Part Of The Problem - They Can't Fight

Episode Date: January 28, 2025

Dave Smith brings you the latest in politics! On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave is joined by co-host Robbie "The Fire" Bernstein to discuss the references made to Dave and Scott Horton on Jonah Goldberg's podcast The Remnant by Jonah and Michael C. Moynihan, reflect on the difference between the "old guard" of conservative media and new media, and more. Support Our Sponsors:Upgrade your wardrobe instantly and save20% off with the code [PROBLEM] at https://www.publicrec.com/PROBLEM #publicrecpodCrowdHealth - https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/promos/potpTax Network USA - 1-800-958-1000 or go to TNUSA.COM/SMITHPart Of The Problem is available for early pre-release at https://partoftheproblem.com as well as an exclusive episode on Thursday!Get your tickets to Porch Tour here:https://porchtour.comFind Run Your Mouth here:YouTube - http://youtube.com/@RunYourMouthiTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/run-your-mouth-podcast/id1211469807Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/4ka50RAKTxFTxbtyPP8AHmFollow the show on social media:X:http://x.com/ComicDaveSmithhttp://x.com/RobbieTheFireInstagram:http://instagram.com/theproblemdavesmithhttp://instagram.com/robbiethefire#libertarianSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello, hello, what's up everybody? Welcome to a brand new episode of part of the problem. My headphones weren't plugged in all the way. That was the issue there. What's up? I'm joined by Robbie the fire Bernstein. How are you, sir? I feel like I didn't get the full inshore experience. You know what? Sometimes that's good for you though. It leaves you desiring more wanting more Which is what I always try to do we? Kentucky that's right. We're going Order because I you can't get hammered on the Thursday nights

Because then you're chasing you're chasing hangovers all weekend You don't want to wait. I think we have a three-hour car ride together after it So you know the next day that is maybe you could get hammered, you'll be fine. Louisville, Kentucky, this Thursday night. I like saving it for the last night, but I'm excited to be in Louisville. Excited for, I think I've been told it's Lou-ville. You know what, these towns gotta get their shit together.

You know, work on names that are more pronounced like the letters. I gotta go back to kindergarten. It's one of the two things. Listen, I'm learning how to say city names by touring the country. I always learn it by the time we're there. By the time we're there and I'm on stage,

I get it right. Louisville? It's not Louisville? Louisville. Louisville? I don't know. I could be completely wrong. Maybe you're right.

But we will be in one of those places and then Fort Wayne, Indiana, this Friday and Saturday. Comic DaveSmith.com for those ticket links. Of course, as I mentioned to you before, I'm also debating Josh Hammer at Princeton University. Ever heard of it? Hmm, all right. Bad sign for the world. But debating him on the US-Israel relationship and its influence on American foreign policy. So it's on February 11. I believe there are still some tickets available for that.

If you'd like to come out, go. I'll tweet about it again. I'll tweet out the link later today. OK. So and then, of course, comictapesmith.com. I think I said that, right? And of course, partoftheproblem.com if you want to support our Podcast and become part of the live chat and get the members only episode every week

That's where you got to go partoftheproblem.com All right, so there is Look there's a lot going on in the world and we're gonna have a busy week with lots of topics to discuss. I did want to respond today to a podcast that called me out, not by name. They went the Ben Shapiro route. They won't state your name. They don't wanna give you the press.

I understand, but I just, I, listen. Lord Voldemort are over here. Well, look, I just, I am. They do treat me like Voldemort. I will say this. I am only spending today's episode on this topic. Only 10% of it is my ego. Well. Okay.

There's 90% a reason why it's worth responding to this stuff. It's an honor tradition that no matter how small the platform calls out on Twitter, we have to dedicate full episodes to it. I just. The part of the problem way on Twitter, we have to dedicate full episodes to it. I just. The part of the problem away. Listen, there has to be a punishment

for refusing to say my name, okay? Say my name when you call me out. And if you do, I will decide whether or not to retaliate. But if you do this shit, then I'm going to. Penny grievances with Dave Smith. There you go, that could be the new podcast. Well, look, I will. So for people who don't know, if people follow me on Twitter, they may have seen I posted a couple of times about this.

But for those of you who don't know what we're talking about here, this was on Jonah Goldberg's podcast. Now, he wouldn't be Jewish by chance. I name like that. It's not I'm not pro-isl kind of guy impossible to say rub Impossible to determine one way or the other I don't know but this is you know, I ironically I guess Given our back and forth. I've actually as I was posting about this on Twitter and as we discussed it here on the podcast I've had to explain who Jonah Goldberg is to a lot of people because the truth is he's kind of...

I never heard of him. Yeah, well, and it's understandable. It would be understandable that most people paying attention today have not heard of this guy. But I'm just a little bit older and I'm obsessed with this shit, so I know exactly who Jonah Goldberg is. Jonah Goldberg was the editor at National Review

which National Review of course was for the at least the second half of the 20th century probably the you know gold standard of of a conservative publication debatably the most influential conservative publication. Um, Jonah Goldberg was a young star in this world. And you know, in, in neo conservative circles, let's say he was really, I mean, he must've been, you know,

he's got to be about 15 years older than me. Um, somewhat something in that ballpark. But so this would put him, I mean, he was the editor of national review in 2002. So if he's 15 years, I mean, I'm not, I don't know exactly his birthday, but this would put him at around 30 maybe. So imagine like, he was like really a big shot at that time. And I remember many years, I mean, I remember reading his weekly columns in National Review and seeing him on all types of TV shows.

He was always on the Fox News All-Star panel and this stuff and, you know, advocating all of the disastrous policies that ruined the 21st century. So he's got this guy, Moynihan on his podcast and they, you know, the topic of me and Scott Horton and Darrell Cooper and some of these guys came up. Now Michael Moyniham is, he's the fifth column podcast guy. So he's, I thought he worked for Reason at one point.

I could be getting that wrong, but he worked for Vice News and the Daily Beast, and he did a podcast with some, well, it would have been, I think, Camille Foster was part of the podcast for a while, and Matt Welsh, I believe, was as well. I'm not sure who's currently on the podcast. But anyway, as tends to happen with these things, I get, they were talking about some me and some people in our camp.

And then, you know, people on social media send it to me. And I did end up listening to it. And it's, it's, look, it's kind of fascinating to me because again, I remember being, you know, whatever I was 20 when he was 30 or 35 or whatever, and he was the, you know, the editor at National Review. And I remember, you know, hating him then because he was wrong about everything and awful. And now it's just, it's a little bit of a surreal thing

when, you know, they're like trash and me. But also I just thought it was, it was almost like a perfect microcosm of like the old dying media, giving their feelings about people in this new media and they're, I mean, look, I, I don't want to like poison the well, so I guess we could just jump in and kind of dissect it a little bit. So you know what?

I'll save my thought until you guys hear it and you can tell that I'm not just, just inventing this. This is how these guys are so let's let's start the podcast and then we can obviously will will stop a bunch And and give our our thoughts on it. So this is from Jonah Goldberg's the podcast is The really give them a plug here on the bigger platform. Yeah, I well listen these guys are uh They're kind of like you ever see those commercials Rob where it's like on Fox News they'll have the commercials where like you can send a box of Jewish goodies to a Holocaust survivor somewhere in the world. I never saw it. Is that a real thing? Yeah these people are without and it's our job to help them so let's get some some eyeballs on Jonah Goldberg's podcast. It's like super potato skins skins for them to open up and go, I haven't seen this in years.

I guess, okay, the show is called The Remnant. That is, which is a reference that I'm quite fond of. Back to my childhood in camps. All right. Come on, Jonah. There's just a bunch of Jews here joking around. All right, we can all have fun together. All right, Let's let's dive into this and discuss. Defending East Germany. You know, this thing like what Soviet nostalgia gets right. It's like, excuse me.

And I think so much of that comes from foreign policy, actually, because I mean, so Rob was a very dedicated neocon. He was a very long time. It should be 55 minutes is where we want to start. And 55. OK, yeah, maybe I was maybe minutes is where we want to start. This is 55-11.

55-11? Okay, yeah, maybe I was wrong about that. No, no, no, I thought it should be right there. But, um, hold on one second. Yeah, okay, just play it, that's fine. Change in Iran, where he, I think he was either born or his parents were born, he might actually have been born in Iran. And he, and he, Is this from the right run, from Guilty, actually? his parents are but he might actually have been born wrong and he and he is guilty actually libertarians okay there's a completely baddie school of

libertarians who seem to have taken over that the kind of mantle of libertarianism you see this comedian guy who's always camera's name is always talking on on Twitter and they never talk about economics I've never heard them talk about it okay let's let's pause it right here. Just not. So, look, what can you say about this? First of all, I understand there's this comedian guy who's kind of taken over the libertarian mantle. Who else are we talking about here, okay?

So, this is clearly a shot at me. What these guys do, and this is, again, it's just, it's these kind of, it's these tactics from the old order that somehow they think are still going to work. It's that, hey, like, we're above that. So they don't even wanna pretend that they know my name. Like, it's just, like we're above that so they don't even want to pretend that they know my name Like it's just off this comedian guy. I don't even remember his name, you know, like first of all, I

Know it's a difficult name to pronounce. I understand. It's a difficult one to memorize but this is an act Moynihan knows my name He could just say it if you you wanna spend the time criticizing me on the podcast, well then just say it and do it. Cause think about this. While you guys think, I was gonna say before, but I said I didn't wanna poison the well,

but it's like, you'll see through this whole thing. It's just this pure like snob routine that they do. Like just constantly letting you know. and they're not even good at it So they're like I'll just tell you that I'm better than you whereas like you're supposed to kind of demonstrate that not just assert it But think about while you're trying to play this game of pretending you can't remember the name Dave Think about how stupid what you're saying is imagine Dave, think about how stupid what you're saying is. Imagine saying you can't remember someone's name and then criticizing them for what they don't discuss.

Just think about how stupid that is. Like, you're telling me that if you can't remember the name Dave, you don't know enough about me to remember the name Dave Smith, yet you know what I, not only what I do talk about, right? Cause you'd have to have a lot more familiarity with someone to criticize them for what they don't talk about, right? Like I could not be familiar with someone at all and see them say one thing and then I could criticize them for what they said. But in order for me to criticize someone for not discussing something, like avoiding a topic

i'd have to actually follow their work right because that would be pretty stupid like if i were if somebody were to uh let's say tweet about um tax policy and then my criticism of them was i go i don't know anything about this guy i'm not sure what his name is but my criticism of him is that he never discusses monetary policy well how would I know that unless I was somewhat familiar with the guy and then he could turn around and be like I wrote three books on monetary policy and I'd be like oh I feel like a retard because I just criticized someone whose name I don't know for what they don't discuss and again a good way to avoid looking really really stupid like that is to like not do this not criticize someone for what

they do and again Moynihan sorry this is just a stupid criticism I talk about economics constantly my faction in the Libertarian Party is the Mises caucus named after Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian economist. We talk about economics constantly. Too much, some might say. But anyway, what can you even say about that, other than like, this is just, this is silly on its face. And again, the reason, there's a thing here, and i'll get into this more with these guys, but there's a thing here where It's just I don't know exactly how to say it

There's a reason why me and you would not make that type of mistake There'd be no time that we'd criticize someone pretend We don't know their name and then claim they don't talk about something which they talk about all the time and the reason why is like Because we'd we'd look like idiots if we did that right and we are in the marketplace here you can't We can't just be retarded because then like we'll lose our support You know people come in here and they watch the show because they count on us to not be retards. You know, like I'm not saying we're the most brilliant things in the world, but like we at least, the expectations

when you talk about something, you kind of know what you're talking about. You kind of know a little something about it. And we would guard against talking about something that we don't know about at all. The old school guys, the guys from the old order, they don't have any at all the old school guys the guys from the old order They don't have any of that because they weren't in a real competitive market. They were at the National Review Where what are you gonna do compete with the National Review? The National Review already made it so you can't compete with the National Review They're like in they've been knighted in this circle. And so they would when they were talking about back in the day

Let's say if they were talking about Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan or anyone who they had like exercised from the conservative movement, they could just say whatever they want because you never get to hear from that guy. But that's not the world we live in now. You can't just say whatever you want about me because I have a bigger platform than you do. Now, Jonah Goldberg, I tweeted something about this. There's actually a pretty funny exchange. I tweeted something about this, like just on the level of like, how dumb is it to claim?

You can't remember my name, but you can criticize me for what I do and don't discuss. Right. Pretty straightforward, stupid. And so I said this and Jonah Goldberg, uh, he, he responded to me. Um, so let me, uh, make sure I get this right. So I give him what he said. So he responded by saying, I have so little idea of who you are. I don't even remember talking about you. Sorry dude. Didn't mean it as an insult. Still don't. And this is what I'm telling you, just the pure snobbery of these guys as if they're superior to everybody because you fucking sold the war in Iraq 20 something years ago.

But your one claim to fame is the most disastrous foreign policy blunder in modern American history and yet you have a sense of superiority when you call. Now, as soon as he says that, it's so funny because he tweets this. And then everybody on Twitter is just responding. They're like, hey dude, you know, Twitter has this really cool function where you can see how many followers everybody has.

And so, by the way, I'm not saying, if you don't know who I am, that's fine. Don't know who I am. Lots of people don't know who I am. I don't know who lots of other people are I'm sure there's lots of people who have way bigger followings than me and I don't know who they are, right? but what I would never do what you'll never see me do on this show is Address somebody with a much bigger following than me

Criticize them for what they don't talk about Okay, which is something they do talk about all the time and then when they call me out on that go, dude I don't even know who you are. Like what's that supposed to mean? Anyway in this new world unlike the old world You have to be prepared to actually argue against those people You don't get to just slander Ron Paul with whatever you want and then people don't get to hear from them. And in fact, as I said to you before, Rob, as like, we have a much bigger platform than them. And so it just it's like, you know, my three year old, he has like one of those, you know, like the little hammers that kids

have that are like squishy at the end that make like a little honk noise when you hit them it's like if you had that little hammer and someone else has a sledgehammer and then you just hit them with your little clown hammer I'm the guy with the sledgehammer so now I'm just sitting here looking at this sledgehammer in my hand going like oh well if you want to get into a game of hitting people with hammer like if you want to get into a game of hitting people with hammer, like if you want to get into a game of shitting on each other on our podcasts, I'll just do that to way more people than you do it to. It's, I don't know what to say. It's just the whole thing is, is very bizarre to me.

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is of course Crowd Health. We've been telling you about this company for years because they really are that amazing. If anybody here is not thrilled with their health insurance carrier, which is pretty much 100% of people, you got to check out CrowdHealth. It is a decentralized healthcare payment system that frees you from the tyranny of health insurance. So in other words, this is not health insurance. It's an alternative to health insurance where you can see whatever doctors you like, because there's no networks limiting you. It's significantly less expensive than health insurance.

They rip out the middleman with all the bureaucracy, and a lot of people say this is a huge portion of the costs of health insurance. Singles are about $185 a month. A family of four is $605 a month. And you can use the promo code P OTP and get only $99 a month per person for the next three months again crowd health is not health insurance It's a totally different way of paying for health care terms and conditions may apply

Check them out at join crowd health comm an unbelievable company and a really great alternative to the broken health insurance system. All right, let's get back into the show. I don't know, Rob, any thoughts? Well, you know, this is our first time discussing it. You sent the episode my way this morning and I gave it a listen when I was preparing. And it's funny that you call him snobbery

because the word I had in my head was that it's just very bitchy behavior. And the two the two moves, it's one criticizing us of, oh, you're libertarian. So then you guys should be talking about economics, which for one, we do. Well, that's about to come up. Oh, yeah, I guess that came up already. We do. And then the second one, which I, you know, I'll talk more on this later once we hear it. But I've experienced this a lot of times in contracts where someone will put something in a contract and you go, well, I take issue with that. And they go, well, it's not important,

but we have to keep it. And that's our entire argument about you guys shouldn't be focused on the foreign policy. It's not important, but it should be exactly the way that we lay it out. Well, then it's important. And then that means we should discuss it. But it's kind of like this bitchy move of like,

no, it just should be my way. Let's just have it my way. Don't even discuss it You guys should be go talk about this other thing. You're like well. Why can't we discuss it? You're not supposed to it's not your thing. Yeah, it's not that important Let's just take it right out of the contract and now it's really not important Right so not important that we never have to think about it again. Yeah, I get the comparison All right, let's let's keep playing Even an issue. It's all about foreign policy. It's all about Israel They're literally more interesting in having conversations about how bad Churchill was

Then they are about you know, our trade barriers net positive for the American worker, right? I mean, these are interesting conversations that I think there's a real right there worker, right? I mean, these are interesting conversations that I think they're actually really there. What a like, think about the again, the just bitch behavior is a good way to put it. Just condescending snobbery. Oh, you'll decide what are the interesting conversations like, by the way, are trade barriers good for the economy is an interesting conversation. I'm not downplaying that these are the time. Listen, we're all policy nerds here, us and them, right?

Like this is what we all do. Yes, that's the type of thing I would read an article about. I would listen to a podcast about, like I do find that to be an interesting conversation. Are you saying that Israel or World War II are not interesting conversations? Are those not things, like like as if it's like that? And I'll tell you, this also is of the old order.

Is that this is, by the way, this was a big part of the beef that Murray Rothbard had with National Review. And when the hardcore libertarians kind of got purged out of that movement was that they wanted Murray Rothbard to just like write articles about the minimum wage. And he was like, no, I want to write about the war in Vietnam. You know, and like they'd be like, well, libertarians should be like economic specialists over here. And he was like, no, I don't agree to that at all. And that's what they always wanted libertarians to be.

But like, the thing is, first of all, the war in Israel is not separate. The war in Gaza or whatever is not separate from economics. There's an economic component to that war as well. And the fact is that our relationship with Israel has been, let's say, a large piece of the puzzle of why we fought the war in Iraq and why we fought the war in Libya and Syria and Yemen and you know, like all of these conflicts are all very interrelated and this has cost trillions and trillions of dollars. So it's not as if this conversation is separate from a discussion about economics and the economics of it are actually very important but just the

the idea that you get to come up here and say now this is an interesting conversation but you guys want to talk about this which is not interesting who defy listen I mean objectively speaking they're all interesting topics like there's interesting conversations to have with all of them. But who the fuck are you Moynihan to decide what's interesting and what's not? like again These conversations are things that get many more eyeballs on them than anything you ever do. So People are interested in these conversations. You don't just get to come in anymore This isn't how it works. You don't get to just come in anymore and go no, no, no, we've determined what is interesting

And these are the parameters of what you're allowed to discuss But I mean look for libertarians people who believe in Liberty. I mean what could be more important than the topic of war? the you know the the ultimate war. You know, the ultimate infraction on liberty would be dropping bombs on cities full of people. It's even more tyrannical than marginal tax rates being too high, as I'm sure Jonah Goldberg would like to limit the discussion to. Sorry, we want to talk about the war. And oh, by the way, Jonah Sorry, we want to talk about the war. And oh, by the way, Jonah Goldberg also wanted to talk about the war back when he was helping to sell the war in Iraq. He probably doesn't want to talk about that anymore. Jonah Goldberg probably doesn't want

me to read from Jonah Goldberg pieces from 2002. He'd probably rather those fell apart or those faded into the, you know, the distant past. And we forget about that. But if anybody wants to, they're still on the internet. So he was fine to talk about war when he was selling the catastrophe, but those of us who want to avoid the next catastrophe, we should really just shut up and talk about tariff policy or something like that.

I also, I think war is one of the harshest consequences of having a federal reserve, which is a big economic topic that we'll talk about, is that instead of having to tax people and sell support, sell war bonds, get people to support a war, you just get to rob them through inflation. And you get to have wars without the support of the American people.

And if you want to have a war with Russia, you can even have that billionaire, you know, talk about how it's cheaper because you got Ukrainian lives are going to be lost because Americans won't actually go and fight these foreign wars anymore. Yeah, the guy that got the medal from from Biden, I forget his name, the currency dude. I know, I know. Yeah, yeah. Names. Well, look, I mean, also, I will just say that, you know, you guys, the listeners, you may remember this better than me, but it was either one podcast or two podcasts ago that

we had a whole discussion about tariffs and their effect on the consumers and how you can't really tax your way into prosperity. And it's just going to make goods more expensive. We can't really tax foreign countries. We can only tax the goods that Americans are consuming. So we do talk about this stuff. Again, it's all right. Let's let's keep going. Real conversations to be had.

I mean, David Otter at MIT wrote that There is a problem with free trade and what you know, the opening of China has done to the blah blah blah You know, that's an interesting conversation to have a you know People like Russ Roberts who are smart to have a Scotland sick him who's brilliant on this stuff And that's like I love reading about that. They've just completely abandoned it and it is their motivation for everything is just completely abandon it. And it is their motivation for everything is foreign policy. The thing about Tucker that I've noticed, he said it, I think, once directly, but he

said it a number of times and I know exactly who he's talking about. He says, like, you know, these people who I used to scorn because as a conservative, I was supposed to. And he's talking about Noam Chomsky and he's done a bunch of these things about Chomsky. Glenn Greenwald, too. I mean, he was he used to tell me, like's done a bunch of these things about John Greenwald, too I mean he was He used to tell me like I'm agreeing more and more going girl. I can't believe it. You know yeah It's it's it's down the open

I mean it's just that in the open they do these like two-hour love fest together and but that kind of thing I mean it all For a second here, but is it Isn't it interesting that they literally they go, oh, and now, you know, Tucker Carlson has said in the past that there are these leftists he used to scorn. He claims he's talking about Noam Chomsky. I'm not sure if that's true or not. I hope it's true. That would be awesome if Tucker was. I knew he's thinking of Glenn Greenwald when he says that a lot because he's told me that personally. But one thing you might notice, this is it's unattached to any argument.

It's just like Tucker's basically going, you know, there were all these people when I was a young conservative who I was just kind of these leftists who I was just taught I'm supposed to hate these guys. And then as I start reading their stuff, I'm going, you know, they're actually making a lot of sense. They make a lot of really good points. By the way, Noam Chomsky made a lot of really good points about US foreign policy. So does Glenn Greenwald. Like and he's looking at that and going oh actually a lot of the

stuff that they were saying was right. And then but so number one you know if you take someone like you take Chomsky Greenwald guys like this who were real opponents of the war in Iraq and then Tucker's going oh you, I used to think I was supposed to hate these guys, but now I'm saying they make a lot of sense. And Goldberg, one of the major people who was selling the war in Iraq, just goes, yeah, it's terrible. But you're not going to address it all. Why?

Like you're not going to address why you guys lost the moment, why you guys lost the argument, because the policy you supported turned out to be an unmitigated disaster Literally the biggest foreign policy blunder in modern American history Like listen, dude, I'm not even I'll pull it up later. Maybe the But then to you know make this after going by the way, you know, kind of telling us what are the interesting conversations versus what aren't? What people can have these conversations? You see, these people are smart. You can read them. They can have this conversation.

And then just to turn to Tucker and go, oh, but now he loves these leftists and him and Glenn Greenwald just have these two-hour lovefests. What are you two doing right now? What are you guys doing? You're having a podcast talking about things that you both agree with. Neither of you are disagreeing. You're doing the same thing, dude. So yes, the difference is that Tucker and Glenn Greenwald are right, whereas you guys are wrong. The points they're making are very intelligent. The ones you guys are making are retarded. Um, and a lot more people watch theirs. Those are the differences, but the love fest dynamic, it's,

it's unbelievable because you said like bitchy behavior. It is, there's like, it's this incredible atrophy that was built up by people who were in like an insulated world that weren't exposed to like smart critical thinking people from the outside. And so what they resort to is like these, it's kind of it's like teenage girl tactics in an argument. I'm going to tell you you're not I don't even know your name. Like I don't even know who you are Sorry, are you tweeting about me talking about you on my podcast? Cuz like I don't even know you and you guys aren't smart

But these guys are super smart and oh your friends with a leftist. They like have cooties Don't you know that and oh, what are you guys having a love fest? Like what it's just like what do you what are you saying it's like insulting the idea of having a podcast from your podcast yes Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald do shows together yes they talk about things they agree on because they agree on that same thing you guys are doing just no one's listening they are now though because you're playing it more of them are now They are now though, cause you're playing it. More of them are now. Not the way you wanted it, but more of them are now.

Alright guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Public Rec. If you are tired of squeezing into stiff dress pants, you gotta check out Public Rec and their new Game Changer pants. You really can't have it all style and comfort. And for a limited time, our listeners will get 20% off their entire order with the promo code problem at publicrec.com. That's 20% off when you use the promo code problem at publicrec.com.

Whether you need clothes for the work week, formal outings, or just hanging out on the weekends, Public Rec's game changer pants will be your new go-to. They have the most comfortable pants you'll ever wear and they look great too, and you can wear them at the office. For all you guys out there who don't like being in uncomfortable dress pants,

you gotta check this out. Again, publicrec.com, promo code PROBLEM for 20% off your entire order. After your purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them. So please support the show and tell them that you got sent by the part of the problem podcast. Go check them out. Public rec.com, promo code problem for 20% off. All right, let's get back into the show. All right, let's keep playing.

For me with Trump in that interview that he did with Bill O'Reilly, when Bill O'Reilly said, you know, Putin's a cold-blooded killer And he's like, you know, look at our history. You've done a lot of bad stuff, too And I was like wait what the Republican nominee for president just you know said we're pretty bad on the international stage, too And it's just been a weird thing Particularly about this more directly because I've asked a couple people about this a good argument Pause it for a second. Really took it on. Took on the idea.

This is what I mean. I mean, doesn't that not... By the way, I mean, I just said it. Does the next sentence not perfectly describe what I'm talking about? Where it's like teenagers? Like, what? Are you going to attach this to an argument or no? You're talking to the guy who sold the war in Iraq. Okay, yes, by the way, we have talked about this moment quite a bit, it wasn't when Trump was a candidate,

he was already president of the United States of America, it was the Bill O'Reilly halftime of the Super Bowl interview. So this is after the presidential election. Now, again, it's like these old school guys, it's they just, I don't even know how to say this. Okay, this is the analogy that I'll give. All right, Rob, cause I think,

and I think you'll, you'll appreciate this. Maybe not, but let's say, okay, so I'm a big, I'm a big, uh, MMA fan, right? Love the UFC. When we're out on the road this Saturday night, we're going to be in the green room watching the UFC after our show is over because that's what we always do and I've been a fan of the sport for many many years. The first podcast I ever did was a hammer fisting podcast with Louis. Me and Natalie actually met each other on the now defunct, the short-lived Yo! MMA rap. But anyway, big fan of the sport.

So for people who don't know, the UFC started in the 90s. Now I grew up in the 80s, I mean, I was born in 83, so I was 10 when the UFC started, but I remember when I was a little kid, and people around my age will probably remember this, but every town in the United States of America had a dojo. They had karate places or Taekwondo was really big. There was a bit of the like, what was Bruce Lee's one, like Wing Chung

or something like that. But there were all these different like Eastern martial arts places. And this was the old order. Okay. And In this old order that it was always like, you know Whoever the guy at your local YMCA who taught taekwondo like I went to taekwondo almost every boy I knew like when we were seven and eight, this is what everyone did was karate Now this back then every instance it was very mystical and the instructors would always claim these wild things you know like I remember my guy tell him he was a seventh degree black belt in the art of whatever nonsense he was teaching me was and only three men in the world could kick his ass he could kick

everybody else's ass and he had like this eagle crane punch that would make your heart explode if he hit you. Like this was real shit that instructors would say to kids. However, in the old order, you couldn't spar. What am I gonna do, Rob? Hit you with my eagle crane punch and watch your heart explode? Obviously that won't be a fun karate lesson. So we can't spar because I'd kill you.

So we'll just do katas. You just practice the moves, and you do it in front of the mirror, and then you'll hit the bag, and then you'll do this. But we don't fight, because we'd kill you. And then the UFC came along. I'm Jewish. We practice pushing.

Nagging. Just nagging at the mirror for a while. So then the UFC came along, and this was really pretty revolutionary at the mirror for a while. But so then the UFC came along, and this was really pretty revolutionary at the time. Like, no one had even thought you could do this. But they were just like, hey, we're going to have fights with no rules. No rules.

And it was like, is that even legal? And then it turned out they got a lot of pressure from the government. They actually had to do them on Indian reservations for a while, because they were unregulated and it was illegal to do them anywhere else. But they basically just went, hey, anyone, you can come on in and fight. And you know what we found out?

All those guys can't fight. They just were good at pretending to fight. But all of that was pretend. It was all make believe. Like that guy who told me when I was six that there were only four guys in the world who could kick his ass. There were probably 15 guys in that building who could have kicked his ass if he got in a bar fight it was a coin flip whether he would win or lose that bar fight because he didn't fight this was all

bullshit and we actually got to watch some of these guys competed they would come into the ufc and they believe it some of them believe their own horseshit i have this eagle crane punch that will make your heart explode and then they would gear up to like throw their eagle crane punch and a boxer would just jab them and it was like the first time they'd ever been hit and their noses broke and they were like what? Hoist Gracie would just you know take them down and then they're like wait time out what do I do down here I've never trained a day in my life on the ground what do I do down here and they just fell apart because they can't fight they

can't actually fight and And I'm telling you, that's what these guys in the old world are. They don't actually know how to fight. They know how to give the illusion of it. This is, this is like the, it's a cata of arguing. You're not really doing it. You can't actually get in the ring and spar. Not, at least not against an opponent who's not playing along with your dumb bullshit You know so like they do these things where it's like you're looking at at Tucker and saying Like I know already what kind of you pointed out just now that you're just like oh wait

You're not gonna make an argument though. Like you're just gonna say This is I'll pretend to laugh as I bring it up. And Tucker actually likes Noam Chomsky. Okay? Do you have anything coming here? Is there an argument? You know, Donald Trump... Bill O'Reilly said to him, Putin's a killer.

And he said, we got some killers too. We've done a lot of killing. Look at the war in Iraq. We did a lot of killing. And this is the Republican. That's all they got. Are you going to defend? Make the argument, dude. Take on one of Trump's arguments. Since you brought me up, take on one of my arguments. Take on one of, take on Tucker. Something. Something. Are you arguing we

don't have killers too? Because you're talking to the guy. You're talking to the guy you're talking to the guy by the way just to be clear because I did pull this up if anybody wants to go look it up okay the title of the piece is Bag Dead Delanta Est by Jonah Goldberg April 11th 2002 and if I could just skim down after a long bullshit piece of just nonsense, here's the words of Jonah Goldberg, okay? In 2002, when it really mattered from national review, back when national review really mattered back in the old order, when this guy was somebody, um, quote, the point for now is that Iraq shouldn't have existed in the first place. It lasted this long thanks to the Stalinist repression of the Ba'ath

regime and the only reason we didn't get rid of it last time was that the Saudis despised the idea of toppling Hussein because they don't want us to establish an attractive alternative to the nasty form of government they profit from. Well, boohoo for the Saudis. If they hadn't found oil on their land, they'd be a trivia question for students of comparative government today. Wouldn't such a huge move inflame the Middle East? Sure. Wouldn't such a humiliating effort give Osama bin Laden exactly what he wants? Yes. Wouldn't this cause the European diplomats to drop their egg spoons and disgust over such barbarism? Most definitely. Wouldn't the civilized world, with the notable exception of the British, turn its

collective back on us? I guess so. All that would in all likelihood be true until we win Jonah Goldberg 2002 except we didn't win all that shit that you knew what happened happened and then we lost and all that got all that we accomplished was killing a million people but if someone points out that we got some killers on our side too, I guess we just laugh at that. I mean the reason why these guys hate that me and Scott Horton and Darrell Cooper and all the reason they hate that we All have bigger platforms than them now is because they know they can't fight They can't actually play in this game. They can only do katas and exercises in front of a mirror. They can pretend to have a point.

All they're doing so far in this podcast is just pretending to have an argument. But you don't actually have anything. And it sucks. It sucks for these guys. And I get it. I let you know if if Jonah Goldberg, if I didn't know that Jonah Goldberg had written that shit that I just read back in 2002 You know like that will counteract whatever pity I have for him, but I get it

I mean man, it must suck to be like 28 31 32 and you are like you've made it You're the guy you're the whiz kid in neo-conservative circles and you're going to the top dude And then because the policy that you sold ended up, you know, at the end of the day, you were just standing there in a fucking Olympic sized swimming pool of the blood of innocent children while everyone else in the world decided that you should never be listened to again. And then the whole world, the whole game gets revolutionized and now you can't fight. That sucks.

That sucks when you used to tell everyone how there were only three people in the world who could kick your ass and now we found out that you're just some out of shape middle you know middle-aged schlub who can't fight at all that sucks but if you want to come back in this game if you're trying to be in the ufc now you can't just keep practicing your katas. You might wanna go take a Muay Thai class. You might wanna learn some Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, because that's the shit that actually works in arguments. Not this.

Good analogy? That worked for me. But, you know, these guys are still out there practicing their scoffs. Seems to be what they have. All right, let's keep playing. You could turn that off too, if it's getting a little hot in here Oh, I'm comfy. It goes you're good. It's sort of fascinating to me because I've seen you know, you live in an hour

For 20 years and you you know, we are there are literally dozens of us nerds like us who like, you know like follow this stuff this granularly and And one of the things that is fascinating is like, it kind of doesn't matter what the what the what the gateway drug is, what the red pill is, when people start these migrations, right? About becoming sort of cranky on economics or cranky on cultural stuff or or conspiratorial, right, whatever. They end up being obsessed with foreign policy.

And I it doesn't make a lot of logical sense to me is like, OK, so all of a sudden you think that liberal democratic capitalism is bad and we need a social will for a state. Why are you talking to me about Israel? Like you know, like what what which by the way has it much closer to the economic system that you would like I mean again, it's like the condescending giggling isn't a substitute for an argument now He transitioned from talking about libertarians who don't talk about economics enough to now. I don't know exactly who they're talking about, but somebody who thinks we need more of a welfare state here. Certainly not talking about libertarians anymore, but listen, I don't agree with people who say that we need more of a welfare state here, obviously, but the idea of just

dismissing the argument without even, even again taking on any of it, it's like, well, I think the point would be something like we've spent trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars following your clean break strategy of toppling governments all throughout the Arab world. And that's money that could have been spent here at home. Now, you could agree or disagree with that argument, but it's not there. It is a. A fairly reasonable one, it isn't one that you can just scoff at and dismiss.

And like, especially, you know, again, for the guy who was selling the war in Iraq to turn around and act like there's no argument that that money could have been put to better use. I'm not a welfare state guy, but man would we have been so much better off if those trillions of dollars had been spent on welfare rather than destroying Iraq for no reason. Seems to me like they got a pretty strong argument on their hands and you don't seem to have a counter to it. All right, let's keep playing. And the reason why, one, because you kind of brought it up, but two, I was talking with Pot about this yesterday.

My colleague Nick Catogeo, he made this argument that I don't necessarily fully subscribe to, but I think it's worth taking seriously. That the reason why Trump is talking about literally in his inaugural address about territorial expansion of the United States and taking the Panama Canal is that that is historically where nationalism has to go. Right, there's something about notions of greatness and nationalism that has to lead to greatness on the world stage and the only metric for that is either winning a war or expanding your territory. Right. And it feels to me like there's some truth to that.

It also be explained by Trump's Putin envy. Right. Oh, he got to do it in Ukraine. He's cheap. He gets to do it in Tibet and Taiwan. I got to do it somewhere. Right. If I'm going to be remembered like one of those guys. But it's it's very strange to me how radicalism in one aspect of political philosophy, so often for so many different types of people, whether they start out as libertarians or stay libertarians nominally, or they become Marxist or they become, you know, ultra-nationalist,

whatever, they end up just getting really worked up about international stuff rather than like, even though they said that their transformation came because they cared about the plight of the forgotten man and the and the lower classes in America. It's weird to me. Do you have a theory about it? Yeah, I don't really have a theory. I mean, I haven't when it came to people on the left, friends that, you know, went through this in college and stayed like that. And they were the ones that were always pushing, you know, Chomsky's books on me. Just pause for a second. Sure.

I mean, the stupidity of you don't understand why people that aren't, that believe in social services and aren't be giving resources, why they might look at the piles of money being spent on military equipment or foreign entanglements and going, hey, why don't we just start by not spending that money? That has, you can't even come to that argument? You can't figure out a working theory on that. You can't figure out why a poor person in New York can look at the amount of money being spent in Ukraine and that it does no good for them and going, hey, can I just have some of that money?

Or just that you're concerned about the plight of the worker in America and you can't like... And then look at the largest thing that we spend money on and it being defense. Yeah. Like let me hear. Let me try to really break this down for you guys because you're such, you know, just your daunting intellects who obviously can't remember everyone's name. Like they can't even see what the argument would be or why people would be concerned. Okay. Let's see images constantly on the news of areas of Gaza being flattened with your money that was spent on bombs and

you can't understand why a person that cares about the poor and goodness in the world might not go hey instead of that can someone cover my hospital bill you can't even understand yeah why someone's brain would go maybe it's maybe we got to simplify this a little bit okay Jonah Michael let's say you live in house a, okay? House a is your house. I'm going to rob house a of money to spend burning house b and all of the people in it alive, okay? I'm robbing from you in house a

to burn children alive in house B. Do you see where people concerned with the plate of people in house a might be opposed to that? You got any working theories on that? Jeez, I don't know. I guess I'll just sit here scratching my head for the rest of the day, trying to figure out why people concerned with the plight of working people in America might care about funding foreign wars.

And of course, it's as if these guys who I mean, I don't I don't really know much about Moynihan other than that he's at the fifth column and you know, I don't know much about him. I know more about Jonah Goldberg, but certainly Jonah Goldberg was supposed to be like You know, it's like all these guys like Charles Krauthammer was one of them. Bill Crystal was one of them They were always in the old world in the old order They were billed as these like super intellectuals like oh These are the guys that are really really smart like Dave really read everything and they know everything

But then you see Bill Crystal when he comes to debate Scott Horton and you're like, oh Yeah, again, it's literally the only thing I could compare that to when Bill Crystal debated Scott Horton was early UFC's when someone from their local dojo would come to fight hoist Gracie and you just be like Oh, oh, oh That guy knows how to fight youist Gracie and you just be like oh oh oh that guy knows how to fight you guys have been practicing nonsense and again it was a painful thing for those guys at the time because it's not just losing a fight you know losing a fight is one thing but it was losing a fight in a way where you go you

have to start from square one you've devoted thousands and thousands of hours to nonsense. You do not and that was Bill Kristol when he came but all these guys. Okay, Jonah Goldberg. You should be steeped in like the classic great conservative literature enough to know that it's not like a wild argument to make that look. There is no more important factor in the relationship between the government and its own citizens than the permanent warfare state.

Like that is a huge component of how tyrannical our government is against our own people. Right. It's not just the money. It's like immediately. And this is true throughout not just American history, but through the history of almost every single country. But it's certainly true in American history, too, that like the biggest crackdowns of civil liberties come at times of war.

But it's also the time when we historically always would go off the gold standard and start printing a bunch of money But if you think about just when the terror wars that jona goldberg was selling to the american people Um when they first rose up right the year that I just quoted that article from was 2002 Well, what was introduced in 2002? All right, was it late 2001 either late 2001 or 2002 the department Department of Homeland Security, the TSA, the Patriot Act, you know, warrantless wiretaps, all of this stuff. So like the idea that like these are two completely separate things, like if you care about Americans, why are you even focused on wars,

is just like it's stunningly ignorant. It's like no serious conservative thinker ever would have not understood the argument there Just really weak really really weak All the way around this kind of brings to mind I don't know if you've ever watched this special but Bill Hicks He's got that special and he closes it out. I wouldn't even say the end of it's a joke. It's more of a Poem where he's talking about how life is just a ride and then he closes it I don't even know if the math on this was true at the time, but he closes it out with,

if we stop spending money on wars, we could feed clothes and everyone on earth many times over and explore space together. Probably not. But still, yeah. If you've never seen it, it's worth watching those two minutes. It's pretty great.

But like, I just, that idea has been in the ether for so long amongst, let's say, classic liberals or people that are concerned. You're Glenn Greenwald's who might believe believe in more socialism and wealth distribution than we do. But it's the it's I don't know if I was in a relationship and there was no food and we didn't have health care. My wife kept buying jewelry. It would be stupid to just go, hey, let's spend more money on the health care Yeah, the first thing would be why are we buying all this jewelry if we can't afford the health care and the food?

Yes Well and as the point Glenn Greenwald's made which they don't even seem to realize that they were kind of making the leftist argument For them, but he goes well, there's people who want to see More social services here, but then they're complaining about Israel that has a lot of those social services. And you're like, yeah, that's the point Glenn Greenwald's making. But because listen, it's not just

that we are funding Israel's war. It's not like that's the only funding Israel gets. Israel gets billions of dollars every year just regularly. Why do those Jews get social services that we don't? Well, the point is that. The health care sucks out out there by the way I Experienced it firsthand. Well, that's okay. Listen. I love Glenn Greenwald and consider. I'm a hero, but you know, he He should be a libertarian, but he's not but like that's kind of I think more the point

We would make but the point Glenn Greenwald is making is that why is it that so I want these social services here? They already have that there, why are we now sending them money when they already have the stuff that we're saying we can't afford to give our people? His argument makes sense. I'm not, again, I think your argument is superior, that it's like, actually,

you don't really want those social services, but they're talking about it like he doesn't, anyway, these guys just don't know how to fight in this world, they don't know how to argue. Yeah, let's keep playing a little bit more. And that sort of thing. You know, you see the thing with Chomsky is that just the math doesn't make sense. Could it possibly be that in every one of these foreign policy entanglements

throughout the history of the United States that we're the wrong, we're the bad guy in this? In every single instance? I mean States that we're the wrong. We're the bad guy in this in every single instance I mean that obviously was pretty positive. I guess like you guys just aren't fans of United States. I hate to just say like that seems like a like a sort of okay Go ahead you can you can pause it now go ahead Rob this one annoyed me a lot when I was listening to it because it's not Necessarily that were the bad like I were against Hitler we're not the bad guys the argument is do we need to be involved does it help us to be involved and did it even help the world for us to be involved that that's the clear you're not really taking on the argument or the

question yes there are other bad guys in the world yes you can even make the argument the American needs to stand up to those bad guys the argument that we're making is it's been a waste of money and hasn't actually helped anyone. And then you're more of an expert. The argument on World War II is that we just ceded all of Europe to, uh, to Stalin. How did that do for the world? But I, I, even without that, I'm just saying the argument is not whether or not,

Oh, we're the bad guy in everyone. It's did we need to be involved? Did it serve our interest? Did it help anybody? Yeah. Well, also, I was just some of them lot is good. Yeah. No, of course. And again, for

the guys who were supposed to be intellectuals who are supposed to be these like conservative, you know, like again, it's in the same way that that, you know, Beto O'Rourke just had the it factor, according to CNN and MSNBC.

In the old order, you know, Jonah Goldberg was just super smart, you know, in the same way that they would say that, you know, like whatever. Michael Avenatti is, oh, this guy's really a crusader for justice or something. You know, the porn star's lawyer is a really above board guy. But in the same sense, it's like first of all,

let's just say even if your argument is he goes, so you're saying it just happens to be that we're the bad guy in all of these conflicts and they're like just laughing as if well, it's not like a matter of logic that that couldn't be the case. Like, what do you mean? Yeah, governments can be the bad guys. I mean, like, look, again, I agree with your characterization. I think that if you wanna say in World War II that the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese were the bad guys, okay, I mean, they were pretty evil.

So I'm not really gonna give you too much of an argument about that They're like if you if you wanted to if you were writing a novel and you wanted to come up with an evil regime Either of those guys would be like oh wow you really came up with some scary stuff there well done Now on the side of the Allies was Joseph Stalin that one's gonna be a little bit tough Spin as one of the good guys and of course look even Churchill I mean the very killing civilians. Well, I mean the British Empire before World War two had done You know some pretty heinous things but whatever leaving all of that aside

If I was to say that Every post-war every post-world war to war yes the the US government was the bad guys let's just say I mean I wouldn't frame things that simplistically because I'm not an idiot but whatever like let's if I were to say that what's the argument against that your argument against that is oh so every single time we're the bad guy like well that's not an argument dude again this is like you guys don't know how to fight that's not an argument which conflict explain to me how we were good that would be actually taking on the argument which war is it that you want to own is it the one that Jonah Goldberg sold do

you want to own the war in Iraq okay so let's argue there who were the good guys did was what we did good is it not are we we can't characterize that as bad? What would we call it if any other country did that right? And so like it doesn't actually but and then to go oh you just don't like America So now really these two, you know the guys who are gonna determine what is the interesting Conversation and which people are really intelligent and get to have that conversation and which ones I guess can just be mocked and and laughed at Okay, you're not familiar with like the I mean the most basic

Insight that Bastia like and many other great thinkers made which is that there's a difference between your government and your society. What conservative doesn't know that? What conservative who's ever read three books hasn't figured out that it's the left who has a blind spot for that, not conservatives. That your government and your society is the same thing. So if I just say, hey, I think the Biden administration

is corrupt, that means I'm saying I think my grandma's a bad person and I hate football and apple pie. Like these are all the same things. No, I don't hate America. I love America. It's why I'm against the cancerous government in DC. But for me to say that a bunch of corrupt politicians with their, with the help of their faux intellectuals like Jonah Goldberg at National Review,

that they sold an evil policy that proves what? If you think about how stupid the argument is, it's like, Okay, so if I were to say to you Rob the war in Vietnam was evil The war in Iraq was evil the war in Afghanistan was evil the war in Libya in Syria in Somalia in Yemen these were all evil and your responses Come on, they can't all be evil, dude You got to pick one that was good and you don't even have to argue with me about one of them being good Like you don't even have to go well No, let me tell you why the war in Libya actually was justified. You just get to say no Can't be can't be all of them What is this? There's no argument here. There's nothing I Mean, I don't know. I remember when we won in Vietnam. We kept the whole reason engine from turning communist

And luckily we won in Iraq and so the entire region is now democratic. Yes, democracy's flipped. And celebrated democracy and now those people in the region are far better off. Just go visit Libya. They're doing great over there since we started to celebrate democracy in the region. Oh man. And I think we were at war in Cambodia. Did we win that one?

I'm sure the people in that region are happy about how we bombed them to liberation. Yeah, we were we were the good guys We were the good guys where you hate America. Those are your options It just is like I don't know what happened in the Korean War, but I'm pretty sure we kept North Korean checks We don't have to worry about them anymore. So that was a victory, right? It's just I find it so funny because it is like it does it says if like a fourth degree funny because it is like it does it's as if like a fourth degree you know wing Chung black belt was sitting around today talking about how the UFC ruined martial arts and a lot of them do think that by the way they go I ruined my shot because you know it used to be pure and it used to be about this like no you

used to be able to bullshit you used to be able to convince people that you were smart and now they see through you. And a lot of it was because, you know, the policies you pushed resulted in pure disaster. All right. Let's let's keep playing a little bit more. Billy, things like you're anti-American, but there's a lot of truth to it, right? I mean, for sure. Like the people's history of the United States is the Zen view of history is that starts

from the premise that the people in America are oppressed by the same evil government in the elites. And you start from the assumption that we're wrong and then work backwards. Yeah, it's the original sin kind of view of foreign policy. And, you know, like if you're Noam Chomsky and you're dedicating time in 1976 to saying that Father Poncho and all of the accounts coming out of Cambodia are probably fake and they're just, you know, over. In any way, by the way, whatever's happening is our fault anyway because we bombed Cambodia.

I mean, you can get to this point and they work backwards. So it is weird to me to see these people that are kind of nominally on the right, libertarians, taking this kind of argument that is fundamentally an argument that looks to work backwards from the conclusion that we probably did this. I mean, looking at this guy that I saw, his name is Scott Horton. I don't know anything about him, but he's his antiwar.com. He's a libertarianish guy. Yeah, a little bit. He wrote a book about Ukraine.

And what is the name of the book? Provoked. Provoked. The name of the book. It's just like we did it. It was us. Even in Ukraine, you know, the color revolutions, we are destabilizing people. No one else is ever doing this. And you know, Putin and Transnistria, they don't care about that or something.

But it is this kind of envy, I think, with Trump, who's like, yeah, you know, they do it and they get away with it. Why? All right. So let's pause it here, because just the nerve of these two to invoke Scott Horton's name and then to have again. And look, I just maybe it's just me. I don't I think I'm being fair when I say this. I would just feel so embarrassed if I ever did this.

You know what I mean? Like if I ever just like you're bringing up People's name it's such high school girl bitch shit like you're bringing up his name to then right then he's got a mention And I don't even know anything about him. I don't know anything look and I can tell you his website Yeah, I know his website, and I know the name of his book, but the book is called provoked right? Oh, what are you one of those losers who thinks it was provoked? Do you have an argument? Can you refute one goddamn point? That's got Horton made in this book because there's plenty of room in the book By the way Here's a book. There's a book. There's a lot to it. Okay, can you refute one goddamn thing in there?

So what just because it's called provoked, because the argument is that we provoked this conflict, it's already lost or that proves that you're working backward from a conclusion? Like you you don't feel the need to you feel the need to bring up these people pretend to not know my name, pretend to not know anything about Scott, but just dismiss it off the title. The title of the oh and we did everything in these color-coded revolutions. Did we not? By the way there's a chapter on every one of them in there. Refute one thing. I mean thousands of footnotes. Thousands of footnotes in this thing. Yes, sorry which one are you talking about? The Orange Revolution? You're talking about the Maidon Revolution? We

poured tens of millions of dollars into the Maididan Revolution. Might have been over a hundred million dollars. We're not allowed to bring that up. We're not allowed to point out that like if somebody overthrew the government that was the neighbor of us to install a government that was more friendly to them that wouldn't be a provocation. Oh wait, no you guys don't actually have an argument about that because that's not what you're in the business of doing It's just like in the same way if you watched like the if you watched corporate media through the election, right? You'd be like they're not in the business of reporting the news

They're in the business of gaslighting you into supporting the regime, right? So it's like first it's like oh there these are all cheap fakes of Joe Biden being old So it's like first it's like, oh, they're these are all cheap fakes of Joe Biden being old. Then it's like, oh, Kamala Harris is joy. Then it's like, oh, there's a Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden. None of this was about reporting the news. This was doing the thing where they were letting you know you don't want to be with those people because we look down at those people and those are bad people. That's what they're doing here.

That's it. There's nothing more to it than that but damn these guys bring to even bring up scott horton's name dude scott horton will run circles around both of you both of you together bring five more of your smartest friends and you should all debate scott horton at once and watch him wreck every last one of you because you guys have nothing nothing Yeah, let's play one more little clip And then we we got to wrap up their question in the sense that these people are never worked up about the sort of territorial Desires of Putin and trying to reassemble a Russian Empire not in a Soviet way as such But kind of Soviet and it's really the argument that you get from Chomsky and Glenn Greenwald, who's been on our podcast

a bunch of times and who I like personally, by the way, and I think he's a very, very bright guy. I just disagree with him on a lot. He did the same thing that Chomsky used to do. I don't care about that stuff because it's not my government. It's not my taxpayer dollars, which I think is an incredible dodge, which is and you find times when they do care, you know, but Israel, we're giving them. It's like I used to say this about Israel all the time is, well, you know, our taxpayer dollars are funding that. That's why we're on the streets. That's why we don't care about Syria as such. Look, I lived in Sweden for a number of years and I've never met any, I've seen a

culture that is so obsessed with a country so far away and has so little, I mean, it's like 17,000 Jews in Sweden and they don't give any money. But they are out there on the streets every time Israel does something. There's something else motivating us. And what that is, is it antisemitism? I think a lot of times it is. But I think there's other stuff, too, is, you know, it's a pop of the United States. It's just kind of this anti-U.S. argument again. Why those people have gone that far.

It's like, look, one of the things I don't understand either, and we have a lot of mutual friends here and there's a lot of people I respect. But I see a lot of people like at the bulwark, for instance, that don't like Donald Trump and are rightfully outraged by, I mean, especially like I haven't looked, but I'm sure they're outraged and they absolutely should be about this Jan six pardons. It's like it's a disgrace. And I'm glad that there's some Republicans coming out and saying this. Don't pretend to love the police when you're saying to everybody.

And even JD Vance said, no, we wouldn't do that. But like I've seen it take over the brains of so many people that they stop even caring about conservatism as such. You know, they're not really making arguments. It's just been completely overwhelmed by a friend who I like and writes over there. I saw him post something on Facebook, I think. And it was I think Jimmy Carter or somebody died. And they said, yeah, OK, fine.

But the problem was he didn't come out against Trump hard enough. And this is actually maybe it wasn't Jimmy Carter. There's somebody that, yeah, it was fine, but I really wish they would. And that kind of obsession, I think, is what happens to these people and libertarian right, etc. They get this thing in foreign policy and they go all in on it. We talk a lot about Jimmy Carter. At the expense of everything else. I mean, I don't know how you can be a libertarian and never talk about economics. I mean, Matt and I talk about this all the time. We're

counting these people. Have you ever heard them say anything about tariffs, about Trump? Like, and also now Trump is being the imperialist expansionist that you supposedly hate. Well, let's take Greenland. We should have that. It's ours. It's good for us. And why is it good for Denmark? Let's go back to the debates between Buckley and Reagan about the Panama Canal. And we should just like we built it and everyone died there was American, which is actually not true. But that kind of argument is they seem to not have that ideological core that makes them associate with either a party or an ideology.

Watching these people be deranged by this. And I do think that there's people that we like and we know. And I think I don't mean to say the bulwark has a lot of good people over there. A lot of people I get it. You know what I mean? It's like a shorthand at this point sure sure people that have just I don't see like the dispatch is great because I see like Scotland Sycamore has a column and like he's writing about these economic issues that are like what we've always talked about which I think is is so you want my

theory about why a lot of these people don't like to talk about economics because I think there's a really basic explanation for it is complicated Well, it's it it's complicated. It's not complicated It's it's the reason why they don't like to talk about economics is that you know, like Irving Kristol used to say there's no non capitalist economic theory Because the second you get out of capitalism or free market economics, you are bringing in stuff from other realms of thinking and imposing it on something that doesn't, you know, like, like, there is no Catholic theory of economics.

And I'm not saying that there isn't a Catholic understanding of economics, right? But theory has a specific meaning in social sciences, right? It's like a falsifiable thing, right? And The reason I bring that up is that free market economics. I mean you're the guy who made the illusion to broken windows earlier It's funny. You actually made references to both broken windows both the James Q Wilson broken windows stuff and to Bastiats broken window. I'm referring to the Bastiats Right. So the do not off says that All economics boils down to trade-offs right choices, right? And so you can celebrate the money that the window maker is getting from the broken window

But that's taking money that would have been spent for other things. It's all TomSole, right? You can't spend the same dollar twice. That is really boring and annoying for ideologues who want to live in a zero-sum universe, right? And the beauty of talking about foreign policy is it lends itself to Manichaeanism. It lends itself to good versus evil in all regards it it lends itself to utopianism and You can have utopianism in economics

It's just that utopianism economics has been falsified so many freaking times that it's hard for them to get any traction with it But you say you know once we get rid of the Jews You know like that's the way of talking about the sunny uplands of history. And I think it's why people move towards things that are basically their literary arguments, or theological arguments, because to argue about economics means to acknowledge the broken the cricket timber of humanity, the flawed nature of the Metaxi, the

flawed nature of human life thati, the flawed nature of human life that says you cannot have your cake and eat it too. And and that just messes with the heads of ideologues in a way that or fanatics, if you want a better term, because I think we're both kind of ideologues. And the other thing is, I'm just curious, so like, according to this breakdown, I mean, it's so incoherent and rambling and then just straw manning There's the that's why if they get rid of the Jews and first of all, I brought up Bastiat before they did like I don't Know what they're talking about and yes That is our position that all of I agree with soul and Bastiat all of economics is trade-offs all of foreign policy, too

None of us are claiming we want to get rid of all the Jews and then there will be utopia. It's just nonsense, but go ahead. But the money and resources spent on wars means that it can't be spent on other things. Interesting. And so some people might have a preference that it's just spent on other things. Yeah, look at that.

OK. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Tax Network USA. The IRS is the largest collection agency in the world, and it just stepped up enforcement for 2025. If you owe back taxes or have unfiled returns, do not wait for the IRS to come after you.

Simply avoiding your tax troubles is the worst thing you can do. Getting ahead of it is the smart move, but never contact the IRS alone. Turn it over to the team at Tax Network USA because not all tax resolution companies are the same. Tax Network USA has a preferred direct line to the IRS. This means that they know which agents to deal with and which ones to avoid. Tax Network USA has proven strategies that are designed to settle your tax problems in your favor. Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million, their attorneys and negotiators have resolved over $1 billion in tax debt.

Talk with one of their strategists, it's free. Stop the threatening letters. Stop looking over your shoulders and put your IRS troubles behind you once and for all. Give them a call at 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com slash Smith. That's tnusa.com slash Smith. All right. Let's get back into the show. Here, let's play one more little clip. And then I do really have to wrap up. It is, I will just say, yeah, go ahead.

I got to do it somewhere, right? If I'm gonna be remembered like one of those guys. ...evolutions, we are destabilizing people. No one else is ever doing this, and you know, Putin and Transnistria, they don't care about that or something. ...you're saying to everybody, even JD Vance said, no, we wouldn't do that. Trump beat... Because I think there's a really basic... ...of history, and I think there's a really basic lens of history.

And I think it's why people move towards things that are basically their literary arguments or theological arguments, because to argue about is the great enemy of all serious thinking. If you try to reduce everything down to one thing, you're going to say stupid stuff. So if you're going to reduce every controversy down to whether it's good for Trump or bad for Trump or anti-Trump or pro-Trump or whether this person was right on Trump or wrong on Trump, you're going to miss a lot. You're going to, if you think everything boils, if you think tariffs fix everything, you're

just stupid, right? You just don't know how economics work, right? And so much of our politics is trying to reduce everything down to one reason, one thing. No one ever goes into a car lot and says, I'm here to buy a red car today, right? Because there are other things on your checklist. And yet that's the way we want to have arguments. And I think that on the economics thing, it is actually a simplicity thing too, is that when you sit around a dinner table in this city and there's 10 people there and they're all college educated, but they're not political people as such.

They're all going to, if you went around, offer an opinion on Israel, October 7th, Palestinian territories, etc., because they know a sort of bare minimum and they will work up some sort of moral outrage about it. If you go around asking about tariffs, they're like, I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Yeah, sure. Maybe it's good. Maybe it's bad. But I thought I thought one of the most interesting things and no one really has noticed this. Steve Bannon, who I've interviewed a few times, who's a good interviewer. All right. We're going to have to stop there. I was waiting for them to maybe get to something approaching a point, but nothing else really came.

I mean, I don't know what to say. Then they just go on. It's like they invoke me and Scott and then they later talk about Darrell Cooper at some point too. And it's just a total straw man never taking on anything that anyone is actually saying. Again, this is just its weakness. It's like, you know, you can't actually compete. They know that like they would just get the and this is why all of the audience has gone away from guys like this and to alternative voices. I mean, I don't know what else to say about that, to say that any of us are making the argument. In fact, we are the ones expressly not making these arguments.

When people like Jonah Goldberg were making arguments for why we need to go overthrow Saddam Hussein, all of the arguments were to not consider all of the costs of this policy. Nobody here is saying, like I'm certainly never making anything even close to the argument that like if we just hadn't have fought the war in Iraq then everything would be perfect under Saddam Hussein, right? Like nobody's making that claim. We're pointing out that it's a matter of trade-offs and that the trade-offs that you're pushing for are very bad ones to make that lead to much worse outcomes. But this was, I don't know what to say. I mean this to me, it was interesting. I didn't just want to talk about this just like as an ego thing to like, you know, wreck these guys who brought me up. I can see 10% of it was that,

but it's like, I just thought this was a great microcosm of the old order, why it has died, how much they are still unable to, unable to grapple with any of that stuff. And just how, like I said, how much these guys just can't fight. These guys just can't fight. fight it's literally it reminds me of one of those goddamn karate videos where they just they don't even touch you and everyone falls it's like they can fight as much as that guy can fight you know if everybody's falling around you maybe this looks impressive but it sure doesn't to me all right comic Dave Smith calm part of the problem calm run podcast run your mouth podcast Robbie

the fire calm all right catch you guys next time peace Partoftheproblem.com, runyourmouthpodcast, runyourmouthpodcast, Robbiethefire.com. All right, catch you guys next time. Peace.