While concerned parents storm school board meetings to demand an end to Critical Race Theory in the classroom, leftists manage the mental gymnastics of simultaneously denying it exists and defending it. This week, the man who most prominently sounded the alarm bells over this dangerous ideology, Christopher Rufo, joins Senator Ted Cruz and Michael Knowles. Together, the trio explores where CRT originated, how it metastasized, and what the light at the end of the tunnel could be—if there is one. Plus, what does it mean to be a conservative environmentalist?
Verdict is going on tour with Young America’s Foundation! Learn how you can bring us to your campus and apply today: http://yaf.org/verdict.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Parents across the country have been storming school board meetings to demand
an end to critical race theory in the classroom and prominent leftists
responded in one of two ways. Some of them have defended critical race theory is a good and important academic movement and others have
nine that critical race theory exists at all and
Truly many prominent leftists have done
both. At the same time, a critical raise theory doesn't exist, but it's also terrific and wonderful and very important well here, to help us break it down. We have one of the nation's top experts uncritical race theory. This is
with tat groups. Welcome back to vertical tat grows. I am Michael Knolls end this week, I am joined not only by the senator himself
also by Greece for River, who is senior fell.
at the Manhattan Institute and who is Lord,
We responsible for many people around the gun
We waking up to critical
theory and the associated leftist ideological movements that are poison.
the mines of Young America all right. Give you up
in my opinion of seniority. But I want
take a somewhat balanced perspective. I Chris thank you so much for being here. It's going to be with you!
so Senator you- and I were talking not so long ago about what seniority was like back when you were
a student in law school because it it did begin,
in the law, schools, but it didn't end in the law, schools,
Well that's right and Harvard LAW School is really where it
originated and, and unfortunately it is metastasized and spread, and and Chris S, dog ate a terrific job of chronic
where and when it has spread and and and how its manifesting an end. So maybe one thing to do start. This conversation Christie tell us that does critical race theory exist, because if I turn on MSNBC, I see a lot of people screaming at me that there is,
No such thing yeah, I definitely exists, and I've noticed a lotta folks on laughed, especially in places like MSNBC, equating critic
recently with with big foot with the Loch Ness monster. It seems to be impossible to find only in the favourite imaginations of conservatives, but a critical race theorists. Unfortunately, for then left a view
we have a paper trail. If you look at the original academic writings in the late eighties and early nineties, all the way now to cater twelve schools, where I've meticulously documented, not just people's experiences and and people's opinions, but actual pdf videos, documents and hard evidence of these. Really.
atrocious ideas that are not just so give us an example of what of what's being taught to kids in schools. Sure I mean in Cooper, Tino, California, they forced third graters kids. It are about eight years old to deconstruct their racial and sexual identities and then rate themselves according to a racial hierarchy in in fifth grade in in Buffalo and Philadelphia, there are teaching that quote. All white people contribute.
Systemic racism, they were forcing kids to hold up a simulated black power rally in the auditorium chanting for Angela Davis to be freed from prison, publicly
New York, they send out an email to wipe parents saying that hold on Chris. Let me stop beyond that: Angela Davis
for someone who doesn't know who she is, whose Angela Davis,
You know in many ways, Angela Davis was the prototype of critical re stairs. She was the doctoral student of of the kind of founding american critical theorists name Herbert Margarita, who advocated for revolution who condoned even violence. Angela Davis was his student steeped in marxist ideology, who eventually was provided weapons for hostage situation in a court room. She was a member the commune
already, she advocated for the overthrow of the United States, abolishing capitalism and a lot of those ideas that enduring David. This time were really on the radical left French have now,
not only into mainstream university discourse, but even into public Kayser. Twelve schools under this guy's of critical race there, so
as you know, I want to have a good answer for the leftists who have
now made. It seems that their speaking in unison after spending weeks defending Sierra,
in other denying it, and they are saying that almost by definition, critical race theory is only taught and discussed
law schools and that the things that are going on in case through twelve may be their anti white, maybe they're! Bigoted
maybe they're vicious and far left. But but,
ever it is there not the same thing as critical race theory. What what do you say to people who were making that argument? Yeah I mean it's important
like all marxist ideologies. You have theory and practice or did
general ideas and then the practical implementation of those ideas. That's embed,
it was incredible race theory. So what it looks like in a scholarly paper. Obviously there not teaching kindergartners how to read the Harvard LAW Review, but what they are teaching kindergartners it could be. Thank God can be thought of as apply
the critical race theory, so I'm just not allowed some key terms, and these are really had a red flag terms that if their teaching and gave her to school, it's almost undone.
Fully informed by critical race theory and using the principles of critical rice theory. So if you hear whiteness white privilege, white fragility, oppressor, oppressed, intersection out any systemic racism
spirit, murder, equity, anti racism, collective guilt or affinity spaces which are racially segregated, training programmes and educational lectures. All of those key terms which you here in hundreds, if not thousands, of school districts across the country,
even if they don't say under the heading critical race theory. Those are all ideas that are derived from critical race theory and applied in the classroom through critical, pedagogy, okay, so Chris, but back up a little bit and
through those terms, a lot of those terms we may or may not have heard of, but but what do they mean did go through them one at a time. It also offers real of terms related to whiteness. It's this idea that people of different racial categories can be reduced to a racial essence. This almost metaphysical property of whiteness, the condition of a being white, and that includes, by definition and their theories white privilege. This idea that society is tilted towards you. You are embedded by simply existing. You have vested property interests and advantages because of the color of your skin and also white fragility. The idea that any reaction against something like critical race theory doesn't come from principled agreement or descent. It comes from the kind of that this kind of psycho pathology of being white, that you are fragile, but you are going to react out of rage out of other sorts of emotions to any challenge. Dear
identity, and then I think, a second bucket. You have to look at oppressor and oppressed. This is marks in conflict theory derived in in the nineteenth century, but now looking at that through a racial lands, the idea that the oppressors or not you know the capitalist landlords and ownership class, but actually a racial category of whites, the oppressed are black Americans and people of color and then intersection. Reality basically takes that this kind of you no kind of shaken up approach to this oppressor and oppress distinction.
seeing all the differential categories, a religion, language, disability, status, your body mass index even are all vestiges of this capitalist white supremacist patriarchy that oppresses people, and then this is then do the kind of antidote that they believe they profess is something like equity or anti racism and Abraham candy. Who, I think, is the kind of critical race guru our time defiance Anti racism defines equity in very simple terms. He says the cure
Pass discrimination is present discrimination. The idea that being you know, we don't want to have equality in law. We don't want to have colorblind this. We don't wanna have meritocracy. We want to have.
legal regime that favours people on the basis of race that tips, the scales to someone on the basis of race and even in many cases, incredible raspberry, actually abolishes the system of capitalism, redistribute land and wealth on the basis of racial identity. So so let me break down, because there are a number of concepts.
They're like, like you mentioned equity now, equity sounds very similar to equality and equality is a good thing,
when will we are a nation
was built under the principle of a
Letty under the law, but but but when you hear that the critical race theorist talking about equity, they,
mean equality. What what's the difference between the two? It's a really key difference and I think that they have adapted the term equity really to play a language game to trick most Americans to think it's just equality to point out. Is that a better version of what we had before, but that the philosophical premise of these of these ideas is quite different. Equality, as you said, seeks to provide equal protection under the law. It improve, protects the individual's right to
like private property to freedom of speech to political participation, representation set? So equality says you? You can't discriminate equity
as you must discriminate, as is that at my my following this right, that's right and that the key differences that equality looks to you as an individual and says that the unit, the key units of measurement, analysis and policy is the individual human being who should be protected from discrimination. Equity says we don't want to look at society as as a collection of individuals. We want to look as society as a collection of competing racial groups and we need to achieve the equality of outcomes between those racial groups by whatever means necessary
including racial discrimination, which they call positive discrimination or affirmative action, which is so interested in amidst IP, because one thing you said there that I think this is really important. Is you talk about the
language games and in the world of critical race theory, I mean that the left is very good and created when it comes to language and end the similarity between,
Equity and equality- it's like oh gosh, who could be against equality, which I guess means everyone has to be for what they call equity,
which is discriminate by
stone race, which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing, but but they do a similar thing with system
racism and and when you say so, systematic racism is different from racism might like nobody disputes. Racism is real their bigots in the world. There are bigots there why
bigots. There are black bigots. There are bigots of every racing in an creed you can find. Now that is a very dear.
Thing from the notion of systematic racism, which is that the system
is fundamentally racist, whether to the criminal justice system, whether it is the capitalist system, whether it is, what it, whatever the systems
We have in the country
they are built into their structure- racist, that's very different, but the problem is when someone's listening to it and they here
systematic racism, they think we're yet racism exist, so that must be right and when they
someone denying it. They say well, gosh that guy's alone,
does he says: there's no racism, how how much my
How did they get out of these language games, trying to make
invidious sound like it's a knock you us yeah, I mean they ve been very successful with it and I think that's why we have to be very vigorous in creating language and also subverting their language. So systemic racism is very interesting. It achieves really two objectives for them.
Simultaneously one. It assumes that any disparity and outcome through any kind of statistical measure, a where things are
well in the ways that they want them to be equal makes its
makes the case for racism as the as the original cause of everything. So what it tries to do is basically say that all of these systems are racist because they produce unequal outcomes by whenever measure that their measuring
the day, but the second thing that it does is: it also implies a solution. If something is systematically racist, the only solution is to tear down that system. So they try to put this systematic lands, institutional and systemic glance on all of the various categories, whether it's the constitution, whether its law, whether its private property or their it's the Civil Rights ACT and non discrimination, and then they try to say basically the only solution, because we ve tried civil rights. We ve tried equality. We ve tried everything that that they said was going to lead to greater equality. It all has to go, and I think at heart, if you look at critical race theory, it is anti constitutional. It is exe.
With ITALY, Anti Fourteenth amendment. The idea of equal protection under the law is explicitly anti capitalist. Sore economic system has to go, and if you go on down the line, you find that people that the critical racers dont want to reform the United States. They want to overturn the United States. They want to and fundamentally destroy the institutions in the hope that something better will emerge. So
the court. The question that keeps striking, because I think absolutely your right senator I mean you actually
this this sir ideology, develop at the place where it developed in the year
is that it was developing and Chris you ve tried that
very well, and I agree, I think the argument now that's being made on the left that actually, when
educators and high schools and middle schools? Repeat all
the various axioms of critical race theory that that somehow is totally different from critical raised there. I think it's kind of weak, argued session nominal list argument that basically just
to run away from words having any meaning at all as general principles at, but I am still left with this question: how did critical race theory develop,
in the nineteen eighties at Harvard LAW School. How did it go from this kooky fringe movement at one law school
a very disreputable law. School is as far as I'm concerned by the way, but how did it go from there to every system of education in the country? Yeah,
that's a big question and I think you can look at a couple. Different methods of transmission. I think probably the most important one is graduate scores of education, so
There is a large body of academic research, but they think of as the critical turn and education so taking credit
legal studies, digging credible theory taking critical race theory and applying it to education and the idea being that, if you can shape a curriculum and shape a pedagogy,
to apply the ideas of critical raised, their kids you're, going to bring up a generation
installed some of these problems, such as white privilege and white fragility, systemic racism, excetera. And if you look at graduate schools that I can taste them, I mean they are steeped in this stuff other than the kind of foundation
spoken most Gratis was immigration is the pedagogy of the oppressed by the british, pedagogical olive frere, and then they take off,
these ideas from critical theory and undue, essentially critical race theory, the practice forcing the practice,
I don't know thousands or maybe tens of thousands of people who are great
waiting for any schools businesses
the only framework that they now and there being put into place and superstructure
the country. One thing that I've seen is that older teachers are not teaching this older ginger
In many cases are people who leaked documents to me because they're saying this is tearing our institutions apart, but if,
Under thirty five and you're, a new public school teacher within the first five years of career of your career. This is the water that
swim, and this is what your teaching this is how
designing a regular, and then you have a network of of of nonprofits of critical race theory based
training programmes and diversity, lecturers and contractors they create
an economic ecosystem where they can attach themselves the public institutions like school districts and then pushed needs ideas from that friends.
all the way into, in some cases, a kindergarten classroom, and I think it in a way you have to give these books respond. We ve had a thirty year plan
to get their ideas into the institutions and in many ways there just on the cost of success. Unless we stop them
Chris one very useful thing. I think you have laid out for folks listening or watching the pod, if your parents, if you have
AIDS, Heidi and I are girls- are ten and thirteen. If you're looking at their curricula
school that their buzzwords that you want to be looking for things like white privilege or whiteness, her white fragility, which are weird concepts things like,
anti racism, which it which I have to say by the way I have to
back in Marvel at at the cleverness of the propaganda, because Anti
So am, I think I've were absolutely I'm antiracist. Racism is, is horrible and evil and big
tree, and so of course I am against that. But but
racism is a code word that doesn't actually mean being a
Racism, it means
Being a racist, explicit
and discriminating number one against white kids
screw emanating number two.
viewing the system in
way that it is inherently biased and wanting to tear it down, and yet we talked a minute ago about how all of
originated in Marxism? What's interesting as it did
just originated Marxism. The end point that this curricula
is designed to teach the kids to go to is Marxism
EL. It is designed to tear down capitalism and
place it with communism, replace it with Marxism at with with government power
for, although on racial lines, and it is that, is that a fair characterisation, yeah. I think it is and one of the things that I've noticed my research. If you look at it
raise theory, and you look at their literature, but that their academic work and they are always focused on pointing out problems and I've always ass. In the back of my mind, will what do you want? What are you proposing? What kind of policy solution are you suggesting would solve these problems and in every case it is active discrimination? This idea that the that equality of outcomes must be achieved through government action and government force it scepticism about private property
saying that private property actually is a form of whiteness that actually private property and white identity are inextricably linked, and in order to reduce whiteness and white privilege, you have to actually change property arrangements, and then it is somewhat like Avram Candy again who propose
as a federal department of Anti Racism, that's unaccountable to voters unaccountable to Congress and the council to the executive and in what would that department do bit. It would have the power
to veto, nullify or abolish any law at any level of government in silence political speech: that's not deemed antiracist. So when you put all these disparate parts together, you have again kind of the end of private property. You have redistribution of land and wealth along racial lines, and then you have an omnipotent federal bureaucracy with the power to suppress speech and the power to invalidate law,
outside of the confines of our federal system? It starts looking a lot like a marxist twentieth century style staid, and you
keep in mind, I have to say that that, as you describe the Federal Department of Anti Racism, that that is terrifying- and it's not just marxists, profoundly anti democratic to have some guy
bureaucrat with the ability to set aside any law. Here she doesn't like
an end to silence and sensor speech, but this
nonsense is not just being taught in the schools are being taught. The schools is dangerous, it is also being taught in corporate Amerika. Also being taught in the federal government is also being taught the military's. I right yeah, that's right. I have reported on all of those demands I mean started,
last year with a series of reports I did on the federal government there give us some examples. Yeah so I'll give you some examples. You know the
example that I like to tell Us Sandia National laboratories, which is a federally
Lady Laboratory that designs America's nuclear Arsenal, so the actual had nuclear weapons that we have to keep our country safe. They sent their white male executives to a three day. White male privilege are re education camps. They sent them to a resort down
ago, and they had them deconstruct their white male identities. They had them a red and recite white male privilege statements and they had them write letters of apology to fictitious women and people of color. The idea is that breaking down their identity in order for them to be
and a softer and more open to absorbing this ideology, and some of these things
Look at them. You say why all you know this is one crazy training. This is this is some
it was probably well intentioned, but it went arrive, but then I started doing reporting at I think. Now
than a dozen federal agencies, I'm sure it's now almost every federal agencies, including very important places like the Treasury Department, like Homeland Security, like the FBI but West Point Military Academy. All of these, these these institutions, that most Americans had faith in have been really really infected with this ideology and really have started to adopt it.
IRAN and I think, over the short term. It makes for a splash headline about over the long term it something that is very dangerous for our country sets
Ultimately, we play devils advocate for a second here this past week, general Mark Melias, the term of the joint Chiefs of staff
testifying in Congress and made a lot a news, not Anna, and I know generally well, I like him is it by Princeton Grady, actually is the
the general officer in the military that is a prince from grad and then- and I got to know him when he was the commanding officer- afford Hood in Texas when he was a threat.
Star General, before he had? He had gone up to be hit chairman of the Joint Chiefs, but but General Milly Kind of vented
and and he was under questioning in the house and and he said he was offended- that people were Chris,
sizing, the military as woke, and the army
and he gave is I've read Karl Marx, but that doesn't make me a communist. So, what's the
sponsor too well. What's wrong? With reading some of this stuff yeah, I mean it is a really important distinction right. It's
I read a lot of critical race there. I think it's important to read. I think it's totally fine to read in the context of a college classroom, but there's there's there's two different ways: you can approach it. You can approach it as one person,
among many, where you have a reason debate where you look at its flaws, you look at its benefits and then you try to come to a better understanding of the world by comparing the variety of subjects,
The other way is to really use it as a form of indoctrination to compelling people to believe to forcing them to believe in this to presenting it, not as one perspective of among many but as the truth as dogma. So there is a difference between, say, West Point, having a survey clay
Ass of different views of race in America, including this among many different views and also reading Doktor Martineau
King Jr and book, or to Washington, to Frederick Douglass Anne and in that context, a survey class this this could be reasonably and key.
Included as as among the views there are that's very different from say, a tray
program that you're foreseeing young eighteen nineteen twenty year old soul
and sailors and arrogant and Marines to complete this
learning programme in order to be able to serve the military yeah, that's right and I think from what some of the documents that I've seen from within the United States military, it's not presenting it as a survey. It's not presenting it as one perspective
many a thing. This is the ideology of the: U S: Army or the Marine corps or West Point Military academy. These are the books. You need to read it through its raw remedy Angelo achievement. Candy is this new gospel of critical race theory that their presenting, as
this kind of thing that you need to believe not again a competing perspective. I think it's also very different when you're talking about kids when you're talking about a k through twelve education, where again, it's different, it's presented not as an academic subject, but its presented as a kind of method of indoctrination, and I think that's why you're seeing millions of parents rise up to say, hey, look. We want to have a discussion about these issues. We want to work on these issues, but what we don't want is a one sided, manipulative kind of Marxism based curriculum that is being forced down our children's throats. Despite the fact that the that the parents, the people who actually are invested
schools and pay for these schools. I disagree with this stuff in it violates their conscience and it's worth pointing out a third grade. Classroom is not exactly a free market place of ideas in whatever you might have in a graduate seminars, and even
graduate really when you're right you, what your teaching to eight year olds
is this is true, and this is false, right, you're, giving them rudimentary education so that they can think later on and more complex ways and I think you're, absolutely right Chris. This is not correct.
though there are many defenders of seniority, we're trying to pretend that this is
One idea among many in a remarkably of ideas, not how its being taught and
It is, as you also point out, Senator the fact that this
made it into the? U S, military, the fact that officers are being told to him
I'd this stuff and are being encouraged to to treat it as the gospel truth. Rather,
just as some crazy idea among many the fact that this is infiltrated corporate board rooms there. This is impulse
I did so many institutions in our country it
I'll make you almost lose hope, and I wonder, is there any glimmer of hope here? It's very strange that I think proper
the majority of Americans disagree with this kind of stuff. You you see a lot of parents rushing to their school boards and yet all of the powerful institution.
Seem uniformly to be pushing it yeah
I am an optimist, I'm very hopeful about this and I think that's what I'm seeing on the ground. What I'm seeing in hundreds of emails every day is people for our people from all
walks of life people from a rider racial backgrounds, people from all over the country that are starting,
rise up to say, wait a minute? I don't.
What is in my school. I dont want this in my church and all others in my local government. I dont want this being pushed by the: U S, Congress and what I think worse,
every day is a new video of hundreds apparent showing up its war meeting, getting activated really pushing on this issue, and you don't talk with a lot of local and state legit
leaders and their telling me that when they're out there in their desperate, this is
number one issue that they get when there
labelling or going door to door speaking an advance people really care about this? I know that some people are saying this has the same kind of energy as the
ninety Bork rational Revolution or two thousand ten T party revolution, but there's something happening in the grass roots of this country.
That people are being energized. My disturbing focus their being engaged in many cases for the first time in politics, and I dont think the institutional responses have I've been frankly
strong. You see all of the media are running cover. You see that my language Ganz, you see them. Retreating from Protagoras theory: none
strategies are gonna hold because people know what's being taught to their kids people have this thorough and intuitive understand
What this ideology is trying to accomplish and we're seeing a critical race theory revolt all over the country
it gives me an immense amount of hope, and I think that love if Brooklyn and vertical
want to do critical race theory in their camper grove. Schools. That's fine! That's there right, but I think we're looking at somewhere between seventy and eighty percent of Americans that we could rally into opposition on this issue, and I think that's a starting point for
south so Chris. If someone wants to learn more were word: where do we go where
someone go to learn more about what this is where it
being taught and and and what to do about it. Yeah I've put together a critical, reactionary, breathing book. So if you just search Google, Christopher Rueful, vertical race, theory, briefing book or see, argued reaping Bob, I provided anything that you'll need to get started to engage on this issue, whether you're apparent whether your local legislator, I what do you care about this in the workplace, so I have definitions, have key concepts and quotations. I have stories about where its being taught in schools also have suggestions for language that successful in winning on this issue, as well as some model legislation, and so that's what I'd recommend you go are you can always reach out to me unhappy to help you
in connection with other people that are working on this issue. I think it's it's just a tremendously important thing right now and I urge everyone to getting all, certainly as Chris we have got to get to the mail bag now. So I will not have you
sit around and answer the difficult impossible questions.
more listeners, I'm sure you could do it cause
You really have done such a service with your writing. A
city journal and your work
an unruly making. This issue come into stark relief Chris forever. Thank you for being on the show, then give birth
where we get to the mail bag? I am so pleased to announce that we are now find.
Lies in the dates for verdict live. We are taking verdicts with TED crews on the road in partnership with the Young America's
nation I will be coming to a school near you or maybe even to your school, but you will need to request that so you gotTa Yoffe, why a f, DOT, Org, slash verdict and apply to have your scooby
the the spots deadline to applies August. Eighteenth, Senator
Can this thing live, we're gonna, go meet people and in real life
we're had it headed out on the road to college campuses will have an auditorium. Will film live? We will have hopefully some friendly question. Some hostile questions
It's really up to the listeners, a verdict where we should go in or should we go
places that are
away seas of of truth and have people that their use to hearing about life liberty?
pursuit of happiness. Or do we go to places of communist?
doktor nation where, where we're going behind the iron curtain,
and we might have to have a subversive effort to come in. I don't know,
asking you the reader, let us know where
think verdict should be filmed and and we're gonna have fun regardless we ab
Lily are. We could even had to the University of EAST Berlin, also known as Berkeley in California. There a lot of lot of schools we can go
and hopefully will be able to do a combination, so you can apply to two hostess at your school that will be wire dot, org, Slash verdict, get those applications and by August Eighteenth, that is the deadline and we're
be looking forward to it? And now before we see alive, we will answer your questions in the mail bag all right. This question completely out of love field, but it's free.
Our colleague Michel, who is sitting
behind you real truth, cactus rights. What
some conservative arguments for environmental practices,
we all here. The sun monster is going to kill us, but as conservatives do we not also wish to conserve our planet? Where is the balance? I think that's a great question and I think a lot of conservatives are really timid when it comes to discussing environmental issues all of us breathe
US drink water, all of us, presumably and then you're drinking. I think coffee here or vodka whenever you drinking those actual, but there that there you go
but but yet a water is at its base. Look all of us would like for our kids to be able to breathe and drink water we'd like for a grand kids to be able to breathe and drink water
protecting the environment. You know you look at debt Teddy, Roosevelt
was one of the first great conservationist and environmentalists? We have a responsibility to protect the environment. What does that mean? That means fighting pollution
bidding pollution is a good and noble
role. It is an important governmental function. We do want to see factories poor and above
gunk into rivers or into the air that that that make people sick. All of that is legitimate, its
where today's environmentalist movement is.
Today's environmentalist movement is focused on shutting down production, so so it's not
The test is: is the air cleaner and is the water cleaner? Then you can actually too
an amazing story, because, as
african ingenuity has moved forward. We have clean the air and clean the water drama,
equally. Last year, the year twenty twenty, what country had the greatest reduction of
carbon emissions of any country on earth. Answer the United States of America by far not even close, and what com
is that, what cause that primarily was the shape,
revolution and the increase.
Bull abundance of natural gas. We have, and we
seen a large scale shift from electricity production from cold and natural gas
natural gas as a much cleaner way to produce electricity than coal and so
say not just carbon emissions going down, but pollutants going down by dramatic numbers. Now here's the weird thing
about environmentalist on the left. You would think if the goal
as a cleaner environment you'd be celebrating that you'd say that's a good thing. What the environmentalist on the left are trying to do is shut down natural gas shut down there
we'll gas destroy american production- and I read
equally: they also want to shut down. U S, oil, which then makes us more
dependent on foreign oil, all of which is produced
a dirty or way I'll see. You
up hurting the environment more an end today,
environmental movement on the left.
Is an ideology, were actually clean. Air and clean water.
is really low on the priority list: stopping human production, stopping new book
This is stopping new residential developments, so
being new economic. Stopping jobs is,
their priority and you ve got zealots.
who view economic development inherently as an evil. Look most of us think
jobs are good. We'd like to have cleaner and clean water to, and have you
You can do both if you actually employ some common sense is the
Medical left on the environment is not interested in common sense, yeah
it does seem to be something a little misanthropic about it. All I dont want to Reno Ray
into our opponents thought process. You are anything, but it does it did.
sometimes seem when I was living in California, as though the left value
Delta smelt more than they did working families who are trying to have jobs and people are
the paper energy prices, an ironic
way so many of their policies actually were were harmful, ultimately to the environment a next west.
from ban is for me Ben rights. Will your next book be titled shameless because
of your shameful plugs of speechless. Yes, it will be
that is. If I ever write a book again senator, I know you ve written multiple books with words I frankly, I'm sick of writing. A book with words it's much too hard, so I'll probably return to my my former Magnum Opus that the final
question is for you from E M Taylor, senator crews can
who explained standing and why
Does this not apply in the deal case against Georgia voting laws? So I I bring up this question because I was
and the next episode. I want to get into some legal questions that are very much in the news right now at this one just came up the deal. Jays is suing Georgia because
of Georgia's voter integrity law. There saying that this is discriminatory and the federal government's gonna go in and stopped your jet from passing laws to protect their own vote and because I know absolutely
thing about the lawn did not go to law school senator. Can you please explain a fourth shore to related
concepts one in order for a court to be able to decide a case. It has to be what's called a case for controversy
ass to be alive, dispute between Real Party said idiot. I can't just be a request for judges
issue, an advisory opinion on a question of law
An element of that one element of that is that you gotta have a real injury
but another element of that is that you ve got to have a plaintive, withstanding and standing put simply as essentially someone with a beef
someone who's got something at stake. So listen! If, if, if you, your book, publisher breaks, it's cool,
tracked with you and says: Michael we're, tired of publishing books with no words,
I can essentially royalty checks fair enough now. I might look at that.
And say that is ridiculous: Michael is the poor guy.
I as a starving gaily depends upon
These royalty checks to buy his skin
genes and is yet oh yeah.
Fifty, whereas on verdict in- and so I am really upset- They'Re- not paying it well as
as I might be, I dont have standing to sue over breach of contract is not I'm not a party the contract. I you have standing to sue if, if they breach of contract with you, you have standing to sue
because you ve suffered an injury and you're actually a party to the man, in this case the contract
so the question is: why does the United States have standing to sue Georgia it in this instance? They soon Georgia under section two of the voting rights
an end. That is a statute that Congress passed to protect voting.
rights and, in an actually gives the attorney general the authority to bring suits to enforce
the law and so in the role as the chief lawyer for the United States
in Amerika the attorney you
nor has the authority under the Voting Rights ACT to bring
and I think the suitors not meritorious and agreeing to discuss that on a subsequent verdict. But in
terms of standing, the way the Voting Rights ACT is written, the Department of Justice has standing to bring a case to enforce section two of the voting rights,
all right. That's just a little teaser for something talking. I yes, that's the argument from the federal government and we will not
and a very bad idea to have to go in.
then that this, this voting rights LAW in Georgia, but not this time we run out of time senator
Thank you is always, and by the way, I think, all of the listeners, a verdict would have standing. If I could no longer afford my skinny genes, I think that would greatly injure all of the viewers out there. I will discuss it coming up
Michael knows, this is verdict with headquarters.
Transcript generated on 2021-08-06.