How the Right Started Critiquing Nazis Like the Left

Introduction and Memorial Day Weekend Banter

Hey, what's up, everyone? Hope everyone's doing well out there. Welcome to the conversations that matter podcast. I wasn't sure if I was gonna have the time to get another podcast in before the Memorial Day weekend.

I guess it's already upon us, isn't it? So I figured I would put one out today. I'm actually fighting a cold a little bit. So my apologies if I cough a little bit during the podcast. Hopefully that'll get better.

I think thankfully I'm sleeping which is good. That's the best way and taking tons of vitamin C and zinc and all the rest of the stuff you're supposed to take. Anyway, it's a beautiful day out there. And the roads are just jammed with people going to the mountains and to the beaches for Memorial Day.

Maybe some of you are out there traveling right now listening to this podcast. And if you are I hope you have a wonderful weekend. And I hope you have a church picked out if you're traveling for the Lord's Day that has like-minded saints that you can worship with.

I. There's a couple things. I want to talk about the main thing. Of course is in the title. I want to talk about this shift that's taken place over the last 60 70 years on. How conservatives are. I should say people on the right politically in the United States?

Think of Nazis and Critique Nazis and where they see Nazism being manifested now. This is something that I I'm sure other people have thought about this. Did I say Memorial Day someone's correcting me Labor Day if I said Memorial Day my apologies Labor Day.

Yes. Which is we won't go into the origins of Labor Day today. That would Enjoy it. I still think you should enjoy it. Even if the the origins of it maybe aren't it's it's a fake holiday to me. But anyway, I let it out.

I let it out. Okay. The reason I think it's important The the subject at hand is because I have noticed a lot of people on the right critiquing conservatives paleo conservatives. Traditional Christians.

Christian nationalists cultural Christians. People supposedly on the right mind you and using the same kind of smears the left uses. And this got me to thinking and I thought I'm sure Other people have delved into this and studied this.

I just don't know where I don't know who did it and where they did it. I'm maybe there's an article somewhere, but I figured since I couldn't find one I would write my own and so I'm hoping to get this published at I don't know Please somewhere that would be willing to publish it somewhere like American Reformer or Chronicles magazine.

If not, I'll just self publish it. But I wanted to discuss the contents in that article and I took about a day earlier this week to To write that and and so that's the the main main thing we're gonna talk about today, of course, though I also have other things.

I want to talk to you about a Richard Dawkins clip I just saw like an hour ago that I said, I got to share this with the podcast audience. This is really your brain on classical liberalism. It really is.

It's it's really crazy what Richard Dawkins proposes and it's consistent though with I think the The overriding philosophy that even people on the right in the last 20 years 30 years Have just taken for granted and it doesn't work anymore.

And so I'm gonna show that to you and And then we'll talk a little bit about God's law. I know I put some Twitter posts out there that people are Commenting on and some people I think are perhaps confused or misunderstanding or maybe I'm just not being clear.

So I'm gonna take a few minutes to just probably cause myself more grief and controversy, but it but it's worth it. It's worth it. We're gonna talk a little bit about the application of God's law to modern Times modern situations, so I don't want to go into detail on that.

I actually have an episode brewing in my mind on that entire subject where we'll talk about how theologians have looked at that subject. But I just want to give you my two cents on it my my opinion where I'm at.

So there's no misunderstanding. So hopefully that sounds good to everyone. Before we get in all that though. I have a little video to share with you. This is an invite from chef Lance Nidihara, and he's a friend of mine He's gonna be speaking at the men's conference in the Adirondack Mountains September 21st through 24th if you can make it overcoming evil conference calm overcoming evil conference calm.

Here's a little clip of him.

A Conference Invitation and a Brief Aside on Holidays

Lance need to hire here. Lance in the appetizer round. He's shown an amazing amount of creativity. My philosophy on evangelism became such that I know now that I have to speak up I have to go out and I have to warn those of the wrath that is to come.

And I am Excited and privileged and honored to be a part of the annual men's conference that we'll be doing up at Camp of the Woods In the Adirondacks. I will be there and I am privileged to be speaking about Battling evil in today's present dark culinary Industry as well as equipping young people to be able to do the same.

Through the Bible through scripture through Christ. And it's gonna be a really great time in fellowship and learning. And I'm looking forward to meeting you all looking forward to this entire thing.

Well, there you have it so Follow Lance's lead. I hope you can be there I hope you can come if there's any questions info at truth script comm is probably the best place to ask those questions. And I will be sure to get back to you and answer them.

It is coming upon us pretty quick though. But there are still openings. So Looking forward to seeing all the men who are gonna come out to that. Um. Let's there's some comments coming in. So let me just acknowledge those.

Yeah, Quiana Shaw is on most holidays are fake. Yeah. It seems like in the last yeah, I don't know a hundred years I mean a lot of the holidays have not been organic. They haven't arisen from natural tendencies.

Traditions in regions that kind of thing. It's it's more of like a An abstract kind of like this is what we in fact I should say that even the holidays that did arise from Certain occasions that were celebrated in local areas and so forth have been turned into abstract holidays, so everything's kind of becoming this but it becomes a celebration of like, you know blanket freedom or you know, What is labor?

Do people even know what Labor Day is, right? It's I Mean Union should be all over that I suppose but we don't even associate it with that. It's just like taking a break. It's like the weekend of the year kind of thing the last who were off for summer.

So some of some of these holidays, you're right. They they're there. They become so meaningless it even gets past the level of abstraction into just that it really means almost nothing but we get a break and I think Juneteenth is actually kind of on the.

The social justice warriors are using it to try to forward their agenda, but I actually think it's being fast-tracked. Not not because it's their intention. But just because it's the way that people who didn't cultivate that habit.

It's a foreign thing to them. That's how they're gonna treat it. There's like another day off. There's no traditions associated with this, but I'm glad to have a day off. So anyway, it's it does devalue the the celebration of holidays, which are supposed to as the name implies Holy Days.

Contra talk with Pastor Richard is on. Happy Friday Pastor Richard. He says that his 11 year old daughter keeps thinking Labor Day has something to do with having babies. Actually, that might be a better a better holiday.

Anyway Ad Robles is with us. Hey ad. Hope you're doing well. Let's get into some of this. So I want to share with you guys this video first because this blew me away check this out. This is Richard Dawkins now for those who don't know Richard Dawkins wrote the God delusion.

He's a big neo-atheist Thinker maybe the biggest one. I mean, I think he probably sold more than Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris and and he is I would say from like 15 years ago I was very used to like talking to his protégées at college campuses and trying to reason with them and witness to them.

I Remember and I was in a deer stand. Maybe it was about that long ago with his book on my I had an iPod at the time. So it was that long ago and I had his book and I was I had a PDF somehow. That I was able to read and I was reading it and trying to figure out what he believed because so many people Followed Richard Dawkins.

Well, Richard Dawkins has kind of fallen from grace. At least with the left because the left They embraced atheism. In fact, I forget which year it was. Within the last though 10 years. I want to say I think it was 2016 or 2012 I can't remember which one but the Democrat Convention I remember had basically booed God there was a or at least the inclusion of language honoring God in their party platform.

And so this this was and and it still to some extent is the Democratic Party there they're atheistic, but they're pagan more than they are even atheistic and Richard Dawkins He would have been a champion a hero to a lot of those people and now a lot of them have turned on him because he's not woke enough and and the thing that strikes me about all this is, you know conservatives are very hungry to Have some people on our side with a platform and with some some good speaking skills and people who are liked and Richard Dawkins has been liked by at least a sizable group of people for a long time and There is I have seen it even with Richard Dawkins.

There is sort of this Desire. Even even with the past experience of him going after religion really hard and going after Christianity in particular. There is this desire to kind of include him on our side.

Right others who have not been as publicly at least popular for doing the same kinds of things Are included now on the conservative side. James Lindsay's a perfect example I would say of this but you could also look at Bill Maher because another atheist who Has said many things against religion and Christianity and yet now he's included.

So so so I'm gonna play for you a clip of Richard Dawkins and and I think knowing that context is helpful to know he's on a left-leaning show, but look where the the Host is trying to push him on the transgender issue and look the at the defense the flimsy defense that Richard Dawkins gives for why he he doesn't even really give a reason but for why he objects to transgender surgeries for children But not for adults.

Here's Richard Dawkins out.

Richard Dawkins, Classical Liberalism, and Transgenderism

For example things like arresting doctors who provide certain Gender-affirming care as it's called. Maybe you have an issue with the term or not. But what about the arresting of doctors? For example, does that not start to bite a little bit, too?

Doctors. Have doctors been arrested for that. No, these are bills that have been proposed in the United States. It has not happened to my knowledge. Fortunately. Children or adults we've seen both in different states.

Well, I would have I would have strong objection to doctors Injecting minors children or.

Performing surgery on on them to change their sex and as far as adults you have no issue. Well, I.

Think if it's if if they've thought about it properly like some like Jan Morris, for example who I read years ago one of the first of the trans people's I read and greatly respected her. Her struggle that she went through in order to Change sex from male to female.

She really really put herself through it and clearly sincere clearly suffered from from gender dysphoria. No doubt about that and and and. I take my hat off to her and to the doctors who helped her but I fear that what we're seeing now is a fashion a craze a Mimetic epidemic which is which is which is Spreading like an epidemic of.

Measles or something like that I'm trying to make sense of that. I mean, it doesn't really make sense. He's struggling to he's pausing. He's having to think about it and there's nothing wrong with that if you haven't thought about something but this has been a hot-button issue for a few years now at least since 2020 and especially in Britain and he's Clueless on how to navigate this it's it's really sad to me in a way because he has Darwin in the background as someone just pointed out he's got a bust of Darwin and He claims to be this Rational thinker he believes in reason that's one of the things if you read Dawkins you're gonna see over and over and over is the supremacy of reason over the superstitions of religion and the bigotries of tradition and reason is going to be the thing that really advances us and we should throw away all those antiquated notions of tradition religion and ties to the past and embrace Embrace our evolution, but also Embrace the what makes sense to human beings and so he's he's a bit of he's a rationalist or I guess there's no other way to say it and And he's also a materialist and Which doesn't really jive because you know rat.

To him it would be in your brain things sparking off things chemical reactions that are actually causing this reason in the first place, so There isn't the the intangibles don't have a way to even exist in the materialist world that Richard Dawkins believes in but but the whole idea is that Things can be like a mathematical equation.

We can approach almost every problem that way things can be approached in this rational way. So so where's the rational way? Where's the evolutionary? Biological way to approach the issue of transgenderism, right?

You would think that if you were at least trying to be consistent You would look at that as an inhibiting mutation right like people who claim to have this they're not procreating there I mean if they are and I don't know exactly what the numbers are.

But but if they are procreating it certainly is not to the degree that heterosexual couples are. They have higher suicide rates. There's It's a very costly on society to transition them and there's a lot of drugs that they have to take for the rest of their Lives most of the time when this happens, I mean, there's so many Drawbacks to it.

You would think someone who's a rationalist who's a materialist like Richard Dawkins would object to it on those grounds. He doesn't though. And and I'm not even saying that would be a completely rational objection.

I don't think his understanding of reality his philosophy of life makes sense. So There's gonna be problems with it, but but he chooses not to go that direction. Which that would be I would think the low-hanging fruit for him.

It would also give him a lot of blowback. It would be he'd have to act actively be against Transgenderism in order to take that stance and you know, Charles Darwin would have probably said I mean He didn't face these same things, but you know, he would have done something like that, right?

We're in a new era though and Richard Dawkins Decides to make this separation and I've seen others make this separation and I think this is going to be in Conservative elite circles, there's there's going to be a split on this.

There are those who want children to be exempted from this. They don't don't hurt the children and This the whole idea of don't hurt the children which is a appropriate idea we should understand that children are.

There's less wisdom there. They're less able to make the decisions that they are being trained for that. They will be able to make at a later point in their life. There is development, right. Even Jesus it says grew in wisdom and stature in favor with God and man so so children Are to be protected if you make one if you cause one of them to stumble better that a millstone were hung around your neck.

So he's detecting something that is true. Alright, and so there is this category of of protecting kids. But at the same time he objects to transgender surgeries. Because I guess they they harm children somehow they're Innately it's going to do damage.

It's He can't condemn the doctors outright even though that's what he's being asked to do but he can at least kind of give this whimper of a Lame response to say we should protect the kids from that. Okay protect them from that.

Why though right and and this is the question I? Could I could look at something like firearms and I could say well You know a child who's three year old shouldn't be left in a room full of loaded firearms.

Why is that? They don't know how they work. They haven't been taught responsibility. They're not it's not a tool that they can use effectively. The they have there's great potential for damage there, but our firearms wrong.

No firearms aren't wrong in fact firearms are useful tools and I could say the same thing about a Vehicle or heavy machinery or anything that would be dangerous in the hands of Someone who's untrained or a child, but is is right and good in the hands of an adult when it comes to Sexuality I can say that Children do not have the capacity for that yet God has not wired them in such a way as to take part in that and So because I believe as the Bible teaches that sex is for marriage itself and Someone who is not eligible for marriage and someone who is not married should not be participating in that.

Should they have knowledge about it? I don't want to go on a whole long thing here, but but I'm getting to the point the point is that They they don't there are certain phases of development in which we As as parents as members of society We give new responsibilities like the right to vote.

Some of these are based on tradition. But there's this understanding that there is a development that that proceeds forward now. Is that though? Here's the question in the same category is something like transgenderism so it's It's wrong to it's dangerous, I guess to Have a transition for children.

It's dangerous for doctors to perform those surgeries on Children, but yet for adults is perfectly fine. It's even brave. It's even something to admire. Well, that's what Richard Dawkins does at the end of the clip.

He turns it into something to admire if you've thought through it. And you really feel that you're a woman even though you're we're born a man and that's who you really are then You should be true to what?

To That experience you say you have experience living in society and feeling like a woman to quote Shania Twain. If you can sing that song as a man and you really mean it that consent that belief makes it so and and and there should be a Recognition of that and part of obtaining the social recognition is perhaps performing a surgery.

Now if that's a good thing in and of itself. What why is it that it's bad for children. But it's good for adults like at what point does it become because with these other issues like like guns for example.

Or other, you know safety issues or even heterosexuality. I think it's it's fair to say that We are looking at something that's good in a in the right context and and and there's someone who is just unable to navigate That context because they're they haven't developed to the point of being able to have the wisdom and knowledge, etc but in this case with transgenderism it's Dawkins has to has to cram this into this kind of format where it's the same thing as that.

It's like guns so it's like something that's good and right and heroic and worthy of admiration and You know, of course, no doctor should be punished for performing these and we should I mean why not taxpayer money going towards it?

If it's so good we we should champion this. But yet just not for kids not for kids because they don't know how to handle it yet or something that's that's what's happening and I think that's what the conservative movements doing and This is so different than even I would say and I want to say conservative movement I'm saying it's it's now maybe on the fringes but I I think it will become mainstream because you already see this bifurcation with homosexuality and transgenderism where Quote-unquote conservatives think it's okay for homosexual couples to Use surrogacy to become parents.

They think that it's okay. For homosexuals to get married the government shouldn't be involved in that. Uh, it's but they they don't like the transgender thing in sports, right? There's already the separation.

And I think the next logical step is well Transgenderism is fine, but not the kids, right? The kids are the last the the last spark of I guess moral decency the last Thing to go in the we value our children in the United States, but in the Western world in particular has been Uniquely, I would say values children and wants to preserve their innocence.

That's the last thing to go and we have no real reason. It's it's this flimsy consent thing that's holding the whole tidewater back we have no reason to Expect that that's going to hold. Because it's built on nothing less than our choice and in this idea that making choices are good.

If you make a choice, you just have to be able to handle that choice you just have to be able to make that choice and have it be your own choice and Not with the influence of someone else's as children are apt to be influenced.

And so so is it 12 years old? Is it 18? Is it is it 3? I mean, what's what's the choice here? I mean the same thing could be said about pedophilia when when does the consent enter the picture? What's missing though is the idea of virtue and tell us that there's actually purpose baked into creation there's expectations and responsibilities and obligations we have and so the growth period is to be able to Fill those obligations fulfill them to Benefit your fellow man to live in the order that God has established, right?

I'm not talking about the gospel I'm not talking about any of that yet. I'm just saying the way that God set up from creation that is there's a purpose in that and so that and that's how traditionally we've I Mean everyone really up until pretty recently in the Western world would have viewed the difference between being a child and being an adult and Now that's that's all changing.

It's not about developing into something that's Rooted in God's creation. It's just about Like passing an exam so that you can go and fulfill whatever desires you have that's all it is and and so when you're 18, you can vote and when you're 21, you can drink and You know, there's all these different ages that you can do different things at and it's We're saying now that sexuality is is is just like this in the sense that it it also Is is good in and of itself no matter what choice you make sexually.

You just have to prove at a certain age that you're able to handle that. Why? Why? Why not why one age and not another what what is the damage if you. If you have this desire, let's say at 12 or 13. Why is that not brave?

How come this person who's 25 is brave when they make that transition but not the person who's 13 and we need to protect them. What are we protecting them from exactly? Right. The only thing that's holding this back is well, they're just not capable I don't know.

There's some 13 year olds who seem pretty capable right once once that argument falls. And you have a smart 13 year old or something. You just open the floodgates for kids. There's no there's nothing Holding it back.

So that's just my two cents on it. I just think it's silly and it's just not something that we've heard really before but we're gonna hear it a lot I think in the coming years and it's the big mistake.

I think that conservative. Politically conservatives and I suppose Christians to some extent too. It's a mistake that they've made in platforming Atheists and and people who are just so they're there.

They're so antithetical to a Christian understanding of reality not that you can't be cobelligerence on things, but There's this is where it leads. This is your brain on classical liberalism. Richard Dawkins isn't woke.

Remember Richard. This is not a guy who's supposedly woke. He's anti woke and the woke people don't like him and yet he's saying that it's it's a brave. It's a really noble thing for someone who's an adult at least to pursue changing their gender.

I Don't know seems pretty woke to me, right? Well, he's he's he his his whole idea is based on though consent and looking at individual humans as Autonomous and able to make these decisions. So I think it's more in a classical liberal framework and.

So I wanted to share that with you. I thought that was pretty crazy. Let's get into the main topic. I think that's yeah, oh no, I had one more thing. But you know what? Let's save that because I've already been going about 26 minutes.

So let's get into the main topic. Lots of comments coming in. Yeah Richard Dawkins does go wobbly at times as we see in the video. We need Christians to stand on the word without wavering. That's very true.

You know, who else is Joe Biden? I just saw Joe Biden. The other day is going pretty wobbly as well. It no Joe Biden and Mitch McConnell. Mitch McConnell is actually I was thinking of. I get now I see I'm getting him confused now because they They're acting the same exact way.

It's crazy. All right, let's get into the Nazi stuff. All right. Well one more comment. John Philip Brooks says, okay. So why do conservatives criticize male to female transgender people so much more severely than female to male transgender people?

I don't know. I haven't noticed that you know. Do they do that? I Guess so, I guess so. Yeah, it's It seems more prevalent to me. Maybe I'm wrong on that, but it does seem more prevalent to me. I Don't know.

Maybe someone else in the chat can answer that question. Okay, let's talk about this. I Have this on a word perfect document, that's the I'm kind of weird. I don't really use word I've I've been trained on this program called word perfect and so I keep using it but it's about Double-spaced it's it's like nine and a half pages so I'm gonna read some of it to you and Just talk about this because I think it's fascinating and it's important for us to understand.

Why the Left Uses Nazis as a Political Smear

So I start off I say it goes without saying that the modern left use their political opponents as proto Nazis. This of course puts them in the enviable position of wearing the white hat regardless of the strength of their arguments.

The sheer volume of media attacks on Donald Trump for somehow gleaning from Adolf Hitler is overwhelming. Just recently Vox carried the subtitle Trump isn't Hitler but when it comes to the courts He successfully is borrowing from the Nazis playbook.

The association this time is that in the same way Hitler used his arrest for the Munich Beer Hall pooch To promote himself. So Trump is also using his arrest for election interference to promote his candidacy.

Okay. So in other words, there's this very loose tie that you could try to make and say well Hitler was elected for trying to overthrow or Arrested for trying to overthrow the government and Trump's also being arrested and therefore they must be the same person.

Of course modern left has failed to see the parallels between their leaders and Nazis on things like race obsession health care and environmental policies. Only conservatives are guilty of adopting Nazi beliefs.

I mean, it's just so obvious. You're not seeing articles from the left paralleling Hitler with their own heroes, he's not like Gramsci he's not like Nelson Mandela, he's not like Martin Luther King jr.

All these guys were in jail cells writing stuff. Because and that's how you know about them because that's where they wrote their stuff is in jail cells and from these jail cells they were able to acquire an audience and It was because they were threats in very in different ways but threats to the government.

Ironically modern conservatives foolishly seem determined to appropriate this lazy smear for themselves as a defense mechanism as a way to convince their voter base That political progressives are the true Nazis and thus win the moral high ground before adopting this tactic.

It is wise to consider when it came where it came from who benefits from it and how conservatives traditionally critiqued Nazism so. This is I think foolhardy from the beginning and I I'm sure that I've fallen into this before.

Probably not recently, but I was influenced to some extent from some neo-conservatives I mean I read Jonah Goldberg's book liberal fascism and thought it was like one of the best things when I wrote when I read it and There are some interesting things in it, but it's overall.

I think it's probably I wouldn't recommend it at this point I'll put it that way and I really thought that Conservatives would politically win if we were able to show that the left were the true Nazis because we all know the Nazis are Bad, right?

We all grew up with the World War two movies and video games and we know the Nazis are bad in fact, I was talking to a friend of mine the other day and we were talking about first-person shooter video games and we were talking about how like you don't have like war of 1812 or French Revolution or Napoleonic Wars or You don't really have a lot of World War one stuff even certainly not Civil War Revolutionary War first-person shooters.

Why is that and There's like tons of World War two. Like we just keep killing Nazis in video games and and so it's just part of what we're used to and and so. If if that's the big villain if that's the the worst imaginable thing Is to be a Nazi then whoever gets to paint the other side as the true Nazis will gain a political advantage and and so the left has cultivated this and Of course, you know, they have their reasons for being anti-nazi because the Nazis were national socialists and they were international socialists so they were sworn enemies in Germany and They have continued to be sworn enemies.

In fact, you can see even remnants of this playing out in the Russia Ukraine struggle because Ukraine there's regiments that have Nazi esque neo-nazi sympathies. They use Nazi symbols, etc fighting Russian units who while they're not Soviets now, there's still a history there and so.

So this hasn't really gone away, but that's not the only critique of Nazism. In fact, it's not even the strongest critique of Nazism and It's kind of insane I think for conservatives to just buy into that moral framework that the Nazis are Of course the worst thing that could ever be there there's all kind in fact the current threats are Our totalitarianism from globalists who you know, maybe you could say they resemble the Nazis in some ways but they really more resemble kind of like a Really more classical liberal to be honest that's formed a totalitarianism.

There's threats, of course from the the actual communist world as well there's threats simply from moral degeneracy and You know, the left is like someone told me this years ago. I thought it stuck with me.

So why do you keep calling the left Nazis? They're basically a suicide cult. They're like Jim Jones. I mean compare them to that I mean, that's that's really what they are. Yeah, that's actually I mean that's much worse in a way it I mean It's not to say Nazis are good it's just to say that they're they're not the big threat right this second and It's easy to take an already defeated threat from years ago to recycle it and to just keep Keep trying to smear today's opponents as part of that same threat to categorize them that way.

Because you don't have to think really you don't have to do any philosophical work. You don't have to understand the roots of a particular ideology. You can just say it's that same old ideology. We've always hated.

So when the left starts doing crazy stuff, I would just say let's suppress that urge to call them Nazis or even You know racists or even you know clansmen or whatever the Democrat Party's the real racist that it doesn't phase them at all.

And it just all it does is teach our side that that's the worst thing imaginable. So we buy into the left's framework when we do that very foolish thing to do, but we've been doing it. Unfortunately for I'd say it got mainstream probably within the last 15 years, but it's been going on in conservative intellectual circles for longer.

So during well, let's start actually here. The first thing that I talked about is the Frankfurt School psychologist Theodore Adorno and in 1950 he wrote a book. Called the authoritarian personality. This is only three years after the Paris peace treaties were signed and he suggested things like parental authority traditional gender roles family pride preserving heterosexuality.

Defending American culture and Christian beliefs signaled implicit pre fascist tendencies. So you're not quite a fascist. But you're you're getting there if you hold to these things these things and this isn't there was more than just that but but these.

Were things that he thought? Were threats and you can see the modern left using all of these of course university programs use these in their psychology departments. Now two years after this point after this book was published.

You can see this already playing out in the 1952 Democrat campaign for the White House and President Harry Truman. He wasn't running. In fact, I'm trying to remember the name of the guy who was running at that time.

I should probably look it up. No one remembers the losers of these things if they don't have a future in politics it was a guy by the name of Adley Stevenson, so Adley Stevenson and he he did not we could probably call this a landslide.

I mean Eisenhower really did beat him. He only got 89 in the electoral vote 89 electoral votes and then President Eisenhower got 442. So, but I mean look he had 44 .3 percent of the popular vote and Eisenhower at 55 .2 percent.

So, I mean there was a split like the big part of the country liked Stevenson but President Harry Truman, of course was the outgoing president during this time and President Harry Truman Campaigned for Stevenson and campaigned against Eisenhower and the Republicans.

Now, how did he do that? Let me give you an example of what he did. He blamed Republicans for things like opposing civil rights. Yes, even in 1952 that was already a discussion. Restricting immigration was another thing that they were they were bigoted on this.

That the Republicans promoted the belief that Soviet subversives had infiltrated the State Department. You remember McCarthy and He called that the big lie. That that's been recycled the big lie and he said that it was deadly to the American tradition of Liberty and the kind of Weapon used by the Nazis the fascists and the communists.

Okay, so the communists are also kind of bad guys. But the Nazis are the chief bad guys. He warned the National Jewish Welfare Board that Americans should be vigilant to oppose the philosophy of racial superiority Developed by the Nazis from re-emerging in the United States.

Under the guise of anti-communism. He even linked Republicans opposition to government subsidized jobs programs to an unwillingness to defend ourselves against the aggression of the Nazis and the fascists and do business with Hitler instead and Ironically all of this was aimed at Dwight Eisenhower who defeated actual Nazis.

But was now guilty of accepting quote the very practices that identified the so-called master race. Unquote. So as early as 1952 five years after the Paris peace treaty. You already have this going on.

You already have Democrats using this playbook to smear their Republican rivals. Okay, so Don't think that this was something that was concocted for Donald Trump or George W Bush or Ronald Reagan? No, it's been going on much longer than that.