#yeah if I still have to debate what your opinion on Palestine is in the year 2024. um | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rabiesprooftreerat · 8 months

Text

Damn i really gotta rant. This thing will be in basically 2 sections, politics and the tism. I love my family, but hOLY SHIT it feels weird sometimes.

Essentially, I'll be screaming about my issues and shit

Normally, if someone has a differing political opinion from me, I'll be fine. I like hearing how others think. I can be stubborn and abrasive about it at times, I'll admit, but overall? No harm, no foul! I'll try and see from their side and respect it. After all, as long as there's no harm done, it's fine!

But, FUCK am i not safe! :)

My family and I are talking about Palestine over dinner (how it sucks, how sad the loss of innocent lives are, supporting Palestine) and eventually we get sidetracked. My sister talks about reverse eugenics (????) and we move on to US presidents. Now, I don't support Trump, I have no reason to. I am a queer, neurodivergent Latina. I have good reason not to like him, not to mention his issues as president.

My sister says that I "just don't like Trump because she's gay." Which okay???? That's still a damn good reason to not like him. That is actually a VERY VALID REASON! I say that there's more, that WE ARE LATINAS and he's a RACIST! She goes "okay?" and says that the economy was good with him as he ran the country like a business. Which you shouldn't do, you should care about your citizens. I start with this, get this point dismissed, and (I shit you not) said she liked him for his honesty.

She liked him for how honest and publicly racist he was.

What? I say that if THIS was what he showed to the public, then how was he like in private? She ignored this, and i pointed out his connection with EPSTEIN, to which she said that most big wigs are pedos anyway (not the point)! I explain how bad this is and his other crimes, to which she says that Obama also committed crimes and was secretly a racist.

Did i bring up Obama? No. Did i plan to? No. Am i saying he's completely innocent? Absolutely not. Will i search up Obama's apparent racism? NOT RIGHT NOW! THIS WAS ABOUT TRUMP AND THE ISSUES HE CAUSED! BESIDES, if i was telling you we are not safe because we're Latinas (regardless of if we were born on US soil) during his time in office, that should be taken seriously.

IF I SAID THAT I, YOUR SISTER, WAS NOT SAFE IN THE COUNTRY BECAUSE OF MY SEXUALITY, THEN YOU SHOULD LISTEN BECAUSE MY LIFE IS ON THE LINE!

Eventually, i say that i view The Orange as one of the worst, but Reagan is THE worst to me. I will say i was aggressive at this point. After all, I was pissed, and I have no reason to lie. My sister goes on saying that I wasn't even alive for it, so i can't know that he's the worst. Which, W H A T?

As if Reagan's actions don't affect us now. I am shouting because what. I SEE the effects right now with my two FUCKING E Y E S. My mom is home now and is a Reagan stan apparently, so we debate. It's more like an argument, and a sad one at that.

Now, i have a bad habit of talking down to people if i believe i am right. Regardless of age or superiority, i can do this to you. Is it bad? Yeah! I don't like doing it either. It's annoying and feels a little gross. If i am given some respect and reasoning about something, I don't do it. You treated me as an equal and i have no reason to talk down to you. I will return that respect as best i can. BUT (as is in the case with my family) if i am treated as lesser because of my age, am interrupted too many times, or the conversation is purposely derailed with the intent to shut me up, I will talk down to you.

I will use small words, slow my speech, and talk as if you are also a child. If you cannot talk to me as an adult, then we will talk on the same level as children. I hate having to do this because it feels stupid, but I need to as it's the fastest way to regain respect in the convo. My mom even says that whenever I talk down to someone, it's because I'm usually RIGHT! She says this because I DO IT TO HER!

I have to constantly reiterate the point to both her and my sister, that Reagan has done such harm that it's still felt today. Again, i am told that i don't know what I'm talking about because i wasn't there like my mom was. I, again, try to explain why he's not good. My mom says all Latinos love Reagan 'cause of his policies and i don't know anything. She understands what I'm saying because I'm talking clearly so we can converse. She then DERAILS THE CONVERSATION!

She asks who's worse, Clinton, Bush#1, or Bush#2? I tried to bring it back because they were not part of the topic of Reagan. She continues, Clinton, Bush #1, Bush #2? I try to bring it back, cycle repeats. Slowly i get annoyed and get louder and slower each time. Eventually, i tell her bluntly that the conversation was about the Reagan Administration, not Clinton. Not George Bush. Not W. Bush. THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION! My sister laughs, saying that my mother loved history, my mom starts about Clinton, and sits on the couch.

She allows the conversation to return to Reagan and FINALLY I can talk about his effects on unions and the economy. I am talking down to my almost 50yr. old mom at this point, who is an immigrant as well. Had she not dealt with issues, I would have been beat by now. I explain how Trickle-Down economics was a failure and how his methods of union busting are still used today. All explained slowly and clearly, like i was talking to the child i has dismissed as. She concedes that i had good points but had giggled during the explanation (my sister literally asked if i knew and i did not).

Was it rude? Yes. Could i have been better about it? Yes! I was an asshole. But damn was i tired of what I was saying not being taken seriously.

"You just don't like him cause you're gay and he's homophobic", "You know ____ did this bad thing too, right?", "You weren't there, so you can't know!" I have to talk down to an adult to be taken seriously, no matter if i am an adult or not. All because i am young.

I have to strip the authority of the grown ADULT to be on an equal level and be heard.

I am and will forever be sick of not being heard, especially when it comes to my OWN GODDAMN MIND!

Now for the tism talk. Oh my god my family is... something. Now, i have been aware of my ADHD for YEARS now. I had brought it up before with my parents when i was like 13, but it was shut down because I could never! I was "too smart" and had no mental issues (i did in fact, have mental issues). After all, a mentally ill could NEVER memorize an entire page of nothing but cancer facts! A "retard" couldn't possibly be getting all A's in elementary AND be interested in oncology! No way!

This hasn't been the first time something like this happened either. First time, I said i might be introverted because i heavily related to other introverts. After all, i get tired in my head around people and like to be alone if i need to recharge! I "took it from the internet" at the time and OOPS! I was introverted.

The second time, i said i might have ADHD because i researched the symptoms. It explained a lot as to why i struggled now in school, focus, the Leg Bounce©️, and maybe we can find a way to help me raise my grades! I was told that only my sister had it, i was lazy, and sent to a group where kids with substance abusing parents were. Despite the kids group and the drunk dad i had, i did not get better and my only solace was anime, danganronpa/other fandoms, and Amino.

Coming out as queer was taken well so not much to say there.

But then, i got on Tiktok and i got recommended all these funny and relatable people! Some had ADHD, but some were relatable in a way that the ADHD people weren't. The way these people had little things they adored with their soul, how the hot food can't touch the cold food or it's all bad, the little movements and that make them happy, how some sound is evil, etc.

I found out that they were autistic and things clicked, sorta. "This makes sense," I said. "They have the 'tism!" But what about me? Surely, I'm not autistic. I'd know! Over time i came to realize that there was a good chance i did have the 'tism.

But what about the tests! If i am diagnosed as autistic, what will happen? America is shit and what if i need to flee? That might interfere! I found the RAAD-S test along with the JoJo Autism Wheel and took it. RAAD-S: You have the tism.

Autism Wheel: Autism! You got it!

I took and retook the tests. Each time I got autism. And god!

It felt so good to have reason as to why I'm like this!

That's why flappy hands and making cat noises feel good! This is why hot and cold food can't touch or it ruins the whole plate! This is why the same foods each time is good! It's why radiological accidents live forever in my head! Why Cookie Run Kingdom and Purrfect Apawcalypse and more are switching in my head forever.

I tell my sister that i might be autistic.

She says that i can't be. I was just a smart child.

I say "what child talks about cancer?" She says a smart one.

Eventually, it's brought up in conversation and laughed about. They have me take a BUZZFEED-ESCE QUIZ to "prove" im autistic. The quiz says i got autism. I get happy and they are surprised. I have to talk about boundaries now but its weird.

They CARE about my mental state. But i have low expectations for them. If you have low expectations, its hard to be disappointed. So i cry because this is new. Too many feelings and i cry.

IT TOOK OVER A DECADE TO NOTICE ANYTHING. AND I CRY BECAUSE I AM FINALLY LISTEN TO AND ITS WEIRD! WHAY IS IT WEIRD AND WHY CANT I TALK ABOUT MY FEELINGS AND BOUNDARIES?

And its because it never happened. Boundaries didn't exist and i was "too sensitive" so i had to get better. My mom told me ONCE as a JOKE to "stop crying or I'll never watch movies with you" when i was, at most, 10 years old. So i stopped and no one cared. I started my covering my mouth with my hands, then crying quietly, to silent tears, to not crying. Hell she was surprised that i don't cry at tearjerking scenes because she forgot what she told me. No one cared then so why should i believe it now? I want to but i cant. And it's really sad.

End of rant ig

#politics #a rant #i am pissed #tw alchohol mention #dont reblog

0 notes

drunkoctopusinc · 4 years

Text

Saw this on Instagram and not gonna lie- it kinda bugged me. Some of these points are accurate, some I disagree with but I see the argument for, others are out and out wrong. Usually the inaccuracies are due to purpously inflammatory phrasing, which is understandable since its a meme but the issues are to important for the language to stand fully uncriticed. Basically, I know it’s just a meme but I wanna pick it apart since this stuff is important and quite frankly I’m a little bored.

“Total support for Isreal”

This is true of the official platforms for each party. That being said I think it’s important to note you will find Democratic candidates and office holders with more moderated views on Isreal and (increasingly so) candidates who strongly support Palestine. There is no such moderation or diversity of opinion on the Republican side. If you want to cast your vote for someone who doesn’t support Isreal you might find that in a Democrat especially in the House of Reps, so be sure to look up your local candidates because they might surprise you on this one.

“Do Wall Streets bidding”

Wall Street is basically begging for Dodd-Frank to be repealed, and no Democrat is gonna do that. A Democratic administration created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and since 2010 there have been 3 separate bills introduced by Democrats to improve/reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. (The most recent was a bi-patrician bill sponsored by Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), John McCain (R-AZ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and Angus King (I-ME)) I understand how a lack of success can make it feel like Democrats are just doing Wall Street’s bidding, but that’s not the case. There are certainly differences in the level of regulation Democrats are asking for, but the broad strokes is Democrats want regulations put on Wall Street, while Republicans believe Wall Street can be trusted to do whatever they want.

“Unlimited Military Spending”

Much to my chagrin, this is true. Regardless of party affiliation it’s good for any elected official to say they brought jobs to the district, and more fighter jets mean more jobs building fighter jets. No one wants to rock that boat.

“Hostility to Russia, Iran, & China”

This one has multiple parts with varing degrees of debatablity. For Russia the Obama Administration tried to soften relations but Putin basically responded “No thanks Toots” and proceeded to violated Ukraine’s sovrienty, back a dictator using chemical weapons on his own people, and meddle in our elections. Basically the Dems tried but it’s a two way street and Russia’s gotta be on board too. Meanwhile Trump and the Republicans seem to be fine with Russia paying militants to kill Americans and undermining democratic norms in the 2016 US elections as well as a bunch of other European elections so seems like they want to get along with Russia whatever it fucking takes. So I’d say there’s a pretty big difference on that one.

Regarding Iran, there’s not much difference between Democrats and Republicans. Both are skeptical about Iran and don’t want to risk the alliances we have with other middle eastern nations in order to tighten bonds with Iran. HOWEVER, the Iran Nuclear Treaty was a huge step forward in calming tensions which damn near every democrat supported. And the Republicans basically yeeted it into the sun for no good reason. So at least democrats don’t want to make shit worse with Iran. As for China 100% hositlites would have remained the same with a Dem and probably most Republicans. But at the moment Republicans support an active trade war with China which is only making our relations with them worse. So for both Iran and China the Dems gotta get at least some points for not wanting to make shit worse.

“Full Spectrum Dominance.”

Yes. Both parties want the US to a strong political and economic force on the world stage without any major foreign threats. (TBH I struggle to see the problem with this because that dominance could be used to give every nation wi-fi and tasty cookies just easily as to perpetuate rampant injustice especially when its so vauge as to what they mean by Full Spectrum Dominance. But I don’t have nothing against you if you don’t want the US to persue dominance as goal.)

“Let Money Rule politics”

Campaign finance reform is a complicated issue because there isn’t 1 clear answer for how to do it. Campaigning costs a lot of money and candidates have to get that money somehow, unfortunately there isn’t really an answer for how it needs to be done that can’t in some way be attacked for not going far enough or not solving the real problem. So while Democrats generally try to find solutions and create reform, it is perfectly understandable and reasonable to feel they aren’t actually solving anything. However I think it’s important note (given how important this years election is) that Joe Biden has been very consistent on voting for campaign finance reform for the past 40 years, even going so far as to create a system of public funding for congressional elections in the early 90s. So if this is a high priority issue for you Joe Biden has a strong record on it.

“Neoliberalism Rocks!”

I’ve found online the term “neoliberalism” is used to describe such a wide range of policies it’s becoming less and less clear exactly what a person means by saying “neoliberalism.” So how accurate this claim is really depends on how you define “neoliberal.” That caveats aside, traditionally both parties have their neoliberal cohorts, and they do wield a far bit of power since they usually are the “deal makers” who talk more with the other side and create the compromises which get broad enough support to pass. However, the Republican Party has been drifting away from neoliberal policies for some time and has been completely sprinting away from them since trump was elected. For example here are some policies self described neoliberals love which recent republicans have taken a massive shit on; Free Trade, easier immigration, and a carbon tax. Neoliberals are inherently in the middle so yes both parties have neoliberal segments (Bill Clinton, Bush Senior for example) but Republicans are rapidly running further and further right, so if not already accurate to say “Neoliberals universally identify as democrats” it will be soon.

“Spy on Everyone!”

This is a bit hyperbolic but yeah mostly. While there are officals on both sides who want to stop or at least curb the survalince state when talking about the respective parties as a whole there aren’t big differences on changing this, at least not public ones.

“Screw the Old and the Poor!”

This one is just so wildly overstated as to be impossible to really discuss/debate effectively. I could say this is false because both parties agree we should strive to eleminate poverty but they differ on how. I could also say this is true because neither party has proposed a solution which would actually help end poverty, or I could say this is false because the Democratic platform includes issues like raising the minimum wage and expanding the social safety net which will help the poorest Americans. There’s no way to really analyze for accuracy because its so broad and emotional that it’s really more of an opinion statement than anything. (To be clear, there’s nothing inherently wrong with such a statement. In many ways they are critical to the nations broader political discussion. it just doesn’t lend itself to what I’m looking to do with this post and I felt it would have been dismissive to just say “it’s an emotional argument so I don’t care”) The only substantive thing I can say here which still fits into my general structure is no candidate wants to do anything against old people because old people vote in big numbers. It’s the reason despite talk of cutting medicare and social security Republicans haven’t actually tried anything substantial on those issues.

“Oligarchy not democracy”

This is another one that gets caught up in definition. If you use the strictest definition of democracy and a broad definiton of Oligarchy then yes this is right but otherwise it really depends on how you define oligarchy. The majority of Americans have the right to vote, thus they have a say in what our government does. This would generally meet the most common definition of democracy and neither party wants to change that (at least not officially.) there is no bi partisan call for the wealthiest 1% or even the wealthiest 10% of Americans to have exclusive control over our governance. Of course that’s the most inflammatory version of this statement, and I doubt that’s what the person who wrote it was saying. The more likely definition of oligarchy this person was using is a government where an elite class hold a disproportionate share of political power rather all political power. In which case it’s very very hard to agrue the US isn’t an oligarchy. I mean even if we put aside the more heavily debated question of how strongly political power and money are, I think everyone would agree my senator has more political power than I do. Plus, the founders didn’t want “mob rule” they were terrified of a populist leader rising up, so they didn’t create a pure democracy. Instead they made republic, which one could argue is simultaneously an oligarchy and a democracy. This means when anyone looks to maintain the current american system even in the broadest strokes it could be agrued they’re supporting oligarchy over democracy. However you could just as easily argue they’re supporting democracy. The line between oligarchy and democracy aren’t as clear as we’d like them to be. (And of course when you bring the “how strongly are political power and money connected” debate back into the picture it only gets more obscured). Now, to finally get to my point, the degree to which the US is an oligarchy is unclear and so is the degree to which each party supports maintaining the oligarchical elements. However I think saying that either party doesn’t support democracy is inaccurate. BUT I also think it is vital that we recognize under Trump the Republican Party has tolerated repeated undermining of our democratic system risking serious and dangerous backsliding into totalitarianism. The Democratic Party has not engaged in this backsliding at all and has fought against it as much as they can, and you absolutely must understand that as you vote this fall.

“Vive US imperialism!”

Yeah this is pretty much spot on. I mean I don’t think either political party is looking to conquer Cuba or to steal Baja California from Mexico but yeah the bulk of people in each party are at the very least not invested in reducing what has been called “Neo-imperialism” which is almost certainly what this statement is referring to, so while I could get this on the technically but that would be disingenuous.

“outlaw third parties”

Third parties are legal. No one wants to make them illegal, the constitution also wouldnt let them. The problem is our voting system makes third parties mathematically unstrategic. You could argue they are functionally unallowed and there’s no insensitive for either party to change that so the idea here isn’t to far off, but outlawing third parties is such a bold claim, and that mathy disadvantage is drastically reduced in local races. So if you support a third party or want to create a third party, go for it. Just know that your efforts will be best spent starting local.

“Crush the left”

Pretty sure “the left” here means self described socialists and further left in which case yes. the establishment of both parties are still scared by the s-word and even worse the c-word because no one wants to be the USSR. But there are loads of people who would define the left as the democrats and the Democratic Party doesn’t want to crush Democratic Party. (It doesn’t mean to be a self destructive idiot but sometimes it just can’t help itself) so again I know what they’re going for here but little astrisk for other people might not.

“Regime change is cool.”

If regime change was something both parties liked there would be US troops in Venezuela right now. The oldest Democrats might not be out and out against all regime change but no democrat (and plenty of Republicans quiet frankly) want to repeat the Iraq War. When it comes to regime change worse case something democrats and republicans disagree on and best case something they both agree is bad.

TL;DR- there are key differences between the political parties, regardless of what a meme might say. It’s not the 90s anymore so those differences are pretty big and only getting bigger. To each there own on who and what they support, so do your research and learn which party and which candidates best represents your values.

PS- if it’s Donald Trump go jump of a bridge.

#2020 election #joe biden #donald trump #democrats #republicans #discourse #im kinda just venting here about the sloppy Rhetoric the internet praises #like i know theres no reason to expect nuanced debate #but it bums me out we dont actually understand the other side of any agrument because we only see there self-congratulatory memes #nothing wrong with memes #just they arent a subsitute for actual discussion #anyway this is just me over thinking stuff

0 notes

wyattvsmusic · 4 years

Text

Jay Electronica - A Written Testimony ALBUM REVIEW

I never thought that I’d ever get to write this review. During my last radio show of 2019, the very last question I asked my friend was if he thought that Jay Electronica would put out an album in the 2020s and we laughed and said absolutely not. This is because we have waited so damn long for one album. The very first words said on Exhibit C (one of the best songs ever) are “it’s coming.” Nothing came. On Road To Perdition, Jay Electronica finishes one of his verses with “I been patient.” His fans have def been more patient. Since 2009, the incredible songs Exhibit A and Exhibit C have been the only official Jay Electronica releases. However, there are a handful of fantastic songs that he’s put out on Soundcloud randomly. If you haven’t heard songs like Jazzmatazz, The Announcement, Dear Moleskine, Dimethyltriptamine, and Victory Is In My Clutches, do yourself a favor. All we’ve ever wanted from Jay Electronica was an album and because it took so fucking long for it to come out, all we wanted was more music. The last song we heard from Jay Electronica was in 2017. I understand that great art takes time to make and that you have to experience life in order to put it into the art but Jay Electronica has had plenty to say for a while. Plus he had been teasing it for so long. The highly-anticipated debut album, Act II: Patents Of Nobility (The Turn) was announced not very long after Jay Electronica signed with Roc Nation in 2010. I really want to know what that contract looked like because it was ten years ago and he hadn’t dropped anything at all. Ever since I started doing my most anticipated albums list every January, I have included Act II on every single list because I knew it wasn’t going to come out. Even when Dr. Dre and Lil Wayne released their long-anticipated albums I still knew that Jay Electronica wasn’t dropping. Making the fans wait a long time for an album can be both good and bad. A long wait can be rewarding because great music takes time to make but if you let the expectations build for such a long time, they might be so high that they can never be met or the fans could eventually just stop caring. Last year, I went to go see Jay Electronica live and yes, he did have enough songs to put on a full show. Of course, fans asked him about the album and he laughed it off, saying “my life is an album” and that people know him as “Erykah Badu’s baby daddy who only has two songs.” I was a little kid when Act II was announced and I had been looking forward to it ever since even though I didn’t think it would come out. Us fans were just constantly let down because he would tweet release dates and tease that the album was coming and we even saw the tracklist for it in 2012. We did eventually get to hear songs from this tracklist such as @FatBellyBella, Better In Tune With The Infinite, Run & Hide, Road To Perdition, Letter To Falon, and Shiny Suit Theory—which actually appears on A Written Testimony. I can see why it’s included: it features JAY-Z, and it’s mixed like the rest of the songs on this album. I have loved that song ever since it dropped in 2012 and I know all the words to it. So now that Jay Electronica finally dropped his debut album after 10 years of waiting, the question most people ask is if the album is as good as you hoped it would be. My answer to this question is fuck yeah. I love this album and it’s really everything I wanted from a Jay Electronica album. Before I get to talking about how much I love this album, I wanted to talk about some of the biggest issues I have. This album starts with some words from Louis Farrakan. He says that “black people of America are the real children of Israel.” This didn’t surprise me because I know that Jay Electronica is an active member of the Nation of Islam but as a Jewish person, I didn’t like the intro at all because 1. it’s just not true and 2. Farrakhan is a major anti-semite. I did feel some of the same sentiments that Peter Rosenberg had about the lines on this album about the “synagogue of satan” and when he said “satan struck Palestine with yet another mortar.” Those lines don’t sit well with me as a Jewish person. I don’t think Jay Electronica is anti-semite and when I saw him last year, he said something like he loves everyone no matter what religion they are which I appreciated a lot. Also, I’ll forever love Jay Elec not just because he’s a dope rapper, but because he said “They call me Jay Electronica—fuck that / Call me Jay Elec-Hanukkah, Jay Elec-Yarmulke.” I have seen people say that having JAY-Z featured on damn near every song is cheating and I sort of agree. I was hoping for a “debut album” of just Jay Electronica but JAY-Z is my favorite rapper. I love Hov but I really wanted just a Jay Electronica album. I love what I got but I think it’s fair of me to want just a Jay Elec album. Also, Raekwon’s first album was basically a Ghostface collab and Dr. Dre’s The Chronic heavily featured Snoop. It was odd to me that Hov had the first verse on the album but Lady Of Rage had the first verse on Doggystyle instead of Snoop. Even though he didn’t start the album, Jay Electronica came out the gate swinging. One of my favorite lines from him on this song is “And I bet you a Rothschild I get a bang for my dollar.” Chance The Rapper tweeted that this album is the reason Rap Genius was made and I totally agree because even though I’ve listened to this album so many times, I’m constantly catching new bars. This album doesn’t seem that personal but it can get introspective at times, especially towards the end. For the most part, this albums is just the two Jays rapping their asses off. The Blinding was a perfect mix of both. The first part of the song had me nodding my head so hard and I loved how they went back and forth. I really was not expecting Travis Scott on the album but his short hook sounded great and was a great way to transition into the next beat. I did like how Jay Elec started his second verse with “Extra, extra, it's Mr. Headlines / Who signed every contract and missed the deadlines” which references his song Extra Extra and missing the deadlines of his contracts to drop his albums. Even though this album took 10 years to drop he tweeted that the albums was recorded in 40 days so he had the line “40 days, 40 nights, tryna live up to the hype.” I also like how this line led into “Hov hit me up like, ‘What, you scared of heights?’” because the expectations for this album grew so high just to be recorded in 40 days and he had to take that jump to release it. It is about time we heard Hov over an Alchemist beat and The Neverending Story is just so fucking good. I liked Jay Elec’s line where he said “But if you want beef, I'll filet mignon ya.” The beat on Universal Soldier is so fucking good and it’s one of those loops that kind of left me in a trance. This song has one of my favorite JAY-Z verses on the album and I loved that lyric where he said “We done ducked them fed' charges, now we eatin' confit.” Flux Capacitor was an instant standout because that Rihanna sample is fucking bananas. It seems like a very hard beat to rap over but both JAY-Z and Jay Elec bodied it. This is probably my favorite beat on the album and the beat switch at the end was amazing where the Rihanna sample went crazy. I almost wish that switch led into another verse from them rapping over that beat. The production for this album was very interesting to me because Jay Electronica produced most of it. I was expecting a lot of Just Blaze production because he was so involved with all the hype surrounding Act II but he’s nowhere to be found in the credits of this album. I do love Jay Electronica’s production and I think it fits him very well. Shiny Suit Theory was also produced by Jay Elec and I feel like it fits in the album very well because the way these songs are mixed which leads me to my other issue with this album. These songs are poorly mixed but it seems very intentional. The songs on SoundCloud that Jay Elec has dropped through the majority of his career aren’t very well mixed either so this is what I’ve come to expect from him. JAY-Z sounds good over these beats too because it’s not like 4:44 had the best mixing either. One of the only songs without JAY-Z on it is Fruits Of The Spirit which is produced by No ID. I do like the way Jay Elec raps on here but I have heard that loop flipped so many times (ex: Talib Kweli - Never Been In Love). The last song, A.P.I.D.T.A. makes the perfect closer to the album in my opinion because it is the most personal. When I heard the hook, “I got numbers in my phone that'll never ring again,” I really did feel it in my soul because it’s a really weird and sad feeling looking through your contacts in your phone and seeing the number and past messages that you’ve sent to someone that died. I feel like this song encapsulates that feeling perfectly. Apparently this song was written the night Kobe Bryant passed away (RIP) and it almost reminds me of Better In Tune With The Infinite because Jay Elec said at the show I went to that he wrote it after his mother or grandmother (I can’t totally remember) passed and that’s one of his most personal songs. The number one questions I see after the release of this album is if Jay Electronica kept up with Hov and if Hov bodied Jay Elec on his own albums. I think both of those questions are up for debate and I could argue either side and the fact that you can do that shows how good this album is. This is top tier lyricism and I’m very happy that Jay Electronica finally dropped his album. I hope this opens him up to putting out more music because I still would like to hear more from him and I would be interested in hearing some of those songs from the original Act II tracklist because I think Jay Electronica could eventually be put in the GOAT conversation but he needs to have a catalog first.

Fav Tracks: The Blinding, The Neverending Story, Shiny Suit Theory, Universal Soldier, Flux Capacitor, A.P.I.D.T.A.

#Jay Electronica #JAY-Z #Hov #Roc Nation #A Written Testimony #Travis Scott #The-Dream #Act II #Swizz Beatz #Araabmuzik

0 notes

theconservativebrief · 6 years

Link

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has become a breakout star in the Democratic Party since June, when she pulled off a stunning upset in the New York midterm primaries, beating Rep. Joe Crowley, a top Democrat in the House.

And, not coincidentally, she has also become the white-hot epicenter of not just derision, but blistering, nonstop criticism from conservatives and Republicans.

Ocasio-Cortez is a part of the new left flank of the Democratic Party that is fighting both Republicans and establishment Democrats (and, occasionally, the media) in advance of the fall midterms.

A Bronx native, she’s a democratic socialist, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) as her political mentor. She’s become a welcome surrogate on the trail for progressive primary candidates; in fact, she’s seemingly everywhere, campaigning for left-leaning Democrats in Kansas, Michigan, and Hawaii.

And to some on the right, like Sean Hannity, Ocasio-Cortez and her politics are “downright scary.”

Former President Barack Obama is retired from politics, for all intents and purposes, and, to paraphrase Richard Nixon, not available for conservatives to “kick around” anymore. And blasting Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, whose name and image Republicans have used to try to terrify voters for more than seven years, just isn’t getting the job done.

Polls like this are why I tend to doubt the attacks on Pelosi do the GOP much good. Pelosi ranked dead last (out of 10) when people were asked whether something or someone was an impt factor in their vote choice for 2018. https://t.co/7L4kgqBYAJ pic.twitter.com/zYX98yMZrI

— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) August 15, 2018

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is young, new to politics, and far to the left. And to many on the right, she is something else — a target.

Ocasio-Cortez has become ubiquitous in conservative media, a perfect character to represent a changing Democratic Party that is going hard on expanding the social safety net — in the conservative media’s view, too hard.

Though most Republicans have never heard of her, National Review, Breitbart, the American Conservative, and other right-leaning outlets have all written extensively on Ocasio-Cortez. National Review’s Charles C.W. Cooke wrote that he was doing so “because she’s being hyped as the Next Big Thing. Because she’s now within the Vanguard of the Extra Serious Committee for Democratic Socialism in America. Because she’s making videos with Bernie, and being toasted on the Sunday shows.”

Two weeks ago, prominent conservative writer and podcast host Ben Shapiro offered Ocasio-Cortez $10,000 to debate him. “Miss Ocasio-Cortez, I’m really excited that you’ve been elevated to that position and I would love to have a real conversation with you about the issues,” he said, adding, “Not only am I eager to discuss the issues with you, I’m willing to offer $10,000 to your campaign, today, for you to come on our Sunday special,” concluding, “However you want to do it, I am more than willing to talk to you.”

(The Sunday Special is a special feature on The Ben Shapiro Show podcast and video series in which Shapiro interviews figures from politics and culture. For the sake of transparency, Shapiro has also invited me to be on the show.)

Though Shapiro told Fox Business that he didn’t expect a response, Ocasio-Cortez ultimately did. “Just like catcalling, I don’t owe a response to unsolicited requests from men with bad intentions.” I reached out to the Ocasio-Cortez campaign, and was told that the tweet was Ocasio-Cortez’s full statement on the matter.

Just like catcalling, I don’t owe a response to unsolicited requests from men with bad intentions.

And also like catcalling, for some reason they feel entitled to one. pic.twitter.com/rsD17Oq9qe

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Ocasio2018) August 10, 2018

I reached out to Shapiro, too, and asked why he wanted to debate Ocasio-Cortez (who is running in a deep-blue district in a blue state) and what his response was to her tweet. He said he wanted to have “a discussion or debate — whichever she chose” with Ocasio-Cortez, “Because Tom Perez called her the future of the Democratic Party, and because she hasn’t done a single interview with anyone who didn’t vote Democrat, so far as I am aware.” In response to her tweet, Shapiro said, “Cross-partisan discussions make the country better. End of story. She had every right to say no, of course. But suggesting that this is in any way comparable to catcalling is patently ridiculous and insane.”

Shapiro has gained a massive online following, particularly on Twitter and YouTube, and his appeal with young conservatives has made him, according to the Washington Post, “the person who appeared to be doing the most to shape the thinking of the new generation of Republican leaders.”

And on DailyWire.com — of which Shapiro is editor-in-chief — there are six pages of stories on Ocasio-Cortez, with headlines including, “INSANE: Here’s How Much The Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez ‘Medicare For All’ Bill Would Cost” and “Ocasio-Cortez Makes Most Idiotic Statement Ever On Twitter.”

The laser focus on Ocasio-Cortez within conservative and right-wing circles is reminiscent of another Democrat who still looms large in the right: Nancy Pelosi, who to conservatives “epitomizes out-of-touch, liberal elitism” and whose image has been used in GOP campaign ads across the country since the late 2000s.

[embedded content]

But Pelosi’s ability to shape the opinions, and votes, of Republicans and independents with her mere presence in ads may have been overstated from the start, and especially in 2018. And with Donald Trump taking up considerable oxygen in the minds of voters, that effect may be even more muted.

As one campaign strategist who spoke anonymously with Politico said in June 2017, “There is zero evidence that linking a candidate to Nancy Pelosi is a meaningful, powerful message that will persuade swing voters or motivate the GOP base.”

That makes Ocasio-Cortez’s entrance into the political scene an important one — for Republicans.

To be clear, Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t become a “boogeyman for conservatives” just because of her ideas and political positions. As a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and someone who ran on Medicare-for-all and a federal jobs guarantee in a deep-blue district, that would have been par for the course.

And Ocasio-Cortez isn’t just a democratic socialist, she’s a democratic socialist who is young, female, and making headlines across the country as she attempts to lead progressive candidates like herself to victory in their primary races.

To many on the left, she’s an invigorating “rock star.” To conservatives looking to paint the new left as terrifying, she’s the perfect example. Plus, if Ocasio-Cortez wins in November, she, like Nancy Pelosi, could hold her seat in Congress for decades.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez greets supporters in Flint, Michigan, on July 28, 2018. Kainaz Amaria/Vox

So conservatives are framing their criticisms of Ocasio-Cortez and, in Shapiro’s words, the “howling at the moon branch of the Democratic Party,” through not just Ocasio-Cortez’s political platform, but through her gaffes and misstatements. One example: She argued that the cost of government-financed health care would be far outweighed by private health care if you added in “the cost of all the funeral expenses of those who died because they can’t afford access to health care.” Another: She said critics of her confusing answers on the Israel/Palestine issue were largely from the alt-right. (They weren’t.)

Michael Graham wrote for CBS News that “[her] gaffes have become so frequent—and harmful—that a cottage industry has risen up on the Right to trumpet them. She’s become a staple of talk radio and clips of her less-than-flattering moments frequent Fox News. Websites like the Washington Free Beacon and the Daily Caller delight in highlighting the latest misstep from the new poster person for American Progressivism.”

In a Free Beacon article titled “Five Idiotic Moments in the Most Recent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Interview,” Alex Griswold put it more succinctly: “So yeah, conservatives are looooving this whole Ocasio-Cortez phenomenon.”

Some observers, like FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, have argued that despite her mistakes, Ocasio-Cortez’s policy knowhow is “about on par with or maybe a bit ahead” of the average member of Congress.

The level of policy expertise isn’t great in Congress. And everyone says some dumb shit in long, extemporaneous interviews. Pick one of the random 435 members of the House out of a hat, have them do TV several times a week, and you’ll see much worse.

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) August 9, 2018

And it’s worth pointing out that misstatements aren’t exactly uncommon in the world of politics, from House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s “valiant but often unsuccessful struggles with the English language” all the way up to the president of the United States.

(Even though Trump frequently commits errors and gaffes and tells outright lies, one Republican Congress member said in July, “I don’t care … He has a different technique, that’s why I voted for him … [he] doesn’t want to act like one of those guys who you just played talking here, saying all of those words.”)

But within the conservative imagination, Ocasio-Cortez might not be that much like Nancy Pelosi, who does hold real political power and influence and has for decades, or even Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Ocasio-Cortez is maybe more like the left-wing version of Tea Party candidates who flamed out hard in the 2010 midterms, a Todd Akin or a Christine O’Donnell.

More specifically, O’Donnell — the Tea Party candidate who stunned the country when she won the 2010 Delaware GOP primary — became national news not for winning her primary, but for gaffes widely (and gleefully) shared in mainstream media outlets, from a complete lack of knowledge regarding Supreme Court cases and the Constitution to her mistaken belief that scientists had created mice with human brains.

Within weeks of winning her primary, O’Donnell went from a shock victory to being parodied on Saturday Night Live — a fate many conservatives would love to see befall Ocasio-Cortez.

Christine O’Donnell’s book, Troublemaker, at a book signing after speaking at a Broward Republican Party fundraiser in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on August 25, 2011. Carey Wagner/Sun Sentinel/MCT via Getty Images

But there’s something important to remember about Christine O’Donnell. Though she ultimately lost in the general election, her candidacy was a part of a larger wave election that put Republicans with policy positions like hers in the majority in the House and gave the GOP considerable power in states nationwide.

O’Donnell was a Tea Party candidate whose political generation included such figures as Mick Mulvaney (now Trump’s budget director), Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID), and Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) — all of whom didn’t just win their races in 2010, but reshaped their political party as a whole.

In short, though O’Donnell lost, her ideas and political perspective won. And the conservative concern about Ocasio-Cortez, and, more broadly, “an insurgent-led shift towards a more Sanders-esque Democratic party,” is still very much a possibility.

For her part, Ocasio-Cortez’s team has made it clear that she will not be slowing down her media appearances, arguing that the added attention will put the spotlight on her policy platform, which includes eliminating ICE and a federal jobs-for-all guarantee.

But conservatives will continue to hammer her, believing that by doing so, they can sink the most visible representative of the “new” Democratic Party.

Ocasio-Cortez speaks about income inequality, low minimum wage, and Medicare-for-all in Flint, Michigan, on July 28, 2018. Kainaz Amaria/Vox

Original Source -> Why conservatives love to hate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes