« Commentary Magazine Podcast

Amy, What You Wanna Do?

2020-10-14 | 🔗
Today's podcast takes up the ludicrous and offensive efforts to brand Amy Coney Barrett a colonizer and a homophobe, even as polls show the American people (and Democrats!) are taking to her. Also, what on earth was Nancy Pelosi doing attacking CNN's Wolf Blitzer for being a...Republican? Give a listen.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Welcome to the Commentary Magazine Daily podcast today is Wednesday ACT over fourteen twenty twenty. I am John by boards. The editor of Commentary magazine with me, as always, executive, editor, a green while hired, I jump Senor rather Christine rose high, Christine
souci, had editor nor Rossman high on our agenda. We are closing our November. Seventy fifth anniversary issue tomorrow will have some stuff online Friday and over the weekend, then the next week and there's a lot of good stuff there. So please, beyond the watch at commentary magazine dot com, where we give you a few free, reeds and then ask you to subscribe, nor Robin you have watched roughly two thousand nine hundred and eleven hours of the Amy Coney Barrett hearings, the most interesting piece of data that I have seen the only real piece of data that I've seen about this comes from a political morning, console Paul this morning that says that a Democrats appear to be shifting in heard direction. Forty eight percent of Americans now say that she should be confirmed and Democrats have moved in her direction by thirteen or fourteen points
the course of the hearings. So what do you make of it? What we ve been seeing that movement over the course the last couple of weeks, even before the confirmation hearings began so interesting You bet trajectory continue along the same path. I think it's probably reinforced that movement is reinforced by but I've watched his hearing. So again, when you watch, you know whatever it was, probably closed, twenty hours of testimony and also of leads together. So I can't They tell you if there was a moment, one moment or another moment, and what the general sense that I got from watching these things is that it was Isn't. It has generally been a really glorious and boring exploration of policy and judicial philosophy,
what we ve been focusing on. Primarily among Democrats has been uneven broadcasting in advertising this for a long time that they were going to focus on this upcoming challenge to the affordable care act and they ve been talking a lot about Obama CARE and, to the extent that there's been demagoguery, and you know, appeals to empathy over and above the questions of law. Here you know you got a lot of that, but there is also a time to talk about jurisprudential philosophy. What is original ism? What is textual ism? How oh, how that current conflicts with the preferred democratic understanding of judicial philosophy, which should take into account disparate impact and the effect of law and the congressional intent and all that stuff is really fascinating. If you like politics, as we understand it to be in the before time, but that's not how politics now we're politics is anymore. I'm the activist wing on the democratic left, doesn't get out of bed in the morning
for the Asia in judicial philosophy. They are animated exclusively by identity, grievances and you're beginning to see the bit the beginnings, another whisper campaign against in Dakota Bear to try to generate the kind of traction and and was: he hasn't an engagement that they got into the cabin on hearings with the lowest possible denominator. The the bar to entering into the conversation is only as low as your identity. What you're accidents and birth are and that's what they need to get and they tried to do it on a big, the more unscrupulous types up to an include, Emacs Kennedy Candy rather of the notion that just judge bear it is, has some racial antipathy to her because she has to adopt a black children. Jude, therefore colonized than somehow that landed flat in part, because it is insane so at least we have some semblance of sanity left in me in that
our conversation, but there were moving onto another identity grievance in an effort to brand judge, bear it as a homophobia, and I guarantee you that This is gonna, be the remainder of the democratic opposition to her candidacy. It started as a whisper campaign, all among Jornal and journalists and reporters people I come. Offended. Msnbc enemy shall cinder PBS, who said that her use of the phrase- sexual preference, as opposed to section sexual orientation, was reflect some anti deluding. An understanding of what type of what proper etiquette is. One tat when talking about the algae, be taking community and it made its way up into the mouth of Maisie Horatio. Yesterday senator for Hawaii was on the on the bench
Rather, on the day s questioning the judgment and basically fished for an apology, firmer fur for using this phrase to which she said, Judge Barrett, said yeah, I didn't mean to offend anybody, but there's obviously textual. There is no attempt at animals here and that should have been the end of it, but it's not can be the end of it. He saw the institutions like WEBS jurisdiction Hurry now revise its definition of this phrase. To include a note that it is offensive. We are retroactively, condition people here to believe that this house, always and forever been in an a phrase that it was something you should avoid up to it. Cleaning style guidelines from eighty in New York Times, which, according to Glad apparently wanted this term removed from public discourse. but neither aping nor New York Times abided by that, apparently because they ve been using this phrase breeding frequently well after twenty thirteen and twenty fifty nine sixteen twenty seventeen and all in it,
on text that is non discriminatory and not a hurtful context, but where's complex now right, ok, so what you are saying is that for Calgary, familiar Michel, sender and mark just. Turn it slate now that the dogma lives deeply within But this is a way that they tried and failed to get at her Catholicism by talking about the handmaid thing right. But her very success as it is a law professor and and a judge disprove the lie that she, some sort of you know handmaid to her husband or to her the roulette, the male religious leaders and in her the organizations who is part of So that's that's failed. So now I think that the concerns they fell outrage about her use of the word. Preference rather than orientation is we to try to get back at the Catholicism point to drive that home, then it nothing is sticking to her, because she such an accomplished- and
judiciously temperamental human being. We see that the more you watch her. The more two things emerged for me from my didn't watch anywhere near as much as no bless. You know for doing this doing God's work for the rest of us, but the one thing I was really struck by was the fact that all these democratic arguments that think we can't rush this hearing are dickie less because most of what they do during those hearings is below the eight and an that's fine, but they would rather have weeks and months to do that. I guess, and now they have a very limited timeframe, that limited timeframe serves the american people. It does not serve the IMF. vanity, vanity and the impulses of the centres. But I do think that it that has been disproving we're getting a lot of substance added in very short time, even with there,
on two occasions. So briefly, just one thing that I have to know, because I watched so much of this stuff is- is the foe outrageous not limited to the Democrats here Republicans repeatedly made the point that Democrats have been on the often about her face about her associations based on her faith. They are now. they are explicitly avoiding that now. Maybe there was an effort on the part of activists to to get Democrats to adopt a position, but they are allergic to it. There are doing their utmost best to avoid the appearance the impression that they are going after her faith and Republicans are suggests They are when they are not is duplicitous. It is in my view, and it's something that that you know just as I just in the interests of fairness should be clear that I have not seen that any allegations that they are doing. That is a contrivance. Ok, so. In my hours of watching, which were equal, knows them credit
two modes. One was to you now give speeches about health care and the unfairness of the process and all this while she sat there and did not. The Kamala Harris she did make faces. You can roll her eyes. She was very still and placid and it was an impressive display of self control cuz. I don't know how I would have handled it in her circumstances and the other was the Asker direct questions that Sudan would answer directly like they said. The president wants you to rule on the Obama CARE case that will come up a week after the election he wants you to rule a certain way and she says flat. She said flatly in response five or six different times No one at the White House asked me about any specific case, and if they
done so, I would have said I cannot say a word about that. It is pending before the court and the judicial independence. The independence of the judiciary requires me not to end. for that question. So where do they go from there either they can say well, obviously, you're lying without question. The white House. Ask you a question and you answered it, so you could get this job on the course which they didn't have the nerve to do but which effectively they have said in previous hearing. That means somebody pretty got pretty close to saying outright. That Brett Kavanaugh, when he said he hadn't, discuss specific ever cases what the Trump White House but heard me at and demeanor and behaviour mates that made that very difficult for them to go at her but her. But that was what she was direct about And so either they have to go to deaf can one say: you're lying. I can't believe you, because I do not believe what you were saying:
and then the other was about how trust me you there to rule for him on the election and then she said I can't even talk about this because it really may come for the cord next month. Nobody asked me about any specific case or how a rule on any specific manner, but I can't talk about it. I can't talk about anything else, which is then news to say. Well, you see she wouldn't answer the question directly because obviously she's gonna ruin favor from the oddity of the Obama CARE case, and you know there's somebody for there been so many different challenges and everything else to Obamacare than its of its it. Some I dont really entirely understand, what's going on in this case, but from my Sermon friends, David French, Adam White, Romero, others,
This is apparently a lousy case that the white that that people on the right do not expect to win that it's a dumb case according to according to David French of Dumb, case, the White House shouldn't have align itself with it because it's probably gonna lose, but even if she were accused herself, if as they are demanding, she would announced that he would refuse or something case- and there were a party line rendering which of course they are basically saying There- was that the conservative justices will probably- or at least a couple them will probably vote against that that if there were such occasion would end up forty four and the case would be reached did an there and end the earlier ruling that is being appealed, which a sort of in the direction of Obama care would stand. So this entire proceeding of demanding that you accuse herself in this case effectively.
would lead to, according to their own theory of the way them everybody votes according to their partisan interests and who appointed them. Would lead to the case being rejected anyway. So. what the hell is going on here doesn't make any sense, and so that's one of the reasons they haven't landed a blow on her in the course of these proceedings, because she's answering the questions that you can answer. Choosing badgered by them and looking very placid in response and now we have this semantic war on her, and this idea that by using the fray sexual preference, which, as we know Joe Biden, use just a couple of months ago, she is committing a thought. I'm at an hat. You know in a form of you know, I don't know what you would call it. Hetero normative supremacy, a premeditated thought crime. there. Isn't there's no allowance for can affirm context here.
Even ignorance. It is because it is an ado at an offence. Maybe there's some allowance for ignorance, I should say, but that ignorance is itself an indictment, because you should be aware of sort of things the way in which she has done the arbitrary act? By saying you know, I can answer that when it comes to appending case, which is which is Morgan allowable, but have also been every man labour day up. Yes, but she also Dennis Fur for politics whenever a political issue comes up with she's defined rather expansively in that something the Democrats are of very frustrated by as well, particularly when it comes to the president's sort of ambiguity about his peaceful transition of power comments that she said as a political issue, She will not way into it now the democratic commentary around the single liberal, progressive commentary, as is that really is a political issue, not really right. I mean
that's so foundational that it can't be considered just near politics, but of course it is because we are not talking about the structure of the constitution, which defines the president's term very explicitly. That has an end date when it ends a series of mechanisms. Kicking so we're talking about is this if this were to come to a head and a real conflict, it very well couldn't come before the court, but it would be related to the mechanisms of the constitution that provide for the transition of power from one presidential term to another presidential term right so not up it's not it's not. It is politics toward what its definite knows. This doubling Did you expect to go this easily? Well, I remember when we were discussing a few weeks back. What would
happen and John. You said that they would go after her on healthcare stuff because in part in the arm, I dare to terror. The identity attack deserved a bit their trial, balloon of painting her some sort of racist, colonialist had fallen flat. And what not- and I remember saying well that this is a lot of time to to your probably right that they will go after that, that they will use the time to discuss a bomb care, but that is a lot of time to discuss a bomb care and it has been a lot of time to discuss a bomb care and I fear I think it, I think that the die is cast pretty early on that this was going to be boring in terms of automated no in terms of bed, ideology in and Lee
theory, but I mean in terms of fireworks and political warring Willoughby, that's our aid, just the one. The one thing that I really, I think the pole that shows even democrats moving towards embracing her is a temper mentally, which I think is one of the most important things you should look at when you're assessing whether someone should sit on the bench, particularly a lifetime of women's Supreme Court temper really matter matters as much as judicial philosophy, because this is not just they're not going up. There is a seller. Is there a group of nine or fifty if the Democrats have their way, but for now it's not so they her temperament doesn't allow even these. You know crazy, identitarian things to stick, because she won't allow him and she's she's, obviously brilliant the way. She's answer these questions definitely and thoughtfully, and it with great detail shows that the fact that some of the the left you
tactics for attacking republican nominee such as, for example, the Notre Dame Letter from all these people, who are professors of man's language in Nepal and Anthropology denouncing not a single Notre Dame LAW School faculty. Member sign that letter. Those are the people she actually worked with three years and who know her the best. Even those tactics like having people in their own past denounced them. Haven't stock and there's a rest I really do go back to the point you made earlier John Temper mentally, and I know I wouldn't color placid. I would just color absolutely unflappable incompetent, and that is what is sticking in people's my watch. These areas as the ice. Think, though, that the best line that the Democrats could take in this case and the mistake that they're making eye if they're making a mistake, I'm really think this is gonna matter. One way, or the other is to say, seems like a fine person
she seems even like a good juror, so I could disagree with her philosophy on her approach, but I mean she's a serious person and all of that it just as processes is unjust, and I can't vote for her, because this is a this is a disgraceful process and it's it back of hypocrisy, American Airlines and all that, because then you can sever transfer from the nomination, but they had. No, there is no utility, they ve done a little baby, I'm saying there's no utility and going at her on on her approach or philosophy, her behaviour, even the sexual preference nonsense, and it is nonsense and I or what anybody says. It is nonsense and we can go into whites nonsense. But I even one I'd like humour that its nonsense to preference is already a euphemism when it was created, and now a euphemism as replacing it. It is, it is a euphemism and then there's another you from it
that is even better or worse, depending on whenever you, whatever game, you're playing in order to try to get one up on. Somebody who says something you don't like or you wanna like shame in social media or whatever because where they stand strong, where they stand, I would say in a position where they they their arguing. Where republicans have very little in the way of an honest defence are more like a factitious defence is that it was open aid to deny Merrick Garland the hearing or about whatever but it was an ok to Europe, but it. But this is ok, Yeah I got, it is the greater the day. Every every question I saw brought that up and dwelt on it for at least a few minutes
Have you got that night? Now? It's all I know is making the Prob ly Miss Tilney. They did you that, in the reason why they don't dwell on and in part, because this is the entirely their argument to begin with that, this is agreed just republican hypocrisy and it is, they invented a standard for themselves and twenty. Sixteen that didn't exist only two violated and twenty twenty that's Line and instead slowly true irrefutable, but the problem that they can, they can't well on it because their argument rests on hypocrisy and hypocrisy is so common in politics. It is the water and they swam? It is not something that is so rare as to be agreed just till they can't do well and I can't be the entirety their argument, but they have to establish the products for what they want to do next year. That's what what I'm saying the entirety of the entirety of what they want to do next, furthermore, more the rest of them, if they actually mean it would just seriously take up the idea of packing the court order. They might call it judicial reform. That's it! That's that
talk about your romanticizing, the cards on the table, as I the or a euphemism, now or judicial reform, they mean to keep hammering home the injustice of this nomination of houses, rebalance the court and they ve been doesn't have to rebalance the court but mine and their stand. There actually happened a few people who ve hit that she's a terrible careers for having accepted the nomination right. We ve seen this in the tottering clauses have tried to make this stick in and be a testament to her character that you accept This illegitimate nomination, which in calling for a career, is for doing that, which is absolutely ridiculous, but I do think that's right. I don't think the average American it looks at a process is already under way. Looks at any country, marriage and face this is all just terribly illegitimate. Unless there are already a kind of committee, into their activism on one side or the other
they just see an extremely competent and accomplished woman, whose temperament seem suitable, whose whose zero a woman taking a private a slight previously held by women and they gonna go wow. What what's the problem here and they do see the attack suddenly her and her family as absolutely repulse it, as they should Willoughby Aber MAX candy thing and that this whole. What that that you have you have the incredible cross purposes. The cultural cross purposes of the left and right coming into very, very sharp. Focus here, which is that the general caricature of the left of the right and particularly of religiously minded people on the right is that they are. You know, reactionary, bigots, trying to someone You know an old world in place of the new world in which dog
I the doctrine, an injustice rule, And then you get the real image of the religious of other religious right which isn't Jerry Farwell Junior and it isn't. You know what it is: Amy Coney Barrett right who was living if the dogma lives loudly within our lives loudly within her private life, where she buys by her faith and attempts to use her a privilege to be of help in the world outside her own narrow band, which is why she adopted to children from Haiti one in the wake of the leader of the horrible you now a natural disaster there in into
ten and this. This complicates every cliche and an end, the caricature that the left wants to paint and believes of the right and therefore they have to twist themselves into any logical not to get back to it. So, therefore, what she is by taking two children into her home and making them part of her family and big making them berets is colony. Of course, this is a really the private public distinction point you just made is really important. I think we forget it. It's actually a point: the Noah makes in his book really well to the left and the identity politics left in particular, it refuses to even acknowledge or respect the distinction between a private world at a public road. You must
perform your identity at all times in the performance of that identity must always be consistent. That's why they want to out everyone who they think should be a whose whose roots homosexuality it is something we want to keep private it's why they want to this that, if you speak it as a woman as a as a true, woman, as this has it that, and that is something that the erosion of the public and private distinction is one of the reasons I think our politics has become so toxic and so polarize, because we do need a backstage right. We need a private life. She has clearly each is clearing. thriving, rich private life that involves raising children, adopting children being involved in a church community as most Americans do have, and I think that again, that's part of her appeal and I would say the same thing about it if she was a if she was of an extreme left, in terms of her that this distinction, it should be respected at something we ve allowed to erode without really thinking about it and its harmful. What that we do not just want to say. One final point make one final point on the sea: bottom ex can be caught Amazing Point, which is that
the analogy itself- is preposterous offensive, because the whole point about colonizing is that that is that the people that you colonized do not become part of view. They are still other. They don't become citizens of your empire. They don't become fully active participants in your circle. They are people that you rule over. and that a blunderbuss then plunder and whose resources you exploit and then maybe, if you're, really good new bring, some of the bounty and benefits of the West rule of law. You know sort of like idea, advances, technological advances and all that that is the opposite of what happens when somebody
Somebody else they are bringing them in to integrate them and make them part of their daily lives and are promising not only legally but also to God. The day will see no distinction between those whom they have burst and those whom they choose to bring into their. Emily, bear equally their children, their men, and that is a that is a an act of emotional capacious mess that all of this kind, Living your identity denies all of us, because the ideas that we cannot have true, I'm analogy with anybody who was not ourselves and speaking as somebody
who was raised in a family. Where were a step farther became a father by choice. It is one of the great. You know emotional, heroic things that a person can do to do that and b that, and it is that it is, and it is an act of emotional spiritual generosity and it should be emulated and celebrated. Instead of trashed and caricature saw not going to allow an opportunity to flood my book pass. Thank you Christine another point of available now at Amazon Book, eight million predicted all the crazy that were experiencing now, no predicted a few years ago. I have to say,
There is a just got a world, he checked and you're not doing your job. So, let's not really telling this thing it's like gives a bourbon women. Will you please, like your theory, yes, I am so glad you think it's getting their damn neighbourhood anywhere as as noble and effort, as you made their John. I think it is a mistake to engage with this sort of stuff, intellectually, because it is an anti intellectual response, the reason why we appeal so often to identity politics is because there is no way for these people to engage with judicial philosophy. They don't have the requisite intellectual ground. They haven't done the research that have done their homework. There's no way for them to really fully the comprehend the legal arguments around the sever ability of this particular aspect of the Asia. It is far too complex and no one wants to do the research. What you can do is invoke. Identity and you have
eliminating the bar to entry into every political disk, every political debate and every aspect of political discourse. What's more, you can engage in an authoritative late, because the arbiters of that discourse will provide you with that authority. If you enter to a debate as an ax. You have all already seven. You have overcome whatever barriers entry into that conversation that were there before and when you can be taken seriously and you can apply Orientated Leon, it's a very valuable way to create engagement in the political process. Ok, that's why it anything man's waiters jumped down. Politics is not in my time. I want to disagree with you on one thing, which is your idea that its anti until
so it is not. It is intellectual corruption, but, as Orwell would have said, some ideas. Are you know? What is that you have? Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual believe in them. You have to be applying theory rather than life to a situation to say that a family that adopts two children is is it is colonizing? That is that it requires intellectual idiot. Were it maybe a kind of more it's a kind of moral idiocy, but it requires intellectual gymnastics just to get there and intellectual ism in this case is simply a description. It's not a I'm! Not yet without something that we should praise, because intellectual intellectual ism can itself be among the worst things the world has ever seen as communism put em anything TAT Adam
before I have just stated, but you know it's it's even worse in some sense than what no disguised, because you don't have to be an axe to comment about the life, the next big everyone gets in on the game. Right I mean, there's you know, that's the charge on can be led. The charge of racism can be led by by woke white people and many on texts is ladder, a man as a woman. I want a woman's by Ireland swelling with a lion. That's a good point. Actually it's one of the things that constantly pointed out about a lot of the agitation and an activism of the past. Many months is that white women, those whites of everyone and enter the listeners? You don't know what we're John was making joke about. President trunk
A was begging, suburban white women to like him like a laker like an abusive ex boyfriend who once back into that into the fold, but it's just can't bring himself to it. Keep the echoing he's come on come on. I see neighborhoods. Don't please learn like or like somebody who you know, somebody that you had a bad employment relationship with in some way or other, and then they need a job recommendation. So they're like Remember all the good stuff I did for you, please, like, like they're gonna, call you and ask for a reference like you just be nice about it. Now that was so. That's not even a bit. That's like! That's it, Sir desperation. Stereotypes about open what one The things that you haven't heard from the usual aspects is any accusation of man's planet, no one had no one has had the slow this problem with the lectures to which any country where it has been pretty from people like the caravan and acquiring Booker. We ve been
great condescending it's at times, but done that's, that's! Ok, I guess because they have brought their hearts in the right place for our friends, our friend Randy by speaking of one of those occasions, which was Sheldon White House, the Centre for Rhode Island. who spend thirty minutes, basically yelling at bear it and not letting our answer anything in going through this whole org chart of the evil. That is basically sermon and legal, intellection and teaching, and apparently you because their connections on a chart, like you know like carry, has on her wall and homeland with strings between things. This, of course, is varied, various and an Randy. Our friend Randy Barnett was a professor at George Mason LAW. School said re. Looking at that and of the conversation that original Lisbon, everything was like the old story about the the Russian
reading the protocols of the elders of Zion, and somebody says why: why are you reading them he's, like I loved it, makes me feel so powerful. Apparently we run everything to help. So this had a gun, weird Counter, Sheldon White Houses, portrait of the tentacles of concern. Do I have a conservative legal theorists it I'm going. everywhere, and we heard him you'll just to like you know who basically, arts are sitting Guenaud, would teaching placid law schools and we can report is an example here. on your paper podcast does the conspiracy hidden in plain sight there, but I have. Say: we have to give a shut out to TED crews, who absolutely demolish the dark money side of that argument. By just listing how much dark money has been fed into democratic covers, because at that was kind of a resort of a master class unhappy just point by point:
yeah good on him and his staff for compiling it, and just showing that again to the hypocrisy point that this is a distant something that they have had little sending to create so guys. Let's outlets pull back for a minute, and let me talk to you about something that is an exciting I think this is the second time that this advertiser has appeared on our podcast and that is fast growing trees, dot com, Because no are you live out in the country, and I don't so when is the perfect time to plant trees and shrubs big box to exports will take any time or I'm great question, but the best friend to plant I'm telling you now, because you this is your time is actually fall. Which means now is the time to go too fast, growing trees, dot com skip the big bang
stores and head too fast growing trees, dot com, the world's largest online nursery cause, there's no more waiting and cut lines messy cars digging through a lack lustre selection just go too fast, growing, trees, dot com and choose from thousands of varieties of trees, shrubs and plants, expertly curated to thrive in your area and delivered to your door, one or two days whether you're looking for shade privacy, fruit, trees or just added color for your yard. Every plant is shipped with a well developed root system. Ready to explode with new growth comes spring. there is a better way to bind treason, shrub and plans for your home yard, faster and trees. Dotcom fall is planting, sees no Rossman, don't let it The entire deference a joint over one million satisfy gardeners, fast, growing, trees that come plus the thirty day alive and thrive. Guarantee means your plans will arrive, happy healthy
and ready for planting so now through November fifteenth go to fostering trees, dot com, slashed commentary for ten percent of that's ten percent off at fast growing trees, dotcom, Slash commentary, fast, growing, trees, God COM, slash commentary and we thank them for answering the commentary magazine podcast. Can we talk about Nancy policies meltdown? Can we talk about Nancy closely and will what's her in her mouth them? Yes, please Her very plainly why she was not negotiating more a more readily on the corona virus, stimulus that clearly the White House I was by the white has received. Manoeuvre was re. The deal that shit. It was really the road block here and she got. incredibly testy and said that he was spewing republican talking points and then
Man's now. What she ever did tat what he ever did to help suffering people on the street, whom she feeds. Evidently the better. If you know this, but the federal budget is hers to hand out like, like she's throwing coins into a Salvation army bucket. It was kind of a startling display and under other sir, stances, I would say, could have been career ending. I mean it once again, not to play the. If there are republican, did something anything remotely similar to this, but to go on tv to have a friendly anchor say. Why are you doing this and not have the answer to get angry because her naked political and partisan decision to delay any corona virus spending
relief. Until after the elections, the Trump will get no credit for it is just you know, without it It's it's naked and raw, and highly without you, you can the sugar you're not from generates a booby. It's also another example to add to the countless ones we already have of how trumps opponents and critics devolve into mirror images of Trump right. I mean this is a very trompe response to to reasonable question too, to lash out at the at the media source as partisan and untrustworthy the end. Underhanded yeah guess are being too kind to her honestly, an issue which was pressed on this covered relief, which her caught her caucus has been balking at endless
was talking. You know about invoking democratic talking points about how people are needed and therefore their hungry, the camp of food on the table, and she goes we represent, that we represent them and said well, that's great he's trying to sign off throughout all this and he can't get. He can't sign off you won't. Let him go away. That's ok! Well, will dominate the perfectly enemy, then says it's nowhere near perfect, but thank you for your sensitivity to our constituents needs very sarcastically, because I am sensitive because ice on the street begging for money. Have you fed them? We feed them has fed them. Yeah the earlier was uncomfortable. Man went away This is all reflective, and I can't say the pole, unfortunately, but I saw a recent poll about who you blame: warfare, covert reliefs, not enough not getting through Congress Donald Trump Organ, see policy down from. I dont know why it should be Miss Connell that serve the more diametric opposition there, but anyway it between the policy and an trumpet was forty from forty three policy. I wish
said the polar knows reason, but that reflects a level of insecurity that is entirely deserved. but also that she let it just spill out into the streets there is very impolitic, will cease must be- I mean, look if Wolf Blitzer is bludgeoning you on television, with the phrase with phrases about bread lines and your responses to say it's fine. She actually went worse than saying we feed them. She said we know them We know that it was so strangely entitled, I actually got some Marie Antoinette binds from her at that moment, like we know than we we need them. I mean it in its fine, it's all fine, but she also went to the values point. She said they don't share our values as if this is a moral sheet she wanted to recast. Extremely practical discussion in moral terms like they don't share values, so we're not going to feed the american people. We will
than we do that, but we're not going to do it now, because I have a disagreement with the Trump administrations values. That's not gonna play for people who need a check to put food on the table and and the fact that Wolf Blitzer was. Was being the tough guy here and as no I said, it was extremely painful to wash. It was a lot of second hand, embarrassment going on as a viewer she's she it lasted it. I will turn to your point, John, actually think she was quite dusted, handling trumpet the very beginning of this type of his time. because she knew how to enrage him and still seem cool? That's why she got those you know sleigh queen this, is on reaching back. But she wasn't the speaker of the house. So now she has been entirely different position because she was powerless right as the
The minority in the house is, and so she was only the opposition right beginning twenty eighty of the end of twenty eight June. She becomes speaker of the house again and, and what has her speakership been what what was the dominating issue of her? Baker shoe impeachment impeachment, while in just a roll call vote, is the what she's annoyed with and broken represents the squad type interest right. This is the very progressive outside of the Democratic Party which, ladies and gentlemen, being this is the for years. If I'm get elected there, these battles have been brewing and she's trying to keep alive I'm, but that the lid is off. I think. I mean what's interesting, is that you know a once again. You Sidney unforced error, the trump made last week by announcing that he was ending the corona virus, you noted ending negotiations because their policy would never greener them. Oddly enough, he is correct, but
by, but by saying I'm the alpha male. I'm gonna end this incentive. Instead of her, he really hee, hee hee, let go you know. We basically took his foot off to listen to what I was about to use a break accelerator metaphor, which is. obviously terrible. I mean he, he released the pressure on her for a bureau for five days and clutching relates to crack and ones now I really didn't release the crack and releasing a crack and would be come here we'll sit down and in three hours you and me and match, and we will have a deal- that's how you dont released the crack, and I don't want to do that to Mcconnell. Apparently, Mcconnell in the republic in the centre and very interesting playing in a very interesting game, because the as who are not up for reelection twenty twenty and who do not have tough racism, twenty twenty,
and who remember how Republicans fell, pressured to sign onto tarp and tough in two thousand eight and how bad that was in the parties. Odor almost to me, we, after a lot of them, sign that the people who want to go on and am like run for president twenty twenty four? dont want to agree to any further spending and Mcconnell is trying to swim, accommodate them and, oddly enough, therefore, policies recalcitrance helps him. It hurts drop and it hurts everybody in the country who needs that. we'll leave witches various. I want to remind people who are against that believes that's. The only reason that debt relief is needed is because of mental actions to shut the ITU, to affirm it we play a role in shutting the economy down
the competent beautifully? Everyone could make hey of this, because it pulls back the curtain on a lot of what the truth is around these phase for covering negotiations, which has its the disparate interests inside the democratic caucus in the house. That had been the obstacle to this thing and why it was so finally stupid for Download, from the same walking away from the table beside the fact that he wasn't walking away from the table its just like his his we're an idea of what effect the negotiating tactics are, but that it was always the recalcitrance among Democrats towards a package and not just in or even piecemeal. Piecemeal was something I think that Republicans both that briefly, but even though I analyse ballot bail out, which is now on the table, has been like something that has a fire lit under it. After these lay offs it united Airlines on its it was always the democratic parties latent between the did the moderates in them. Press never could get get together on a particular issue and Nancy policy can wrangle them
She is no longer the manager, she wasn't twenty ten and that restoration was evident in this interview, a competent republican opera One could say: listen, this is it. This is the hope. The whole thing here guys it's right in front of your face. They can't go. They can't negotiating the faint because the Cancun on the same page, so we are weak. We what we could see in the wake of a binding victory is Biden callings You know the meeting in our second week of November, and you know reckoning everyone to come to the table and make a deal, and then mysteriously man We had the old will be made and then they can claim going into too. Twenty one that you know they do this, they deliver. They just they started by delivering, which has some weird analog to Trump. You know and caterpillar right, you remember the trump during the during the
transition. You know when I got to caterpillar to do whatever it could do in these. Are you see, I'm not even president yet and I'm making Amerika great again, Indiana, the governor of which was my pants down who provide tax relief, targeted tax relief. Fur I learned in Indiana right so I mean you could see that happening, and you know you can claim that maybe the elections in you know two weeks in five days, so you know people away this long, they can wait. You know they can wait a little longer, but you know I am struck by pardon my New York Centralism again the story about one of my favorite one of the most wonderful places in New York to the oyster bar in grand central station reopened. It's it's a glorious old mid century
american restaurant, in the basement of the of the grand central station, huge its enormous under these glass to be no ceilings, and it's an amazed in place and they re open, but they could only reopen with twenty five percent capacity and they spent four or five days reopened and they closed again because there is no way for them to operate on twenty five per cent capacity. The physical footprint is too big. They need too large a staff. They cannot make the kind of money and nobody is coming for grand central station since sensors twelve percent population in the business District of New York during this period, and so that as ever in small bore, is to me so like a represent them story of why this relief bill needs to happen and the fact that apparently, the white them with tremendous racial and the, and
hello, see are two hundred million dollars apart at the White House, whose numbers up to one point, eight trillion and policies number the two trillion and she will not make a deal is pretty staggered and shocking and maybe she'll be punished, and maybe she won't by how she's punished exactly although I do wonder whether she survives as speaker after this after November Why would you want her? Well, let's hear it's gonna be a hard argument against her. If that, if the dominoes fall as we expect, they will, which will be expanded, Democratic House majority there expecting up to. I don't have seats Tennessee while she led the emigrant lot. Why would she the credit for that, and why did she get blamed for it? She wouldn't get blamed for it, but you could say,
a great many transitional figure. It's really wonderful, but you know we really need new blood here that blood new blood by the way Campi steady Hoyer was also two hundred and seventy eight years old. With a lump of ice flow and let bake woven others anomalies. That was always the implicit deal with right with its speakership right. She was supposed to be user one and done Well, she never set at and likes was probably doesn't go. She probably doesn't mean it, and the funny thing about the squad is that I'd. None of them seems to have any poor, gonna zation ambitions right there, all pr people like this job doing this. being speaker or where majority leader, everyone a slice it. These are hard difficult, boring, technical jobs
We have to stay up many late hours and, like figure out where you going to go first and who's, going to vote this and how organizationally this is going to work and make less than do whipping and all of that, and they just stand there and blather and going Instagram and make make up videos that they don't want to do that works of the question who will be their champion and in a coup my work to coup her out with theirs. port, not asleep. I think that that give short shrift to the moderate wing of the party, which is actually a very strong block and has been very effective at the wielding its influence blocking initiatives that would otherwise have sailed through with the support of the progressive way and to the extent that we ve seen any organizational ambition. As you say, it has from the moderate wine from the warlike TIM Ryan Turann, some right, yes tomorrow. Yet so those
the people who understand a having institution works and we want to make it work under their leadership. But I anyway, as we as we think about their. These are some interesting political questions that obviously will be tabled until November. Third, that's another reason why policy can get away. this and also why Amy Colony, barracks elimination can't really penetrate to the highest just because we really are now in the final stretch. The question is Trump Verses Biden. It's only Trump Verses Biden, and it's all this question now about whether Trump can get anything going to reverse what appears to be unstoppable momentum or entropy or whatever you want to call it that is gonna observed, like buying gesture of Greece, the skids on his way to victory on election day, and that's the only thing. That's of any interest really any real political interests.
I'm saying you know, won't you like me. I saved your damn neighborhoods. What what did he do honestly? What trump due to save suburban neighborhoods? I have no idea what he did to face of urban neighbourhoods. I mean, I see hearts of urban neighbourhoods, but I see that he helped suburban neighborhoods either and what's more, it's not four presidents to help a herd of urban neighbourhoods. That's ridiculous thing both to propose and to demand credit for that he I think he's annoyed that he didn't get any, and we ve talked about a lot of the park ass, red ass, well, ass. He was doing it. He didn't get any bound sitting, get any positive response from showing up and in Euro Suburban Wisconsin, suburban Minnesota. All these little places that were seeing eruptions of violence and rioting and one night, he didn't see anybody,
it from doing that right. He shut up you like me. It was his law and order couple of weeks of being Mr Law and order, and it didn't play while a suburban women there's just something about Trump, that that message was not going to be heard. Even though if you look at the issue. It is a it is of concern to those women, but they dont think that he is just not the person to solve that problem for them. It's not just that saying suburban women like who set stands Stanza says as a super, one woman, I'm telling you it's man, cyclists progress. Don't people don't think of themselves that way there not. I am a I'm a type in a political
map where they say you know, the real people are going to decide this election or suburban women. It's not because they're women and they live in a suburb. It is because they have a series of interlocking characteristics that combine to have the term suburban women be a convenience, and all like soccer moms were, or you know there were various there have been various terms. Reagan. Democrats like these are terms of political art. They do not define any person and invoking them. You aren't speaking to anybody, but a political consultant. Now the good said the guide candidate tells it an individual story about someone who is life,
the mere of that demographic right. You talk about. You know Mary Jones, who lives in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, and you had explains he happened to her, and then we did this for, like that's how you get to that demographic used to run up a deaf to retail politician, he's a performer stiffer thing, and you know a part of that whole thing with suburban thing. What was that it? Some cat skills, Tom. Why it's like him saying? I don't even know how to take this seriously enough. Won't you like me change. Damn neighborhoods, please, like me, like an one, ran saying: I'm sulk, Lord, that I will make out with anybody. I mean this is the way You know it really is like I'm a little of the Sarah Life Scatcherd nineteen. Eighty eight with John Love, it's playing MIKE Dukakis the weekend before the Elect
then? Where is like? Well, I'm gonna lose. So let's do this. This fund way it's Dukakis after Dark, raised, unplayable after dark witch of the tv show with you after the sixteen. These are Walking around people are like sitting there drinking champagne and he's like. Oh, hey, Willie Horton. How are you you know like that? I mean in Trump is sort of like these are like tumbling his way to what appear with what may appear to be his inevitable end, and I'm not he's acting like it. I'm not acting like him he's acting like I was thoroughly enjoy. Donald Trump and Smoking jacket. I would like that sitting down crossing his legs, a grand piano yeah. That would be that don't joke. The job we may. I am frightened the fireside tat, but the main thing happened. I mean it's or what
it's not like you live, you know he's gonna, be like mix and walking through the gate and like having yelling at the paintings of previous president's, like you have next in the final, eight billion held behold folks, like some other place, some other much more comic gambit. In my view, anyway, with that we will, we will bring today's proceedings were closed. We won't be assembled tomorrow for a prestige, not jump on words, keep the cavern.
Transcript generated on 2020-11-04.