The cleaning crew is still scrubbing the blood off the floor from last week's cage match about Ukraine and January 6, and already Ali and Frazier (that is, Lucretia and John) want to go for a sequel—maybe "Rumble in the Faculty Club Food Court" or something. (And yes, since we recorded in the morning instead of evening happy hour like we are supposed to, talk turned to McDonald's and breakfast meats. Steve blames John for McDonald's stock slumping this week while the broad market had a monster rally.)While we await Don King's promotion for Cage Match 2 next week, we devote this episode to catching up on the other news of the moment, especially the rot in higher education as fully revealed by last week's ignominious appearance of the presidents of three Poison Ivy League universities (boy did we call it or what). But then we also note the curious legal cases that popped up this week, especially Jack Smith's Hail Mary pass to the Supreme Court to try Trump as soon as possible, but the equally inside-out coverage of what a novelist might call "The President's Heart Is a Lonely Hunter Biden." Somehow we ended up with a digression into religious liberty, and pondering whether the Hell's Angels might be a bona fide religion that might be useful in some circumstances.Next week, back to the Cage for Round Two!

We finally get around to our promised but delayed cage match about Ukraine and unanswered questions about January 6, and alas, all of Steve's attempts to cheer up Lucretia with the week's great news—the Hunter Biden indictment, the embarrassment of Ivy League presidents, Kevin McCarthy resigning, Trump winning Tom Friedman's vote—proved unavailing. Futile, even. Why Lucretia even trashed McDonald's, which is really fightin' words for John.But then we get down to business, with the bruising cage match. Steve did his best to play a "neutral" Sean Hannity, posing challenges to both John and Lucretia about both topics, but occasionally donning a Hershey's Kiss-sized tin foil hat on a couple of points. Score the jabs about roundhouse blows at home, and send in your point total in the comment threads.John and Lucretia were united on one topic, though: Both attacked Steve for his fondness for classic Genesis, which Steve discussed at length this week on Steve Gosney's Rumble channel here (or YouTube version here) if you have the proper tastes in "rock music that went to college," to quote Jody Bottum on prog rock. Natually, Steve takes out revenge with the exit music, with a fragment of a classic Genesis song that includes the fitting lyric, "Even academics, searching printed word. . ." Who can name that song without looking it up?Note: We haad a few technical glitches recording this episode, with some abrupt edits and incomplete thoughts in a couple places, but listeners should be able to make out the main threads.

So we had promised last week that this episode would feature a cage match between Lucretia and John about realism versus idealism as applied to the Ukraine War (especially since John baited Lucretia by calling her a neocon, which is fighting words not just in the desert west), as well as the problem of January 6, but the passing of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Henry Kissinger diverted us, along with the DeSantis-Newsom debate. Along the way we were treated to an extraordinary tale—John Yoo, as a young Supreme Court clerk, going one-on-one with the visiting Charles Barkley at the Supreme Court's own basketball court, which is known as the highest court in the land because it is located on the upper story of the Supreme Court building. Can you guess how it went? (Barkley was still playing in the NBA for the Phoenix Suns at the time.) It was the surprise revelation of this episode.We had lots of critical (though respectful) things to say about both Justice O'Connor and Henry the K, and I suspect as usual listeners will find our contentions unique and not widely mentioned in the torrents of encomiums for both historic figures this week.And we promise we'll go the cage match next week, or your money back. (Though we did do a small preview with a brief argument about why the cause of Israel should rank higher than the cause of Ukraine.)

While most other podcasts are taking the Thanksgiving holiday off, your three bartenders behind the Three Whisky Happy Hour remain on the job, because no one wants leftover podcasts for the long weekend. Steve and Lucretia had traditional home-cooked feasts, while John, naturally, dined Thursday at a yacht club, sweater knotted properly around his neck.In the middle of this episode that ranges from the metaphysics of free speech to Nikki Haley's chances to the Argentinian and Dutch election results along with the Israel-Hamas deal, Steve recalls hearing Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu in person in Washington several years back explaining that the reality of the Middle East is that often the choice is between bad and worse, and this becomes the unifying theme for several of our disparate topic today. In some ways, this episode turned into previews of coming attractions, as we set up a clash of the titans (that is, Lucretia against all comers) next week on the ongoing dispute about January 6, and the essence of "neoconservative" foreign policy. Consider these teases as a placeholder, along with our custom exit music, "Am I Very Wrong?" (to which question Lucretia typically answers "YES!"), a 1967 tune by a then-obscure combo whose name will not be uttered here:Am I very wrongTo hide behind the glare of an open minded stareAm I very wrongTo wander in the fear of a never ending lieAm I very wrongTo try to close my ears to the sound they play so loud

Hoo-boy—pour yourself three-fingers of your favorite high-proof single malt for this episode of the Three Whisky Happy Hour, as Steve, John, and Lucretia throw down hard on the limits of free speech in theory and practice. A lot of people—some of them conservatives (and, ahem, John at times!)—think that banning student chapters of the pro-Hamas Students for (In)Justice in Palestine, as Governor DeSantis has done in Florida, represents right-wing "cancel culture" and is therefore hypocritical. Steve and Lucretia argue that two generations of flabby jurisprudence from the Supreme Court about the First Amendment has left us illiterate about the first principles of the matter.Thus, we recur to some older writings of David Lowenthal and Harry Jaffa on this point, and suggest that is it not difficult at all in principle to distinguish between political speech that deserves protection and speech from would-be tyrants who, if successful, would take away everyone else's right to speech (if not right to life in the case of Jews) if they gained power. Whether to do so is a matter of prudence and circumstance, but one of the lessons of history is that if a nation waits too long (cough, cough—Germany in the 1930s—cough, cough) to assert its right of self-preservation against the barbarians in its midst, a free society is lost.The question of barbarism is central to the second part of today's episode, where we sort out some of the basic issues of the laws of war and just war theory. And we use Angelo Codevilla as one of our expert witnesses on this subject, which shouldn't be that hard to sort out, but somehow is if you only read the New York Times or some other pre-school level source.

Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal are back in fashion these days, featuring some truly strange bedfellows. Liberal intellectuals told President Biden that he could become the next FDR if he simply spent like a convention of drunken sailors, but some of the "national conservatives" also suddenly like FDR and think we should emulate the New Deal's economic policies, which surely has Milton Friedman and William F. Buckley rolling over in their graves.Meanwhile, historians have neglected FDR's record on civil liberties, with the conspicuous exception of the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II because that is too large a blot to be ignored (though even that story is not understood fully or accurately). Historian David Beito explores this forgotten aspect of FDR and the New Deal in his new book, The New Deal's War on the Bill of Rights: The Untold Story of FDR's Concentration Camps, Censorship, and Mass Surveilance. There's probably a connection between the New Deal's political economy and constitutionalism and these offenses to civil liberties—the point Hayek made in his misunderstood Road to Serfdom—that modern-day FDR admirers ought to keep in mind

With John Yoo, who accuses Lucretia and Steve of being closet monarchists, back from his jungle adventures in South America (albeit without any archeological relics to satify his Indiana Jones fantasies) and sitting in the host chair this week, the gang offers its two cents on the latest GOP debate (someone—guess who?—is not impressed with Nikki Haley), and the disappointing election results, which, Steve suggests, is like Twain's remark on Wagner's music ("it's better than it sounds"), though with the key takeaway that the GOP is doomed to more election night disappointments as long as it has a deer-in-the-headlines problem when it comes to abortion.After reviewing a few new legal developments in the largehr Trump saga, we get down to exploring the mounting crisis of anti-Semitism, with an analysis of why this current eruption of anti-Semitism we're seeing nwo is not your grandfather's anti-Semitism, but is in fact ax expression of a much deeper problem with the maliganancy of the progressive left. College administrators who think they can weather the storm and wait for the fury to abate on its own are deluded.We're going to retur next week with a sequel, and explain to everyone why a wholesale purge of leftist institutions is not a violation of free speech rightly understood, or merely "right-wing cancel culture," as the left and too many simple-minded libertarians think. Fire away (heh).

With John Yoo still away somewhere in the jungles of South America, Steve and Lucretia are delighted to be joined by a very special guest, Prof. Amy Wax of Penn Law School. Followers of the campus scene may be familiar with Penn Law's crusade to fire Prof. Wax for the sin of offending against campus orthodoxies on race and immigration, at the same time Penn so conspicuously tolerates anti-Semitism.Prof. Wax isn't at liberty to discuss the details of her ongoing ordeal, but we do get into the thick of several pertinent questions, such as:—Does the current crisis of tolerance for anti-Semitism on campus represent a possible inflection point to turn back “wokery” at last, or will this episode prove that higher education has passed the point of no return?—Is there any evidence that the high-profile donor revolt at Penn and elsewhere is having an effect?—On a wider note, many conservative law professors are leaving their posts because of the increasing ideological hostility. This seems another bad omen for academia.

Another bonus classic format edition, this time featuring Steve in extended conversation with Col. Austin Bay, one of the proprietors of the indispensable Strategy Page, columnist for Creators Syndicate, and author of the splendid Cocktails from Hell: Five Complex Wars Shaping the 21st Century.His column last week is a brief and lucid tour through the proxy wars America is currently confronting (against Russia and Iran, by way of Ukraine and Israel), and our conversation goes into much greater depth on both of these conflicts as well as our potential conflict with rapidly-arming China.Can Ukraine defeat Russia? What must Israel do to prevail, and what are the risks of a wider war? Some of what Col. Bay lays out will curl your hair and make you want to buy a lot of canned goods, but he also gets into detail about how combined arms work on the battlefield and especially in the kind of urban warfare U.S. forces faced in Iraq and Israel is facing now in Gaza. The biggest risk of the moment, Bay agrees, is with America's pathetic leadership class, making him more worried for the fate of the country than at any time in the last 20 years.

Way back in 1960, Leo Strauss wrote in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences that "Natural law, which was for many centuries the basis of the predominant Western political thought, is rejected in our time by almost all students of society who are not Roman Catholics." In the decades since then, however, natural law has enjoyed a revival of sorts, and is implicated today in the rise of constitutional originalism at the Supreme Court. But it is also a confusing subject, because many so-called "new natural law" theories seem to concede too much to modern philosophy, as if the great tradition of natural law begins with Bentham. To be sure, the classical authors such as Aristotle, Cicero, and Aquinas were not simple thinkers on the subject, but their work tends not bog down with specialized jargon or abstruse theory. One person stands out for rescuing the older tradition of natural law: Hadley Arkes, author of Mere Natural Law: Originalism and the Anchoring Truths of the Constitution. In this conversation, Steve Hayward draws out the basics of the argument from Prof. Arkes, and extends the line of reasoning to today's controversies about free speech and "cancel culture," which are more confused than ever with the sudden eruption of anti-Semitism on college campuses.