The first thing I should point out is how much I want to love this podcast, and for that reason I'm rating on a little bit of a curve. Most of that good will is based on the strength of the first episode: the premise of the podcast is most fully realized in episode 1, "Mike Cernovich", in which other than an interview at the end, 90% of the information in the episode comes from clips of Cernovich himself, and host Nathan merely fills in the cracks with contextual information. Episode 2 is a bit lighter in source material, until episode 3 consists entirely of the host and a friend listening to clips of Steve Bannon speaking, then giggling and playing armchair psychiatrist.
So far, all of the subjects of this podcast's episodes have been ideologues with a questionable grasp on factuality, and for each, a compelling case could be made that they are a pernicious presence in American society--this show succeeds when it gives these people rope and allows them to hand themselves with their own words; it fails when it merely plays random clips of them talking, and then giggles and calls them names.
