, very briefly, gives states a lot more flexibility to make their own decisions so they're not burdened by federal guidelines and regulations when it comes to coverage. Okay, and Mike Lee, all of last year,

or it's been two years now since Cruz came to the Senate, Mike Lee was a friend of Ted Cruz's and generally perceived as a kind of moderating influence, certainly as conservative as Cruz, but much more measured, much more reasonable. And Mike Lee is the senator who threw the stink bomb, who said, I'm not supporting this thing and made it clear he's the one.

With that, McConnell's vote count dipped under 50. What's Mike Lee doing? Well, I think you got to look at Lee a lot like Senator Paul of Kentucky. These are conservatives who, since this whole process started, really just wanted to gut the entire law. I mean, Lee's a hardcore conservative from Utah. He never liked the Republican plan. If it wasn't going to strip away all the regulations and the taxes, he was never really going to be for it. And I think his statement was indicative.

I think the bigger problem for McConnell and Trump is Jerry Moran of Kansas. He's getting scared by the hospitals in Kansas going against this bill and a lot of concerns about Medicaid out there. Lee, I think, though, is just – he's the right flank. He never liked it. Okay, and then that leads to Mitch McConnell, who had a reputation. Nobody really warmed to Mitch McConnell. Nobody would ever say he's warm and fuzzy or your heart goes out to him. But his reputation ever since all those years ago, he held the vote on Obamacare. He held his caucus together and Obamacare passed the Senate without

a single Republican vote. He did it. He held them now mitch mcconnell who has a reputation as a master of the senate has egg all over his face what's going on well he was a master of the senate in opposition and it's different i mean it sounds cliche to say it's different in governing but i think mcconnell got a total curveball with trump's election too i mean if you had paul ryan as president ted cruz even as president uh mitt mean, if you had Paul Ryan as president, Ted Cruz even as president, Mitt Romney, if you had someone who was based in conservative principles, had a conservative orthodoxy, to at least some extent, I think McConnell was ready for that to roll through legislation, just like he's been able to roll through some judges and nominees for the courts.

But McConnell just has never really built a relationship with Trump. He doesn't really know how to deal with Trump's stride at nationalism and populism. And he only has 52 seats to play with. And he's really managing not one party, but about three or four in the Senate GOP. Right. So what happens next is that McConnell's going to call a vote on a clean repeal. They will fail to put the votes together and he'll shrug his shoulders and say, now we've tried everything. August recess, go home. Is that right?

I think that's right. I think he knows the White House wants everybody to stay through the recess, so he kind of did a preemptive call to make sure everyone stays in Washington so the Senate doesn't get blamed for not getting things done. But here's the secret no one really wants to talk about, is that Republicans who I talk to, the top guys in the Senate and the House, they actually don't mind if this thing doesn't pass. To them, politically – I'm curious on your guys' take on this – politically, they think it's better to blame the Democrats as the insurance markets collapse in some states and then say to the Democrats, you have to shoulder the blame for the plan, not us. Wow, that just strikes me as...

Okay, so here's the case. Here's the political case. You've got old Rob Portman, and Rob Portman's reputation, and as best as I can tell, his personal temperament is the inside dealmaker. He wants to get things done. On the other hand, whereas President Trump carried Ohio by eight points, Rob Portman in his reelection campaign carried Ohio by more than 20 points. So what's his game here? He actually wants to blame the Democrats, or he really wants to preserve the Medicare, Medicaid rather? I mean, Portman is not a tool of Governor Kasich, who is very much pro

keeping the Medicaid expansion in place. But Portman has his own concerns. I mean, Portman's elected in 2010 and reelected in 2016, so you think he's pretty safe right now. But he knows Ohio is a swing state, and Ohio has an opioid crisis. And so Portman's whole position throughout this process has been, I need opioid money from the federal government to help cover this crisis in my state, period. So you're really, from him, you're getting an argument of expanded federal role in Ohio health care coverage, which, again, is against the usual Republican tradition you'd have in an Ohio Republican senator.

Hey, Bob, it's Rob Long. How much trouble is the president in politically? I mean, he ran and said, I'm going to replace it with something better. It's going to be cheaper. You're going to love it. It's not going to take that long. It's going to be easy. Everybody in government is stupid. It's easy to do. I'm going to do it. It's going to be cheaper and better. And how much trouble is he in politically if he doesn't deliver lot of the Trump people tell me inside the White House, look, repeal and replace, nationalist instincts and foreign policy, talking through trade war with China, reimagining U.S. alliances, thinking through jobs and growth, maybe trying to get tax cuts. It's not trying to manage the health care system. That's not, in the White House's view, part of their brand.

So they don't think they're actually going to pay much of a political cost because they think the base is so aligned against the media, doesn't like the Democrats. They're not just going to suddenly bolt or sit home. They actually like that Trump's kind of in the mix as this controversial outsider. Right. But I mean, are there enough voters like that? I mean, you got a lot of votes from people who said, I'll get the guy shot. Maybe he'll be able to cut the Gordian.

I mean, that's the big gamble, right? They're losing. They're bleeding in blue states right now with their whole strategy. The Bannon-Steven Miller strategy is run up the score in the Rust Belt and just hope and pray that that's the way to win those same states in 2020. Last question. I've got a last question. Is he going to fire Jeff Sessions? Is he going to fire Robert Mueller? situation any other political any in history any other time a president says something like this you immediately resign you can't go to work the next day if a president says this kind of thing publicly to the new york times about how you rather kind of have you out of the job but in this strange washington in this strange trump land uh sessions is at the justice department

hasn't really communicated with trump in a long time is pretty isolated and he hasn't gotten a clear signal i mean that interview was a pretty clear signal with the times but he hasn't really communicated with Trump in a long time, is pretty isolated, and he hasn't gotten a clear signal. I mean that interview was a pretty clear signal at the time, but he hasn't gotten a clear signal that he actually has to step down, so he's not stepping down. What a situation. Yeah, I mean what – do you think people are sitting there saying, hey, dude, you got to go? Or is it just everyone's just kind of looking around saying, wait, didn't you get the message? I mean is it like the guest who won't leave the party? And doesn't he have – if you're Sessions, don't you have a lot of leverage here?

I mean, it's no coincidence that this came out right after we heard or we were – the news broke about his maintaining of that civil forfeiture rule, which, of course, all conservatives hate, right? Are the long knives out for Sessions right now? Oh, they're out. I mean, Trump's been furious ever since Sessions refused himself from the Russia investigation. I mean, that's evident from all my conversations and our reports. But I think the problem is Trump, if you look at his career, doesn't like direct confrontation,

so he hasn't actually asked for Sessions' resignation. So it's this awkward tension that just kind of continues. The hope is, among some people the White House, is that he does just resign on his own. But Sessions, he gave up a safe Senate seat in Alabama. What is he going to do after this at this age? He wants to stay in there and do some law enforcement

work and try to craft immigration policy, even if he doesn't have the same rapport with Trump. He wants to stay, but this dynamic can't last. It's like the Real Housewives. This is my last question. You just said something that I find very, very striking. Trump doesn't like confrontation. You mean to tell us that the man who became famous across America by saying, you're fired, can't say you're fired?

I think, Peter, if you got into a spat with President Trump, he would be happy to tweet about you and say, Peter Robinson, the worst. He's a loser. But if he saw you in person, Peter, in the Oval, and you had some recommendations on his speech, he would be ingratiating and try to win over you and be charming, because that's just Trump's style. I have no explanation for this. I'm not a psychologist, but I've observed him enough. He loves the public fight, kind of shies away from the private one. Now here's your third last question. Just as we know that all those years in the wilderness, the Republicans were crafting

an exquisite health care bill to replace Obamacare, we know that they've got ready-to-roll-out, no doubt, great tax reform packages that will just slide through like a BB through the gut of a duck. Tell me, what is the situation, prognosis, on tax reform? The prognosis is they can try to get through some limited tax cuts, cut the corporate rate, cut some middle class rates, not really worry about the deficit.

Who cares about the deficit in Trump's Washington? Just do something that's going to encourage growth. And they don't really want to go after the tough stuff. I think there's no real appetite in this administration to have a big fight about certain deductions. They know the middle class voter doesn't want to really have that kind of debate right now. So it's all about just showing some effort, some action on tax cuts, even if it's not wholesale Paul Ryan style tax reform. Well, who makes the cans that we keep kicking down the road? Because they are some strong, good cans. That's a fine American product right there. I'd invest in that can manufacturer. Great. There's so much more to do,

but Bob, we thank you for coming by and taking the time to talk with us, and we'll have you on as soon as we can. Thanks. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Bob. So, no real tax reform. Okay. All right. Well, maybe when we get the House and the Senate back by bigger margins.

I know. It's always that. Well, we need bigger margins, although they do but still i agree with you uh yeah well rob for example i mean you're going back to the television business now soon aren't you you're going to be we're going to have another series in my office right now yeah we're gonna have another series of uh of of guest hosts to stand in your stead um are you are are you actually doing any new casting are you changing up the cast of this at all just yes yes we are we are changing the cast it's kind of? Yes, yes we are. We are changing the

cast. It's kind of complicated. How do you get those actors? Well, you know, it's really hard because it's hard to find people. It's impossible. No, it actually can't be done. It's impossible. There's literally no way to do it. There's literally no way to do it. There you're wrong.

You may find yourself wandering around California saying are there any actors here? Any actors whatsoever? Do you mind if you're staggering around New York trying to find somebody with a theatrical background? Good luck for you. When it comes to businesses and jobs in the elsewhere, there's a tool that people need to know about, and it's called ZipRecruiter. Posting your job in one place is not enough to find your quality candidates. With ZipRecruiter, you can post your job to 100 plus job sites with just one click.

Then their powerful technology efficiently matches the right people to your job better than anyone else can do. And that's why ZipRecruiter is different. Unlike those other job sites, ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you. It finds them. In fact, over 80% of jobs posted on ZipRecruiter get a qualified candidate in just 24 hours. So you're not juggling emails, calls to your office. Forget about that. You can simply screen, rate, and manage candidates all in one place with ZipRecruiter's easy-to-use

dashboard. Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results. And right now, you, the Ricochet listener, can post jobs on ZipRecruiter for free. Did I say that? Yeah, that's right. Free. Just go to ZipRecruiter.com slash free trial. That's ZipRecruiter.com slash free trial. One more time.

Try it for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash free trial. And thanks to ZipRecruiter for sponsoring this, the Ricochet podcast. And Rob, you probably have to run off and do some sort of theatrical thing soon, right? So, yeah, whatever I do, it's very theatrical. Anything I do is theatrical, but yes. I want to ask you guys this question.

Peter and Rob, we just had a big interview with the New York Times with Donald Trump. Why does he talk to them? I do not know. You don't know? He's a New Yorker, that's why.

He's a New Yorker. He talks to the New York Times because he reads the New York Times, because he's a New Yorker, and because no matter what he says about the New York Times, it's his hometown paper, and it's ingrained in him. I mean, it's his, it's his hometown paper and it's ingrained in him. I mean, it's just something he, he, he loves. He's not, he doesn't hold fast to these things he rants and raves about. He doesn't hold fast to.

He, um, he can't get, get away from it. That's, that's probably the most normal thing about him. Rob, would you say perhaps that the approval, the eventual approval of the Wall Street, of the Washington Post and the New York Times is sort of hanging out there like the brass ring that he truly wants to grab? That's some people's cheap psychoanalysis of the situation. You know, his psychology is kind of a mystery to me. But this one, I'll go the baby step and say that the hometown newspaper, it's something he reads every single day. It was formed the cultural soup that he was raised in, and that's just what it is. I mean, he wants – I mean, it is true.

I mean, taking away from the most recent political history, it is true that in his life, the way he's conducted his life and the way he's acted has been desperate for approval. I think desperate for approval is something you could say that he's been. Even now, he's desperate for approval. And the New York Times kind of represents the apex of approval, I guess, especially if you're a New Yorker. The reason I ask is when I was looking through the interview and there was something that just stuck out. And here's the quote.

And people have been angry with the podcast before because we began by bashing Trump. And they said, why don't you leave it to the end so I can just stop listening? And OK, well, this is that the quote is, well, Napoleon finished a bit bad. But I guess he was talking about background finished a bit bad. But I asked that. So I asked the president, what about Napoleon? He said, quote, no, no no no no what he did was incredible he designed paris the street grid the way they work you know the spokes he did so many things even beyond

and his one problem is he didn't go to russia that night because he had extracurricular activities and they froze to death how many times has has Russia been saved by the weather? Twice at least. That is astonishing, though. I know, we're not supposed to be astonishing, we're not supposed to be, but really, where do you begin with that? What does that mean?

He didn't go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities and they froze to death. What the hell does that mean? They froze to death leaving Russia. They got there in what, September? Well, you know, I mean. They died when they left. I would say, and I take second place to no person in my critical attitude towards the president but i would say that um we do occasionally

um exercise ourselves over things we probably don't need to oh i'm not exercise i just think it's amusing because and it's revelatory i mean it's revelatory too it doesn't nothing about this surprises me but macron was probably talking about paris and talking about how it was redone by napoleon he was talking about napoleon the third he wasn't talking about nap it was redone by Napoleon. He was talking about Napoleon III. He wasn't talking about Napoleon, Napoleon. Because Napoleon, Napoleon did not redesign Paris. At best, he tried to build it. He wanted to. He started a canal. He didn't redesign because of the Second Revolution, right?

Napoleon III was the guy who was right houseman houseman very good in the third hired houseman right right and that's that's the great story about how the paris that we now love is actually the work of a top-down urbanism project that destroyed the diversity of architecture and replaced it with a monolithic style that we now all love but at the time they were just stunned it's like what happened to our old beautiful Paris? You've turned it into this vulgar monstrosity, which I just find hilarious. Anyway, that's a whole different story.

That's elitism, I suppose. And it's probably one of the great courses you can listen to at greatcoursesplus.com. Anyway, I had to throw that in because that one sentence just contained so much. There's where madness lies. It's taken down a lot of wise people. Yeah, and it doesn't matter.

I mean, it does not matter. What matters, I guess, going back to the start of the show, Betsy DeVos matters, right? Regulatory reform matters. Pushing back, however, on this confiscation of assets, that is one of those things. Well, we knew this was coming anyway because Sessions was for it and Trump was for it, but it just

reminds us there's lots of work to be done. And we'll do it next week. This podcast was brought to you by The Great Courses, ZipRecruiter, and BombFill. Please support them for supporting us. Go to the Ricochet store, buy stuff. Go to iTunes. Give us a five-star glowing review, and that'll help other people find us as well.

And remember, as Rob told you at the beginning of the show, podcast listeners, join today for our brand-new podcast listener tier. Only $2.50 a month. Cheap, as Mad Magazine used to say. Thanks for listening. Thanks to our guests. Thanks, Peter, Rob, and we'll see everybody in the comments, which I'm sure will be nothing but cryptocurrency for the first 30 ones, because that's the statement that I made

probably in the beginning. And they can explain it to me, maybe. That'd be good. Explain it as we move. Guys, next week. Next week. Thanks, guys. Take care. Thank you. And there must be something to get from good But to this, there's never good Satellites, they make space burn We've been told not to keep the strangers out We don't like them, we've started a pain in the back

We don't like them, we're over and out Across the world, we're gonna blow them down John, I know you're something you think you should Thank you. We know the street bars must be yours So many hearts come really good To sing along with the road We could be jumping on the road There's a one-way street in a one-horse town One-way people starting to brag You can have it now put them down. These homeless people gonna blow us down.

Charlie don't serve anything he should. Charlie don't serve anything you know that he should. Charlie don't serve boys who have a gun. Charlie's gonna be the next boss. Ricochet. Join the conversation.