Gangs and the Government

Gangs and the Government. Stop and think for a second. How different are they really? I am going to show you in very plain language how our government and other world governments essentially ARE gangs, they just wear suits and carry briefcases rather than urban fashion and carry measures of protection. Let’sreview, shall we?

The Flag-

For the United States of America, the flag is Red, White and Blue, with 13 stripes and 50 stars. The flag for the Bloods is a red bandanna. The flag for the Crips is a blue bandanna. Wearing a flag is a clear indication of loyalty, and non-verbally allows everyone within eyesight to instantly develop an understanding of what it is you represent. 

Territory – 

The United States government is constantly telling us that the reason we are going to war with 9 countries (hopefully we don’t get to 10 with Iran) is to protect the homeland. We have to protect our borders. We have to keep Americans safe. Why? Because they live in America, and that is the territory that we occupy. On a much smaller scale, that is exactly what street gangs do. GD’s and Vice Lords are doing what they view as protecting their neighborhoods, and they do so by going to war with other gangs who they view as a threat. 

Money – 

Gangs sell drugs, commit robberies, and pimp sex workers to earn a pay day. But think about this. Big Pharma lobbyists donated close to $200 Million dollars to various campaigns, in order for the lawmakers who win different positions in government to essentially do their bidding, which would be reducing the amount of regulation and reducing the tax burden they pay. This is mostly about the lack of regulation, which has turned the Midwest into a heroin den. So government (at minimum) facilitating the sale of narcotics? Check. Every heard of civil asset forfeiture? That’s when a cop pulls someone over, notices a “suspicious” amount of money, and confiscates it from a person without an arrest or a charge. Then it is on the person of interest to prove they weren’t going to use the money in a crime, otherwise the police department gets to keep it to purchase things like coffee machines, and new equipment for themselves. Sounds like robbery to me. And as far as pimping? The Dictionary.com definition states “a man who controls prostitutes and arranges clients for them, taking part of their earnings in return.” Replace the word “prostitutes” with “employees”, and tell me what is different between that and any 9-5 job in corporate America, which is regulated by….the government. 

Military – 

Obviously, the government officials aren’t on the front lines in these wars, risking their lives to take bullets. Of course not. Sowhat they do is send much younger, desperate people who see no way out to participate in the violence for them. What does that sound like? That sounds like OG’s who don’t want to do a crime, so they send the impressionable “little homies” to do it for them to prove themselves. Then what happens when soldiers return home or the little homies go to jail? Everyone who sent them on these missions forget about them, and they waste away in society as if they never mattered. 

The whole point of this post is basically to say this. I understand gang culture. I get the appeal, I get the benefits of being a part of something bigger than you, I get the family aspect, I get the financial aspect, I get all of it. Trust me. What I do NOT understand however, is conservatives who are super pro-military and super pro-gun ownership that have absolutely no idea why gangs exist. Our government is currently the biggest, most dangerous, wealthiest gang on the planet. So either be against what our government is doing on a mass scale, or don’t be so quick to judge what one set of Piru’s does on a very minor scale, comparatively speaking. Is gang violence a problem? Yes. Is United States militarism a problem? Damn right. But let’s be principled. You cannot view one as “patriotism” and the other as “criminal”, when I just broke down why being in a gang and being in government in the USA is the same thing. 

#Whoop

Calling A Racist Racist is Worse Than Being Racist

It’s worse to call a bigoted white person a racist than it is for that bigoted white person to actually commit acts of racial bigotry, also known as racism. 

That’s basically what you get whenever you watch Fox News, listen to Tonald Drump, listen to Ben Shapiro (unless it’s a Muslim calling out AIPAC, then calling out bigotry is all good), or follow Michael Tracey on Twitter. 

Calling a white person racist garners the reaction that calling a black man a n!gger does. They get UPSET when you say they did or said something racist. As Splinter explains: 

“Martin Luther King, Junior’s leadership of the civil rights movement has not been the actual accomplishment of the movement’s broadest goals—America remains a racially segregated and unequal society—but rather a shift in the nation’s conventional wisdom about what falls within the bounds of acceptable, respectable thought. Within the span of a single generation, outright public racism went from respectable to disreputable.”

The basic idea here is as long as you are not super openly acting in a prejudiced manner, then it is not REALLY racist. However, when you cover the language up and disguise it in other phrases, then you have enough plausible deniability to say “What, me? No way, I don’t have a racist bone in my body.” The Root actually has a hilarious article about “Racist Bone Disease” that you should check out. 

My main reason for this piece is due to the fact the republican approval ratings for Tonald Drump have actually gone UP since this whole “Go back to where you came from” bullshit with the 4 best congresswomen currently serving, 3 of which were born here, and 1 (his main target) immigrated here at age 12. I don’twanna hear shit about the right wing not being racist, bigoted, prejudiced, or none of that. Yes you are. There’s levels to everything, and maybe we can get along, maybe we can laugh together, we might even be able to hang out. But you will 100% NOT convince me that you don’t view non-white people as “the other”. You almost certainly view the people of color you are friends with as “the good ones”, while the rest of us are criminals and rapists like Drump said. 

I really wanted to give a good portion of Tonald’s supporters the benefit of the doubt that they aren’t racist, or even cool with racism, but that they just needed the establishment to be broken up so bad that they were willing to risk for voting for a racist.  I actually understood that.

But….

TODAY, on July 18th of 2019, if you still approve of the job this man is doing, it has nothing to do with the establishment. You are either: A. Very rich and those tax cuts were your wet dream, or B. You aren’t the biggest fan of people who are darker than you.

Trim The Democrat Fat

Alriiiiiiiiiight! Finally, we are shedding some of the extra weight around the Democratic Presidential primary season. 

Eric Swalwell has, or will be (as of 7/8/2019) dropping out of the race. This is great news. Now all we need are the following people to drop out so we can have a legit battle of ideas.

1. Pete Booty Judge

2. Bet on my Stork

3. John BickenBackBeinBoolPooper

4. Kirsten Jello Brand

5. Cory Barack O’Booker

6. John Del-Lame-ee

7. Andrew Yang (Can’t think of anything creative for him, and Kyle from Secular Talk hasn’t created one yet either.)

8. Marianne “Flower Child” Williamson

9. Amy Cloud Boot Jar

10. Jay Inslee 

11. Tim “Al ’Qaeda and the Taliban are the same” Ryan

12. Michael “Not the Singer” Bennett

13. Bill “Seriously Guys, I’m a Lefty” de Blasio

14. Handsy Uncle Joseph Biden

All of these candidates basically are the same as each other, so we can just throw them under some categories. 

There’s Team Kamala, which I would say includes Booty Judge, Beto, Hickenlooper, Jello Brand, Cory Booker, John Delaney, Amy Cloud Boot Jar and Michael Bennett. The Centrist Dems who are not going to fight against big money interests, will not end the wars, will not get medicare for all or tax paid public college and university tuition. They’ll be cool towards minorities and women, but they also won’t fight for legalized cannabis or clearing the records of non-violent drug offenders.Joe Biden also fits this category. 

There’s Team Bernie, which you can throw Marianne Williamson and Bill de Blasio (rhetorically) in the mix. Again, strong caveat with Bill de Blasio, I don’t believe him. At all. But if you listen strictly to what he is saying in the debates, he sounds like Bernie. 

Tulsi is basically on an island as the only super anti-war candidate, and as much as it saddens me to admit, as of now it doesn’t look like she’s got much of a shot. However, her strong antiwar voice is completely needed on these stages, so for that reason alone I hope she doesn’t drop out yet. 

Elizabeth Warren is still going strong, and the only reason I want to see her stay in the race is because if Bernie doesn’t win, she’s got to. Otherwise, we will see no substantial change. Although Elizabeth is a little closer to the center than I care for her to be, she’s still overall pretty good. If Bernie Sanders gets a 90% from me, Liz is a solid 80. If I agree with 80% of your record, I feel ok voting for you. So with all that said, let’s keep trimming the fat and get this race down to a reasonable amount of candidates. 

Night Two of the Democratic Debates

Part two of the Democratic debate‘s. This too will be relatively tweet thread like.

I did not catch the debate from the very beginning but from the part I walked in on when they were discussing Medicare for all and education, of course Bernie Sanders was the strongest. He was the only person besides Joe Biden to provide clear, concise, and articulate policy positions for the issues of healthcare and education. Everyone else spoke in platitudes, and did much of what was done yesterday, which was explain what the problem is and just talk about how terrible things are rather than providing a solution to fix said problems. 

On the issue of education, Joe Biden stated that he wanted to make community colleges for Renee, but not all public colleges and universities. He also did not make a mention of canceling the student loan debt.

They are letting Kamala Harris speak for a really long time on the issue of immigration. Her answer is good though. 

John Hickenlooper says we need to reform ICE, not demolish them.

Marianne Williamson is saying a lot of things that sound nice, but there is no policy plan behind it if you pay close attention. She ended strong with stating how the USA 

basically fucked up most of Latin America.

Shout out to Pete Booty Judge for stating the the right wing completely ignores the separation of church and state, and saying the Democrats are representing those who have any religion or no religion. That is something that is not talked about nearly enough.

Handsy Uncle Joseph is starting to get amped up. He isn’t stating anything of policy substance, but he is trying to sound like a lefty. He got pressed before he finally stated that he would not deport someone for a low-level crime.

Bernie coming through with all the 

substance, stating how we need to stop 

trying to overthrow Latin American countries.

Eric Swalwell is mixing some issues with the census and family separation. Weird.

Kamala Harris replies, stating that she disagreed with Obamas immigration policy and advise her staff in California when she was the state attorney general to use their own judgment on the issue of deportation. Solid.

Michael Bennett argued passionately for his position on immigration, that might help him out. 

I didn’t get the chance to take notes on the rest, so I’ll link the Splinter live blog 

coverage to get anything I missed. 

https://splinternews.com/we-feel-dead-inside-splinters-2020-democratic-debate-l-1835925094

Night One of Democratic Primary Debates

I took voice notes throughout the debate, so this blog will basically be written in a Tweet thread format. Enjoy.

Tulsi Gabbard started off wonderfully, with clear and concise policy ideas including a green new deal, Medicare for all, and free college which would be paid for by ending the Wars and reinvesting the money.

Bill de Blasio is actually saying some pretty good stuff as well, I’m not sure how much I believe him.

Every single candidate has mentioned green technology or the green new deal.

Cory Booker looks angry.

Elizabeth Warren being her usual wonky policy driven self. Very long drawn out responses to the questions.

Only two candidates are willing to abolish private insurance. Elizabeth Warren and Bill DeBlasio.

Amie cloud boot jar basically said a bunch of nothing, and is in favor of the public option rather than Medicare for all.

Elizabeth Warren strongly comes out in favor of Medicare for all.

Bet on my stork coming through with cliches and speaking about personal stories, rather than policy solutions.

Bill de Blasio strongly challenges Beto in the rain work on his position for private insurance.

Tulsi Gabbard comes out in favor of Medicare for all, with private insurance still being an available option.

Cory Booker comes out in favor of Medicare for all as well, and also did a relatively good job of tying health issues in with economic and educational issues as well. Again, I’m not sure how much I believe that he will fight for it.

Julian Castro came out in favor of abortion being covered in a Medicare for all bill. That isn’t an issue I’ve heard brought up very much, but I feel that was a good answer.

Elizabeth Warren using sneak words like “access”. No, everyone gets healthcare, no questions asked.

I liked everything that Julie and Castro said about immigration until he got to his solution. Ending the drug war should be one of the top priorities of any Democratic nominee.

Cory Booker going after that Hispanic vote flaunting his Spanish linguistic skills. Gotta love identity politics.

I’m hearing a lot of what is wrong with our current immigration system, but not very many solutions, aside from Julian Castro.

Build a Blasio is actually railing against corporations, rhetorically I’m not surprised, I will be very surprised if he actually sticks to this line of attack if he somehow makes it to the general.

Beto O’Rourke also had to show America that he can speak Spanish, so therefore he will be great for the Hispanic community. Because that’s how it works.

Oh shit shots fired! Julian Castro is giving Beto O’Rourke that heat right now regarding his voting record on immigration.

John Delaney has looked and lost this entire debate.

Tim Ryan looks incredibly confused and a little bit intense.

Cory Booker wants to be Barack Obama so bad.

The moderator just called out all of the candidates and said that nobody has given her a clear answer on how to fix the “child separation” policies. Fantastic.

Cory Booker is the only candidate on stage who would not have voted in favor of the Iran deal. When pressed on it, he simply stated that he would try to negotiate a better deal. Where have we heard that from? Oh right, Donald Trump.

Tulsi Gabbard of course spitting mad knowledge when it comes to foreign policy. This is definitely her strongest attribute.

I wonder how many times Rachel Maddow is going to bring up Russia to the candidates.

All the technical issues they were having are hilarious.

Elizabeth Warren does not have a solid policy solution to gun violence.

Cory Booker does not have a solution to gun violence.

Julian Castro does not have a solution for gun violence.

Tim Ryan has one policy proposal which is his mental health professionals in schools.

Beto’s answer is “let the kids do it!”

Corey Booker cleaned up his answer a little bit, still not great but at least there were some statistics that he sites.

I wasn’t able to take notes during the last portion, but all in all I think that they allowed Bill de Blasio and a few other lesser known Candidates take over the entire debate. I barely got to see Tulsi Gabbard say anything, and it was almost comical how they treated John Delaney. I feel bad almost everyone was wishy-washy on Medicare for all and they used to weasel words like access, universal, affordable, and other various words that sort of let you know they’re not all the way on board with Medicare for all. I’m very interested to see how the debates go tonight.

Donald Trump and Opposition Research

Controversial take time.

I'm not flipping out over what Donald Trump said regarding the fact he said he would "look at it" if given information from a foreign government about an opponent. He said it's simply called "opposition research" and everyone does it.

I agree.

Now, is there a difference between him actively seeking out information from foreign, perhaps even hostile governments and him being given information (that by the way was all 100% accurate) that he didn't ask for, but happens to use? I say yes. 

Why do I feel this way? Well for one, there is still no proof or even hard evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, or John Podesta. However, even if there was, what did we learn? We learned that there was a little something called the "Steele Dossier", which was paid for the DNC and Hillary Clinton, and that information came from Russian sources and was given to a British spy, for the purposes of.......

Getting opoosition research on Donald Trump. You know, the same reason that Mueller began his investigation 2 years ago, but saying that Trump was actually the guilty one? Yeah, that.

The other reasons I feel this way are because of this simple thought excercise. Let's just say your best friend of 25 years has secretly been stealing from you, and a 3rd party tells you, and shows you evidence that this has been happening. Would you be upset with the 3rd party for delivering the message, or would you be mad at your best friend for being a theif? Most people with common sense would have ill feelings towards their (former) best friend, I would hope. In this case, the best friend is Hillary and the DNC, the 3rd Party is Russia. 

Now, was this a smart thing for Trump to say? Of course not, especially given the current political climate and the whole 2 year long investigation that people still won't let go of. However, if you actually listen to it as a singular statement, rather than something that Donald Trump said, it's really not that crazy. It's actually very rational.

Still, f*ck Donald Trump tho. #RIPNipsey.

Making Fun of Louie Gohmert

I love Louie Gohmert.

No seriously, I do.

Stop laughing, I know you think I’m joking, but I’m not.

I genuinely appreciate any time this man says ANYTHING. It is almost 100% of the time going to either infuriate you or make you laugh hysterically. I choose to react in the secondary way. I’m just going to link a few videos of him saying stupid things here, and I hope you all enjoy because seriously….COMEDY.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqbo3LtKais

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gxj7AIQAEV4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz54CEoWDZA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKEIyV-VUrY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADkm-Ek5tbo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=978v6lEnZY4

All videos are provided by Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk, which is a YouTube channel affiliated with TYT Network. Follow him on Twitter @KyleKulinski.