This week iPhone users using the speech to text feature saw a bit of a “bug” when attempting to dictate a particular word. When the word “racist” is spoken, the iPhone first interprets and displays the word “Trump” before quickly correcting itself and displaying “racist”.
Per New York Times reporting, an Apple spokeswoman blamed the issue on “phonetic overlap between the two words”. Unfortunately the Times reporters did not consult our dear linguist, so I figured I would myself. John: does it seem at all likely that this is a case of a “phonetic overlap” as Apple claims, or do you suspect something more nefarious?
I've asked this in the past but it's not yet been addressed. John and Glenn who do you turn to for news? Who are your most trusted sources?
Glenn, I see you're subscribed to Matt Taibbi. You've had him on your show in the past and I believe he's long overdue for another appearance. I think it would do John a great service to be on with him.
I've linked a recent article from Matt's, Racket News Substack, which discusses some of the issues DOGE has exposed. Yet the legacy media has painted them as disinformation or ignored the stories entirely. Do you ever feel as though you're being fed propaganda? If not, shouldn't that be cause for concern?
On reducing federal deficit spending, waste, fraud and abuse are often blamed, but it seems to me that voters and their representatives are subject to perverse incentives when it comes to voting on government spending and taxation: we want more services and less taxes. Everyone likes free stuff. I’m not aware of any viable private business in which customers vote on the services provided as well as the price to be paid collectively in exchange for the services.
As, I understand it, the US Constitution contains no requirement for a balanced federal budget. Yet, for most of the first 200 years, the federal debt was fairly limited except for the years during WWII. In the second chapter of his recent dissertation, Dr. Cameron Tilley argued that a balanced budget had been an unwritten norm, which could be set aside during emergencies. But this norm was abandoned sometime in the 1980s.
In the late 1980s and ‘90s, a series of legislative measures attempted to reign in federal debt, and appeared to be successful in the late 1990s (aided by reduced military spending after the collapse of the USSR). But this approach failed after 2001 as Congress responded to new emergencies with tax cuts and ever more deficit spending.
Options: 1) Enact a new set of deficit reduction laws to produce different results. 2) Reestablish the old norm by acknowledging and resisting the perverse incentives faced by voters and their representatives. 3) Prepare for the lenders to stop financing our deficit.
I think options 1 and 2 are unlikely to work. What do you think?
Regarding No. 1, I remember in the 1980s, a balanced budget amendment and, less harsh, a line item veto were regular topics at GOP primary debates. Dole said, if elected, he would actually use line item veto and let the courts decide if it was constitutional or not. I miss those years.
I don't think I ever even knew that. Good for Clinton. Too bad, because if it could be used, I believe Congress would react by crafting better legislation. I can see the Court's point, though.
"In the early ’90s, Hank Rowan gave $100 million to a university in New Jersey, an act of extraordinary generosity that helped launch the greatest explosion in educational philanthropy since the days of Andrew Carnegie and the Rockefellers. But Rowan gave his money to Glassboro State University, a tiny, almost bankrupt school in South Jersey, while almost all of the philanthropists who followed his lead made their donations to elite schools such as Harvard and Yale. Why did no one follow Rowan’s example?"
Does anyone else think this smells like McCarthyism??
"Federal employees are told to name colleagues who work in DEI roles or risk 'adverse consequences'
Emails sent to government workers at numerous agencies gave employees 10 days to report if a colleague's job relates to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts."
What are your thoughts on Trump coin? At best this seems like a rug-pull scam to enrich Trump. At worst this is a bribing mechanism allowing Trump to be influenced by big players (foreign and domestic) without any hope of tracing the contributions (i.e. Zuck could pump a billion into the coin to ensure TikTok gets banned, or Putin could pump it up to ensure Ukraine is cut off from aid). Is there any steel man for Trump creating this? Could ANY good come from this?
I despise the far-left ideologies undergirding movements like BLM. The ideological purity tests (are you woke enough?), the in-group/out-group mentality (anti-racists vs bigots), and the belief in counterfactual narratives (police are hunting down black men, regardless of what the data says) leads to a religious fervor that I find dangerous. There’s a genuine pain and resentment powering the movement, but the “three-named” leaders only fan the flames of discontent and direct that fervor toward the destruction of our ‘racist’ institutions.
I also despise the far-right ideologies undergirding movements like MAGA. The ideological purity tests (are you loyal to Trump?), the in-group/out-group mentality (MAGA vs RINOs), and the belief in counterfactual narratives (the 2020 election was stolen, regardless of what the data says) leads to a religious fervor that I find dangerous. There’s a genuine pain and resentment powering the movement, but the “three-named” leaders only fan the flames of discontent and direct that fervor toward the destruction of our ‘deep state’ institutions.
Glenn, I admire how you stand up to the illiberal left, but you seem perfectly content to let the illiberal right thrive. Yes, you’ll tepidly acknowledge that Trump went “too far for your liking” during the 2020 election, but I’ve never heard you give an honest account of what transpired. You never confront the claims of widespread ballot fraud head on or highlight Trump’s own attempts at overturning the election. The Republican base has become completely untethered from reality because the conservative thought leadership abdicated their responsibilities and allowed these conspiracies to flourish.
Maybe you saw us as useful idiots. Perhaps you saw the utility in these false narratives; as a tool for defeating the left. Well… mission accomplished I suppose. But where will this weapon be directed next? What collateral damage will we receive?
So here’s my question Glenn: How far is too far? Are there any actions that Trump could take that would require you to stand in opposition? Are you Glenn X. Loury, a “three-named” person of the right? Or are you a conservative thought leader who’s willing to correct, admonish, and guide when necessary?
Glenn, which proud boy were you most excited to see released? 😂
Seriously though, I am curious what both of you think about the pardons. Trump is actively trying to rewrite the narrative around Jan 6. In the fullness of time will it be remembered as an attempt to overturn an election? Or will it be seen as a witch hunt? Which would you prefer it to be remembered as?
South Africa is currently getting more media attention than it has in a long time. Elon Musk has been criticized both for being from South Africa and for leaving South Africa. As well, Trump has called for granting refugee status to Afrikaners.
A lot has changed in South Africa over the past 30 years. Looking back, what are your thoughts?
Alt Q- I think the main problem we have run into as regards black/white questions runs like this: Black leaders have developed a race consciousness, American Black - and as PART of that consciousness they propose that white people in America do not meet the same prerequisites that would grant them permission to create American White. What many imply is that German, English, Russian etc are cultures, but American White is just a shorthand way of seeing these cultures all together. Black Americans, they say, have faced a collective struggle and have therefore earned the right to be particular thing. But, of course, American White people can make precisely the same claims. My question: Are the Black leaders correct? I see only three possible positive takes 1. Black consciousness is wrong and should be broken apart. 2. Black consciousness, right or wrong, means White Consciousness. 3. Black Consciousness is special. Where do you stand?
At times Trump seems more prominent, at other times Musk comes to the fore. Of course all members of the Glenn audience want keen analysis to prevail. So, in truth, are we living under the Trusk or the Mump administration?
Are we witnessing the end of liberal democracy? (I mean liberal not in its political association with the left but in its philosophical sense).
Trump is the most avowedly illiberal President the US has had in recent memory and perhaps ever. And what is more, as a candidate seeking a second term he made no secret of his illiberalism and he more or less rode it to victory.
I don't need to remind either of you of the many hours you have spent, including on this very podcast, highlighting the illiberalism of the left.
Are those of us who still believe in philisophical liberalism just doomed to see whatever is left of it end, or do you see any reason for hope?
Glenn, I wonder if you could assess Trump’s stance toward our historic allies from a game theoretical perspective. It seems that by playing hardball with nations that have been part of the US-led western bloc post-WW2 Trump may achieve certain concessions while undermining our long term relationships with those countries (i.e. our recent disposition toward our erstwhile allies is more suited to a single-turn game than an iterated game).
in response to Corporations rolling back DEI initiatives, NAACP sent a "Black Consumer Advisory" that stated in part the following"
"Call to Action The NAACP urges Black consumers to take the following actions in response to these harmful practices: 1. Spend Intentionally: Support businesses and organizations that maintain and expand their DEI commitments and prioritize investment in Black communities. 2. Demand Accountability: Call out corporations that have abandoned DEI initiatives and demand transparency in their practices. 3. Support Black-Owned Businesses: Prioritize Black-owned businesses and service providers in spending decisions. 4. Advocate for Change: Push for policies strengthening supplier diversity, workplace equity, and economic inclusion for Black professionals and entrepreneurs. 5. Stay Informed: Educate yourself and others about corporate rollbacks and their impact on Black communities. The NAACP recognizes that the rollback of DEI initiatives is a direct attack on Black economic progress, civil rights, and the principles of equity and fairness. These actions are part of a broader effort to reverse gains made in civil rights and social justice. We urge Black consumers to remain vigilant, informed, and intentional in their economic decisions, using their collective power to demand accountability from corporations and institutions. Together, we can push for meaningful progress and ensure that diversity, equity, and inclusion are prioritized and expanded."
I am curious on your current thoughts of the NAACP and its current outlook on civil rights and social justice.
You've discussed many times the 'cultural' aspect of crime, and perhaps other conditions which seem to perpetuate in predominantly minority communities. I've also heard both of you at various times, and perhaps to lesser degrees, discuss education, particularly public education. Aside from Professor McWhorter’s occasional mention of the influence of ‘acting white’, I don’t recall you discussing cultural influence on the public school setting. Perhaps I'm misreading your individual/collective assessment of 'public' education as it relates particularly to lower income/minority communities, but I get the sense (again, perhaps incorrectly) that you feel (much like I often see/hear echoed by politicians and the main stream media) that many public schools are 'failing' predominantly minority student populations, and that the majority of student’s lack of learning/performance is the ‘fault’ of the schools. I also recall one or both of you mentioning school vouchers and/or charter schools as potential 'solutions' to long term underperforming school districts.
My questions are:
1: Do you believe existing faculty/educational institutions (say in Baltimore or DC) are 'failing' students? If you were to completely swap out the faculty and infrastructure (with no other changes) from say Fairfax County (VA) and Baltimore city, is it your belief that Baltimore students would then rebound with higher scores and better outcomes, and Fairfax in reverse would drop precipitously? I find it completely implausible to believe that the existing faculty in cities like Baltimore are filled with uncaring educators who lack the ability to teach. I strongly suspect that many/most of the same cultural influences which contribute to other quality of life issues (like crime), are also heavily influencing poor educational outcomes.
2: My understanding with most Charter schools is families (ie. Parents) must often agree to volunteer at the school, attend school events, and must pledge support for and be involved with the school’s efforts to teach their child. In my mind, this allows for something of a ‘cultural reset’ at those singular schools (and the same with private schools), where the students are then surrounded by likeminded peers (and their parents), which exerts collective pressure to perform and which likely significantly influences the better outcomes in student learning and associated test scores. Is this wrong?
I bristle every time I hear a politician or talking head say a local school (or system) is ‘failing’ students, especially when many of those same schools have dramatically increased funding (ie. Baltimore) compared to statewide/nationwide norms. But I trust you two to correct my thinking if there actually is some demonstrable failure on the part of low performing schools.
A little frivolity:
This week iPhone users using the speech to text feature saw a bit of a “bug” when attempting to dictate a particular word. When the word “racist” is spoken, the iPhone first interprets and displays the word “Trump” before quickly correcting itself and displaying “racist”.
Per New York Times reporting, an Apple spokeswoman blamed the issue on “phonetic overlap between the two words”. Unfortunately the Times reporters did not consult our dear linguist, so I figured I would myself. John: does it seem at all likely that this is a case of a “phonetic overlap” as Apple claims, or do you suspect something more nefarious?
Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/technology/iphone-dictation-trump-racist.html
I've asked this in the past but it's not yet been addressed. John and Glenn who do you turn to for news? Who are your most trusted sources?
Glenn, I see you're subscribed to Matt Taibbi. You've had him on your show in the past and I believe he's long overdue for another appearance. I think it would do John a great service to be on with him.
I've linked a recent article from Matt's, Racket News Substack, which discusses some of the issues DOGE has exposed. Yet the legacy media has painted them as disinformation or ignored the stories entirely. Do you ever feel as though you're being fed propaganda? If not, shouldn't that be cause for concern?
https://open.substack.com/pub/taibbi/p/listen-to-this-article-the-media?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1k6ee3
On reducing federal deficit spending, waste, fraud and abuse are often blamed, but it seems to me that voters and their representatives are subject to perverse incentives when it comes to voting on government spending and taxation: we want more services and less taxes. Everyone likes free stuff. I’m not aware of any viable private business in which customers vote on the services provided as well as the price to be paid collectively in exchange for the services.
As, I understand it, the US Constitution contains no requirement for a balanced federal budget. Yet, for most of the first 200 years, the federal debt was fairly limited except for the years during WWII. In the second chapter of his recent dissertation, Dr. Cameron Tilley argued that a balanced budget had been an unwritten norm, which could be set aside during emergencies. But this norm was abandoned sometime in the 1980s.
https://www.econlib.org/book-chapters/chapter-ch-2-the-old-time-fiscal-religion/
In the late 1980s and ‘90s, a series of legislative measures attempted to reign in federal debt, and appeared to be successful in the late 1990s (aided by reduced military spending after the collapse of the USSR). But this approach failed after 2001 as Congress responded to new emergencies with tax cuts and ever more deficit spending.
Options: 1) Enact a new set of deficit reduction laws to produce different results. 2) Reestablish the old norm by acknowledging and resisting the perverse incentives faced by voters and their representatives. 3) Prepare for the lenders to stop financing our deficit.
I think options 1 and 2 are unlikely to work. What do you think?
Thanks,
Greg McIsaac
Regarding No. 1, I remember in the 1980s, a balanced budget amendment and, less harsh, a line item veto were regular topics at GOP primary debates. Dole said, if elected, he would actually use line item veto and let the courts decide if it was constitutional or not. I miss those years.
It was passed and signed into law in 1996. After Clinton tried to use it, the US Supremen Court struck it down (6-3) in 1998. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_York
Maybe SCOTUS would change its mind if a similar case is presented in the near future. If so, its effectiveness would depend on how it was used.
I don't think I ever even knew that. Good for Clinton. Too bad, because if it could be used, I believe Congress would react by crafting better legislation. I can see the Court's point, though.
I would LOVE a discussion of this:
"In the early ’90s, Hank Rowan gave $100 million to a university in New Jersey, an act of extraordinary generosity that helped launch the greatest explosion in educational philanthropy since the days of Andrew Carnegie and the Rockefellers. But Rowan gave his money to Glassboro State University, a tiny, almost bankrupt school in South Jersey, while almost all of the philanthropists who followed his lead made their donations to elite schools such as Harvard and Yale. Why did no one follow Rowan’s example?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl73ghf_Uy4
To take it further ... there are MANY interesting discussions on this compilation of podcasts.
I Hate the Ivy League: Riffs and Rants on Elite Education
Malcolm Gladwell (Author, Narrator)
https://a.co/d/aVtHT0I
Given that both of you are affiliated with elite educational institutions ...
Better yet ... invite Malcolm Gladwell on the show.
Does anyone else think this smells like McCarthyism??
"Federal employees are told to name colleagues who work in DEI roles or risk 'adverse consequences'
Emails sent to government workers at numerous agencies gave employees 10 days to report if a colleague's job relates to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/federal-workers-told-name-dei-colleagues-risk-adverse-consequences-rcna188871
What are your thoughts on Trump coin? At best this seems like a rug-pull scam to enrich Trump. At worst this is a bribing mechanism allowing Trump to be influenced by big players (foreign and domestic) without any hope of tracing the contributions (i.e. Zuck could pump a billion into the coin to ensure TikTok gets banned, or Putin could pump it up to ensure Ukraine is cut off from aid). Is there any steel man for Trump creating this? Could ANY good come from this?
I despise the far-left ideologies undergirding movements like BLM. The ideological purity tests (are you woke enough?), the in-group/out-group mentality (anti-racists vs bigots), and the belief in counterfactual narratives (police are hunting down black men, regardless of what the data says) leads to a religious fervor that I find dangerous. There’s a genuine pain and resentment powering the movement, but the “three-named” leaders only fan the flames of discontent and direct that fervor toward the destruction of our ‘racist’ institutions.
I also despise the far-right ideologies undergirding movements like MAGA. The ideological purity tests (are you loyal to Trump?), the in-group/out-group mentality (MAGA vs RINOs), and the belief in counterfactual narratives (the 2020 election was stolen, regardless of what the data says) leads to a religious fervor that I find dangerous. There’s a genuine pain and resentment powering the movement, but the “three-named” leaders only fan the flames of discontent and direct that fervor toward the destruction of our ‘deep state’ institutions.
Glenn, I admire how you stand up to the illiberal left, but you seem perfectly content to let the illiberal right thrive. Yes, you’ll tepidly acknowledge that Trump went “too far for your liking” during the 2020 election, but I’ve never heard you give an honest account of what transpired. You never confront the claims of widespread ballot fraud head on or highlight Trump’s own attempts at overturning the election. The Republican base has become completely untethered from reality because the conservative thought leadership abdicated their responsibilities and allowed these conspiracies to flourish.
Maybe you saw us as useful idiots. Perhaps you saw the utility in these false narratives; as a tool for defeating the left. Well… mission accomplished I suppose. But where will this weapon be directed next? What collateral damage will we receive?
So here’s my question Glenn: How far is too far? Are there any actions that Trump could take that would require you to stand in opposition? Are you Glenn X. Loury, a “three-named” person of the right? Or are you a conservative thought leader who’s willing to correct, admonish, and guide when necessary?
Glenn, which proud boy were you most excited to see released? 😂
Seriously though, I am curious what both of you think about the pardons. Trump is actively trying to rewrite the narrative around Jan 6. In the fullness of time will it be remembered as an attempt to overturn an election? Or will it be seen as a witch hunt? Which would you prefer it to be remembered as?
South Africa is currently getting more media attention than it has in a long time. Elon Musk has been criticized both for being from South Africa and for leaving South Africa. As well, Trump has called for granting refugee status to Afrikaners.
A lot has changed in South Africa over the past 30 years. Looking back, what are your thoughts?
Alt Q- I think the main problem we have run into as regards black/white questions runs like this: Black leaders have developed a race consciousness, American Black - and as PART of that consciousness they propose that white people in America do not meet the same prerequisites that would grant them permission to create American White. What many imply is that German, English, Russian etc are cultures, but American White is just a shorthand way of seeing these cultures all together. Black Americans, they say, have faced a collective struggle and have therefore earned the right to be particular thing. But, of course, American White people can make precisely the same claims. My question: Are the Black leaders correct? I see only three possible positive takes 1. Black consciousness is wrong and should be broken apart. 2. Black consciousness, right or wrong, means White Consciousness. 3. Black Consciousness is special. Where do you stand?
At times Trump seems more prominent, at other times Musk comes to the fore. Of course all members of the Glenn audience want keen analysis to prevail. So, in truth, are we living under the Trusk or the Mump administration?
Would love a comment on this ....
Federal Employees Ordered to Report Colleagues in DEI Roles or Face 'Adverse Consequences'
https://www.btimesonline.com/articles/172465/20250123/federal-employees-ordered-to-report-colleagues-in-dei-roles-or-face-adverse-consequences.htm
Yikes! Squeal on they neighbor, or else !
Are we witnessing the end of liberal democracy? (I mean liberal not in its political association with the left but in its philosophical sense).
Trump is the most avowedly illiberal President the US has had in recent memory and perhaps ever. And what is more, as a candidate seeking a second term he made no secret of his illiberalism and he more or less rode it to victory.
I don't need to remind either of you of the many hours you have spent, including on this very podcast, highlighting the illiberalism of the left.
Are those of us who still believe in philisophical liberalism just doomed to see whatever is left of it end, or do you see any reason for hope?
Glenn, I wonder if you could assess Trump’s stance toward our historic allies from a game theoretical perspective. It seems that by playing hardball with nations that have been part of the US-led western bloc post-WW2 Trump may achieve certain concessions while undermining our long term relationships with those countries (i.e. our recent disposition toward our erstwhile allies is more suited to a single-turn game than an iterated game).
in response to Corporations rolling back DEI initiatives, NAACP sent a "Black Consumer Advisory" that stated in part the following"
"Call to Action The NAACP urges Black consumers to take the following actions in response to these harmful practices: 1. Spend Intentionally: Support businesses and organizations that maintain and expand their DEI commitments and prioritize investment in Black communities. 2. Demand Accountability: Call out corporations that have abandoned DEI initiatives and demand transparency in their practices. 3. Support Black-Owned Businesses: Prioritize Black-owned businesses and service providers in spending decisions. 4. Advocate for Change: Push for policies strengthening supplier diversity, workplace equity, and economic inclusion for Black professionals and entrepreneurs. 5. Stay Informed: Educate yourself and others about corporate rollbacks and their impact on Black communities. The NAACP recognizes that the rollback of DEI initiatives is a direct attack on Black economic progress, civil rights, and the principles of equity and fairness. These actions are part of a broader effort to reverse gains made in civil rights and social justice. We urge Black consumers to remain vigilant, informed, and intentional in their economic decisions, using their collective power to demand accountability from corporations and institutions. Together, we can push for meaningful progress and ensure that diversity, equity, and inclusion are prioritized and expanded."
I am curious on your current thoughts of the NAACP and its current outlook on civil rights and social justice.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://naacp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Black%20Consumer%20Advisory%202025.pdf
Professor's Loury/McWhorter,
I'm a huge fan!
You've discussed many times the 'cultural' aspect of crime, and perhaps other conditions which seem to perpetuate in predominantly minority communities. I've also heard both of you at various times, and perhaps to lesser degrees, discuss education, particularly public education. Aside from Professor McWhorter’s occasional mention of the influence of ‘acting white’, I don’t recall you discussing cultural influence on the public school setting. Perhaps I'm misreading your individual/collective assessment of 'public' education as it relates particularly to lower income/minority communities, but I get the sense (again, perhaps incorrectly) that you feel (much like I often see/hear echoed by politicians and the main stream media) that many public schools are 'failing' predominantly minority student populations, and that the majority of student’s lack of learning/performance is the ‘fault’ of the schools. I also recall one or both of you mentioning school vouchers and/or charter schools as potential 'solutions' to long term underperforming school districts.
My questions are:
1: Do you believe existing faculty/educational institutions (say in Baltimore or DC) are 'failing' students? If you were to completely swap out the faculty and infrastructure (with no other changes) from say Fairfax County (VA) and Baltimore city, is it your belief that Baltimore students would then rebound with higher scores and better outcomes, and Fairfax in reverse would drop precipitously? I find it completely implausible to believe that the existing faculty in cities like Baltimore are filled with uncaring educators who lack the ability to teach. I strongly suspect that many/most of the same cultural influences which contribute to other quality of life issues (like crime), are also heavily influencing poor educational outcomes.
2: My understanding with most Charter schools is families (ie. Parents) must often agree to volunteer at the school, attend school events, and must pledge support for and be involved with the school’s efforts to teach their child. In my mind, this allows for something of a ‘cultural reset’ at those singular schools (and the same with private schools), where the students are then surrounded by likeminded peers (and their parents), which exerts collective pressure to perform and which likely significantly influences the better outcomes in student learning and associated test scores. Is this wrong?
I bristle every time I hear a politician or talking head say a local school (or system) is ‘failing’ students, especially when many of those same schools have dramatically increased funding (ie. Baltimore) compared to statewide/nationwide norms. But I trust you two to correct my thinking if there actually is some demonstrable failure on the part of low performing schools.