WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.040 --> 00:00:02.359
<v Speaker 1>If a man today were to say that if he wants.

2
00:00:02.240 --> 00:00:04.360
<v Speaker 2>A girlfriend that can cook or clean, you might as

3
00:00:04.360 --> 00:00:05.440
<v Speaker 2>well be screaming me inward.

4
00:00:06.599 --> 00:00:12.199
<v Speaker 3>Okay, well you sound like a democrat. I'm not retarded.

5
00:00:14.160 --> 00:00:18.719
<v Speaker 4>Well whiskey, come and take my pain, the honeys, my ry,

6
00:00:19.160 --> 00:00:20.480
<v Speaker 4>oh whiskey.

7
00:00:21.359 --> 00:00:23.879
<v Speaker 3>Why think alone when you can drink it all in.

8
00:00:23.879 --> 00:00:28.839
<v Speaker 5>With Ricochet's three whiskey Happy Hour, join your bartenders Steve Heyward,

9
00:00:29.000 --> 00:00:37.320
<v Speaker 5>John U and the International Woman of Mystery Lucretia, where.

10
00:00:37.159 --> 00:00:39.240
<v Speaker 6>They slapped it up and David ain't too.

11
00:00:39.320 --> 00:00:42.880
<v Speaker 4>Easy on the should tap got to give me and

12
00:00:43.079 --> 00:00:43.880
<v Speaker 4>let that whiskey.

13
00:00:44.520 --> 00:00:46.679
<v Speaker 5>Well, boy, I sure learned my lesson to try and

14
00:00:46.679 --> 00:00:50.640
<v Speaker 5>do a podcast without real producers, didn't I?

15
00:00:50.640 --> 00:00:53.280
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. John, and I managed without you as

16
00:00:53.320 --> 00:00:56.359
<v Speaker 1>a producer just because we were a little crazy.

17
00:00:57.439 --> 00:01:01.039
<v Speaker 5>Well, yes, I preserve some of john little one liners there.

18
00:01:01.079 --> 00:01:04.840
<v Speaker 5>Otherwise I am in fact invoking me as I put

19
00:01:04.879 --> 00:01:07.400
<v Speaker 5>it in a substack. Note what Star Trek did with

20
00:01:07.439 --> 00:01:11.840
<v Speaker 5>their original pilot that NBC rejected because it was too cerebral,

21
00:01:12.159 --> 00:01:14.439
<v Speaker 5>and instead of junking it, they recut it and wrapped

22
00:01:14.439 --> 00:01:16.200
<v Speaker 5>a whole new story around it. So we're going to

23
00:01:16.239 --> 00:01:18.079
<v Speaker 5>do that listeners, okay.

24
00:01:17.799 --> 00:01:20.400
<v Speaker 1>Because we're too cerebral for you, Steve, is that what

25
00:01:20.439 --> 00:01:20.920
<v Speaker 1>you're saying?

26
00:01:21.319 --> 00:01:23.879
<v Speaker 3>No, no, no, Maybe you didn't see the note.

27
00:01:23.599 --> 00:01:28.040
<v Speaker 1>But I did see the note. I saw the undisciplined apart.

28
00:01:28.120 --> 00:01:30.560
<v Speaker 1>But I prefer to think that that's that John and

29
00:01:30.560 --> 00:01:32.680
<v Speaker 1>I were just a little too highbrow for you and

30
00:01:32.719 --> 00:01:33.640
<v Speaker 1>you can't keep up.

31
00:01:33.719 --> 00:01:37.879
<v Speaker 5>So okay, yes, well, well, John reveled way too much

32
00:01:37.920 --> 00:01:40.560
<v Speaker 5>in avoiding my mention of a certain statute. But I

33
00:01:40.560 --> 00:01:44.319
<v Speaker 5>also in the frame of mind of the director in

34
00:01:44.359 --> 00:01:47.319
<v Speaker 5>the mel Brooks movie, the producers who we read the script,

35
00:01:47.359 --> 00:01:50.040
<v Speaker 5>and he says, all that whole third act has got

36
00:01:50.079 --> 00:01:54.680
<v Speaker 5>to go. The Germans are losing the war. So I've

37
00:01:54.719 --> 00:01:56.879
<v Speaker 5>shorten a few things to that, but I moved everything around.

38
00:01:57.799 --> 00:02:00.000
<v Speaker 5>And so first of all, I do want to refer

39
00:02:00.159 --> 00:02:03.239
<v Speaker 5>to the little teaser cold open before our theme song.

40
00:02:04.400 --> 00:02:06.840
<v Speaker 5>You know what, John especially likes to rib me for

41
00:02:07.000 --> 00:02:10.520
<v Speaker 5>being obsessed with Sidney Sweeney. But she's back in the news,

42
00:02:11.199 --> 00:02:13.680
<v Speaker 5>so you know, on her HBO show, as you heard,

43
00:02:13.719 --> 00:02:17.479
<v Speaker 5>if you listen from the beginning, she someone says, are

44
00:02:17.520 --> 00:02:21.879
<v Speaker 5>you a Democrat? And she says, I'm not retarded? Looking

45
00:02:22.280 --> 00:02:23.120
<v Speaker 5>right now?

46
00:02:23.199 --> 00:02:24.000
<v Speaker 3>The funny thing is.

47
00:02:25.680 --> 00:02:29.280
<v Speaker 5>The social media reaction has been utterly predictable. All these

48
00:02:29.360 --> 00:02:32.479
<v Speaker 5>leftists are saying, oh, it's terrible. She would say that,

49
00:02:32.759 --> 00:02:35.919
<v Speaker 5>you know, Republicans say retarded, but Democrats don't. And of

50
00:02:35.960 --> 00:02:38.759
<v Speaker 5>course the obvious answer is you want to supply.

51
00:02:38.840 --> 00:02:41.919
<v Speaker 1>They are exactly Thank you.

52
00:02:42.120 --> 00:02:44.960
<v Speaker 5>I thought you'd say that, but I did see a squire,

53
00:02:45.039 --> 00:02:47.639
<v Speaker 5>but I didn't chase after it. But apparently Candice Owens

54
00:02:47.680 --> 00:02:49.400
<v Speaker 5>and Megan Kelly are down on her.

55
00:02:51.039 --> 00:02:51.879
<v Speaker 3>I'm not quite sure why.

56
00:02:51.879 --> 00:02:57.039
<v Speaker 5>I think it's because she's supposedly allegedly has come out

57
00:02:57.080 --> 00:03:00.400
<v Speaker 5>saying she likes Trump, she's for the Iran war against

58
00:03:00.439 --> 00:03:03.719
<v Speaker 5>anti Semitism, and so guess what she's now taking sides

59
00:03:03.759 --> 00:03:09.919
<v Speaker 5>beyond just wearing good jeans. Okay, sorry, all right, enough

60
00:03:09.960 --> 00:03:12.759
<v Speaker 5>of that mirth though, I think for at least a

61
00:03:12.800 --> 00:03:16.840
<v Speaker 5>couple minutes, so you guys didn't do the order that

62
00:03:16.919 --> 00:03:19.199
<v Speaker 5>I kind of had mine. But guess what, it's a

63
00:03:19.599 --> 00:03:21.000
<v Speaker 5>simple matter to rearrange them.

64
00:03:21.120 --> 00:03:22.479
<v Speaker 3>So, you know.

65
00:03:22.599 --> 00:03:26.879
<v Speaker 5>I think that the story on the gerrymanderin cases is fascinating,

66
00:03:26.919 --> 00:03:28.520
<v Speaker 5>not so much for the law of it, which you

67
00:03:28.560 --> 00:03:32.080
<v Speaker 5>guys talked about, but I think it is interesting because

68
00:03:32.120 --> 00:03:35.919
<v Speaker 5>of the reaction to it. So let me just cut

69
00:03:36.000 --> 00:03:38.680
<v Speaker 5>back in here to your guys discussion and we will

70
00:03:38.680 --> 00:03:40.520
<v Speaker 5>pick it up on the other side.

71
00:03:40.759 --> 00:03:44.159
<v Speaker 1>Okay, I do want to ask you what you think

72
00:03:44.199 --> 00:03:49.400
<v Speaker 1>about all of these crazy court cases about redistricting. We

73
00:03:49.479 --> 00:03:52.039
<v Speaker 1>talked about it last time, so most of our listeners

74
00:03:52.080 --> 00:03:55.520
<v Speaker 1>heard the basic thing. But since we talked last time,

75
00:03:56.039 --> 00:03:58.639
<v Speaker 1>we had we see Tennessee. Let me get it right,

76
00:03:58.680 --> 00:04:03.360
<v Speaker 1>Tennessee and Louisiana. Now District Tennessee is being sued by

77
00:04:03.400 --> 00:04:08.800
<v Speaker 1>the na A c P arguing that the Memphis redistricting

78
00:04:10.319 --> 00:04:14.400
<v Speaker 1>is in and out of itself racially discriminatory. Right. I

79
00:04:14.400 --> 00:04:18.279
<v Speaker 1>don't know where where they'll get with that. The Virginia

80
00:04:19.879 --> 00:04:22.920
<v Speaker 1>Uh did you follow any of that Virginia suit to

81
00:04:22.920 --> 00:04:24.240
<v Speaker 1>the United States Supreme Court?

82
00:04:24.439 --> 00:04:27.839
<v Speaker 7>Oh? Yeah, just got thrown out today just while our podcast.

83
00:04:28.600 --> 00:04:31.040
<v Speaker 7>Oh that was obvious that would happen. Yeah, that was

84
00:04:31.160 --> 00:04:34.240
<v Speaker 7>There was no federal issue. It's all just a question

85
00:04:34.319 --> 00:04:39.120
<v Speaker 7>of Virginia is it's the question of Virginia constitutional amendment procedure.

86
00:04:39.720 --> 00:04:44.759
<v Speaker 5>Right, and John unplugged.

87
00:04:48.600 --> 00:04:52.000
<v Speaker 7>That our complete election state in the country would be

88
00:04:52.680 --> 00:04:54.600
<v Speaker 7>fit for decision by the Supreme Court.

89
00:04:54.759 --> 00:04:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, crazy, It was crazy, but we also have

90
00:04:59.800 --> 00:05:03.920
<v Speaker 1>some I mean, the Democrats have decided to go crazy

91
00:05:04.120 --> 00:05:08.560
<v Speaker 1>on this whole thing. Okay, I'm not going to be

92
00:05:08.759 --> 00:05:13.040
<v Speaker 1>my usual dismissive self about everybody in the Democratic Party,

93
00:05:13.079 --> 00:05:17.519
<v Speaker 1>but they seem you know, Kamala Kamalama ding Dong came

94
00:05:17.560 --> 00:05:21.839
<v Speaker 1>out today said there are no bad ideas. And yeah,

95
00:05:21.879 --> 00:05:23.759
<v Speaker 1>she came out and said, there's no bad ideas. There's

96
00:05:23.800 --> 00:05:27.720
<v Speaker 1>no reason why we shouldn't pack the court, why we

97
00:05:27.800 --> 00:05:32.600
<v Speaker 1>shouldn't try everything we can to get around this silly

98
00:05:32.759 --> 00:05:36.639
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court decision about you know, not discriminating on the

99
00:05:36.639 --> 00:05:39.759
<v Speaker 1>basis of race and districting. She just went on and

100
00:05:39.800 --> 00:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>on and on what you know, the all of the

101
00:05:42.079 --> 00:05:45.680
<v Speaker 1>things that the left that lost the left the election

102
00:05:45.959 --> 00:05:50.079
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty four she's doubling down on and so

103
00:05:50.160 --> 00:05:52.759
<v Speaker 1>are lots of leftists. I mean, in Virginia they were

104
00:05:52.800 --> 00:05:54.600
<v Speaker 1>going to pack the Supreme Court. Then they were going

105
00:05:54.680 --> 00:05:58.199
<v Speaker 1>to just abolish the whole thing. They did try the

106
00:05:58.240 --> 00:06:01.920
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court, you know, to the US Supreme Court. Is

107
00:06:01.959 --> 00:06:04.720
<v Speaker 1>it really an existential crisis for the Democrats? Do you

108
00:06:04.759 --> 00:06:06.839
<v Speaker 1>think John's so?

109
00:06:07.040 --> 00:06:11.199
<v Speaker 7>One thing is I listened to your guys Pod episode

110
00:06:11.199 --> 00:06:14.160
<v Speaker 7>where you talked about it and I think you're quite

111
00:06:14.240 --> 00:06:19.240
<v Speaker 7>right about the effects of the decisions. That this is

112
00:06:19.240 --> 00:06:21.839
<v Speaker 7>not going to produce I think a huge change in

113
00:06:21.879 --> 00:06:25.399
<v Speaker 7>the midterms, but there will be maybe six to eight

114
00:06:25.519 --> 00:06:29.480
<v Speaker 7>extra seats that will be added, could be added by

115
00:06:29.680 --> 00:06:33.480
<v Speaker 7>states that thought they were thought they were acquired by

116
00:06:33.480 --> 00:06:38.720
<v Speaker 7>the Voting Rights Act to add majority minority districts that

117
00:06:38.759 --> 00:06:41.519
<v Speaker 7>they're called, and now that they don't have to under Klay,

118
00:06:41.639 --> 00:06:44.079
<v Speaker 7>they can go back and draw the districts they wanted to.

119
00:06:44.120 --> 00:06:48.199
<v Speaker 7>And there's nothing wrong with eliminating, for example, a Democratic

120
00:06:48.240 --> 00:06:52.199
<v Speaker 7>seat in Tennessee that was sat in Memphis if you

121
00:06:52.360 --> 00:06:55.120
<v Speaker 7>just want to create the maximum number of Republican states.

122
00:06:55.800 --> 00:06:58.959
<v Speaker 7>And one thing that Kalay said is that it's now

123
00:06:59.279 --> 00:07:02.959
<v Speaker 7>the burden is on the plaintiffs to show that what

124
00:07:03.040 --> 00:07:06.680
<v Speaker 7>the legislature is doing really isn't just about maximizing partisan

125
00:07:06.720 --> 00:07:09.759
<v Speaker 7>advantage or protecting incumbents or all the many reasons that

126
00:07:10.560 --> 00:07:12.639
<v Speaker 7>states usually engage in redistricting.

127
00:07:13.040 --> 00:07:14.680
<v Speaker 3>That's one, you know.

128
00:07:14.720 --> 00:07:16.560
<v Speaker 7>The second thing I think you guys are both right

129
00:07:16.680 --> 00:07:19.240
<v Speaker 7>was the key relative impact. The real importance of it

130
00:07:19.279 --> 00:07:24.000
<v Speaker 7>will come after the twenty thirty census, when a lot

131
00:07:24.040 --> 00:07:24.720
<v Speaker 7>of seats.

132
00:07:24.480 --> 00:07:25.240
<v Speaker 3>Are going to shift.

133
00:07:25.279 --> 00:07:28.959
<v Speaker 7>I think from the liberal old states like California, in

134
00:07:29.040 --> 00:07:30.720
<v Speaker 7>Oork and ILLINOI and they're going to move to the

135
00:07:30.759 --> 00:07:35.240
<v Speaker 7>sun Belt and southern states. That plus Klay could lead

136
00:07:35.240 --> 00:07:40.079
<v Speaker 7>to a major shift in House of Representative seats in

137
00:07:40.120 --> 00:07:42.959
<v Speaker 7>the South, and then they'll be districted to maximis. Because

138
00:07:42.959 --> 00:07:44.920
<v Speaker 7>I think once you've started this, Lucash, I don't know

139
00:07:44.959 --> 00:07:48.000
<v Speaker 7>what you think, but I think once Trump said let's

140
00:07:48.000 --> 00:07:49.480
<v Speaker 7>go ahead and do this, and a number of states

141
00:07:49.480 --> 00:07:51.680
<v Speaker 7>did it, I don't think there's any going back. I mean,

142
00:07:51.680 --> 00:07:54.560
<v Speaker 7>what would be the incentive for a state to say, oh,

143
00:07:54.639 --> 00:07:56.120
<v Speaker 7>we're not going to do that. I mean, look at

144
00:07:56.120 --> 00:07:59.079
<v Speaker 7>New England, right, New England has basically reached it. All

145
00:07:59.120 --> 00:08:02.160
<v Speaker 7>the states of New Ly have basically I think, redistricted

146
00:08:02.199 --> 00:08:05.279
<v Speaker 7>all but one Republican seat out of existence in the

147
00:08:05.399 --> 00:08:09.399
<v Speaker 7>entire region. And they've never gone back. This has been

148
00:08:09.399 --> 00:08:11.839
<v Speaker 7>going on for years up in New England and they've

149
00:08:11.839 --> 00:08:15.600
<v Speaker 7>never gone back, even though no other states retaliated against

150
00:08:15.600 --> 00:08:17.839
<v Speaker 7>them for this, and the way you're seeing states do

151
00:08:17.959 --> 00:08:21.199
<v Speaker 7>it now, so I don't see why we'd ever go

152
00:08:21.360 --> 00:08:24.600
<v Speaker 7>back to the world before. But lastly, I don't see

153
00:08:24.600 --> 00:08:26.839
<v Speaker 7>what's so bad about that. I mean, really, what I

154
00:08:26.839 --> 00:08:29.920
<v Speaker 7>don't really understand why it's so bad for states not

155
00:08:30.040 --> 00:08:35.159
<v Speaker 7>to because this makes right state legislative elections important. People

156
00:08:35.159 --> 00:08:37.279
<v Speaker 7>should care about who they elect to the state house

157
00:08:37.320 --> 00:08:40.399
<v Speaker 7>because they're the ones drawing the districts, and so to

158
00:08:40.440 --> 00:08:42.679
<v Speaker 7>me it seems like a I mean, this is just

159
00:08:42.720 --> 00:08:45.919
<v Speaker 7>a I don't know, a consequence of democratic elections. I

160
00:08:45.960 --> 00:08:49.279
<v Speaker 7>don't see what's so bad about jerrymanders. I see lots

161
00:08:49.279 --> 00:08:52.480
<v Speaker 7>of people complaining about jerry manning. It's so terrible for democracy.

162
00:08:53.240 --> 00:08:56.240
<v Speaker 7>I don't think it is a federal system where you

163
00:08:56.279 --> 00:08:58.360
<v Speaker 7>have fifty different states and they're allowed to draw the

164
00:08:58.399 --> 00:09:00.720
<v Speaker 7>districts as Maybe it would be a bad thing if

165
00:09:00.720 --> 00:09:04.840
<v Speaker 7>you had one single gigantic districting system for the entire

166
00:09:04.919 --> 00:09:08.159
<v Speaker 7>country and you could redistrict a cole you know, whole

167
00:09:08.159 --> 00:09:10.840
<v Speaker 7>party out nationwide, but that's not the case in our

168
00:09:10.879 --> 00:09:13.840
<v Speaker 7>federal system. So real it is so bad about jerrymandering.

169
00:09:13.879 --> 00:09:16.679
<v Speaker 1>I don't get it. Let me put all play Devil's advocate,

170
00:09:16.879 --> 00:09:19.440
<v Speaker 1>and I don't. When I say that, I mean it sincerely.

171
00:09:19.480 --> 00:09:23.039
<v Speaker 1>I don't know that I fully believe this, But I

172
00:09:23.159 --> 00:09:25.360
<v Speaker 1>even looked a little bit of skance at the whole

173
00:09:25.360 --> 00:09:29.240
<v Speaker 1>idea of Trump asking Texas to redistrict in a in

174
00:09:29.279 --> 00:09:32.200
<v Speaker 1>the middle until I started paying a little more attention

175
00:09:32.279 --> 00:09:34.679
<v Speaker 1>to what, like you talk about what the Democrats had

176
00:09:34.720 --> 00:09:38.559
<v Speaker 1>actually really done with districting in the past without ever

177
00:09:38.600 --> 00:09:42.159
<v Speaker 1>being countered in any way to speak of by the Republicans.

178
00:09:42.200 --> 00:09:47.679
<v Speaker 1>But I can remember being, you know, in an American

179
00:09:47.720 --> 00:09:50.879
<v Speaker 1>government class talking to my students and saying that the problem,

180
00:09:50.919 --> 00:09:53.639
<v Speaker 1>for instance, in California is not so much that the

181
00:09:53.720 --> 00:09:57.480
<v Speaker 1>voters are choosing their representatives, it's that their representatives are

182
00:09:57.519 --> 00:10:02.320
<v Speaker 1>choosing the voters. Right, You've heard that, that old cliche. Yeah.

183
00:10:02.360 --> 00:10:05.720
<v Speaker 1>At what point, though, do we stop believing that you

184
00:10:05.840 --> 00:10:11.519
<v Speaker 1>can buy demographic information and other pieces of information about

185
00:10:11.559 --> 00:10:15.480
<v Speaker 1>voters determine how they're going to vote. When will they say,

186
00:10:15.519 --> 00:10:17.360
<v Speaker 1>for instance, and this is going to be a question,

187
00:10:17.600 --> 00:10:21.039
<v Speaker 1>I promise, when will voters look at this whole situation say,

188
00:10:21.080 --> 00:10:22.879
<v Speaker 1>you know what, I don't really like that you did this,

189
00:10:23.559 --> 00:10:25.320
<v Speaker 1>and now I'm going to vote for the other party

190
00:10:25.360 --> 00:10:27.919
<v Speaker 1>they talked about that happened in Virginia if the ten

191
00:10:27.960 --> 00:10:31.639
<v Speaker 1>to one thing had gone through, So voters, do voters

192
00:10:31.639 --> 00:10:33.840
<v Speaker 1>still have a say? Is what it comes down to.

193
00:10:34.399 --> 00:10:37.639
<v Speaker 1>Could they still elect a Democrat in out of one

194
00:10:37.679 --> 00:10:41.480
<v Speaker 1>of those redistricted Memphis areas.

195
00:10:42.080 --> 00:10:45.720
<v Speaker 7>Do you think, Yeah, what if a party said, we're

196
00:10:45.840 --> 00:10:48.639
<v Speaker 7>the clean government party and we can't paign on getting

197
00:10:48.759 --> 00:10:51.799
<v Speaker 7>rid of jerrymanders, and we can't paign on having a

198
00:10:51.840 --> 00:10:54.559
<v Speaker 7>redistricting committ right, and you or the people, as they

199
00:10:54.559 --> 00:10:58.440
<v Speaker 7>did in California once upon a time, or in Virginia,

200
00:10:59.039 --> 00:11:02.679
<v Speaker 7>vote for a a nonpartisan redistricting commission, or New York

201
00:11:03.320 --> 00:11:06.759
<v Speaker 7>and then right then you have these people come in

202
00:11:06.759 --> 00:11:09.120
<v Speaker 7>and say, it's actually interesting, it's mostly in blue states

203
00:11:09.159 --> 00:11:11.639
<v Speaker 7>who write the blue states who once said we wanted

204
00:11:11.639 --> 00:11:13.360
<v Speaker 7>to have these in the first place, but now we

205
00:11:13.399 --> 00:11:15.600
<v Speaker 7>don't like the results, so we're going to get rid

206
00:11:15.600 --> 00:11:18.679
<v Speaker 7>of them for one time only, or two elections only,

207
00:11:19.080 --> 00:11:22.879
<v Speaker 7>like the Virginia override. But that's something that you can't

208
00:11:22.879 --> 00:11:26.759
<v Speaker 7>paign on. First state legislative elections. Right, you could say

209
00:11:26.840 --> 00:11:31.879
<v Speaker 7>the people are electing parties to control the state houses

210
00:11:32.720 --> 00:11:36.960
<v Speaker 7>in part because of their control. I think about it also.

211
00:11:37.039 --> 00:11:39.879
<v Speaker 7>You know, it's interesting I was thinking about this, Linda. Look, Critia,

212
00:11:39.879 --> 00:11:42.639
<v Speaker 7>I don't know what you think, but this must have

213
00:11:42.720 --> 00:11:45.960
<v Speaker 7>been the way it was before the seventeenth Amendment, right

214
00:11:46.039 --> 00:11:49.559
<v Speaker 7>before right when Lincoln is running for Senate. Lincoln is

215
00:11:49.639 --> 00:11:53.039
<v Speaker 7>actually asking people to elect certain members to the Illinois

216
00:11:53.080 --> 00:11:54.799
<v Speaker 7>State House because they were the ones who would pick,

217
00:11:55.080 --> 00:11:55.639
<v Speaker 7>would pick.

218
00:11:56.679 --> 00:12:05.519
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, all right, we're back. And I'll just add this,

219
00:12:06.679 --> 00:12:09.919
<v Speaker 5>Aside from the legal questions about it and the long

220
00:12:09.960 --> 00:12:14.440
<v Speaker 5>politics of jerrymandering, I've noticed that the reaction to it

221
00:12:14.519 --> 00:12:17.000
<v Speaker 5>is significant, I think in two ways. One, you had

222
00:12:17.000 --> 00:12:19.519
<v Speaker 5>a bunch of people, including I think David French at

223
00:12:19.519 --> 00:12:22.600
<v Speaker 5>the New York Times, but who cares having their knickers

224
00:12:22.639 --> 00:12:26.279
<v Speaker 5>in a twist about why didn't the Virginia Supreme Court

225
00:12:26.759 --> 00:12:30.600
<v Speaker 5>intervene before the vote to save the taxpayers the cost

226
00:12:30.639 --> 00:12:32.600
<v Speaker 5>of an election, and this and this and this, and

227
00:12:32.960 --> 00:12:35.519
<v Speaker 5>of course the simple answer is the law said they couldn't,

228
00:12:35.639 --> 00:12:39.399
<v Speaker 5>And actually, appellate courts don't rule on prospective things unless

229
00:12:39.440 --> 00:12:42.000
<v Speaker 5>there's an error in say the language or the law

230
00:12:42.080 --> 00:12:45.799
<v Speaker 5>that's drafted in the initiative. That's happened occasionally. Lots of

231
00:12:45.840 --> 00:12:49.080
<v Speaker 5>Supreme courts have struck down initiatives state supreme courts around

232
00:12:49.080 --> 00:12:51.960
<v Speaker 5>the country after they've passed, So there's nothing unusual about that.

233
00:12:52.480 --> 00:12:56.279
<v Speaker 5>But then the shocking reaction of the Democrats in Virginia,

234
00:12:56.559 --> 00:12:59.519
<v Speaker 5>let's fire the whole Supreme Court. I mean, forget court packing.

235
00:13:00.840 --> 00:13:03.879
<v Speaker 5>Let's reduce the retirement age to fifty four so they

236
00:13:03.919 --> 00:13:06.919
<v Speaker 5>all have to leave and reappoint new people. I mean,

237
00:13:06.960 --> 00:13:10.879
<v Speaker 5>this has been nan Republic stuff. You know, packing the

238
00:13:10.919 --> 00:13:15.080
<v Speaker 5>Supreme Court is constitutional, right, this is Congress can change

239
00:13:15.120 --> 00:13:16.360
<v Speaker 5>the number, so that's true.

240
00:13:16.559 --> 00:13:21.120
<v Speaker 1>But presumably so can the state of Virginia legislature or

241
00:13:21.279 --> 00:13:25.720
<v Speaker 1>change the constitution. You know, it's likely a different process

242
00:13:25.840 --> 00:13:29.200
<v Speaker 1>because there are very few states that actually have the

243
00:13:29.240 --> 00:13:32.840
<v Speaker 1>protections for the Supreme Court that the United States does.

244
00:13:32.879 --> 00:13:34.240
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, go ahead. I'm sorry.

245
00:13:34.360 --> 00:13:37.039
<v Speaker 5>Well, now you add one more layer onto this, which

246
00:13:37.320 --> 00:13:41.360
<v Speaker 5>is the Voting Rights Act case. You have the Democrats

247
00:13:41.360 --> 00:13:45.279
<v Speaker 5>in hystery about it with the Democratic House leader what

248
00:13:45.360 --> 00:13:48.399
<v Speaker 5>Hakeem Jeffrey's saying, this is an illegitimate court that's been

249
00:13:48.440 --> 00:13:50.720
<v Speaker 5>a refrain for a while now, an illegitimate court.

250
00:13:52.480 --> 00:13:53.440
<v Speaker 3>Who was it who said?

251
00:13:54.279 --> 00:13:58.639
<v Speaker 5>Somebody tweeted out some Democrat packed the court. Now I thought, okay,

252
00:13:58.879 --> 00:14:02.679
<v Speaker 5>let's give from five more justices. I mean, they're not

253
00:14:02.720 --> 00:14:05.440
<v Speaker 5>even thinking this through at all. But the point is

254
00:14:05.440 --> 00:14:08.039
<v Speaker 5>is that I am now I'm going to recant something

255
00:14:08.039 --> 00:14:10.799
<v Speaker 5>that I think I said in some episode many months

256
00:14:10.840 --> 00:14:15.039
<v Speaker 5>ago that well, I think we are both reflecting that

257
00:14:15.519 --> 00:14:20.559
<v Speaker 5>wonder about getting rid of the filibuster. And I still

258
00:14:20.559 --> 00:14:23.159
<v Speaker 5>don't like the idea, But now I am convinced that

259
00:14:23.200 --> 00:14:26.039
<v Speaker 5>the Democrats, if they get the chance, they will abolish it.

260
00:14:26.159 --> 00:14:28.679
<v Speaker 5>They will pack the court, they will admit DC and

261
00:14:28.720 --> 00:14:29.639
<v Speaker 5>Puerto Rico.

262
00:14:30.120 --> 00:14:32.559
<v Speaker 1>They will elect college or try.

263
00:14:33.159 --> 00:14:35.120
<v Speaker 5>Or abolish it correct one of those things.

264
00:14:35.159 --> 00:14:39.440
<v Speaker 1>And well, they're already, They're already they do have statutory statewide,

265
00:14:39.440 --> 00:14:44.080
<v Speaker 1>statutory methods whereby they're going to undermine the electoral college.

266
00:14:44.080 --> 00:14:45.759
<v Speaker 1>And yes, I do think they will do that, you know,

267
00:14:45.799 --> 00:14:49.159
<v Speaker 1>the idea that the elector all electoral college votes will

268
00:14:49.200 --> 00:14:52.679
<v Speaker 1>go to the popular vote winner, and that sort of thing.

269
00:14:53.200 --> 00:14:57.039
<v Speaker 1>I need to think sometime sometimes, I need to think

270
00:14:57.159 --> 00:15:00.720
<v Speaker 1>through what the actual practical ramification as that are, because

271
00:15:00.799 --> 00:15:03.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm guessing it wouldn't turn out the way they expect

272
00:15:03.759 --> 00:15:05.399
<v Speaker 1>it to. You know, I had to. I was going

273
00:15:05.480 --> 00:15:08.120
<v Speaker 1>to send you something and I just thought busy. I apologize,

274
00:15:08.159 --> 00:15:11.200
<v Speaker 1>But who was it in California that now wants to

275
00:15:11.279 --> 00:15:15.000
<v Speaker 1>change your jungle primary of course, back to you know,

276
00:15:15.279 --> 00:15:18.799
<v Speaker 1>a party based system, because hey, this isn't working out

277
00:15:18.840 --> 00:15:20.679
<v Speaker 1>what way the way we thought it would? You know,

278
00:15:20.799 --> 00:15:23.960
<v Speaker 1>that we would have one hundred percent full time forever.

279
00:15:24.720 --> 00:15:27.799
<v Speaker 1>Uh one party advantage with this jungle primary.

280
00:15:28.720 --> 00:15:32.519
<v Speaker 5>Yeah so typical, right, yeah, I mean so as you know,

281
00:15:32.639 --> 00:15:35.080
<v Speaker 5>our democracy trademark is actually literally true.

282
00:15:35.120 --> 00:15:36.360
<v Speaker 3>Our democracy means we.

283
00:15:36.279 --> 00:15:39.879
<v Speaker 5>Win, right, we will if if we're not getting our way,

284
00:15:39.919 --> 00:15:44.200
<v Speaker 5>we changed the rules. But here's the This gets back

285
00:15:44.240 --> 00:15:46.919
<v Speaker 5>to an even older conversation we had along with John

286
00:15:47.080 --> 00:15:49.039
<v Speaker 5>maybe three years ago now maybe more.

287
00:15:49.679 --> 00:15:51.679
<v Speaker 3>We were speculating about, you know, could there really be

288
00:15:51.720 --> 00:15:52.639
<v Speaker 3>another civil war?

289
00:15:53.480 --> 00:15:55.200
<v Speaker 5>And you know we we you and I tangled a

290
00:15:55.200 --> 00:15:57.320
<v Speaker 5>bit about whether the Spanish Civil War is a model

291
00:15:57.399 --> 00:16:02.840
<v Speaker 5>or not. I am proposing, not highly facetiously, what I'm calling.

292
00:16:02.919 --> 00:16:05.919
<v Speaker 5>You'll see why it's half facetious. I want to propose

293
00:16:06.039 --> 00:16:11.120
<v Speaker 5>the Union of Concerned Political Scientists doomsday clock, and I'm

294
00:16:11.159 --> 00:16:13.080
<v Speaker 5>gonna I'm gonna move the clock up to four minutes

295
00:16:13.120 --> 00:16:16.000
<v Speaker 5>to midnight. Right, people, remember the the action was the

296
00:16:16.000 --> 00:16:18.240
<v Speaker 5>bullt of the Atomic Scientists, and the Union of Concerned

297
00:16:18.279 --> 00:16:21.120
<v Speaker 5>Scientist was even worse. But the point is is they

298
00:16:21.159 --> 00:16:24.360
<v Speaker 5>made lots of publicity for decades with their doomsday clock,

299
00:16:24.399 --> 00:16:25.480
<v Speaker 5>and it would go up a minute.

300
00:16:25.519 --> 00:16:27.799
<v Speaker 1>We're a minute, We're a minute, We're a minute.

301
00:16:27.480 --> 00:16:27.960
<v Speaker 3>That's right.

302
00:16:28.080 --> 00:16:32.120
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, but you know if oh so, let me add

303
00:16:32.159 --> 00:16:33.759
<v Speaker 5>one more data point and then we'll go on to

304
00:16:33.840 --> 00:16:34.960
<v Speaker 5>the next legal question.

305
00:16:36.320 --> 00:16:36.440
<v Speaker 3>Uh.

306
00:16:37.039 --> 00:16:40.840
<v Speaker 5>We've essentially seeing the we mentioned this before a week

307
00:16:40.960 --> 00:16:42.960
<v Speaker 5>or two ago. We've seen the mayor of New York

308
00:16:42.960 --> 00:16:47.120
<v Speaker 5>City essentially threaten Ken Griffith, you know, one of the

309
00:16:47.120 --> 00:16:50.399
<v Speaker 5>the great financial titans of our time, by standing in

310
00:16:50.399 --> 00:16:53.360
<v Speaker 5>front of his apartment around the corner from where that

311
00:16:53.480 --> 00:16:57.679
<v Speaker 5>Luigi what's his name guy shot the seat Mangioni and

312
00:16:57.759 --> 00:17:00.720
<v Speaker 5>became called hero for the Left. I guess there's even

313
00:17:00.720 --> 00:17:03.840
<v Speaker 5>a stage play about him, already celebrating him typical.

314
00:17:05.279 --> 00:17:07.200
<v Speaker 3>But we've seen two things.

315
00:17:07.240 --> 00:17:09.680
<v Speaker 1>You see, by the way, from a female point of view,

316
00:17:09.680 --> 00:17:13.000
<v Speaker 1>he's not that cute. He's a soy boy. Go ahead,

317
00:17:13.839 --> 00:17:16.160
<v Speaker 1>all those women who want to marry him or do

318
00:17:16.240 --> 00:17:17.920
<v Speaker 1>something with him anyway.

319
00:17:17.680 --> 00:17:20.000
<v Speaker 5>Well, you know there's there's always that cohort of women

320
00:17:20.039 --> 00:17:23.160
<v Speaker 5>who write love letters to like Charles Manson in prison, right.

321
00:17:23.200 --> 00:17:26.160
<v Speaker 5>I mean, this is not it's ridiculous. But you know

322
00:17:26.160 --> 00:17:28.279
<v Speaker 5>who wanted to have a date with Jeffrey Dahmer.

323
00:17:29.599 --> 00:17:32.640
<v Speaker 1>I share and he wanted to eat them with dates?

324
00:17:33.079 --> 00:17:37.279
<v Speaker 5>Well, okay, I was gonna say he wanted to share

325
00:17:37.319 --> 00:17:38.680
<v Speaker 5>open face sandwiches with him.

326
00:17:40.440 --> 00:17:48.799
<v Speaker 3>I know that's worse there. Sorry, so you'll set.

327
00:17:48.720 --> 00:17:51.160
<v Speaker 1>Me, okay, I sent you a text.

328
00:17:51.759 --> 00:17:54.839
<v Speaker 5>Well, here's the serious point. You have these polls showing

329
00:17:55.079 --> 00:17:59.079
<v Speaker 5>a parality of Democrats thinking the Butler attempt on Trump

330
00:17:59.160 --> 00:18:02.119
<v Speaker 5>and the White House core respondesced and attempt were faked,

331
00:18:02.720 --> 00:18:05.400
<v Speaker 5>which is Looney Tunes territory. But then you also have

332
00:18:05.599 --> 00:18:09.519
<v Speaker 5>especially younger liberals and Democrats coming along like forty percent

333
00:18:09.599 --> 00:18:14.920
<v Speaker 5>saying violence is justified for political uh, for your political goals.

334
00:18:15.680 --> 00:18:17.640
<v Speaker 5>So if it comes to pass that you have always

335
00:18:17.680 --> 00:18:19.799
<v Speaker 5>reformed and I agree with you, probably wouldn't work out

336
00:18:19.839 --> 00:18:23.640
<v Speaker 5>the way the Democrats think. Uh, then what happens after

337
00:18:23.680 --> 00:18:26.799
<v Speaker 5>that possibly bad stuff. And so that's why four minutes

338
00:18:26.799 --> 00:18:29.480
<v Speaker 5>to midnight is it is a gimmick. It's I want

339
00:18:29.480 --> 00:18:32.039
<v Speaker 5>to make fun of all those you know, Union of

340
00:18:32.079 --> 00:18:33.119
<v Speaker 5>Concerns scientists.

341
00:18:34.400 --> 00:18:36.440
<v Speaker 3>But it's not crazy to think about.

342
00:18:37.240 --> 00:18:39.480
<v Speaker 1>So let me just throw something a little And we

343
00:18:39.519 --> 00:18:40.839
<v Speaker 1>didn't talk about this, but I'm want to throw it

344
00:18:40.880 --> 00:18:43.000
<v Speaker 1>at you anyway. You know, I'm the one who always

345
00:18:43.079 --> 00:18:49.000
<v Speaker 1>complains about Republicans refusing to recognize the war that they're in.

346
00:18:49.160 --> 00:18:51.960
<v Speaker 1>And you know, wanting to be gentlemen, wanting to to

347
00:18:52.559 --> 00:18:57.000
<v Speaker 1>and wanting to stick with principles, wanting to defend institutions,

348
00:18:57.559 --> 00:19:01.759
<v Speaker 1>and even being willing to lose because they're defending their

349
00:19:01.759 --> 00:19:07.720
<v Speaker 1>principles and their institutions. I wonder how much longer, you know,

350
00:19:08.000 --> 00:19:14.039
<v Speaker 1>the Republican Party can veer toward Mike Pence if the

351
00:19:14.160 --> 00:19:18.920
<v Speaker 1>Democrats continue to go down this road, which I do

352
00:19:18.960 --> 00:19:21.680
<v Speaker 1>think is it's becoming worse. You know, you're four minutes

353
00:19:21.680 --> 00:19:24.519
<v Speaker 1>to midnight, whatever you want to call it. I just

354
00:19:25.000 --> 00:19:27.799
<v Speaker 1>you have to wonder. I'm not saying civil war necessarily,

355
00:19:27.960 --> 00:19:32.359
<v Speaker 1>but Trump is popular in large part because he doesn't

356
00:19:32.440 --> 00:19:34.880
<v Speaker 1>care to play the game the way it's always been played,

357
00:19:34.920 --> 00:19:37.680
<v Speaker 1>which is they get to do whatever they want. John

358
00:19:37.720 --> 00:19:40.240
<v Speaker 1>brought up a really good point in this regard about

359
00:19:40.240 --> 00:19:42.960
<v Speaker 1>the jerrymandering that you know, come on, let's be real.

360
00:19:43.440 --> 00:19:49.759
<v Speaker 1>Democrats have jerrymandered both racially jerrymandered and politically jerrymandered, partisan

361
00:19:49.799 --> 00:19:53.720
<v Speaker 1>jerrymanderd for years. It's part of the reason why they're

362
00:19:53.759 --> 00:19:58.400
<v Speaker 1>so desperate. There's nothing left for them to jerrymander. Steve right, right,

363
00:19:58.440 --> 00:20:02.559
<v Speaker 1>I mean, and so Trump and I confess to being

364
00:20:02.599 --> 00:20:05.680
<v Speaker 1>a little bit unnerved by Trump, you know, encouraging it

365
00:20:05.720 --> 00:20:08.880
<v Speaker 1>in Texas and didn't feel right right me of all people,

366
00:20:09.039 --> 00:20:12.279
<v Speaker 1>but you know, John convinced me that this is what

367
00:20:12.319 --> 00:20:14.400
<v Speaker 1>we have to do. We don't have a choice.

368
00:20:15.000 --> 00:20:17.279
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, it's it's a rare day when Sean is more

369
00:20:17.279 --> 00:20:20.480
<v Speaker 5>ferocious than you and I are. But all right, I'll

370
00:20:20.519 --> 00:20:23.000
<v Speaker 5>just add this. You know, I think it's our friend

371
00:20:23.000 --> 00:20:25.960
<v Speaker 5>Tom Klingenstein, who's been writing for several years now, the

372
00:20:26.000 --> 00:20:28.680
<v Speaker 5>phrase that we're in a cold civil war, like the

373
00:20:28.720 --> 00:20:31.079
<v Speaker 5>Cold War is so cold and so that the question

374
00:20:31.240 --> 00:20:34.079
<v Speaker 5>is when does it become a hot civil war for real?

375
00:20:35.319 --> 00:20:37.519
<v Speaker 3>And I also I just add a plug Haret, And

376
00:20:37.640 --> 00:20:39.200
<v Speaker 3>you know I interviewed.

377
00:20:38.759 --> 00:20:41.519
<v Speaker 5>Noel Rothman on the Ricochet podcast, who's got just got

378
00:20:41.519 --> 00:20:43.839
<v Speaker 5>a brand new book out this week on violence of

379
00:20:43.880 --> 00:20:48.000
<v Speaker 5>the left right. And so there's that. But we're going

380
00:20:48.039 --> 00:20:51.240
<v Speaker 5>to go to a quick ad break with some bumper music.

381
00:20:51.400 --> 00:20:54.359
<v Speaker 5>That is the baseline that is blowing up the internet.

382
00:20:54.599 --> 00:20:56.440
<v Speaker 3>So the Internet says, we'll be right back.

383
00:21:05.480 --> 00:21:08.759
<v Speaker 2>Hi, everybody, it's Steve. I know you were expecting one

384
00:21:08.799 --> 00:21:11.400
<v Speaker 2>of those automated drop in ads, but instead today what

385
00:21:11.480 --> 00:21:13.720
<v Speaker 2>I want to do is encourage all of you who

386
00:21:13.720 --> 00:21:16.599
<v Speaker 2>are regular listeners to the Three Whiskey Happy Hour. To

387
00:21:16.759 --> 00:21:21.400
<v Speaker 2>consider subscribing to our group, Substack Political Questions. You can

388
00:21:21.440 --> 00:21:24.920
<v Speaker 2>find it at Steve Hayward dot substack dot com. It's

389
00:21:25.000 --> 00:21:28.119
<v Speaker 2>completely free to subscribe, though, if you'd like to become

390
00:21:28.200 --> 00:21:32.519
<v Speaker 2>a paying supporting subscriber, our rates are much much lower

391
00:21:32.519 --> 00:21:35.160
<v Speaker 2>than your average substack and it would be a nice

392
00:21:35.200 --> 00:21:39.119
<v Speaker 2>token of support if you're so inclined. It's not just me,

393
00:21:39.279 --> 00:21:41.640
<v Speaker 2>but you will find John Yu from time to time,

394
00:21:42.279 --> 00:21:46.079
<v Speaker 2>Lucretia from time to time, but in particular every Thursday

395
00:21:46.119 --> 00:21:48.960
<v Speaker 2>and Friday, we have the very popular novelist Max Cossack,

396
00:21:49.039 --> 00:21:52.640
<v Speaker 2>and on Friday, Ammogirl shows up every week with her

397
00:21:52.720 --> 00:21:56.680
<v Speaker 2>humorous stylings and sometimes snarky observations.

398
00:21:56.000 --> 00:21:56.559
<v Speaker 5>On the world.

399
00:21:56.759 --> 00:21:59.559
<v Speaker 2>So please join up with Political Questions. You'll have a

400
00:21:59.559 --> 00:22:02.240
<v Speaker 2>lot of fun and we'll enjoy having you there. And

401
00:22:02.319 --> 00:22:06.160
<v Speaker 2>now back to our regular programming, beginning with some snark

402
00:22:06.200 --> 00:22:10.559
<v Speaker 2>from John from our original taping session that went so sideways.

403
00:22:12.799 --> 00:22:14.920
<v Speaker 7>You know, guys, if you let Steve have his own

404
00:22:14.920 --> 00:22:18.480
<v Speaker 7>addendum and appendix to our podcast, it's just going to

405
00:22:18.559 --> 00:22:20.960
<v Speaker 7>be about air quality. I mean, does everybody want to

406
00:22:21.000 --> 00:22:24.240
<v Speaker 7>listen to Steve talk fifty I and class have lifted

407
00:22:24.240 --> 00:22:27.839
<v Speaker 7>to Steve talks for fifteenth straight minutes about clean air,

408
00:22:28.359 --> 00:22:30.680
<v Speaker 7>during which time he used up all the oxygen in

409
00:22:30.720 --> 00:22:31.680
<v Speaker 7>the room.

410
00:22:32.160 --> 00:22:36.359
<v Speaker 5>All right, let's resumed with lucretia and John unplugged, this

411
00:22:36.559 --> 00:22:39.880
<v Speaker 5>time about a recent important case from the Ninth Circuit

412
00:22:39.920 --> 00:22:41.680
<v Speaker 5>Court of Appeals that I completely missed.

413
00:22:41.720 --> 00:22:43.079
<v Speaker 3>So take it away, guys.

414
00:22:44.039 --> 00:22:46.039
<v Speaker 1>Well this gives me an opportunity. John, I'm going to

415
00:22:46.119 --> 00:22:49.279
<v Speaker 1>jump right in. There was a Ninth Circuit Court decision

416
00:22:50.119 --> 00:22:52.839
<v Speaker 1>a couple of weeks ago now, and I of course

417
00:22:52.880 --> 00:22:54.720
<v Speaker 1>don't remember the name of it, but it was actually

418
00:22:54.720 --> 00:22:59.400
<v Speaker 1>one of those COVID area era decisions where an employer

419
00:22:59.759 --> 00:23:06.559
<v Speaker 1>held health employer, medical employer some kind would not grant

420
00:23:06.720 --> 00:23:13.599
<v Speaker 1>religious exemptions for the vaccine, and that people were placed

421
00:23:13.599 --> 00:23:18.000
<v Speaker 1>on leave and ultimately fired because they wouldn't they couldn't

422
00:23:18.000 --> 00:23:22.680
<v Speaker 1>get the exception, and the place wouldn't allow them to

423
00:23:22.680 --> 00:23:25.400
<v Speaker 1>come back. I should have sent you the case. But

424
00:23:25.799 --> 00:23:27.599
<v Speaker 1>the reason I want to mention is we have brought

425
00:23:27.680 --> 00:23:29.880
<v Speaker 1>up a couple of times this whole question of the

426
00:23:29.920 --> 00:23:34.160
<v Speaker 1>free exercise clause versus say, you know, we talked about

427
00:23:34.359 --> 00:23:40.359
<v Speaker 1>transgender protections for transgender people and things like that, and

428
00:23:40.400 --> 00:23:42.559
<v Speaker 1>how the courts have not been really good about it.

429
00:23:42.559 --> 00:23:45.640
<v Speaker 1>But this Ninth Circuit decision actually really got me because

430
00:23:45.640 --> 00:23:48.079
<v Speaker 1>here was the argument, and it's unfair to do this

431
00:23:48.119 --> 00:23:50.559
<v Speaker 1>to you because you haven't read it, but it was

432
00:23:51.359 --> 00:23:57.319
<v Speaker 1>that an employer, a health employer needs, you know, medical employer,

433
00:23:57.440 --> 00:24:00.759
<v Speaker 1>needs the people to be healthy. They need them to

434
00:24:00.799 --> 00:24:03.400
<v Speaker 1>be healthy. They don't want them to pass any diseases

435
00:24:03.440 --> 00:24:06.799
<v Speaker 1>on to other people, and that therefore the requirement that

436
00:24:08.079 --> 00:24:11.559
<v Speaker 1>you get the vaccine or get fired made sense. It

437
00:24:11.680 --> 00:24:16.599
<v Speaker 1>was one of those reasonable accommodations, a reasonable compelling interests

438
00:24:16.599 --> 00:24:19.200
<v Speaker 1>that the employer could do, and it was something about

439
00:24:19.240 --> 00:24:23.599
<v Speaker 1>what was reasonable. Well, here's my point. If you fire people,

440
00:24:24.640 --> 00:24:28.000
<v Speaker 1>if your reason for demanding that they get a vaccine

441
00:24:28.480 --> 00:24:31.000
<v Speaker 1>is so that you don't lose your workforce, and then

442
00:24:31.039 --> 00:24:34.680
<v Speaker 1>they fire people who don't get the vaccine, didn't anybody

443
00:24:34.720 --> 00:24:37.960
<v Speaker 1>on the court think that that was problematic? I know,

444
00:24:38.079 --> 00:24:42.079
<v Speaker 1>again unfair, but there is a bigger issue. When are

445
00:24:42.079 --> 00:24:44.960
<v Speaker 1>we going to have courts that actually take the First

446
00:24:44.960 --> 00:24:46.000
<v Speaker 1>Amendment seriously?

447
00:24:46.079 --> 00:24:51.039
<v Speaker 7>Again, Well, this is interesting because it depends who the

448
00:24:51.079 --> 00:24:56.160
<v Speaker 7>employer is. If the employer is a private company, then

449
00:24:56.279 --> 00:24:58.440
<v Speaker 7>the First Amendment doesn't apply to them at all.

450
00:25:00.440 --> 00:25:02.079
<v Speaker 3>If it's a state.

451
00:25:02.160 --> 00:25:04.160
<v Speaker 7>So if it was a state or local government, doesn't

452
00:25:04.200 --> 00:25:06.160
<v Speaker 7>sound like it was. But if it was a state

453
00:25:06.240 --> 00:25:08.640
<v Speaker 7>in local government, then you would have to go back

454
00:25:08.720 --> 00:25:11.839
<v Speaker 7>to the arguments that we were having with Phil Munnos.

455
00:25:11.880 --> 00:25:15.160
<v Speaker 7>If you remember, is the government allowed to pass a

456
00:25:15.279 --> 00:25:19.720
<v Speaker 7>generally applicable law and if it just happens to affect

457
00:25:19.759 --> 00:25:24.839
<v Speaker 7>religious groups more under this case called employment division versus Smith,

458
00:25:26.720 --> 00:25:30.039
<v Speaker 7>unless there's a compelling I mean, unless there's actually it

459
00:25:30.119 --> 00:25:33.559
<v Speaker 7>sounds like there's almost no cases where the religious minority

460
00:25:33.680 --> 00:25:37.359
<v Speaker 7>could prevail unless you could prove that the law was

461
00:25:37.440 --> 00:25:41.079
<v Speaker 7>really a pretext and was really drawn to discriminate on

462
00:25:41.119 --> 00:25:44.519
<v Speaker 7>the basis of religion. Here's the interesting thing, Lucretia, is

463
00:25:44.559 --> 00:25:49.839
<v Speaker 7>that prohibition on hiring and firing by private employers is

464
00:25:49.880 --> 00:25:52.640
<v Speaker 7>not from the First Amendments from Title seven of the

465
00:25:52.640 --> 00:25:56.119
<v Speaker 7>Civil Rights Act of nineteen sixty four. And you could

466
00:25:56.160 --> 00:26:00.960
<v Speaker 7>make the argument that the Title seven does not create

467
00:26:01.000 --> 00:26:04.480
<v Speaker 7>the use the same standard that the First Amendment does,

468
00:26:04.519 --> 00:26:08.640
<v Speaker 7>that it actually could be tougher on employers, that it

469
00:26:08.720 --> 00:26:13.720
<v Speaker 7>could require them to accommodate religious minorities. So, to take

470
00:26:13.759 --> 00:26:16.759
<v Speaker 7>an example, I think that and am player could not

471
00:26:16.880 --> 00:26:20.720
<v Speaker 7>get away with something that said, we're just firing everyone

472
00:26:20.759 --> 00:26:24.680
<v Speaker 7>who gets who won't take a vaccine on religious grounds

473
00:26:24.759 --> 00:26:30.119
<v Speaker 7>because we don't think religious grounds are right, genuine and honest, right.

474
00:26:30.160 --> 00:26:32.559
<v Speaker 7>I think that would the employer would clearly lose.

475
00:26:32.799 --> 00:26:37.599
<v Speaker 1>I think that that issue was addressed and dismissed that

476
00:26:37.640 --> 00:26:41.839
<v Speaker 1>they had, you know, done whatever due diligence to determine

477
00:26:41.839 --> 00:26:44.519
<v Speaker 1>that it was in fact religious exemptions. I don't know

478
00:26:44.559 --> 00:26:46.400
<v Speaker 1>how you actually prove something like that.

479
00:26:47.759 --> 00:26:49.559
<v Speaker 7>So then the real question is, you know, so you

480
00:26:49.559 --> 00:26:52.359
<v Speaker 7>have a you know, like IBM or Microsoft, they fire

481
00:26:52.519 --> 00:26:56.119
<v Speaker 7>someone because they won't take the vaccine, and then the

482
00:26:56.160 --> 00:26:59.359
<v Speaker 7>employee says, I have a religious reason for not taking

483
00:26:59.440 --> 00:27:03.920
<v Speaker 7>the vaccine. Usually the government employed, I'm sorry, the employer

484
00:27:03.960 --> 00:27:06.599
<v Speaker 7>would have to show some kind of what they call

485
00:27:06.720 --> 00:27:10.319
<v Speaker 7>something like a reasonable business justification for why they have

486
00:27:10.480 --> 00:27:16.200
<v Speaker 7>that rule. And I don't know. I mean, I think

487
00:27:16.240 --> 00:27:19.039
<v Speaker 7>some of this is then going to depend on the

488
00:27:19.079 --> 00:27:22.000
<v Speaker 7>science of whether you can read, you know, whether you

489
00:27:22.079 --> 00:27:25.359
<v Speaker 7>really need to demand everybody have a vaccine to have

490
00:27:25.400 --> 00:27:28.319
<v Speaker 7>a functioning workforce. It's really interesting, though, I just don't

491
00:27:28.400 --> 00:27:31.279
<v Speaker 7>I don't know how court resolved because I think this

492
00:27:31.359 --> 00:27:33.319
<v Speaker 7>is really I don't think this has reached the US

493
00:27:33.400 --> 00:27:34.519
<v Speaker 7>Supreme Court.

494
00:27:35.039 --> 00:27:37.359
<v Speaker 1>This is the Ninth Circuit case two weeks ago. But

495
00:27:39.200 --> 00:27:43.359
<v Speaker 1>that was the other thing. If at some point the

496
00:27:44.400 --> 00:27:47.920
<v Speaker 1>the it was absolutely determined, which of course I think

497
00:27:47.960 --> 00:27:51.039
<v Speaker 1>it already has been, but absolutely determined from a scientific

498
00:27:51.079 --> 00:27:54.920
<v Speaker 1>point of view that the vaccine was not only not

499
00:27:55.079 --> 00:27:58.480
<v Speaker 1>effective in the ways that they claimed, but harmful to

500
00:27:58.599 --> 00:28:03.359
<v Speaker 1>many people. That was not addressed at all in the opinion.

501
00:28:04.160 --> 00:28:06.799
<v Speaker 1>Would that make a difference, because wouldn't you be looking

502
00:28:06.799 --> 00:28:09.440
<v Speaker 1>at the employer's state of mind at the time. That's

503
00:28:09.200 --> 00:28:11.880
<v Speaker 1>my first question I had to follow on. No.

504
00:28:11.920 --> 00:28:14.319
<v Speaker 7>I mean, that's a really great question. So I think

505
00:28:14.400 --> 00:28:16.960
<v Speaker 7>one of the things that would have to get to

506
00:28:17.000 --> 00:28:21.000
<v Speaker 7>the Supreme Court is if the employer made the decision,

507
00:28:21.119 --> 00:28:25.720
<v Speaker 7>say in twenty twenty, right at the beginning of the pandemic,

508
00:28:25.759 --> 00:28:29.680
<v Speaker 7>before anybody really knew very much, maybe they could say

509
00:28:29.759 --> 00:28:32.119
<v Speaker 7>we're going to require everyone to get the vaccine. But

510
00:28:32.160 --> 00:28:36.079
<v Speaker 7>then suppose over time you learn more information, For example,

511
00:28:36.119 --> 00:28:38.839
<v Speaker 7>as you say the Cristia that the vaccines not really

512
00:28:38.880 --> 00:28:42.799
<v Speaker 7>necessary if you're under forty, or the vaccine isn't necessary

513
00:28:42.799 --> 00:28:45.640
<v Speaker 7>if you're healthy, you could go on and say or

514
00:28:46.160 --> 00:28:48.119
<v Speaker 7>you're in the age group where the vaccine might actually

515
00:28:48.119 --> 00:28:51.519
<v Speaker 7>be harmful. Then you know, this is interesting. Does the

516
00:28:51.519 --> 00:28:56.160
<v Speaker 7>employer have an obligation to update the policy in line

517
00:28:56.240 --> 00:28:59.359
<v Speaker 7>with new information? I would think you would have to.

518
00:28:59.759 --> 00:29:00.559
<v Speaker 3>Don't think you could.

519
00:29:00.559 --> 00:29:02.680
<v Speaker 7>I don't think an employer could say I'm meeting Title

520
00:29:02.720 --> 00:29:07.519
<v Speaker 7>seven because i have some anti antidiluvian policy that was

521
00:29:07.599 --> 00:29:10.640
<v Speaker 7>made before scientification, and I'm allowed to just stick through

522
00:29:10.640 --> 00:29:12.720
<v Speaker 7>it no matter how much new information comes up.

523
00:29:13.440 --> 00:29:19.599
<v Speaker 1>So there's some back and forth about this in the chat.

524
00:29:19.799 --> 00:29:22.599
<v Speaker 1>And that's the question back to the question of whether

525
00:29:22.680 --> 00:29:25.400
<v Speaker 1>or not it's a public it's an agent of the

526
00:29:25.480 --> 00:29:29.880
<v Speaker 1>state involved. The employer is actually a public employer, not

527
00:29:29.960 --> 00:29:33.200
<v Speaker 1>a private one. But there are cases that deal with

528
00:29:34.279 --> 00:29:41.559
<v Speaker 1>religious persecution of religious minorities or single persons who are

529
00:29:41.640 --> 00:29:45.279
<v Speaker 1>claiming a religious exemption or the right to practice a

530
00:29:45.319 --> 00:29:51.319
<v Speaker 1>religious belief. And is there no First Amendment protection for

531
00:29:51.359 --> 00:29:52.480
<v Speaker 1>that at all.

532
00:29:52.960 --> 00:29:56.160
<v Speaker 7>For non people not connected to the state. Yeah, I

533
00:29:56.200 --> 00:29:58.680
<v Speaker 7>don't not under the Constitution. Again, it has to come

534
00:29:58.720 --> 00:30:02.680
<v Speaker 7>from Title seven. And look, maybe it's an interesting, I

535
00:30:02.759 --> 00:30:06.839
<v Speaker 7>think fundamental question. I ask you, Lucretia, does political theory

536
00:30:06.960 --> 00:30:11.240
<v Speaker 7>require that we have that we make private firms and

537
00:30:11.319 --> 00:30:14.920
<v Speaker 7>individuals not discriminate on the basis of religion when they act.

538
00:30:15.200 --> 00:30:17.359
<v Speaker 7>I think we could make a strong, a very strong

539
00:30:17.359 --> 00:30:21.599
<v Speaker 7>claim that the government shouldn't pick amongst religions when it's acting.

540
00:30:22.400 --> 00:30:25.039
<v Speaker 7>But why do you and I care whether you know,

541
00:30:25.400 --> 00:30:28.680
<v Speaker 7>if Lucretia only wants to drink I don't know Mormon

542
00:30:28.759 --> 00:30:31.640
<v Speaker 7>made whiskey. Why can't you just buy Mormon made whiskey,

543
00:30:31.720 --> 00:30:33.759
<v Speaker 7>like there would be such a thing, Or you know,

544
00:30:33.799 --> 00:30:38.119
<v Speaker 7>why can't Chick fil A, for example, say we don't

545
00:30:38.160 --> 00:30:41.480
<v Speaker 7>want to hire people who want to work on Sundays,

546
00:30:41.720 --> 00:30:44.799
<v Speaker 7>or we're like, why can't Why can't a private company

547
00:30:45.319 --> 00:30:47.920
<v Speaker 7>decide to discriminate on the basis of religion in its

548
00:30:48.000 --> 00:30:53.000
<v Speaker 7>operations and right if that's offensive, then people don't have

549
00:30:53.079 --> 00:30:55.119
<v Speaker 7>to work there, they don't have to buy the products.

550
00:30:55.160 --> 00:30:58.519
<v Speaker 7>And theoretically other competitors will come in and say we

551
00:30:58.640 --> 00:31:01.279
<v Speaker 7>are more religious or we're less religious, buy from us,

552
00:31:01.400 --> 00:31:04.279
<v Speaker 7>work for us. I don't so explain to you, why

553
00:31:04.279 --> 00:31:06.200
<v Speaker 7>do you want Why do you think private firms or

554
00:31:06.240 --> 00:31:11.119
<v Speaker 7>companies or individuals should be under some non discrimination standard

555
00:31:11.279 --> 00:31:11.920
<v Speaker 7>for religion?

556
00:31:12.680 --> 00:31:17.599
<v Speaker 1>What about hobby lobby not wanting to purchase insurance under

557
00:31:17.920 --> 00:31:19.440
<v Speaker 1>the Affordable Care Act.

558
00:31:19.720 --> 00:31:23.759
<v Speaker 7>That's to me, I know, to me, hobby lobby should

559
00:31:23.759 --> 00:31:27.960
<v Speaker 7>be free to discriminate on right, that's because the state

560
00:31:28.079 --> 00:31:30.920
<v Speaker 7>made them. That's my point is the state was trying

561
00:31:30.960 --> 00:31:33.519
<v Speaker 7>to force them not to not to and it's thought

562
00:31:33.599 --> 00:31:37.839
<v Speaker 7>discriminate against we're you know, groups. I think this hobby

563
00:31:37.839 --> 00:31:38.880
<v Speaker 7>lobby should be allowed to.

564
00:31:39.599 --> 00:31:41.799
<v Speaker 1>Okay, So this is a little bit of a changing

565
00:31:41.799 --> 00:31:44.839
<v Speaker 1>of the subject, but it follows on what we're seeing,

566
00:31:45.000 --> 00:31:50.039
<v Speaker 1>the rise of anti Semitism that's tied so clearly to

567
00:31:50.319 --> 00:31:55.200
<v Speaker 1>supposedly to anti Zionism. Right, you can hate Israel, and

568
00:31:55.720 --> 00:31:57.839
<v Speaker 1>I hate Israel, but I don't hate Jews. Now we

569
00:31:57.920 --> 00:32:02.680
<v Speaker 1>know that that that's just simply not the case. Israel

570
00:32:02.759 --> 00:32:10.559
<v Speaker 1>is going to sue the New York Times for that ridiculous, ludicrous, obnoxious.

571
00:32:10.599 --> 00:32:15.119
<v Speaker 1>I don't have enough negative adjectives to describe the Nicholas

572
00:32:16.079 --> 00:32:23.079
<v Speaker 1>whatever his name is, christof piece that. You know, anybody

573
00:32:23.119 --> 00:32:25.680
<v Speaker 1>with two brains in their head realizes that not only

574
00:32:25.799 --> 00:32:29.400
<v Speaker 1>was it just an absolute lie and made up a

575
00:32:29.400 --> 00:32:32.759
<v Speaker 1>bunch of stuff, but it was also done to try

576
00:32:32.799 --> 00:32:38.279
<v Speaker 1>to mute the mute the impact of the testimony and

577
00:32:38.319 --> 00:32:41.359
<v Speaker 1>the vision, the images and so forth coming out from

578
00:32:41.400 --> 00:32:44.559
<v Speaker 1>what Hamas did on October seventh, which you know, was

579
00:32:44.680 --> 00:32:48.680
<v Speaker 1>barely recognizable as human as human, and so they had

580
00:32:48.680 --> 00:32:52.200
<v Speaker 1>to come up with something even more inhuman to try

581
00:32:52.200 --> 00:32:57.119
<v Speaker 1>to get people's attention away. But can the State of

582
00:32:57.319 --> 00:33:00.640
<v Speaker 1>Israel sue the New York Times for for libel?

583
00:33:02.680 --> 00:33:04.079
<v Speaker 3>No, I don't think so.

584
00:33:05.400 --> 00:33:09.119
<v Speaker 7>I mean, I read a book, I read a note

585
00:33:09.160 --> 00:33:12.920
<v Speaker 7>about that, and uh, you know, so you know Ash,

586
00:33:13.680 --> 00:33:16.319
<v Speaker 7>so you know the New York Times versus Sullivan's standard,

587
00:33:16.519 --> 00:33:19.400
<v Speaker 7>And I think we I think we discussed this many

588
00:33:19.480 --> 00:33:21.119
<v Speaker 7>years ago. I think we both agree that is not

589
00:33:21.279 --> 00:33:24.440
<v Speaker 7>part of the original understanding of the First Amendment free

590
00:33:24.440 --> 00:33:27.880
<v Speaker 7>speech clause that you used to have more robust libel

591
00:33:27.880 --> 00:33:30.279
<v Speaker 7>and defamation laws at the time of the founding. There

592
00:33:30.319 --> 00:33:32.599
<v Speaker 7>was no idea at the time of the founding that

593
00:33:32.759 --> 00:33:35.279
<v Speaker 7>since she simply because you were a public figure or

594
00:33:35.400 --> 00:33:40.480
<v Speaker 7>government official, you were somehow not allowed to sue people

595
00:33:40.559 --> 00:33:44.200
<v Speaker 7>for a libel and defamation unless they had committed actual malice. Right,

596
00:33:44.240 --> 00:33:46.680
<v Speaker 7>That was the standard the Supreme Court has come up

597
00:33:46.720 --> 00:33:49.599
<v Speaker 7>with in the New York Times case. But if that

598
00:33:49.759 --> 00:33:55.559
<v Speaker 7>is the standard, right, then then Israel and Israel would

599
00:33:55.599 --> 00:33:57.559
<v Speaker 7>have to And it's interesting. I also don't know here's

600
00:33:57.599 --> 00:33:58.559
<v Speaker 7>a I share.

601
00:33:58.559 --> 00:33:59.559
<v Speaker 3>The thought, is.

602
00:33:59.519 --> 00:34:03.960
<v Speaker 7>Ken a country claim that it's been defamed. Usually it's

603
00:34:04.000 --> 00:34:08.159
<v Speaker 7>the idea is it's an individual's reputation, and you know,

604
00:34:08.199 --> 00:34:10.519
<v Speaker 7>you look at the founding. They almost talk about reputation

605
00:34:10.559 --> 00:34:13.599
<v Speaker 7>as if it's a property right. It's like an property interest.

606
00:34:13.639 --> 00:34:15.880
<v Speaker 7>It's something that you own that can be harmed.

607
00:34:16.360 --> 00:34:18.960
<v Speaker 1>If they do understand that in the context of what

608
00:34:19.079 --> 00:34:20.599
<v Speaker 1>Israel's going through right now.

609
00:34:21.239 --> 00:34:24.239
<v Speaker 7>Oh yeah, But I just wonder whether it's a legal concept.

610
00:34:24.320 --> 00:34:27.519
<v Speaker 7>Can a country have a reputation like you and I

611
00:34:27.559 --> 00:34:30.599
<v Speaker 7>can have a reputation and then sue to say you've

612
00:34:31.000 --> 00:34:33.800
<v Speaker 7>harmed our reputation or could it be the case that

613
00:34:33.840 --> 00:34:35.199
<v Speaker 7>you and I allowed to say whatever the hell we

614
00:34:35.239 --> 00:34:36.280
<v Speaker 7>want about other countries?

615
00:34:36.800 --> 00:34:36.960
<v Speaker 3>Right?

616
00:34:37.480 --> 00:34:41.239
<v Speaker 7>There's just is there any this is That's an interesting thing.

617
00:34:41.280 --> 00:34:45.159
<v Speaker 7>I've never seen anyone try to excavate what the First

618
00:34:45.199 --> 00:34:48.519
<v Speaker 7>Amendment free speech, free press clause meant in terms of

619
00:34:48.559 --> 00:34:53.519
<v Speaker 7>protecting the reputation of a state, a country, or even

620
00:34:54.360 --> 00:34:57.039
<v Speaker 7>maybe this came up in an American state. For maybe

621
00:34:57.079 --> 00:34:58.760
<v Speaker 7>an American state might have done this, but it'll be

622
00:34:58.800 --> 00:35:02.119
<v Speaker 7>the same question. But putting that aside, then you'd have

623
00:35:02.199 --> 00:35:06.960
<v Speaker 7>to prove that Nick Christoff had violated the actual malice

624
00:35:06.960 --> 00:35:10.079
<v Speaker 7>standard when he wrote, and that would mean what did

625
00:35:10.119 --> 00:35:15.119
<v Speaker 7>he actually do to try to verify that this outrageous

626
00:35:15.119 --> 00:35:19.000
<v Speaker 7>accusation had any basis in fact, did he call anybody?

627
00:35:19.400 --> 00:35:23.559
<v Speaker 7>Did he talk to anyone? Or was he just repeating

628
00:35:23.599 --> 00:35:26.519
<v Speaker 7>something that was in the most fevered swamps of the internet.

629
00:35:27.280 --> 00:35:32.400
<v Speaker 1>Now he actually his source was a pro Haamas journalist.

630
00:35:32.559 --> 00:35:35.800
<v Speaker 1>I guess that was his source. I'm to understand. Let

631
00:35:35.800 --> 00:35:38.119
<v Speaker 1>me go back to the Sullivan case New Times, the

632
00:35:38.159 --> 00:35:40.599
<v Speaker 1>Sullivant case for a moment, and carry on with what

633
00:35:40.599 --> 00:35:43.639
<v Speaker 1>you said about you know what Israel's reputation so on.

634
00:35:43.920 --> 00:35:50.440
<v Speaker 1>Remember that the justification for adding the extra requirement of

635
00:35:50.559 --> 00:35:54.880
<v Speaker 1>actual malice. So the defense against libel is the truth.

636
00:35:55.280 --> 00:35:58.000
<v Speaker 1>You cannot see someone for libel if they have printed

637
00:35:58.039 --> 00:36:02.559
<v Speaker 1>something that was true. If an unknown person like me

638
00:36:03.000 --> 00:36:08.800
<v Speaker 1>is the victim of some outrageous slander libel in a publication,

639
00:36:09.280 --> 00:36:11.559
<v Speaker 1>I can sue because nobody knows who I am, and

640
00:36:11.639 --> 00:36:13.840
<v Speaker 1>therefore all I have to prove is that they lied

641
00:36:15.960 --> 00:36:21.920
<v Speaker 1>behind you hide behind what if they defamed the great

642
00:36:22.039 --> 00:36:25.440
<v Speaker 1>Lucretian name, that would be awful. But anyway, but if

643
00:36:25.440 --> 00:36:30.039
<v Speaker 1>somebody writes some scandalous things about you. You have to

644
00:36:30.360 --> 00:36:36.159
<v Speaker 1>prove the intent behind the falsity, not just the falsity.

645
00:36:36.559 --> 00:36:42.400
<v Speaker 1>But the court's rationale is that not requiring that would

646
00:36:42.519 --> 00:36:47.159
<v Speaker 1>have a chilling effect on free speech, which is again

647
00:36:47.280 --> 00:36:50.320
<v Speaker 1>a made up rationale. Why that would have a chilling

648
00:36:50.320 --> 00:36:53.320
<v Speaker 1>effect on free speech? I think it would have a

649
00:36:53.400 --> 00:36:56.800
<v Speaker 1>chilling effect on lies. I don't think it would have

650
00:36:56.840 --> 00:36:59.440
<v Speaker 1>a chilling effect on free speech. But that's what the

651
00:36:59.480 --> 00:37:01.880
<v Speaker 1>Court is said. Do you think there's any chance that

652
00:37:02.400 --> 00:37:04.320
<v Speaker 1>they will abandon it?

653
00:37:04.840 --> 00:37:09.519
<v Speaker 7>So there are I think Justice Thomas and maybe gor

654
00:37:09.559 --> 00:37:11.719
<v Speaker 7>Sich might have joined him, but Justice Thomas has written

655
00:37:12.360 --> 00:37:14.960
<v Speaker 7>an opinion calling for the Court to re examine New

656
00:37:15.039 --> 00:37:18.880
<v Speaker 7>York Times versus Sullivan. It's obviously not an opinion that's

657
00:37:18.960 --> 00:37:22.559
<v Speaker 7>rooted in the original understanding of the free speech and

658
00:37:22.639 --> 00:37:27.320
<v Speaker 7>free press clauses. And this Court is trying to guide

659
00:37:27.320 --> 00:37:29.719
<v Speaker 7>its decisions by originalism.

660
00:37:29.880 --> 00:37:30.800
<v Speaker 3>And if you do, then you.

661
00:37:30.800 --> 00:37:32.760
<v Speaker 7>Would want to look back at it.

662
00:37:33.039 --> 00:37:33.239
<v Speaker 1>You know.

663
00:37:33.280 --> 00:37:37.239
<v Speaker 7>The other thing I think to follow on your point

664
00:37:37.440 --> 00:37:42.119
<v Speaker 7>about why the Court thought this was necessary was, or

665
00:37:42.119 --> 00:37:44.239
<v Speaker 7>at least some scholars have said the real point of

666
00:37:44.280 --> 00:37:48.400
<v Speaker 7>the free speech clause is to create a robust space

667
00:37:48.440 --> 00:37:50.960
<v Speaker 7>to criticize the government, that that's really what the free

668
00:37:50.960 --> 00:37:55.320
<v Speaker 7>speech laws allow us to engage in self government, and

669
00:37:55.360 --> 00:37:58.760
<v Speaker 7>we need to therefore be able to have even stronger

670
00:37:58.800 --> 00:38:02.360
<v Speaker 7>protections for speech that hacks the government. But you know what,

671
00:38:02.440 --> 00:38:04.599
<v Speaker 7>we could actually figure this out because there are lots

672
00:38:04.599 --> 00:38:07.320
<v Speaker 7>of other countries in the world that are Western democracies

673
00:38:07.679 --> 00:38:10.239
<v Speaker 7>that don't have the New York Times versus Sullivan, and

674
00:38:10.320 --> 00:38:12.920
<v Speaker 7>we could say, you, has free speech really been curtailed?

675
00:38:13.119 --> 00:38:16.880
<v Speaker 7>Right England? Famously, you can go to England and sue

676
00:38:16.920 --> 00:38:19.400
<v Speaker 7>people for libel for the very same things you can't

677
00:38:19.440 --> 00:38:22.440
<v Speaker 7>sue here, and that's not uncommon that you see those

678
00:38:22.559 --> 00:38:26.280
<v Speaker 7>kinds of cases. Is free speech in England?

679
00:38:26.280 --> 00:38:26.440
<v Speaker 3>Now?

680
00:38:26.480 --> 00:38:28.880
<v Speaker 7>Free speech in England's under attack for by other reasons,

681
00:38:28.920 --> 00:38:31.639
<v Speaker 7>for different reasons, not because of the libel law. It's

682
00:38:31.719 --> 00:38:32.840
<v Speaker 7>being too strong there.

683
00:38:36.800 --> 00:38:39.519
<v Speaker 5>All right, that was actually a great discussion and I

684
00:38:39.559 --> 00:38:42.159
<v Speaker 5>do want to add this and you can respond as

685
00:38:42.199 --> 00:38:44.920
<v Speaker 5>you like. I think one thing, by the way, that

686
00:38:44.960 --> 00:38:47.840
<v Speaker 5>should be said about the Nick Christoph piece is that

687
00:38:48.079 --> 00:38:51.280
<v Speaker 5>remember he's an opinion journalist and not a news journalist.

688
00:38:51.719 --> 00:38:54.079
<v Speaker 5>That are trying to skirt the line there because they

689
00:38:54.079 --> 00:38:56.639
<v Speaker 5>did give him three thousand words. I think for that piece.

690
00:38:56.920 --> 00:39:01.039
<v Speaker 5>Is that right anyway? And he he likes to represent

691
00:39:01.159 --> 00:39:03.320
<v Speaker 5>himself as a reporter, but you know, they don't really

692
00:39:04.159 --> 00:39:07.159
<v Speaker 5>edit opinion pieces. And I think it's significant that the

693
00:39:07.199 --> 00:39:09.760
<v Speaker 5>news pages there have not picked up on the story.

694
00:39:10.159 --> 00:39:13.159
<v Speaker 5>They're not trying to deepen his reporting so called reporting.

695
00:39:16.320 --> 00:39:19.519
<v Speaker 1>Are you making apologies for The New York Times here, Steve.

696
00:39:19.639 --> 00:39:21.440
<v Speaker 5>No I just I want to make this point that

697
00:39:21.679 --> 00:39:24.480
<v Speaker 5>opinion journalists often get away with something that news reporters

698
00:39:24.519 --> 00:39:26.599
<v Speaker 5>would not get away with. I think it's a bad practice.

699
00:39:26.679 --> 00:39:28.039
<v Speaker 5>I think it should not be done.

700
00:39:29.079 --> 00:39:33.840
<v Speaker 1>Especially when it's factual reporting supposedly as opposed to it's

701
00:39:33.920 --> 00:39:37.199
<v Speaker 1>my opinion that the Israelis are just as bad and

702
00:39:37.440 --> 00:39:41.159
<v Speaker 1>less human than even Hamas's. That's something entirely different than

703
00:39:41.199 --> 00:39:42.440
<v Speaker 1>making up facts.

704
00:39:42.840 --> 00:39:45.280
<v Speaker 5>Well, now here's actually I wanted to bring back something

705
00:39:45.320 --> 00:39:48.440
<v Speaker 5>you and I have called a few times in the

706
00:39:48.519 --> 00:39:51.599
<v Speaker 5>last few years. When I heard that crazy story about

707
00:39:51.679 --> 00:39:57.559
<v Speaker 5>dogs being trained to rape Palestinians, my mind ran back

708
00:39:57.599 --> 00:40:01.360
<v Speaker 5>to the McMartin preschool case and all those related cases

709
00:40:01.360 --> 00:40:05.599
<v Speaker 5>at the times when the media and law enforcement bought it,

710
00:40:05.719 --> 00:40:08.280
<v Speaker 5>hook line and sinker. And you know, there was a

711
00:40:08.320 --> 00:40:10.360
<v Speaker 5>case a couple of years later down in San Diego,

712
00:40:11.079 --> 00:40:13.679
<v Speaker 5>our friend and contributor Lloyd Billingsley reported on it at

713
00:40:13.679 --> 00:40:14.000
<v Speaker 5>the time.

714
00:40:14.280 --> 00:40:15.599
<v Speaker 3>This is Daniel Lachike guy.

715
00:40:16.000 --> 00:40:18.599
<v Speaker 5>So he was Asian, apparently had some I don't know

716
00:40:18.639 --> 00:40:21.280
<v Speaker 5>if he had some congenital birth defects. He looked kind

717
00:40:21.320 --> 00:40:24.119
<v Speaker 5>of creepy, you might say, in the ordinary sense. And

718
00:40:24.199 --> 00:40:26.440
<v Speaker 5>he got convicted. I think he was convicted. I got

719
00:40:26.440 --> 00:40:28.119
<v Speaker 5>to check the facts on this, but some of the

720
00:40:28.159 --> 00:40:31.840
<v Speaker 5>testimony from the kids working on recovered memories was, Oh,

721
00:40:32.320 --> 00:40:36.000
<v Speaker 5>they slaughtered horses and elephants in our classroom. They borrowed

722
00:40:36.000 --> 00:40:39.239
<v Speaker 5>from the zoo. I mean, absolutely preposterous things that then

723
00:40:39.239 --> 00:40:42.679
<v Speaker 5>the news media would report without any skepticism at all.

724
00:40:43.400 --> 00:40:45.679
<v Speaker 5>When you know, you know, you know I've mentioned this.

725
00:40:45.800 --> 00:40:45.920
<v Speaker 1>You know.

726
00:40:46.000 --> 00:40:47.639
<v Speaker 5>Jaffa walked in one day in the middle of the

727
00:40:47.719 --> 00:40:50.039
<v Speaker 5>hysteria front page of the La Times every day and said,

728
00:40:50.079 --> 00:40:52.840
<v Speaker 5>I don't believe a word of this. I thought, huh,

729
00:40:53.239 --> 00:40:55.840
<v Speaker 5>he's a pretty smart guy. Turned out to be absolutely right,

730
00:40:56.039 --> 00:41:00.280
<v Speaker 5>and we saw a bunch of this hysteria and utter

731
00:41:00.360 --> 00:41:04.159
<v Speaker 5>credulity of the media and prosecutors. Right. Janet Reno did

732
00:41:04.199 --> 00:41:07.719
<v Speaker 5>a case in Florida. There's a horrible case out of Massachusetts.

733
00:41:08.000 --> 00:41:11.079
<v Speaker 5>They all got eventually overturned, but not until many people

734
00:41:11.159 --> 00:41:14.840
<v Speaker 5>spent several years in jail. And so for the media

735
00:41:14.920 --> 00:41:17.679
<v Speaker 5>in this case to say, wait a minute, how does

736
00:41:17.679 --> 00:41:21.679
<v Speaker 5>this actually even work? Anatomically right? I mean, not to be.

737
00:41:21.719 --> 00:41:24.000
<v Speaker 1>Too deep, I guess that's what I would say. The

738
00:41:24.000 --> 00:41:27.079
<v Speaker 1>difference is a little bit, Steve that I read Douglas

739
00:41:27.199 --> 00:41:29.639
<v Speaker 1>Murray's column, I think in the New York Coast yesterday,

740
00:41:29.639 --> 00:41:32.639
<v Speaker 1>where you know, he said that there's never ever been

741
00:41:33.119 --> 00:41:38.119
<v Speaker 1>a single recorded incidence of dogs being trained to do

742
00:41:38.199 --> 00:41:42.599
<v Speaker 1>anything like that, ever it ever, you know, And so

743
00:41:43.280 --> 00:41:47.480
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I don't the hysteria that followed McMartin, et cetera,

744
00:41:48.239 --> 00:41:51.360
<v Speaker 1>that there is a little bit of a basis in

745
00:41:51.440 --> 00:41:56.599
<v Speaker 1>fact for you know, child molestation, that sort of thing.

746
00:41:57.760 --> 00:42:00.519
<v Speaker 1>So I do see them as slightly different. You would

747
00:42:00.719 --> 00:42:04.760
<v Speaker 1>you would have to be what I accuse the New

748
00:42:04.840 --> 00:42:09.000
<v Speaker 1>York Times of being to run the story so deluded

749
00:42:09.440 --> 00:42:14.480
<v Speaker 1>and committed to a horrible ideology. Even to allow that

750
00:42:14.519 --> 00:42:17.840
<v Speaker 1>story to run, I can't even imagine that there are

751
00:42:18.000 --> 00:42:21.480
<v Speaker 1>very many New York postscuse me, New York Times news

752
00:42:21.519 --> 00:42:24.480
<v Speaker 1>reporters who would be willing to put their reputation on

753
00:42:24.559 --> 00:42:28.000
<v Speaker 1>the line for something that atrocious, right, But what the

754
00:42:28.159 --> 00:42:29.199
<v Speaker 1>editorial board was.

755
00:42:29.840 --> 00:42:32.960
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, yeah, and the one of comment I'll offer on

756
00:42:33.039 --> 00:42:35.679
<v Speaker 5>it now that it's gonna want to write an article

757
00:42:35.719 --> 00:42:38.199
<v Speaker 5>for a while on this now is what John was asking.

758
00:42:38.320 --> 00:42:40.800
<v Speaker 5>And I can't, I can't. I don't remember now exactly

759
00:42:40.800 --> 00:42:43.400
<v Speaker 5>how you put it. But where is this surge of

760
00:42:43.440 --> 00:42:47.760
<v Speaker 5>anti Semitism coming from? And I want to suggest it's

761
00:42:47.800 --> 00:42:50.840
<v Speaker 5>coming from, uh, where it came from back in the

762
00:42:51.079 --> 00:42:52.920
<v Speaker 5>Really a lot of what you're hearing now is an

763
00:42:52.920 --> 00:42:56.440
<v Speaker 5>invention of the Soviet Union propaganda arms starting decades ago.

764
00:42:57.440 --> 00:42:57.559
<v Speaker 2>Uh.

765
00:42:57.880 --> 00:43:01.400
<v Speaker 5>And you know, I remember hal Roud Armont taking us

766
00:43:01.400 --> 00:43:04.599
<v Speaker 5>through tracing out where this was a different subject, but

767
00:43:04.599 --> 00:43:06.719
<v Speaker 5>it would trace out where some of those crazy stories

768
00:43:06.719 --> 00:43:09.320
<v Speaker 5>got into the media, especially like the Black press about

769
00:43:09.320 --> 00:43:13.800
<v Speaker 5>how AIDS was creation and and and crack cocaine and

770
00:43:13.840 --> 00:43:16.920
<v Speaker 5>cocaine was you know, a CIA plot undermine Inner city.

771
00:43:17.599 --> 00:43:20.960
<v Speaker 5>Those stories always showed up first in some Indian newspaper,

772
00:43:21.000 --> 00:43:23.079
<v Speaker 5>I mean as an India Indian not you know, the

773
00:43:23.119 --> 00:43:26.199
<v Speaker 5>Maveajo reservation, and then would gradually creep their way through

774
00:43:26.199 --> 00:43:28.760
<v Speaker 5>into Western press and break out and you know, whispers

775
00:43:28.800 --> 00:43:31.199
<v Speaker 5>and you know the Chicago Defender. Maybe I don't know,

776
00:43:32.360 --> 00:43:35.000
<v Speaker 5>and uh so I'll bet that's happening now on a

777
00:43:35.119 --> 00:43:37.679
<v Speaker 5>very big scale from the same people. Russia. Iran I

778
00:43:37.719 --> 00:43:41.760
<v Speaker 5>think is pretty good at this. Not sure, but Tar yes, probably,

779
00:43:41.840 --> 00:43:45.480
<v Speaker 5>katar oh absolutely, And not sure about China because I

780
00:43:45.480 --> 00:43:47.480
<v Speaker 5>think if they tried it on social media would sound

781
00:43:47.480 --> 00:43:50.519
<v Speaker 5>too much like a Nigerian prints trying to your bank account.

782
00:43:50.559 --> 00:43:53.920
<v Speaker 5>I don't know, am I, but here's a little interesting

783
00:43:54.000 --> 00:43:57.559
<v Speaker 5>tidbit for you. So I'm I don't know how I

784
00:43:57.599 --> 00:44:01.360
<v Speaker 5>stumble across this, but uh you know, ts Eliot had

785
00:44:01.519 --> 00:44:04.400
<v Speaker 5>a mixed reputation, shall we say, when it came to

786
00:44:04.400 --> 00:44:07.639
<v Speaker 5>anti Semitism, right, you know, jaff It was not fond

787
00:44:07.639 --> 00:44:08.159
<v Speaker 5>of him, and.

788
00:44:08.079 --> 00:44:08.719
<v Speaker 3>He deserves it.

789
00:44:08.760 --> 00:44:11.920
<v Speaker 5>I mean, Elliott wrote some really nasty stuff and some

790
00:44:11.960 --> 00:44:14.719
<v Speaker 5>early poems, and there's some lectures he gave in the

791
00:44:14.760 --> 00:44:18.480
<v Speaker 5>forties and fifties that have some typical anti Semitic tropes,

792
00:44:19.199 --> 00:44:23.400
<v Speaker 5>and you know, you might be I don't think you

793
00:44:23.400 --> 00:44:25.639
<v Speaker 5>should be, but you could be suspicious of his idea

794
00:44:25.639 --> 00:44:28.440
<v Speaker 5>of a Christian society book. I read it recently because

795
00:44:28.440 --> 00:44:31.159
<v Speaker 5>I got curious and I didn't see a difficulty. But whatever,

796
00:44:32.760 --> 00:44:36.559
<v Speaker 5>somebody wrote to Elliott in nineteen fifty three. So you know,

797
00:44:36.639 --> 00:44:39.639
<v Speaker 5>Stalin I think is still alive in early fifty three,

798
00:44:40.320 --> 00:44:42.159
<v Speaker 5>and I asked him if he would sign a statement

799
00:44:42.360 --> 00:44:46.400
<v Speaker 5>deploring Soviet anti semitism, and he wrote back a long letter,

800
00:44:46.440 --> 00:44:50.400
<v Speaker 5>and he said, of course I'll sign this. But on

801
00:44:50.400 --> 00:44:52.360
<v Speaker 5>the inter hand, how hard is it to deplore Soviet

802
00:44:52.360 --> 00:44:55.880
<v Speaker 5>anti semitism? You know, I mean, how can someone decline

803
00:44:57.159 --> 00:45:00.840
<v Speaker 5>to an appeal to protest Soviet anti semitism. But then

804
00:45:00.880 --> 00:45:02.320
<v Speaker 5>he went on and I'll just quote a little bit

805
00:45:02.360 --> 00:45:05.000
<v Speaker 5>from this letter that I think is quite interesting, and

806
00:45:05.320 --> 00:45:08.400
<v Speaker 5>what is it? Explain some things going on now? So

807
00:45:08.440 --> 00:45:11.320
<v Speaker 5>here I'll quote him. The only striking difference between the

808
00:45:11.320 --> 00:45:15.280
<v Speaker 5>present anti semitism in Russia and the anti semitism of

809
00:45:15.320 --> 00:45:18.880
<v Speaker 5>Hitler's Germany seems to me this that the Russians have

810
00:45:18.960 --> 00:45:21.920
<v Speaker 5>learned from the mistakes of the Germans and are much

811
00:45:22.039 --> 00:45:26.719
<v Speaker 5>shrewder propagandists. The Nazis persecuted Jews for being Jews, and

812
00:45:26.760 --> 00:45:30.079
<v Speaker 5>thereby incurred at once the antipathy of all civilized people.

813
00:45:30.800 --> 00:45:34.280
<v Speaker 5>The Russians refrained from any overt doctrine of racial superiority,

814
00:45:34.360 --> 00:45:38.360
<v Speaker 5>which would too flatly contradict their supposed principles and interfere

815
00:45:38.400 --> 00:45:43.280
<v Speaker 5>with their foreign policy. And he goes on their say

816
00:45:43.280 --> 00:45:45.719
<v Speaker 5>more about it, but he says this is a matter

817
00:45:45.760 --> 00:45:50.320
<v Speaker 5>of policy to stoke hysteria. Well, that's curious about Elliott.

818
00:45:50.360 --> 00:45:51.679
<v Speaker 5>I don't know if he had a big change of

819
00:45:51.719 --> 00:45:53.519
<v Speaker 5>mind or if he was just thoughtless in some of

820
00:45:53.519 --> 00:45:57.000
<v Speaker 5>his earlier expressions. But that description of what's going on

821
00:45:57.559 --> 00:46:00.679
<v Speaker 5>again that's seventy years ago now, I think is really

822
00:46:01.599 --> 00:46:02.840
<v Speaker 5>quite extraordinary.

823
00:46:02.920 --> 00:46:05.480
<v Speaker 1>And I hate to tell you, Steve, but anti Semitism

824
00:46:06.280 --> 00:46:11.880
<v Speaker 1>long precedes the Union, I know. But yeah, and I

825
00:46:11.880 --> 00:46:15.480
<v Speaker 1>don't understand it. I really don't understand it. But I

826
00:46:15.559 --> 00:46:18.960
<v Speaker 1>meet people who are, Oh I'm not anti Semitic, I'm

827
00:46:19.000 --> 00:46:20.960
<v Speaker 1>anti Zionist all the time.

828
00:46:21.880 --> 00:46:22.000
<v Speaker 5>Uh.

829
00:46:22.599 --> 00:46:25.079
<v Speaker 1>And it's but you talk to them for very long

830
00:46:25.119 --> 00:46:29.320
<v Speaker 1>and it's you know, who made that movie Jews kind

831
00:46:29.360 --> 00:46:33.519
<v Speaker 1>of thing? Right? You know? I find it despicable, I

832
00:46:33.559 --> 00:46:35.880
<v Speaker 1>really do. But you know, and it's not just because

833
00:46:36.079 --> 00:46:38.239
<v Speaker 1>some of my best friends are Jews, but they do

834
00:46:38.360 --> 00:46:39.079
<v Speaker 1>happen to be so.

835
00:46:40.000 --> 00:46:42.039
<v Speaker 3>And many of our favorite.

836
00:46:41.679 --> 00:46:45.920
<v Speaker 1>Teachers, right yep, absolutely almost all of them. It was

837
00:46:45.960 --> 00:46:49.000
<v Speaker 1>a funny thing that, you know, all of those good

838
00:46:49.119 --> 00:46:53.599
<v Speaker 1>Midwestern Protestant Catholic boys came back to California to study

839
00:46:54.039 --> 00:46:57.239
<v Speaker 1>with that nice old Jewish guy. But I always thought

840
00:46:57.239 --> 00:46:59.119
<v Speaker 1>that was strange.

841
00:47:00.000 --> 00:47:02.360
<v Speaker 5>While we're on it's not directly related, but I just

842
00:47:02.400 --> 00:47:05.800
<v Speaker 5>got my latest copy of First Things magazine in the mail,

843
00:47:05.840 --> 00:47:07.960
<v Speaker 5>and I can't believe I'm this many years old before

844
00:47:07.960 --> 00:47:13.119
<v Speaker 5>I've heard this phrase. The lead story is called tomophobia. Tomophobia.

845
00:47:13.239 --> 00:47:16.079
<v Speaker 5>In other words, it's it's a tomistic. It's again, it's

846
00:47:16.079 --> 00:47:20.000
<v Speaker 5>about a quiles see if you if you're if it's uh,

847
00:47:20.320 --> 00:47:22.960
<v Speaker 5>it's Mary Harrington, who I don't I'm not that familiar with.

848
00:47:23.000 --> 00:47:25.480
<v Speaker 5>But what a great phrase. I am going to keep

849
00:47:25.519 --> 00:47:27.079
<v Speaker 5>that and use it and throw them back in the

850
00:47:27.079 --> 00:47:29.119
<v Speaker 5>face of all the people who say homophobia.

851
00:47:29.559 --> 00:47:35.320
<v Speaker 1>Okay, okay, all right, it's a little obscure, Steve, But okay, yeah,

852
00:47:35.360 --> 00:47:38.079
<v Speaker 1>I know, good question for you, and I'm sorry to

853
00:47:38.079 --> 00:47:39.760
<v Speaker 1>spring this on you. I would probably ask you this

854
00:47:39.840 --> 00:47:41.599
<v Speaker 1>offline if we were offline, but we're not.

855
00:47:41.840 --> 00:47:41.960
<v Speaker 7>So.

856
00:47:42.679 --> 00:47:46.920
<v Speaker 1>I have seen three or four articles in the last

857
00:47:46.920 --> 00:47:49.840
<v Speaker 1>couple of weeks about Harvey Mansfield, two of them two

858
00:47:49.920 --> 00:47:53.599
<v Speaker 1>of them in the Chronicle of Higher Education. What's going

859
00:47:53.639 --> 00:47:54.159
<v Speaker 1>on there?

860
00:47:55.000 --> 00:47:56.119
<v Speaker 3>Uh?

861
00:47:56.599 --> 00:47:59.039
<v Speaker 5>Well, I think it's newsworthy that a person who's taught

862
00:47:59.039 --> 00:48:01.920
<v Speaker 5>at Harvard since at nineteen sixty four, what is that?

863
00:48:02.400 --> 00:48:03.559
<v Speaker 5>Sixty years almost?

864
00:48:03.559 --> 00:48:08.239
<v Speaker 3>It's amazing long time. But it does have this book out.

865
00:48:08.280 --> 00:48:10.440
<v Speaker 5>I've got the galleys and so it's coming out on

866
00:48:10.519 --> 00:48:12.559
<v Speaker 5>where Harvard went wrong, and it's a collection of a

867
00:48:12.559 --> 00:48:16.480
<v Speaker 5>lot of his articles over the years, some resolutions he

868
00:48:16.559 --> 00:48:19.480
<v Speaker 5>wrote the Harvard faculty meetings that did no good. Of course,

869
00:48:20.960 --> 00:48:24.840
<v Speaker 5>so there's a certain valedictory nature to it. I think

870
00:48:24.920 --> 00:48:29.519
<v Speaker 5>I mentioned once being on some zoom meeting. I'm vague

871
00:48:29.519 --> 00:48:32.800
<v Speaker 5>about what exactly the providence of it, but one of

872
00:48:32.840 --> 00:48:35.519
<v Speaker 5>the participant was Pippin Norris, who's very prominent in the

873
00:48:35.519 --> 00:48:39.920
<v Speaker 5>Harvard government faculty, and she was arguing against trying to diversify,

874
00:48:40.519 --> 00:48:43.159
<v Speaker 5>arguing against the viewpoint diversity and now though it was

875
00:48:43.199 --> 00:48:46.480
<v Speaker 5>pretty weak, so I finally interjected and said, so, you know,

876
00:48:46.519 --> 00:48:50.480
<v Speaker 5>Harvey Mansfield's going to retire soon. Will the government department

877
00:48:50.519 --> 00:48:53.320
<v Speaker 5>at Harvard try and replace him with somebody like him?

878
00:48:53.679 --> 00:48:57.039
<v Speaker 5>And there's a long pause and she said maybe. I

879
00:48:57.079 --> 00:48:59.800
<v Speaker 5>said I'll take that as a no until I see different, right,

880
00:49:00.280 --> 00:49:03.400
<v Speaker 5>And you know, so we'll see about that. But the

881
00:49:03.480 --> 00:49:05.719
<v Speaker 5>point is is that what's the old saying the only

882
00:49:05.719 --> 00:49:07.480
<v Speaker 5>good conservative is a dead conservative.

883
00:49:07.519 --> 00:49:07.960
<v Speaker 3>Well he's not.

884
00:49:08.079 --> 00:49:10.079
<v Speaker 5>He's still with us, but he's now retired, and so

885
00:49:10.239 --> 00:49:13.159
<v Speaker 5>you can say, ah, he's a national treasure, whereas a

886
00:49:13.239 --> 00:49:15.079
<v Speaker 5>year ago he was still a fascist.

887
00:49:15.320 --> 00:49:18.639
<v Speaker 1>Okay, well they're saying retired but still roaring was the

888
00:49:18.719 --> 00:49:23.639
<v Speaker 1>latest title that I saw of the article. So anyway, anyway,

889
00:49:23.639 --> 00:49:25.719
<v Speaker 1>I had to ask I just I thought it was strange.

890
00:49:26.320 --> 00:49:29.199
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, he's getting his due, and you know, he's getting

891
00:49:29.199 --> 00:49:30.199
<v Speaker 5>his due and he deserves it.

892
00:49:30.320 --> 00:49:33.000
<v Speaker 1>And by the way, Steve, I wanted to tell you also,

893
00:49:33.119 --> 00:49:37.880
<v Speaker 1>since the AP has determined that musket that what are

894
00:49:37.880 --> 00:49:42.960
<v Speaker 1>they called loaders the seventeen seventy six, why can't I

895
00:49:43.000 --> 00:49:50.840
<v Speaker 1>never remember not muskets, muscleloaders. Muscleloaders are are they're not regulated?

896
00:49:52.880 --> 00:49:57.960
<v Speaker 1>Did you know that? Did you know that, Steve? And

897
00:49:58.119 --> 00:50:00.480
<v Speaker 1>he's passed and I wanted to have a chance to

898
00:50:00.519 --> 00:50:02.559
<v Speaker 1>get it out and I didn't. I didn't, So I

899
00:50:02.679 --> 00:50:04.840
<v Speaker 1>was going to come on the three Sky Happy Hour

900
00:50:04.880 --> 00:50:07.840
<v Speaker 1>with my muzzle loader just to see if somebody from

901
00:50:07.880 --> 00:50:10.960
<v Speaker 1>the AP would turn me into the The ATF is

902
00:50:11.079 --> 00:50:14.840
<v Speaker 1>the perfect example of why muzzleloaders should in fact be regulated.

903
00:50:15.639 --> 00:50:18.559
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, so I'm if Richard Samuelson were with us, he

904
00:50:18.599 --> 00:50:21.000
<v Speaker 5>would have a quick punt about you know, if you

905
00:50:21.119 --> 00:50:23.960
<v Speaker 5>ban muzzleloaders, then you'll ban muzzles or something like that,

906
00:50:24.079 --> 00:50:26.000
<v Speaker 5>which we really need for Okay.

907
00:50:26.000 --> 00:50:29.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, okay, all, sorry, that was my fault. I deserved.

908
00:50:29.840 --> 00:50:30.960
<v Speaker 1>I deserved the bad pun.

909
00:50:31.360 --> 00:50:33.599
<v Speaker 3>Okay. So, okay.

910
00:50:34.159 --> 00:50:37.239
<v Speaker 5>The last segment from you guys that I'm keeping in

911
00:50:37.360 --> 00:50:42.559
<v Speaker 5>our reformulated episode is John surprising me and maybe you

912
00:50:42.760 --> 00:50:45.320
<v Speaker 5>with how presidential Trump is being. So let's roll that

913
00:50:45.480 --> 00:50:47.960
<v Speaker 5>now and then we will multi a conclusion.

914
00:50:54.519 --> 00:50:55.800
<v Speaker 7>So can I ask you, but what do you think

915
00:50:55.840 --> 00:51:00.440
<v Speaker 7>about Christia? I actually think that Trump is really acting

916
00:51:01.280 --> 00:51:06.840
<v Speaker 7>most presidential now for this reason. He's doing something which

917
00:51:06.880 --> 00:51:09.440
<v Speaker 7>she really thinks is in the national interests, even at

918
00:51:09.480 --> 00:51:12.719
<v Speaker 7>the cost of his short term political standing. Right, So

919
00:51:12.840 --> 00:51:16.119
<v Speaker 7>everyone thinks, oh, Trump is so craven, he's a populist

920
00:51:16.159 --> 00:51:21.639
<v Speaker 7>who's appealing to write this megabase. But isn't he actually

921
00:51:21.960 --> 00:51:23.880
<v Speaker 7>saying I agree with them. I think the idea of

922
00:51:24.000 --> 00:51:27.719
<v Speaker 7>Iran having ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons would be very,

923
00:51:27.880 --> 00:51:30.760
<v Speaker 7>very bad for our country and our allies. And he's

924
00:51:30.840 --> 00:51:35.239
<v Speaker 7>incurring large short term hits to his political standing in

925
00:51:35.440 --> 00:51:38.880
<v Speaker 7>order to pursue I think something that most rational people

926
00:51:38.920 --> 00:51:41.800
<v Speaker 7>should think is in our national interests, and that to

927
00:51:41.880 --> 00:51:44.719
<v Speaker 7>me is the leader. That's like the definition of leadership.

928
00:51:45.039 --> 00:51:47.400
<v Speaker 7>I mean, so I said, as a friend of Neil Trump,

929
00:51:47.800 --> 00:51:50.800
<v Speaker 7>you know, I think in contrast to these quick strikes

930
00:51:50.840 --> 00:51:55.920
<v Speaker 7>like Venezuela or in his first term killing SOLMANI you know,

931
00:51:56.000 --> 00:51:58.679
<v Speaker 7>those were things that were calibrated to not hurt his

932
00:51:58.760 --> 00:52:01.559
<v Speaker 7>short term political est. But now I think he really

933
00:52:01.719 --> 00:52:04.960
<v Speaker 7>is sort of acting like a war president, where you

934
00:52:05.079 --> 00:52:07.679
<v Speaker 7>have to do some things that are going to be

935
00:52:07.760 --> 00:52:10.480
<v Speaker 7>politically unpopular because you think it's in the best long

936
00:52:10.599 --> 00:52:15.440
<v Speaker 7>term interests of the country. So I actually I admire

937
00:52:15.559 --> 00:52:18.920
<v Speaker 7>him for this. And even though he's getting enormous, right,

938
00:52:19.599 --> 00:52:24.360
<v Speaker 7>enormous criticism from his own side, the Democrats criticism criticizing

939
00:52:24.400 --> 00:52:28.599
<v Speaker 7>him is just predictable. And you know, if he if

940
00:52:28.639 --> 00:52:30.960
<v Speaker 7>you figure out a way to remove China as a threat,

941
00:52:30.960 --> 00:52:33.280
<v Speaker 7>they would still the Democrats would still criticize them.

942
00:52:34.400 --> 00:52:37.480
<v Speaker 1>Or as people say, if he found a cure for cancer,

943
00:52:40.519 --> 00:52:44.159
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats are still criticizing for you, although you know,

944
00:52:44.440 --> 00:52:48.119
<v Speaker 1>I agree with everything you just said, but sometimes I

945
00:52:48.280 --> 00:52:51.559
<v Speaker 1>sort of have to shut him off because the fifty

946
00:52:51.679 --> 00:52:54.360
<v Speaker 1>first Venezuela being the fifty first state.

947
00:52:54.480 --> 00:52:54.719
<v Speaker 7>Wie.

948
00:52:56.000 --> 00:52:58.639
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes I just don't even get why he does this

949
00:52:58.760 --> 00:52:59.320
<v Speaker 1>sort of thing.

950
00:52:59.440 --> 00:53:03.239
<v Speaker 7>You know, he's just like taunting the media, right, do

951
00:53:03.320 --> 00:53:07.320
<v Speaker 7>you think that's it's just the the cats. I think, yeah,

952
00:53:07.360 --> 00:53:11.039
<v Speaker 7>I think he's just taunting people, taunting the taunting the media,

953
00:53:11.119 --> 00:53:13.480
<v Speaker 7>saying crazy things that drive him us. He can't be

954
00:53:13.719 --> 00:53:16.800
<v Speaker 7>but at least we should make Venezuela territory first before

955
00:53:16.800 --> 00:53:17.679
<v Speaker 7>he made it a state.

956
00:53:21.360 --> 00:53:27.480
<v Speaker 1>No, it just anyway, So, uh, we actually are almost

957
00:53:27.519 --> 00:53:29.000
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the hour, believe.

958
00:53:28.800 --> 00:53:29.039
<v Speaker 4>It or not.

959
00:53:32.159 --> 00:53:36.559
<v Speaker 5>All right, Lucretia, it's time for our help the Babylon B.

960
00:53:39.480 --> 00:53:41.599
<v Speaker 1>I have to say that this has not been This

961
00:53:41.719 --> 00:53:43.719
<v Speaker 1>has been a week that I think the Babylon b

962
00:53:43.800 --> 00:53:46.519
<v Speaker 1>agrees with me that there's not a lot of news.

963
00:53:47.199 --> 00:53:50.480
<v Speaker 1>So there some of them are a little fun like that.

964
00:53:51.320 --> 00:53:57.559
<v Speaker 1>The whole thing with Christopher Nolan and so the thing is,

965
00:53:57.639 --> 00:54:00.239
<v Speaker 1>it's a picture of Steve Bischemi and it says too

966
00:54:00.320 --> 00:54:04.480
<v Speaker 1>far Christopher Nolan casts Steve Muskimi as Helen of Troy.

967
00:54:06.119 --> 00:54:09.599
<v Speaker 5>Well, he cast Ellen Page is what somebody hector or something.

968
00:54:09.800 --> 00:54:10.599
<v Speaker 3>I don't know it's crazy.

969
00:54:11.440 --> 00:54:14.079
<v Speaker 1>Elliott Page, Elliott Page, Sorry, I just yes.

970
00:54:14.239 --> 00:54:16.360
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, I know, I know who I believe will end

971
00:54:16.440 --> 00:54:18.480
<v Speaker 5>up being the next James James bond.

972
00:54:18.280 --> 00:54:21.039
<v Speaker 1>If oh god it yeah, and nobody will go see it.

973
00:54:21.440 --> 00:54:26.960
<v Speaker 1>Faux pas. Trump gives President g with pot of honey

974
00:54:27.280 --> 00:54:34.119
<v Speaker 1>from White House beehive and the picture. The picture. He really,

975
00:54:34.480 --> 00:54:37.199
<v Speaker 1>I mean he looks like Winnie the Pooh in the picture. Right,

976
00:54:37.519 --> 00:54:38.599
<v Speaker 1>go ahead, I'll.

977
00:54:38.440 --> 00:54:41.159
<v Speaker 5>Bet the Babylon beet is censored in China. Just a hunch,

978
00:54:42.000 --> 00:54:42.519
<v Speaker 5>just a hunch.

979
00:54:42.639 --> 00:54:49.920
<v Speaker 1>Conservative too exhausted to form opinion on Thomas Massey, you

980
00:54:50.039 --> 00:54:52.960
<v Speaker 1>know that feeling? Man oh man? Okay? The New York

981
00:54:53.039 --> 00:54:57.519
<v Speaker 1>Times updates slogan to all the news that's fit to print,

982
00:54:57.920 --> 00:55:01.280
<v Speaker 1>plus any rumor, no matter or how implausible.

983
00:55:02.559 --> 00:55:03.920
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that's too true.

984
00:55:04.039 --> 00:55:06.239
<v Speaker 1>I know it's not funny. Some of these things are enough.

985
00:55:06.280 --> 00:55:08.199
<v Speaker 1>And you won't get this, Steve, but I'm gonna say

986
00:55:08.199 --> 00:55:11.639
<v Speaker 1>it anyway for our younger listeners. Millennial figures out how

987
00:55:11.719 --> 00:55:15.159
<v Speaker 1>to use six seven signaling the end of the fad.

988
00:55:15.840 --> 00:55:18.639
<v Speaker 3>I know what that's about. I've got him, you know,

989
00:55:18.960 --> 00:55:20.320
<v Speaker 3>I mean, I'm going to kid who was you know?

990
00:55:20.679 --> 00:55:24.400
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I know, I forgot you're right, and then, along

991
00:55:24.519 --> 00:55:30.119
<v Speaker 1>with my muzzle loaders, about that, I'm sorry, sorry, along

992
00:55:30.159 --> 00:55:37.199
<v Speaker 1>with my muzzleloaders, Associate Press warns that trey bouchets are

993
00:55:37.320 --> 00:55:40.480
<v Speaker 1>exempt from US gun laws. So how you say it?

994
00:55:40.960 --> 00:55:42.199
<v Speaker 3>Yeah it is, Yep, you got it.

995
00:55:42.280 --> 00:55:44.599
<v Speaker 1>Okay, Okay, I want one of those two. Actually, I

996
00:55:44.599 --> 00:55:48.079
<v Speaker 1>want a can into my front yard. Right, one of

997
00:55:48.119 --> 00:55:50.920
<v Speaker 1>these days we'll get one. But next time I'll bring

998
00:55:51.000 --> 00:55:55.880
<v Speaker 1>my muzzle loader, I promise, Quinn, Quinn, right, That's all

999
00:55:55.920 --> 00:55:57.039
<v Speaker 1>I have for today, Steve.

1000
00:55:57.400 --> 00:56:02.119
<v Speaker 5>Okay, Well, John Point always says, always drink your whiskey

1001
00:56:02.119 --> 00:56:04.679
<v Speaker 5>and eat, buy more books. And you have been listening

1002
00:56:04.719 --> 00:56:08.239
<v Speaker 5>to the three Whiskey Happy Hour, sponsored by the Civitas Institute,

1003
00:56:08.480 --> 00:56:12.719
<v Speaker 5>produced and hosted by ricochet dot com. The podcast dedicated

1004
00:56:12.800 --> 00:56:17.079
<v Speaker 5>to what single malt singular metaphysics advanced Sidney Sweeney studies,

1005
00:56:17.280 --> 00:56:20.360
<v Speaker 5>which we've proved this week. Uh And we'll be back

1006
00:56:20.400 --> 00:56:23.519
<v Speaker 5>again next week, hopefully with a more ordinary and normal

1007
00:56:23.719 --> 00:56:26.440
<v Speaker 5>edition of a whisky Happy Hour, we hope.

1008
00:56:26.960 --> 00:56:27.599
<v Speaker 3>Are you kidding?

1009
00:56:27.880 --> 00:56:28.159
<v Speaker 1>Christian?

1010
00:56:28.239 --> 00:56:31.960
<v Speaker 7>This has been the best podcast since sement on Vacation Gone.

1011
00:56:32.199 --> 00:56:54.360
<v Speaker 6>What are you talking about, Ricochet? Yes, Join the conversation
