 Let's see, I think the biggest interference in the election was legal, biased media, gatekeeping of news, Twitter banning links to some stories, Google sent voting reminders only to liberals, etc. While some of that is true, I'll just say I think you have to really question this particularly in comparison to the past. I've said this many times, I'll repeat it now. Think about Ronald Reagan in 1980 running for president. Democrats controlled the house in the Senate, they controlled the Supreme Court, they controlled in a sense all three media outlets, there were only three television right ABC, NBC, CBS, maybe PBS counts, all three were left. The main, all the main newspapers were left. I mean people, the New York Times has gotten worse. I think that's true, but remember other times, I mean, Iron Man was talking about the New York Times and how biased it was in the 60s and 70s. So it was suddenly left, all the major newspapers were left. There was no talk radio. There was no voice for the right anywhere. There was one or two shows that had William Buckley on them or something, but that's about it. And there was no internet where you could actually independently go and check and look. There was no sources for any alternative news. So I'm skeptical about this whole idea that it's worse now in terms of if you want to figure out what's going on in the world, you don't have access because the world blocks to you. The reason people think it's worse now is because of how much better it is. Yes. If all you had was leftist echo chamber media, it would be hard for you to recognize that there were things that you're not hearing. Now you have so many sources of information where you're hearing things you don't get from the mainstream that you start to think, well, why isn't the mainstream saying this thing? But there's never been more alternative voices that it's easy to get access to than right now and specifically never been more right wing voices than right now. So this is just, now that doesn't mean that maybe Google's not doing something bad in this or that case. But the idea that this is the right wing can't get its opinion out is, I think, just not true. But the question said the election interference was these other things. That might be right, but I'm really bothered by the idea of I don't quite have what terms I would use. But packaging together things that interfere in the voting process or the process of tabulation of votes and things however immoral or wrong or good or whatever it is that try to confuse or persuade people into picking someone other than who they otherwise would have picked. So I think when the Russian hacking of the DNC server and spreading that information was described as hacking the election, I think that was a real mistake. It was not hacking the, it's not like they didn't hack the election machines. They didn't confuse people about where the polling places were. What they did is engaged in a propaganda campaign using stolen information and it was a crime and bad and it ought to have been investigated as it was. But it wasn't hacking the election. You're hacking the election if you're trying to get it to seem like Iran voted for someone who he didn't or that his dead grandfather voted for someone. And there's been I think too much of a running together of those things. So I think if someone did something nefarious to poison people's minds against Trump or Biden, we should discuss that under a different heading than discussing if someone interfered with the casting or tabulation of votes. Absolutely. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, whims or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of the spare cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist. All right, before we go on reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now. 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I figured at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it. But at least the people who are liking it, you know, I want to see, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this. And you know, the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at your own book show.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show your support for all for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this. And of course, don't forget if you're not a subscriber, even if you even if you just come here to troll, or even if you're here like Matthew to defend Marx, then you should subscribe because that way you'll know when to show up, you'll know what shows are on when they're on, you'll get notified. Right. So, yes, like, share, subscribe, support, like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one or all of those, please.