Go Woke, Go Broke

Summary

The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson: "Go Woke, Go Broke" Summary

Episode Details:

• Title: Go Woke, Go Broke
• Release Date: June 23, 2022
• Host: Ben Ferguson, hosted on The 47 Morning Update
• Description: Hosted by Ben Ferguson, this episode delves into the latest political developments, cultural shifts, and significant Supreme Court decisions impacting America. The discussion centers around gun control legislation, the influence of "woke" culture in Hollywood, and a landmark Supreme Court case on religious liberty.

---

1. Capitol Hill Showdown: Gun Control Legislation

Timestamp: [04:12]

Discussion Overview: The episode kicks off with a critical analysis of the recent gun control legislation vote on Capitol Hill. Ben Ferguson discusses the surprising defection of 14 Republican senators who sided with Democrats to pass the motion to proceed with the bill.

Notable Points:

• Vote Breakdown: The legislation passed with a 64-34 vote, surpassing the required 60 votes, with all Democrats and 14 Republicans in support.

• Citing the 14 Republicans: Ben Ferguson points out the names of the 14 Republicans who broke ranks, highlighting a significant shift within the party dynamics.

Notable Quote:

Ted Cruz: "It's a combination of the moderate to liberal Republicans combined with Republican leadership combined with the Republicans who are retiring...they transmogrify into very, very different senators until the last two years when they're back on the ballot, when suddenly they become conservative again."
[05:08]

Analysis: Ted Cruz elaborates on the reasons behind the Republicans' capitulation, attributing it to a mix of moderates, leadership pressure, and senators who are retiring and thus less accountable to voters. He criticizes the lack of accountability, suggesting that senators who are leaving office are more susceptible to outside influences and less aligned with their conservative base.

2. The "Go Woke, Go Broke" Phenomenon in Hollywood

Timestamp: [07:06]

Discussion Overview: Ben Ferguson transitions to a cultural critique, focusing on Hollywood's incorporation of "woke" elements and its financial repercussions. The primary example discussed is the underperformance of the movie Lightyear, which included a lesbian toy kiss scene.

Notable Points:

• Box Office Performance: Lightyear grossed $80+ million globally and $51 million domestically against expectations of $135 million globally.

• Cultural Backlash: Ferguson argues that the inclusion of LGBTQ+ themes, such as a lesbian kiss, alienated traditional moviegoers, leading to the film's poor performance.

Notable Quotes:

Ben Ferguson: "We talked last time about how people don't want to see toys and cartoon characters engaging in all sorts of eccentric sexual activities...and Lightyear bombed at the box office."
[12:10]

Ben Ferguson: "There were very few kids movies at the box office this past weekend...Americans said, you know what, I can think of something better to do than listen to Hollywood lecture my six-year-old on their views of sexuality."
[16:19]

Analysis: Ferguson criticizes Hollywood for pushing a liberal agenda through popular family films, suggesting that audiences reject such attempts. He contrasts Lightyear with blockbuster hits like Top Gun, which embody traditional patriotic and conservative values, arguing that the latter's success underscores the audience's preference for non-political entertainment.

3. Supreme Court Victory: Carson v. Maine on Religious Liberty

Timestamp: [17:35]

Discussion Overview: The conversation shifts to a significant Supreme Court decision, Carson v. Maine, which Ferguson hails as a triumph for religious liberty and school choice.

Notable Points:

• Case Background: Maine had a tuition assistance program that excluded religious (sectarian) schools from eligibility, prompting a challenge based on religious discrimination.

• Supreme Court Ruling: The Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Carson, declaring that Maine's exclusion of religious schools violated the Constitution's First Amendment protections for religious freedom.

Notable Quotes:

Ted Cruz: "So the Supreme Court said, sorry, you can't. If it's an equally applicable program that everyone else can get, you can't discriminate against people of faith and schools of faith just because they're exercising their First Amendment rights and their religious liberty rights."
[19:34]

Ted Cruz: "The Establishment clause was about preventing government from controlling churches, preventing government from controlling faith."
[22:54]

Analysis: Cruz emphasizes that the ruling reinforces the First Amendment by ensuring that government programs cannot exclude religious institutions. He challenges the liberal interpretation of the Establishment Clause, arguing that it should protect religious freedom rather than enforce a secular government stance against religion. The decision is portrayed as a protective measure for both religious liberty and educational choice.

4. Addressing Concerns: Potential Implications of the Ruling

Timestamp: [21:15]

Discussion Overview: Ferguson addresses potential criticisms and hypothetical scenarios arising from the Supreme Court's decision, including the establishment of schools with controversial religious orientations.

Notable Points:

• Mailbag Question Response: A listener named Zachary inquires about the possibility of non-traditional religious schools, such as those founded by the Satanic Temple, receiving state funding.

Notable Quotes:

Ted Cruz: "Look, I don't maintain today that federal student loans, federal Pell grants should be disallowed from going to Yale University. So why should I say they shouldn't go to the Satanic Temple?"
[24:08]

Ted Cruz: "A tenured professor at Princeton is a guy named Peter Singer...he's argued in favor of infanticide up until age six."
[25:03]

Analysis: Cruz defends the ruling by drawing parallels between established institutions like Yale and hypothetical ones like the Satanic Temple. He suggests that excluding one religious perspective over another lacks consistency and undermines the establishment of diverse educational options. By highlighting that prestigious universities also engage in controversial teachings, he questions the reasonable basis for singling out specific religious ideologies.

5. The RINO Challenge: Strengthening the Republican Core

Timestamp: [25:28]

Discussion Overview: Ferguson and Cruz delve into the issue of RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) and the challenges they pose to maintaining a strong conservative base within the Republican Party.

Notable Points:

• Primary Elections: Cruz shares success stories from recent primaries, endorsing candidates like Yesleigh Vega who embody strong conservative values.

• Leadership Critique: He critiques Republican leadership for favoring obedient members over conservative insurgents, leading to a dilution of core principles.

Notable Quotes:

Ted Cruz: "Republican leadership in both the Senate and House...if you have someone who's gonna rock the boat, who's gonna be a rebel leadership would rather a democrat get elected than a pain in the neck conservative who will buck leadership."
[26:11]

Ted Cruz: "If you want stronger conservatives, then you gotta get involved in the primary process and get behind people who will follow through on what they say."
[28:54]

Analysis: Cruz emphasizes the importance of grassroots involvement in the Republican primary process to elect candidates who genuinely represent conservative values. He argues that the current party leadership prioritizes loyalty over ideology, leading to the rise of moderates who may not align with the party's foundational principles. By supporting principled candidates, Republicans can strengthen their legislative influence and better resist internal and external pressures to compromise.

6. Upcoming Content: Cloakroom and Legal Discussions

Timestamp: [29:20]

Discussion Overview: The episode concludes with a teaser for upcoming content on Verdict Plus Community and the Cloakroom segment, which will focus on legal intricacies surrounding the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Notable Points:

• Cloakroom Preview: Liz Wheeler introduces the next segment, promising in-depth legal analysis on the implications of the Supreme Court's decision on abortion rights and the Democrats' potential responses.

Notable Quotes:

Liz Wheeler: "We're waiting with bated breath for the Dobbs decision...and we're going to dive into some of the legalities of some of their ideas because a couple of their suggestions I'm pretty sure are against the law."
[29:20]

Ted Cruz: "This week on Cloakroom, we'll be discussing the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. Well, I can't wait."
[31:48]

Analysis: The hosts hint at further exploration of critical legal battles affecting American society, particularly focusing on reproductive rights and the legislative maneuvers likely to follow the Supreme Court's decisions. This segment aims to provide listeners with detailed and nuanced understanding of complex legal issues.

---

Conclusion

In this episode of The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson, the discussion weaves through pivotal political and cultural issues facing America. From the internal struggles within the Republican Party over gun control legislation to the financial repercussions of "woke" culture in Hollywood, and a landmark Supreme Court decision bolstering religious liberty, Ferguson and Cruz provide a comprehensive analysis aimed at informing and mobilizing conservative listeners. The episode underscores the importance of maintaining ideological purity within the party, resisting cultural shifts that undermine traditional values, and staying vigilant in the face of significant legal and political challenges.

Transcript

[Michael Knowles]

I've got good news and good news and bad news. The good news is there's a big win for conservatives at the Supreme Court. The other good news, there's a big win for conservatives in the culture at the box office. But the bad news is squish. Republicans are caving to Democrats up on Capitol Hill on the Second Amendment. Well, the co host of this show has just come from voting on that legislation. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.

[Ted Cruz]

Today's episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is brought to you by Ipvanish. Did you know that browsing online using incognito mode doesn't actually protect your privacy? Without added security, you might as well give all your private data away to hackers, advertisers, your Internet service provider, and who knows who else. Ipvanish helps you securely and privately browse the Internet by encrypting 100% of your data. This means that your private messages, passwords, emails, browsing history and other information will be completely protected from falling into the wrong hands. Ipvanish makes you virtually invisible online. It's that simple. Just for Verdict listeners, Ipvanish is offering an insane 70% off their annual plan. That's like getting nine months for free. You have to go directly to IPVanish.com Cactus to get this 70% off discount. IPVanish is super easy to use. Just tap one button and you're instantly protected. You won't even know it's on. You can use Ipvanish on your computers, tablets and phones, whether you're at home or public. Don't go online without using Ipvanish. Don't forget, verdict Listeners get 70% off the IPVanish annual plan. Just go to ipvanish.com cactus to claim your discount and secure your online life. That's IP V A N-I-H.com Cactus this.

[Liz Wheeler]

Episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is brought to you by Genucel. How old does your mirror say you are? You can delay this question by 5, 10, even 15 years with Jennycel's new Ultra Retinol Serum. You can, you know, see it sitting right here on the desk. Here's a testimonial from Marina. Marina lives in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. She says, great product. My skin loves it. I have spent more money, she says, on creams over the years. Enough to pay off my house. Just kidding. But it feels like that this product has changed my life like no other. Now Mirena is flying high with Jenny Cell's new Ultra Retinal Serum with hyaluronic acid. This works to hydrate your skin at the cellular level. It builds on this deep moisture with incredible anti wrinkle effects. And gentlemen, you know that we ladies, we wives use your razors in the bathroom when you are not looking. Likewise, we know that you use our face products, our skincare products and it's fun. All's fair in love and war. Now if you go to my URL that is jennucel.com cactus you can get up to 50% off genucel's new ultra retinal serum that is 50% off if you go to jennucel.com cactus it's spelled g-e n u c e l.com cactus jenucel.com cactus this episode of Verdict With Ted Cruz is brought to you by American Hartford Gold. Now, the new inflation numbers are out and I think we can all agree they are incredibly depressing. The price of gas is way up. The price of housing is up. The US national debt is way, way, way up. And unfortunately, given the way that our current administration prints money and spends money, experts don't see this going away, this inflation going away anytime soon. So how, how do you protect your money, your savings, your retirement from inflation? Well, when times are turbulent, Americans like you turn to physical gold and silver and American Hartford Gold can show you how to hedge your hard earned savings against inflation by diversifying a portion of your portfolio into physical gold and silver. And it's really easy to get started. All it takes is a short phone call and they will have physical gold and silver delivered right to your door. Or if you prefer, inside your 401k or your IRA. They make it easy. If you call them right now, then they will give you up to 1500 doll of free silver on your first order. So don't wait. Call them right now. Call 855-768-1883 or if you prefer texting, you can text the word cactus to 65532. Again, the phone number is 855-768-1883. Or text the word cactus to 65532.

[Michael Knowles]

Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles. Senator, you have just come from Capitol Hill just voting on this big gun control legislation. There seems to be a compromise between a bunch of Republicans and the Democrats. What happened?

[Ted Cruz]

Well, I just voted about an hour ago on the initial vote, the motion to proceed to take up the legislation. Now, the statutory text they rolled out just a couple of hours ago. So we're still in the process of studying the details of what they laid out. But all the Democrats voted for it and 14 Republicans voted for it. So the vote was 64 to 34. They needed 60 to proceed. So they got there with 14 Republicans and that's gonna consume this week, the debate on that bill.

[Michael Knowles]

I think it is safe to say you are not One of the 14 Republicans who voted to proceed with this legislation.

[Ted Cruz]

That is safe. And actually I printed out the 14 who are. So if you want to know the 14 who are, it is Blunt, Burr, Capito, Cassidy, Collins, Cornyn, Ernst, Graham, McConnell, Murkowski, Portman, Romney, Tillis and Young. Those were the 14 Republicans who voted yes.

[Michael Knowles]

Wish I could say that I were surprised, Senator, but I'm not. You know, obviously you've named a lot of the moderates and the people who often do go over with the Democrats here, but That's a big NU14 is a big number.

[Ted Cruz]

Well, it's a combination of the moderate to liberal Republicans combined with Republican leadership combined with the Republicans who are retiring. And that's sort of the ace in the hole for leadership is the folks who are retiring are never going to face the voters again. They're likely going to go be lobbyists in town. And so suddenly they have all sorts of votes that the people who elected them would prefer they wouldn't take. But since they're not on the ballot anymore, they vote differently than they would otherwise. You know, it's actually a similar manifestation in the Senate. You've got six year terms and it's a common phenomenon where two out of every six years people grow a backbone or conservative and those happen to be the two years they're on the ballot. And then the other four years they're not on the ballot, they transmogrify into very, very different senators until the last two years when they're back on the ballot, when suddenly they become conservative again. And unfortunately it's kind of a merry go round of who are the chunk of Republicans on the ballot that will stand steady. The retiring Republicans, it's an even worse problem because then they feel little to no accountability to the voters who sent them there.

[Michael Knowles]

So this is still being worked out right now just in broad strokes. How bad is it?

[Ted Cruz]

You know, I don't know the full details. As I said, they just rolled out the statutory text right before we voted on it, which is a typical Capitol Hill strategy. So I'll study the details more and know it. There's some elements that are fairly unobjectionable in terms of funding for things like school safety that everyone agrees with. The most problematic elements I Think concern red flag laws. Red flag laws that there's funding to incentivize states to pass red flag laws. Red flag laws are proceedings whereby you can strip guns from law abiding citizens. And in a number of states, particularly blue Democrat states, there are very, very low thresholds for doing so. There's very little protection of due process. And you know, it poses a real problem if somebody is unhappy with you, Michael. If you have a, you know, someone who's mad at you, a disgruntled co worker, a jilted ex girlfriend, what have you, Red flag laws, particularly without serious due process protections, can provide an avenue for that person unhappy with you to go behind your back and take away your second amendment rights to protect yourself.

[Michael Knowles]

Because in that case, the red flag is not, you know, some raving lunatic who's making direct threats, who says, I'm gonna kill you, I'm gonna kill you. The red flag simply could be you are a conservative, you are a Republican, you voted for someone that I don't. You said something that I disagree with. The red flag could be you. And in that case, to deprive someone of a constitutional civil right would seem to be a huge overreach.

[Ted Cruz]

Well, and I will say this, look, they were negotiating back and forth between the Republicans and Democrats on the exact language. And so I haven't read the statutory language yet. I will read it this week before we vote on the final bill. This was the initial vote just to take it up. So I'll study the details. But there's a lot of variance in the details. The devil is in the detail on this. And so, for example, some of the formulations they were talking about keyed off of whether someone was a, quote, mental defective. That's some language that actually is in federal law right now. It's sort of a different era. We don't, don't tend to speak much in terms of things like mental defective. But if the threshold is low, look, there are estimates that something like 20% of Americans have some form of mental illness. You know, I joked at lunch last week that it seems to me serving in the United States Congress should be prima facie evidence of mental illness. You know, you think about schools, how many kids are diagnosed with adhd, how many kids are medicated on Prozac or Ritalin or something else, and if the threshold is low, that There's a hyperactive 15 year old who gets a diagnosis and gets medicated, and you have a gun grabbing blue state that says, okay, well guess what, you've just lost Your right to keep and bear arms for the rest of your life. I think that's obviously unconstitutional and would be struck down by any court following the law. But in the meantime, it's a real problem. And so my view on guns and crime generally is there's a right approach and a wrong approach. You know, there's an interesting story. Are you familiar with Project Exile?

[Michael Knowles]

No, I'm not.

[Ted Cruz]

Okay, so Project Exile was something that was created during the Bill Clinton Justice Department, and it was created in Richmond, Virginia, in the Eastern District of Virginia. And it was the US Attorney there laid out and said, we are going to prosecute anyone who commits a violent crime with a gun. We're going to go after them under federal law. We're going to lock them up in jail with a mandatory minimum sentence. And we're going to let people know. We're going to let people know. If you knock. Knock over a liquor store and you're a felon. On if you're a felon in possession of a firearm, that carries a mandatory minimum sentence under federal law, but typically the feds don't prosecute it. Project Exile says, you commit a crime with a firearm, you're going to jail. You're doing hard time. And they advertise it. They put up billboards in Richmond, Virginia, carry a gun, do hard time. And Richmond had one of the highest murder rates in the country. And the Fed started, anytime you brought a gun to a crime, boom, you got prosecuted, and the murder rates plummeted. And you started seeing criminals that would literally go knock over a liquor store, go do a home invasion, and they leave their gun at home because they'd say, if I take a gun, I'm doing serious federal time. If you want to stop crimes, that's the sort of program that works.

[Michael Knowles]

That's a great point. Obviously, we all agree that we should take guns away from criminals and people who have in some objective way been deemed to be too dangerous to have a gun. We shouldn't just go along with some program to exploit a shooting or a tragedy as a way to advance generally unrelated gun control measures that Democrats have been pushing for a while. Not too late to stop this kind of thing. Let's hope that the squishes toughen up a little bit here and back off of this and listen to this podcast. That's the bad news that the squishes are going along with the Dems here. There is quite a lot of good news in the culture, though. I really want to get to the Supreme Court case, which the left has lost their mind over. They've now said that this is a nearly fatal blow to the separation of church and state. Before that though, I do have to do a little bit of gloating on the culture front. There was a big cultural win here. We sort of predicted it on this show. It's the get woke, go broke prediction. We talked last time about how people don't want to see toys and cartoon characters engaging in all sorts of eccentric sexual activities and kissing and pushing the woke sexual revolutionary agenda. And, and then over the weekend, Lightyear, which made a big show of having a lesbian toy kiss in it, Lightyear bombed at the box office. They were expecting a global box office of $135 million. What did it come to? I think it was 80 something million. And then the domestic box office was way below predictions at $51 million. Did you, Senator, did you take the air out of the gay toys?

[Ted Cruz]

That's a question I've never gotten before. Listen, I will say this. I do think it's amazing how the Verdict podcast seems to be driving Hollywood. At our campus live tour in Alabama, we talked about how Disney wanted Mickey and Pluto to go at it and liberals brains exploded. And apparently the showrunners for Lightyear said hey, what a great idea, let's have lesbian toys get it on. And they got a little Barry White with his deep voice. Let's get it on. And then last week on Verdict, we said this is terrible, leave the kids alone. You said we don't want to see eccentric sex with, with, with kids or toys. Let me take out the word eccentric. How about no sex, kids and toys. And by the way, I will say leftists really lost their minds because last week we talked about do we really need lesbian toys in cartoons? And leftists like the phrase lesbian toys that I really think their tiny little walnut sized brains broke that apparently they're supposed to go on these cultural rampages and we're not supposed to notice. And not only that, we're all supposed to quietly shut up and take our kids. Well, you know what? There were very few kids movies at the box office this past weekend. It was Father's Day. You want to talk about a good time to take your kids to the movies? And I think there were a whole bunch of Americans that said, you know what, I can think of something better to do than listen to Hollywood lecture my six year old on their views of sexuality. How about just have a fun like the Toy Story films are awesome, but it speaks volumes that while Lightyear was getting his ass Kicked the kicker was Tom Cruise and Maverick and Top Gun. A straight up patriotic conservative. We love Americans beat the bad guys. Like the contrast is night and day. And Hollywood is, is so knuckleheaded that they seem unable to get the message. Maybe they will because look, there's tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars delta between those two. Maverick's been out for several weeks and it's still obliterated. Lightyear. Somebody depositing the checks ought to notice that.

[Michael Knowles]

They certainly should. This is what the left does to so many institutions. As you say, Toy Story's a great movie. It's a great. I Love Toy Story 1. I liked Toy Story 2. I don't really remember Toy Story 3 or if there was a 4, but they were good movies.

[Ted Cruz]

And by the way, Tim Allen was fantastic.

[Michael Knowles]

Tim Allen was fantastic. Then they yanked him out of this movie. And so people look at it and they say, well, we like these movies. And then the radicals go in and they say, oh look, we've got these really popular movies and institutions. Let's go in. And in a really heavy handed way, in a very didactic and obvious way, let's go in and use the things that people love to push our radical political agenda, which is completely superfluous and irrelevant to the story. And I'm really pleased to see that the American parents and moviegoers said, oh, no thank you. Yeah, we like Toy Story. We don't like you using the things that we love to push your radical agendas. So no thanks.

[Ted Cruz]

And let me make a point also, Michael, this is also not about. So the left likes saying things like the Florida law was don't say gay. You're right, this is actually not about that. And I'll give an example on the counter. So Hollywood usually is so willing to chase the dollar that they're craving when it comes to China. And they're willing to censor movies because China wants them to. And one great example of that is Bohemian Rhapsody. Bohemian Rhapsody I think was a fantastic movie. I really enjoyed that. It was very well done. China insisted that they edit Bohemian Rhapsody to cut out the scene showing Freddie Mercury was gay. Which by the way, is insane. How do you tell Freddie Mercury's life story and leave out that he's gay? It was a big damn part of his life. And Elton John. Maybe Bohemian Rhapsody is not being marketed to 6 year olds. Bohemian Rhapsody was an R rated movie. It was for adults. It was the story of an incredible artist that was entirely appropriate. You know, Rocketman about Elton John. You wouldn't tell Elton John's life story and leave out that he's gay. It's an integral part of who he is. What made the Light Year antics so dismaying is it was entirely gratuitous. It was meant, it was targeted at kids and it was meant to say, this is what we want to convey to you little children. And I think a lot of parents are saying, leave our kids alone and let us discuss sex and sexuality with our kids at a time and age that is appropriate. Not what you. If we can't even take him to Disney movies, what can we take him to?

[Michael Knowles]

Right? Stop. Stop forcing this. I love that point. It was so gratuitous, superfluous, irrelevant to the plot of Toy Story. It was so heavy handed and on the nose. And I like that the gamble from the left didn't pay off, that the moviegoers are not so infatuated with Toy Story that they were willing to go to the movies and just allow the left to go in and hollow out their stories to push their own radical agenda. So there was a big win at the box office. There was also apparently a big win for conservatives at the Supreme Court. This is in the case at Carson vs. Macon. This is a case up in Maine on religious liberty. That would seem to be what's the case about.

[Ted Cruz]

So it's a terrific, terrific victory for religious liberty. So the state of Maine has a tuition assistance program, and then there's some parts of Maine that are very rural where they don't actually have public schools up and running. And so the state provides tuition assistance for you to send your kids to whatever schools are there, to whatever private schools are there, particularly in smaller communities where you don't have the resources of a big public school. But Maine excluded religious schools said you can send your kids somewhere, but if it's a religious school, or as they called it, a sectarian school, which means they actually believe in faith, believe in God and teach something about God, then you're not eligible. And so the plaintiffs in this case challenged that and said, look, you're discriminating against my free exercise of religion and I want to choose to send my kid to a religious school, and you're discriminating against faith and religion. And the Supreme Court. Six, three. So Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion and concluded that it violated the Constitution to discriminate against religious schools when otherwise they would qualify. They met all the other criteria. If they just stopped those pesky references to God, they would get the state money. But if they insist you say God? Nope, no money. And the Supreme Court said, sorry, you can't. If it's an equally applicable program that everyone else can get. You can't discriminate against people of faith and schools of faith just because they're exercising their First Amendment rights and their religious liberty rights. I think it is a great victory for religious liberty for everyone, but it's also a great victory for school choice. And both of those, I think, are incredibly important.

[Michael Knowles]

Now, what are conservatives supposed to say when they hear the liberal justices on the court and a lot of people in the liberal media complaining that this is an outrageous attack on the American tradition of the separation between church and state?

[Ted Cruz]

Well, there are a lot of things they should say. First of all, the word separation of church and state are found nowhere in the Constitution. They're not in the Constitution. They're not in the Bill of Rights. They're not in the Declaration of Independence. That's not there. The phrase a wall of separation between church and state comes from a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist. So it's a private correspondence is where that phrase is taken from. But it's not actually the law. And what is the law is the First Amendment. And the First Amendment has two religious liberty clauses. It has the Establishment clause that prevents Congress from establishing a religion, and it has the free exercise clause that prevents Congress and prevents government from restricting the free exercise of religion. And there are two different interpretations of what the Establishment Clause means. Liberals interpret it as saying that essentially government must be hostile to religion, that government must treat religion as something bad. That's where you get the phrase wall of separation of church and state. Is church bad. I think that's a complete misreading of what the Establishment clause is about. The Establishment clause was about preventing government from controlling churches, preventing government from controlling faith. Both the Establishment clause and free exercise clause work hand in hand.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, this actually leads into one of the mailbag questions that we got. We've been extremely derelict on taking mailbag questions, so I do want to get through a few of them before we go. And this was on this case and on the question of religious liberty. This is from Zachary, who says if the Satanic temple starts private schools that your tax dollars will pay for. Will you conservatives regret the Supreme Court decision? So we're happy about it. Now, I think this is a great ruling, and obviously I don't think that the Christian school should be discriminated against, and I'm very in favor of school choice. But what happens if the Satanic temple, which is it's a little different than the outright Satanists down on their knees. They're kind of ironic Satanists. And we could debate further whether one can be an ironic Satanist or you end up kind of being a sincere one. Either way. But what if they start a school and they say, okay, we've got the Satan school and your tax dollars are going to go for that? One, would that follow from the court case? And two, should we support it?

[Ted Cruz]

So yes, it would follow and should we support it? Well, let me answer it by making an observation. I don't maintain today that federal student loans, federal Pell grants should be disallowed from going to Yale University. So why should I say they shouldn't go to the Satanic temple? They're teaching as much garbage at Yale and for that matter at my alma maters, Princeton and Harvard. So I don't particularly mean to single out Yale.

[Michael Knowles]

It's a really good point on, I'm sorry to say, on my alma mater and yours too, and probably most schools at this point in the country is if you had a school that was teaching the tenets of Satanism and then you had any old run of the mill, public or otherwise, name brand school, what would the difference be? I'm not sure that if it were a blind test, I'm not sure you could identify them.

[Ted Cruz]

So, Michael, let me give you an example. A tenured professor at Princeton is a guy named Peter Singer. Peter Singer is a very left wing ethicist who among other things has argued not only is he in favor of abortion on demand, which a lot of people on the left are, he's argued in favor of infanticide up until age six.

[Michael Knowles]

Right. It was a fair bet that Professor Singer could make some of the more moderate Satanists blush. That's a very important point.

[Ted Cruz]

And there's a phrase you rarely hear, more moderate Satanists.

[Michael Knowles]

So I got a lot of questions this week with lots of salty language, but this is a family show, so I'm gonna clean it up a little bit. This was one of the more eloquently written ones. Gets back to what we were talking about at the top of the show. This is from Josh. Why are there so many worthless RINO Republicans currently? And it's not obviously this guy and other people are complaining about this, but it is a real tactical Republican question, which is why are there so many rhinos? Why are there so many people when it seems that there is so much wind at the backs of the conservatives?

[Ted Cruz]

Because we don't do a good enough job in Primaries on insisting on and finding strong conservatives with proven records. Listen, I'm on the road nonstop between now and election day. I'll probably be on the road 30, 40 days between now and the November election. Campaigning for candidates for the senate, campaigning for candidates for the House. Look, I'll give you an example. So we had primary elections tonight in multiple races. Yesterday I campaigned for a candidate in northern Virginia, Yesleigh Vega. Yesleigh Vega is. And she won tonight. So I did two rallies for yesterday, she won tonight. So yes, Lee Vega is, I think, a fantastic candidate. She's running in a democrat district. You have Abigail Spamberger, who's the incumbent. Yesle is the daughter of immigrants from El Salvador. Her brother was nearly killed by Ms. 13. He was badly wounded by Ms. 13. She knows firsthand the perils of illegal immigration. Uh, she's a cop. In fact, she's a three time cop. She's been a member of two police forces and she's now a deputy sheriff. She is the wife of an army soldier. She is the daughter of a pastor. Her, her, her dad is, is a pastor right now in Maryland. She is the mom of two teenage kids and she is a fantastic candidate. Now, when she jumped in this race, no one thought she had a prayer. All the money was on the other side. I sat down, I met with her, I said, you're a star. Endorsed her campaign for her. She was trailing yesterday. She just won today. That's encouraging. We don't do that enough. And there's a structural problem. Listen, Republican leadership in both the senate and House, they want members. Their number one criterion is a member who will be obedient, who will just do what leadership says. And the dirty little secret is if you have someone who's gonna rock the boat, who's gonna be a rebel leadership would rather a democrat get elected than a pain in the neck conservative who will buck leadership. If you're a middle of the road squishy mod, they'll flood you with cash because you'll be obedient. You'll do what leadership wants. If you're a pain in the neck conservative, they'll do everything they can to kill you. And so listen, if you want stronger conservatives, then you gotta get involved in the primary process and get behind people who will follow through on what they say.

[Michael Knowles]

Not only are you hanging around trying to gum things up on Capitol hill while the squishes are trying to give away our second amendment rights, not only are you going around the country raising lots of money for the good conservative candidates, but not Only are you doing this show, coming straight and doing this. But Senator, we can't let you go because you are sticking around for the Verdict plus Community to discuss even more on the Cloakroom with Liz Wheeler. Liz, what are you gonna talk about?

[Liz Wheeler]

Hi, Michael. Hi, Senator. We are going to get into some really nitty gritty legal stuff. So we're all waiting with bated breath for the Dobbs decision. Right. Is Roe v. Wade gonna be overturned? Did Chief Justice John Roberts convince somebody else to join him in not overturning Roe v. Wade? We're waiting for this. It seems like it's going to be at the last minute. But the Democrats, meanwhile, are preparing their arsenal of what they're going to do in response to Roe v. Wade being overturned, what tactics they're going to use. And so we're going to dive into some of the legalities of some of their ideas because a couple of their suggestions I'm pretty sure are against the law. So if you'd like to join us for this conversation, it's going to be great. Head on over to verdict plus it's verdict with Ted Cruz.com plus if you use my promo code, Cloakroom, then you can watch for free for one month on your annual subscription. It's Verdict with TedCruise.com and the promo code is Cloakroom. It's really gonna be a great discussion. I'm very excited about it.

[Ted Cruz]

And Michael, let me jump in for a second and take people behind the curtain and get in a little bit of the sausage making of how we do Cloakroom. So before we do the podcast, every week, Michael, you and I get on a conversation with our producer and we talk about what topics we want to have and sort of roughly lay out. Okay, tonight we're going to talk about the gun stuff and we're going to talk about Light Year and we're going to talk about the Supreme Court case.

[Michael Knowles]

This just happened on Capitol Hill on this. We got to hit this.

[Ted Cruz]

So we do a prep call and it's a loose prep call. We kind of just roughly have topics and then get into it. But it's interesting Cloakroom, the way we've done it and just sort of arisen organically every episode. When you turn to Liz and say, Liz, what are we gonna discuss on Cloakroom? If you cut to me and asked me, I have utterly no idea. So when Liz comes on, she's coming up with these topics and she sort of has a mandate of fine, interesting, esoteric, deep dive legal topics. And I gotta say, she's phenomenal at coming up. She's come up with some really good topics, but I'm sitting here every week going, I don't know, let's hear. And sometimes if it's really esoteric, Liz and I will have a brief. Like she'll forward me some. If she wants to talk about a particular case that I haven't read recently, she'll forward it to me and I'll reread it quickly. But it is an interesting process because we've had some really good deep dives on Cloakroom of ideas that Liz has that she springs on me out of nowhere and we jump into them.

[Michael Knowles]

This week on Cloakroom, we'll be discussing the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. Well, I can't wait. I can't wait to hear the topic. And so I don't have to do any preparation at all. You're in the hot seat, Senator. Liz, you've got all the prep. We will see you next time. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.

[Ted Cruz]

This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations and candidates across the country. In 2022, Jobs, Freedom and Security PAC plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the.