The Daly Weekly (2/21)

Trump and gay rights, the defamation of Zelensky and Ukraine, Margaret Brennan on free speech, and more.

Hi everyone.

Welcome to this week’s Daly Weekly, where I answer whatever questions you throw at me.

Let’s get right to it…

---

Sir John: My liberal gay friends are very fearful that Trump is going to “take away their rights,” specifically gay marriage. I attempt to reassure them that Trump already reaffirmed the Supreme Court decision, and said it’s the law of the land, and he made no attempts to end gay marriage during his first term, but the bad orange boogeyman has them terrified. While I would love to have had deeper conversations with them, any dissent or attempt at reason would dismiss me as a fascist homophobe, and I don’t need that nonsense affecting me from the woke mob. My rational but left-of-center wife seems to have the same concerns, so I ask you: are they right? Is Trump planning on ending gay marriage? Why do my gay liberal associates think that ending the trans agenda of men competing against women and using girls locker rooms is somehow the same as Trump ending gay marriage and “coming after” the LGBTQ community? Am I missing something here? — “Gay Marriage” regards from The Emperor

I’m not at all concerned that Trump will end gay rights. I never have been, and I think anyone who has objectively looked at his past (both in and out of government) would know that he’s very gay-friendly. Heck, a number of people who’ve served in his administrations are openly gay. That’s a bit ironic I guess, being how homophobic a number of his supporters are (I get all kinds of hate mail and social-media responses from MAGA folks calling me every gay slur in the book; and I’m straight). But no, Trump’s not homophobic, he’s not a social conservative, and I’ve seen no compelling evidence that he’s even religious. So, I’m not sure why people are worried about this.

[Clifford] Smith spoke of the many issues with agencies such as USAID. He also commented on the need to reform Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and "things like this." What are the solutions to these situations? — David M.

Hi David. I know I already answered this question in the comment section, but I figured other readers might be interested in it. Past Daly Express guest, economist Jessica Riedl, has a fully-scored plan here.

Since you’re Ukraine piece earlier this week, the Trump administration has only doubled and tripled down on its anti-Ukraine/pro-Russia stance, with Trump calling Zelensky a “dictator” with a “4% approval rating”, claiming that Zelensky refused to meet with the U.S. Treasury Secretary (they met, and there are several pictures of the meeting), and opposing Russia being called the “aggressor” in a G7 statement on the 3rd anniversary of the Russia/Ukraine war. Do you think there’s any chance the U.S. won’t abandon Ukraine entirely? — Alex D.

There’s always a chance, I guess. But the odds are very much in favor of Trump abandoning Ukraine. A number of Republicans seem legitimately surprised by what’s happening, and I don’t get why. Trump’s been hinting at this for a long time, and Vance has been outright saying it. What we’re seeing feels less like a U.S. policy shift than a switching of sides. Now that he’s surrounded almost entirely by yes-men and yes-women in his second term, Trump’s worst impulses (including his affection for Vladmir Putin) are playing out on the world stage. And they carry enormous consequences.

A quick note on something you said at the beginning: Zelensky’s approval rating in Ukraine is in the mid to high 50s (higher than Trump’s here), and National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru had a clever line about Trump calling Zelensky a dictator: “You can tell Zelensky isn't a dictator because Trump doesn't praise him.”

John: Many in the general public think that corporate business CEO’s are for free markets, when in fact they often are not. Existing, established companies like regulation and restrictions that create barriers to entry. This scares away competition. Is the same thing happening in media? I’m noticing traditional media more-and-more are not a fan of free speech. They liked it better when they, and they alone, were the conduit to all news and information. The latest example is Margaret Brennan with CBS News. In her interview with Marco Rubio, she very much appeared to advocate for restrictions on free speech, lest they unleash another Hitler on the world. — Steve R.

I’m sure those working for the legacy media, and other well-established media institutions, absolutely resent alternative news-sources peeling away their audience. And I’m sure they’re particularly resentful when they view those sources as wildly misleading and irresponsible (which a lot of them are). I saw part of the Brennan clip, and she was obviously off-base. Free speech isn’t the problem. I think we do have a big problem with the abandonment of basic journalistic standards.

I saw on social media that you’re in DC right now for the Principles First Summit. How are things going there? — Ben G.

It hasn’t actually started yet, Ben. A reception tonight (Friday) will kick things off, and the forums will be on Saturday and Sunday. I flew in early (into a bitter cold DC) to do a little sight-seeing. Someone on the Principles First board was kind enough to invite me to a family-style dinner last night at a local Italian restaurant with volunteers for the organization. We all had a great time, and it was fun meeting more online acquaintances (including subscribers to this website) in person. Afterwards I hung out at the hotel bar with a couple Principles First folks I met last year. Good people. I’m going to do some more sightseeing this morning before things get started, and should have one or two episodes of the Daly Express (including some interviews) come out of my time here at the Summit. Stay tuned.

---

Thanks everyone! You can send me questions for next week by leaving a comment in the comment section.