There was a lot to respect in your guest comments. Even in some of the things that I didn’t agree with. The disappointing part was at the point where he got dangerously close to saying something positive about our current president, he had to throw in that he thinks he’s a bad president. It’s like a reflex or perhaps it’s that people on the left fell They have to say this or their friends won’t talk to them anymore. What I found particularly ironic here is that he said that even though President Trump is trying to do many of the things that he are, you needs to be done. Granted President Trump is not doing them in exactly the way he thinks they should be done. But he is trying to do something different. I’m grateful for his acknowledgment that the policies of the far left have failed. So overall, I’m grateful for having had the opportunity to hear his point of you. I’m glad you had him as a guest. Thank you.
Isn't that how Harris became the presidential nominee? She was essentially annointed by the King ignoring the voices of the peasants. I was always flabbergasted at how few Dems were not outraged by this calculated move.
I guess I have to say some words about the 3/5ths compromise. Otherwise smart people who say that this means the Constitution says that even free Black people in 1789 are 3/5 as human as white people are simply wrong. But the implication that Black people count to exactly the degree that is necessary for the people in the room to all stay in the room is bad enough. It can also be said that SC and GA had a more credible threat to walk than the very few 100% antislavery delegates to the Convention.
Whenever you hear "fascism" it's a Jungian self-dialogue/internal battle within the liberal mind.
Liberals are so ensnared by their own interdicts that they haven't developed what Jung calls the "shadow", or darker side that's necessary for being a moral and well-balanced individual.... Is there any coincidence that middle-aged/Boomer white men are usually the most deranged with T.D.S? They're jealous that one man can be so liberated when they're so cucked and low on the totem pole.
So when you hear "fascism" think T.D.S, then think Jung and the shadow. It's exactly the neurosis that Jung talked about with disintegrated individuals.
1. Clinton got rid of (fired? retired?) over 400,000 federal workers (and had the last balanced budget). Obama deported 1.7 million over two terms. Still holds the record. Biden deported (not counting border “turn backs”) 740+ thousand in his last fiscal year (Oct. 2023 thru Sept. 2024), which was the most since 2014. Over 700 flights to multiple countries.
Now Trump is testing the limits of executive power.
Congress and SCOTUS will not dissolve. But protesting fascism and authoritarianism is a lazy, short-cut, virtue-signaling attempt at relevance. Why not line up some stellar candidates and take back the House?
Under Clinton, the government offered mass buyouts. But there’s a key difference with what’s happening under President Donald Trump: a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly approved Clinton’s program following months of review.
By contrast, Trump’s “deferred resignation” offer, conversationally known as a buyout, emerged within a week of his inauguration, with lots of uncertainty about the terms.
While I like to believe that a bipartisan Congress would approve of Trump's deportation policies the hard truth is that they will resist him every step of the way for the next four years. I think this is evident from Trump's congressional address where the majority of Dems made fools of themselves.
People are having buyer’s remorse regarding Trump. His polling numbers are crashing on issues like the economy. There should be due process for deportations. Republicans are being challenged at their town halls. See Byron Donalds and Chuck Grassley.
Republicans are doing their best to supply good PR for Democrats. RFK Jr shows his ignorance about autism. Hegseth is incompetent. Noem plays dress up. Musk is making a fool of himself.
The mild protest of the State of the Union speech becomes a big thing because Rep Al Green is said to carry a pimp cane by one Republican woman Another white female Republican called Green a “boy”.
Republicans are losing elections in Red areas. Thanks Republicans.
I agree with the central point of your conversation that the fascist accusation against Trump is wrong and ahistorical, especially correct is the background of post WWI civil wars, the rise of the Freicorps movements which ultimately became Hitler's SA, who make the Loud Boys and the Oath Breakers look like the kindergartners they are.
But Daniel Bessner's American history should be challenged. You both express shock at the horrible deportation of Mexican-American citizens in the 1930s. The link for this in Bessner's article is a page from the US Holocaust Museum's web history site which itself seems to be based on a US Civil Rights Commission paper from 1980 and an academic paper. The problem is the excellent 32 page article by Brian Gratton (ASU) and Emily Merchant (Michigan) calls the numbers you cite into question. Using census data they "indicate substantially lower numbers, limited government involvement, and considerable voluntary departure." In essence the actual academic source contradicts the argument.
Similar objections could be made to the use of military intervention statistics.
I would agree with the comments about the imperial presidency and part of the breakdown of democratic institutions in our own time is that the presidency gets covered as if it should rightfully have all the power and failures of a president to get legislation through Congress are treated as moral failings. Not everyone has LBJ's arm-twisting skills.
"Famously, Gore Vidal caused William F. Buckley to lose his cool by calling him a “crypto-Nazi” in a televised 1968 debate—Buckley replied by hurling a homophobic epithet at Vidal and threatening to punch him in the face."
OK, let me see if I've got this straight. There should be no repercussions from calling an anti-fascist a fascist, but it is the height of impropriety to call a gay guy gay.
As far as I'm concerned, Vidal threw down the gauntlet. He invited a counter attack and got it.
Here's something to think about: Progressives call Trump a fascist at the drop of a hat. But you had better not let them hear you refer a trans guy as a man. There is no intellectual depth to progressivism. And even less compassion.
But Vidal won that exchange. Buckley didn't use a simple descriptor, he wasn't just "calling a gay guy gay." He calls him "you queer," an unambiguous slur at the time. It was meant as an insult. Vidal was TRYING to bait Buckley into a response like that, and Buckley took the bait. The documentary about that debate series, Best of Enemies, is pretty persuasive on that. Buckley himself was embarrassed about his own outburst, as Vidal likely knew he would be. He lost his cool, he said something really nasty, and he threatened his opponent. In a debate, that's a loss. That's why you can see a big smile cross Vidal's face—he got exactly the reaction he was trying to get.
So, calling a guy queer was an unambiguous insult at the time. What is it today, when I am called a racist, a white supremacist, and a right-wing extremist (whatever the hell that is) by hate-filled people who stereotype everyone, including themselves?
Is it the goal to win an argument? To form the biggest coalition? When you get down to it, what were either Buckly or Vidal really good for?
“We don't have gangs of violent young men with combat experience roaming the streets attached to political organizations that just think any form of democracy is politically illegitimate”
Um….antifa and BLM behaved militarily (see Nancy Rommelman’s observations in Portland). So, yes we have fascism on the left, since it was born as an offshoot of socialism.
Haven't listened yet, but I just had to call attention to the rather marvelous typo in the last sentence of the introductory essay. The price of liberty is eternal attention to spelling.
There was a lot to respect in your guest comments. Even in some of the things that I didn’t agree with. The disappointing part was at the point where he got dangerously close to saying something positive about our current president, he had to throw in that he thinks he’s a bad president. It’s like a reflex or perhaps it’s that people on the left fell They have to say this or their friends won’t talk to them anymore. What I found particularly ironic here is that he said that even though President Trump is trying to do many of the things that he are, you needs to be done. Granted President Trump is not doing them in exactly the way he thinks they should be done. But he is trying to do something different. I’m grateful for his acknowledgment that the policies of the far left have failed. So overall, I’m grateful for having had the opportunity to hear his point of you. I’m glad you had him as a guest. Thank you.
...except we're not talking about illegal immigrants in some cases. they are legal. that's the point.
Isn't that how Harris became the presidential nominee? She was essentially annointed by the King ignoring the voices of the peasants. I was always flabbergasted at how few Dems were not outraged by this calculated move.
I guess I have to say some words about the 3/5ths compromise. Otherwise smart people who say that this means the Constitution says that even free Black people in 1789 are 3/5 as human as white people are simply wrong. But the implication that Black people count to exactly the degree that is necessary for the people in the room to all stay in the room is bad enough. It can also be said that SC and GA had a more credible threat to walk than the very few 100% antislavery delegates to the Convention.
Whenever you hear "fascism" it's a Jungian self-dialogue/internal battle within the liberal mind.
Liberals are so ensnared by their own interdicts that they haven't developed what Jung calls the "shadow", or darker side that's necessary for being a moral and well-balanced individual.... Is there any coincidence that middle-aged/Boomer white men are usually the most deranged with T.D.S? They're jealous that one man can be so liberated when they're so cucked and low on the totem pole.
So when you hear "fascism" think T.D.S, then think Jung and the shadow. It's exactly the neurosis that Jung talked about with disintegrated individuals.
How about a little context:
1. Clinton got rid of (fired? retired?) over 400,000 federal workers (and had the last balanced budget). Obama deported 1.7 million over two terms. Still holds the record. Biden deported (not counting border “turn backs”) 740+ thousand in his last fiscal year (Oct. 2023 thru Sept. 2024), which was the most since 2014. Over 700 flights to multiple countries.
Now Trump is testing the limits of executive power.
Congress and SCOTUS will not dissolve. But protesting fascism and authoritarianism is a lazy, short-cut, virtue-signaling attempt at relevance. Why not line up some stellar candidates and take back the House?
Clinton’s buyout plan had the backing of Congress
Under Clinton, the government offered mass buyouts. But there’s a key difference with what’s happening under President Donald Trump: a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly approved Clinton’s program following months of review.
By contrast, Trump’s “deferred resignation” offer, conversationally known as a buyout, emerged within a week of his inauguration, with lots of uncertainty about the terms.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/7/fact-check-did-clinton-set-the-precedent-for-mass-federal-worker-buyouts
While I like to believe that a bipartisan Congress would approve of Trump's deportation policies the hard truth is that they will resist him every step of the way for the next four years. I think this is evident from Trump's congressional address where the majority of Dems made fools of themselves.
People are having buyer’s remorse regarding Trump. His polling numbers are crashing on issues like the economy. There should be due process for deportations. Republicans are being challenged at their town halls. See Byron Donalds and Chuck Grassley.
Republicans are doing their best to supply good PR for Democrats. RFK Jr shows his ignorance about autism. Hegseth is incompetent. Noem plays dress up. Musk is making a fool of himself.
The mild protest of the State of the Union speech becomes a big thing because Rep Al Green is said to carry a pimp cane by one Republican woman Another white female Republican called Green a “boy”.
Republicans are losing elections in Red areas. Thanks Republicans.
I agree with the central point of your conversation that the fascist accusation against Trump is wrong and ahistorical, especially correct is the background of post WWI civil wars, the rise of the Freicorps movements which ultimately became Hitler's SA, who make the Loud Boys and the Oath Breakers look like the kindergartners they are.
But Daniel Bessner's American history should be challenged. You both express shock at the horrible deportation of Mexican-American citizens in the 1930s. The link for this in Bessner's article is a page from the US Holocaust Museum's web history site which itself seems to be based on a US Civil Rights Commission paper from 1980 and an academic paper. The problem is the excellent 32 page article by Brian Gratton (ASU) and Emily Merchant (Michigan) calls the numbers you cite into question. Using census data they "indicate substantially lower numbers, limited government involvement, and considerable voluntary departure." In essence the actual academic source contradicts the argument.
Similar objections could be made to the use of military intervention statistics.
I would agree with the comments about the imperial presidency and part of the breakdown of democratic institutions in our own time is that the presidency gets covered as if it should rightfully have all the power and failures of a president to get legislation through Congress are treated as moral failings. Not everyone has LBJ's arm-twisting skills.
"Famously, Gore Vidal caused William F. Buckley to lose his cool by calling him a “crypto-Nazi” in a televised 1968 debate—Buckley replied by hurling a homophobic epithet at Vidal and threatening to punch him in the face."
OK, let me see if I've got this straight. There should be no repercussions from calling an anti-fascist a fascist, but it is the height of impropriety to call a gay guy gay.
As far as I'm concerned, Vidal threw down the gauntlet. He invited a counter attack and got it.
Here's something to think about: Progressives call Trump a fascist at the drop of a hat. But you had better not let them hear you refer a trans guy as a man. There is no intellectual depth to progressivism. And even less compassion.
But Vidal won that exchange. Buckley didn't use a simple descriptor, he wasn't just "calling a gay guy gay." He calls him "you queer," an unambiguous slur at the time. It was meant as an insult. Vidal was TRYING to bait Buckley into a response like that, and Buckley took the bait. The documentary about that debate series, Best of Enemies, is pretty persuasive on that. Buckley himself was embarrassed about his own outburst, as Vidal likely knew he would be. He lost his cool, he said something really nasty, and he threatened his opponent. In a debate, that's a loss. That's why you can see a big smile cross Vidal's face—he got exactly the reaction he was trying to get.
So, calling a guy queer was an unambiguous insult at the time. What is it today, when I am called a racist, a white supremacist, and a right-wing extremist (whatever the hell that is) by hate-filled people who stereotype everyone, including themselves?
Is it the goal to win an argument? To form the biggest coalition? When you get down to it, what were either Buckly or Vidal really good for?
Yet Buckley was shown to be on the right side of history, decades ahead of the curve with the "Q" destined for glory in LGBTQ+.
I suppose we just disagree about that.
Twas a joke...
I'm a bit slow today!
“We don't have a powerful left in this country”
OK, no need to read further, this guy is blind.
“We don't have gangs of violent young men with combat experience roaming the streets attached to political organizations that just think any form of democracy is politically illegitimate”
Um….antifa and BLM behaved militarily (see Nancy Rommelman’s observations in Portland). So, yes we have fascism on the left, since it was born as an offshoot of socialism.
Haven't listened yet, but I just had to call attention to the rather marvelous typo in the last sentence of the introductory essay. The price of liberty is eternal attention to spelling.
Oh yikes, that was a very different sentence than intended. Spell-check brain. Thanks for catching it.