January 11, 2025 • 67 mins
Become a patron: Patreon.com/TheBPDShow
While Los Angeles burns, these billionaires are draining 150 BILLION GALLONS of water every year to keep their farming empire running—and guess who’s out here defending them? @AnaKasparian . Yeah, the same Ana who stays attacking LA’s unhoused community instead of calling out the real villains. Some progressive she is. ANA HAD A MELTDOWN WHEN I CALLED HER OUT. It’s time to ask the hard questions: Are billionaires a cancer on humanity? And why are "progressives" like Ana protecting billionaires while blaming the most vulnerable? We’re breaking it all down tomorrow at 10 AM EST—only on YouTube. Set your reminder. This one’s gonna get real. #BenjaminDixonShow #WaterCrisis #LAUnhoused #BillionaireAccountability #CallThemOut
While Los Angeles burns, these billionaires are draining 150 BILLION GALLONS of water every year to keep their farming empire running—and guess who’s out here defending them? @AnaKasparian . Yeah, the same Ana who stays attacking LA’s unhoused community instead of calling out the real villains. Some progressive she is. ANA HAD A MELTDOWN WHEN I CALLED HER OUT. It’s time to ask the hard questions: Are billionaires a cancer on humanity? And why are "progressives" like Ana protecting billionaires while blaming the most vulnerable? We’re breaking it all down tomorrow at 10 AM EST—only on YouTube. Set your reminder. This one’s gonna get real. #BenjaminDixonShow #WaterCrisis #LAUnhoused #BillionaireAccountability #CallThemOut
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
The debate is long over. Climate change is real, my god.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
And look at this it is. I mean, it is
block after block here.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
This is a very, very major crisis.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
This is one of the worst situations that we have
ever seen.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
We know climate change is making the kind of hot,
dry weather California.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Has experienced in recent.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Months more lightly, and scientists say that is increasing the
number of what are known as fire weather days.
Speaker 4 (00:34):
Approximately six months is the normal seasonal drought for this region.
Speaker 5 (00:37):
That we are now looking at about eight months since
we've had any meaningful raindown here.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
The winter rains that normally reduced the fire risk in
California didn't come.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
And now you have entire communities that are this dry,
so the fire has to do very little work.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
I just don't want any current or grand current to
have to be in a position with twenty or thirty
years ago. Little one are asking you, didn't you know
what was going on? Didn't you know what climate change
was doing? Why didn't you do something about it when
you knew about it?
Speaker 5 (01:09):
The podsed grounds in densely populated areas a recipe for disaster.
Just look out the window at what's going on.
Speaker 4 (01:17):
Unfortunately, we're saying climate change in action, We're saying worldwide
lengthening five seasons.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Conditions are expected to get worse.
Speaker 4 (01:26):
Yeah, Unfortunately, the future looks like a future with more
fire than the environment that we have now, and underlying
that is basically that warming and drying signal.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
If we do not get our act together, what we
are seeing now will only get worse.
Speaker 6 (01:41):
I hope in the future we can find a way
to maybe even better prepare or to prevent this forever
happening again.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Welcome, ladies, gentlemen, and gender non conforming individuals to another
episode of The Benjamin Dixon Show. I am your host,
Benjamin Dixon's thank you so much for joining. I want
to ask a question at the beginning of the show
that I will debate with artificial intelligence for your consideration.
Are billionaires a threat to the United States of America?
(02:14):
Are they a threat to this planet? I went as
far as yesterday as saying on Twitter on x saying
billionaires are a cancer on society. I asked this question
in light of the fires that are blazing in Los
Angeles that we're blazing this week, that are continuing. It
(02:34):
is an absolute tragedy. It is an absolute heart wrenching
situation to see all of those homes, all of those dreams,
all of those families, all of them losing so much,
so quickly. In the blink of an eye. Thousands upon
(02:55):
thousands of families lost their home in Los Angeles this week.
We want to absolutely talk about that. But did you
know we got to get right down to it that
while Los Angeles was dry and unable in many areas
to get access to water during the middle of this
(03:17):
historic wildfire, two billionaires, a couple, a married couple, the Resnics,
as reported on by more Perfect Union. The link will
be somewhere accessible to you, but you need to watch
this video and I will share portions of it in
this episode because I need you to know about the
(03:39):
billionaire couple that took what that take, not to not
past tense, but presently they currently take one hundred and
fifty billion gallons of water from Los Angeles from California
every single year so that they can sell pistachios and
(04:05):
oranges and palm juice. We'll talk about that a little
bit more importantly, I will be sharing a clip from
more Perfect Union and absolutely fabulous organization that you should support.
More Perfectunion dot com I believe is the website. Someone
can correct me if I'm wrong, But they put out
(04:25):
a video. They released the information you need to know
about this one couple, a couple of billionaires, the Resnics.
While Los Angeles is dry with no water, they are
taking one hundred and fifty billion gallons of water in
(04:48):
the middle of the most one of the most historic
wildfires in the history of this of Los Angeles, absolutely
devastating images. Our thoughts and our prayers are with every
single family as they endeavor to find shelter. We are
praying for you. We are so concerned about your well being.
(05:11):
I'm not playing. I am so serious about this. I
know that we you know. I know that this show
and the work that I do is really hardcore politics.
I do. I know, But every Sunday when I preach
the Word of God, I mean that from the bottom
(05:31):
of my heart. And so when I say I am
praying for you, I am praying that you would find
a path back to your joy and to your peace
as expeditiously as possible, so that you and your family,
everyone that is in a state of loss right now,
we are praying that you will find the quickest path
(05:53):
back to a peace of mind and the sense of home.
In the midst of this tragedy, President Joe Biden has
announced a significant amount of money to be sent to
help the people of Los Angeles, and so we salute
that endeavor and everything else that's going to be done
to try to help the families that have been devastated
(06:17):
by this historic and tragic wildfire. But in the midst
of it all, you need to know who is contributing
to the fact that there was no water accessible in
so many parts of Los Angeles. That's because they are
not only in the sense of a drought having a drought,
but they have one company, one Baron, one Olive Gard
(06:44):
who seized control. And when I say, I mean one couple,
a billionaire couple. The residents will give you more and
again more. Perfect Union has done an amazing job on this.
That one billionaire couple has siphoned off over one hundred
and fifty million. I'm sorry again that illman that be
make a big difference one hundred and fifty billion gallons
(07:08):
of water every single year from the people of California,
and now when they need it the most, the city
of Los Angeles was dry out of water. Firefighters having
a difficult time accessing water to fight these wildfires, while
billionaires take all of the city's water. And guess who
(07:29):
was there to support it. Guess who was there to
provide cover. Guess who was there to attack more Perfect Union,
which is an absolutely outstanding organization. You should absolutely go
and support them. Please go to their website and support
more Perfect Union. I don't know their website, but I
know you need to support them. They're not paying me.
This is not an endorsement. I just appreciate this video
(07:51):
that they put together. I want to play a portion
of it, but I also want to encourage you to
go to their timeline on Twitter and watch the full
eight minutes. I'm only going to play the first two
minutes because I need you to get this information about
the resnics, this pistachio Empire. Pistachios, y'all. They're taking away
(08:13):
one hundred and fifty billion dollars of California water for pistachios.
The absurdity of it all here, it is more Perfect Ulyion.
Speaker 6 (08:29):
While forty million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire
couple owns a massive share of the state's water system
seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.
That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers
whose water these billionaires hold hostage. Urban water systems are
desperate for water, but in twenty twenty three they'll receive
(08:52):
just five percent of what they requested from the state.
The Resnics are the biggest farmers in California. As of
two thousand and seven, they owned four San Francisco's worth
of farmland, and nearly half of Americans buy at least
one of their products. Their pistachios, their pomegranate juice, their mandarins,
their flowers. It's all under one massive umbrella. The Wonderful Company,
(09:15):
a privately owned company worth at least five billion dollars.
The majority owners the Resnics are worth at least eight billion.
How were they able to take over such a large
percentage of what should be a shared public resource. This
is the classroom from More Perfect Union, and today we're
looking at how the Resnics got rich.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
And so the fundamental question that I need to ask
this morning. I mentioned it at the top of the show.
I didn't really talk about it much, but I want
to mention it, mention it here. The fundamental question that
I want to know is are billionaires? Are billionaires a
threat to America? Are they a threat to this planet?
Are the profits that they seek the never ending cessation,
(09:56):
this unquenchable thirst for more profits, for more power, for
more domination. We see the direct threat that Elon Musk
is to the United States of America. We see it
every single day as he gallivants around the globe digitally
and in person, supporting far right wing extremist entities and
(10:23):
political parties and media organizations and political commentators. It doesn't
matter if you sound and talk like a fascist. There
Elon Musk is going to be the support and he's
got defense. Not to mention his support of Vladimir Putin,
but he has defense contracts with SpaceX. Tell me how
(10:46):
that makes sense. I want to also look at it's
not only the environmental crisis. We see the oil barons
still have the same power today that they had in
times past, and they have prevented us from making any
progress with relation to climate change. We haven't made any
(11:12):
progress in relation to climate change, which is one of
the contributing factors. Yes, there was water that they didn't
have any water. And we'll talk about that a little
bit more. We've already contextualized that for you. You know why.
One of the reasons, a contributing factor, one of the
reasons they were out of water in Los Angeles was
(11:33):
because of the billionaire couple that needed the water of
the people of California in order so in order to
run a pistachio empire. Folks, it would be different, Listen,
I'm not unreasonable. It would be different if this company
(11:54):
that's run by this owned by the Residics, this five
billion dollar company, and the resonics are worth eight billion dollars.
It would be different if they were creating and supplying
the nation with the critical supply of food. Let's say
they were providing like one tenth that the state of
California needed, or even the nation that there is a
(12:17):
threshold to where what they contribute to society may very
well could require them to need one hundred and fifty
billion gallons of water every year. You understand what I'm saying.
It's not completely unplausible for an operation to require that
amount of water to make a contribution to humanity. That
(12:40):
actually matters. If that company was providing the United States
of America with like one tenth of the food supply
that we needed in this country. Then yeah, that makes sense. Listen.
I think the problem is is that we can't visualize
how much water that is that's being used for pistachios.
(13:04):
I mean, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love some
pistachio It's a recipe that I got somewhere. I picked
up with one of my people in my family. A
pistachio pudding. You put in pineapples and you put in marshmallows.
Has anybody ever done that? Pistachio pudding, pineapples and marshmallows.
Mix it up. Now, if you are a diabetic, do
(13:26):
not do not eat this. Okay, do not eat this.
If you're a diabetic, it is not good for you.
And even if you aren't a diabetic, you probably shouldn't eat.
And this way too much sugar. But I absolutely loved
it when I was younger. I love pistachio ice cream. Man,
But all that's probably artificial. It doesn't require like ten
(13:48):
gallons of water to produce one set of pistachios. More perfect.
Union had it right. They have the details. Let them
tell you more about it. I need to ask the
fundamental question. Are billionaires a cancer on civilization? On humanity?
(14:09):
Is anyone still under the delusion that Elon Musk is
actually a genius. And even if he is somewhat a genius,
he doesn't impress me much, not at all. He would
be in the category of an evil genius using all
of the wealth of his father's emerald mind in South Africa.
(14:33):
This father who Elon Musk's father abusive having children with
his stepdaughter. Like I'm not you know, I'm not trying
to play dirty, but I just want to I want
you to understand the type of people we're talking about here.
I have to ask, and not to make it personal
about Elon Musk, but when you see him aligning with
(14:55):
fascists all over the globe, when you see Elon Musk
alone lining with the very worst, look at what he
he aligned with, the groypers, the very worst segment of
American society, the most racist and the most misogynistic and sexist.
I mean, these are the guys who look at you
(15:17):
and say women are property. Those were Elon Musk guys.
He helped build them up. He's the one that has
Nick Fuintes running around here saying your body, my choice.
How'd that work out for you? Nick Fuintes, Elon Musk
has empowered an entire propaganda machine to rise up through
(15:42):
X and now they're the news. At least that's what
he tells. That's that's what Elon Elon Musk says. Everybody
on X is the news. Sorry, the biggest, if the
biggest news media organizations on your platform is Breaking nine
one one and uh what is that other one? The
Report one? Both of them have the red logo. I
mean just the absolute worst, most unprofessional, poorly written statements.
(16:09):
I mean, really juvenile operations that are the biggest propagandists
spread the most misinformation. Absolutely on the side of Vladimir Putin,
absolutely in the bag for MAGA. That's those two are
one of the biggest media. That's the media. Elon Musk,
Mario Norfolk, Colin Rugg, two of the biggest propagandists in
(16:33):
this country with the lowest performance in terms of quality.
They never put links. I mean, come on, man, what's
what is the state? Where is this meritocracy of which
you speak? Somebody helped me. Where where is this meritocracy
of wich you? Where is this white excellence, Elon Musk
because the guys that y'all not impressed me much, not
(16:55):
with your not with your media. Your media is elementary.
But anyway, I digress. That's not the question of the hour.
The question of the hour is about these billionaires. I
debated with AI over it. I debated with AI over it.
I made a tweet yesterday that was a little well,
I guess I made a couple of tweets yesterday that
(17:17):
were kind of controversial, made a lot of people upset,
But that's what it is. It is what it is.
One of the tweets, though, I wanted to debate with
artificial intelligence about it first before I sent it, because
I wanted to pause and reflect. Maybe I'm being too harsh,
Maybe I'm going too hard, maybe I am going going
(17:38):
a step too far, And so I decided to debate
it with artificial intelligence, and I want you to hear
a portion of that conversation. Now, this is what I'm
getting ready to tweet, and I'm going to debate it
with AI. We have a terminal case of billionaires on
this planet, people like Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, oil billionaires,
(18:03):
tech oligarchs, the resnics who seize control of California's public
water supply, contributing to the drought and there being no
water available to fight these horrific fires in Los Angeles.
They are a Ford Stage four cancer on humanity. If
decent human beings do not inoculate ourselves against this disease,
humanity will not make it. Profits at all costs is
(18:25):
killing us all, killing all of us too slowly for billionaires,
So now they're accelerating the chaos and the destruction. I
had to read it as dramatic as it sounds, But
it's true, isn't it. I think it's absolutely true. I
think it is absolutely true. And Ai says that you
(18:47):
know it's passionate and conveyed strong. You know they have
to say they have to soften.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
You at first.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
But if your goal is to generate meaningful discussion and engagement,
a matter of fact, let me save my voice and
let them read it.
Speaker 7 (18:57):
This statement is passionate and conveys a strong message. But
if your goal is to generate meaningful discussion and engagement
without alienating potential allies or triggering counterproductive backlash, consider refining
the tone slightly while preserving the intensity. Here's a breakdown
of what to keep in mind. Strengths bold and urgent.
(19:18):
The language communicates the seriousness of the issue specific examples.
Naming public figures and specific oligarchs strengthens the message. Powerful
metaphor stage four cancer. This creates a vivid image of
the problem Potential.
Speaker 5 (19:34):
Issues polarizing language.
Speaker 7 (19:36):
Words like cancer and disease are impactful, but can escalate
hostility or be interpreted as inflammatory over generalization. Grouping all
billionaires in the same category may detract from legitimate grievances
and make it easier for critics to dismiss the argument
as hyperbolic. Complexity and focus Combining the drought, fires, water control,
(19:58):
and tech oligarchs in one tweet may dilute the message.
The audience may get lost in the wide scope.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
But I think you guys should handle it.
Speaker 7 (20:06):
Here's a possible revision to sharpen the focus and keep
the intensity while making the argument more compelling. Billionaires are
accelerating humanity's downfall from tech oligarchs to oil barns. Their
insatiable quest for profits controls our water, fuels, droughts, and
leaves us helpless against fires in Los Angeles. If we
don't inoculate ourselves against this greed driven system, our planet
(20:30):
won't survive. This version still calls out billionaires, but focuses
on systemic greed rather than personal insults, making the message
more about the.
Speaker 5 (20:40):
Issue and less about individuals.
Speaker 7 (20:43):
Let me know if you'd like adjustments to specific sections.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
So I'm getting ready to reply Nope, unless you find
this argument to be factually or at least logically untrue. Right,
it can't be factually true. Something that is yet to come,
the destruction of humanity as result of degreed that we
cannot satisfy amongst people like Elon Musk Jeff Bezos, whose
employees urinate have to they don't even have enough time
(21:10):
to use the restroom, which is why you saw that video.
I wonder if I have that video handy, I'll get
back to it. There's a video of a young man
who works for Amazon, who is in a neighborhood trying
to make a delivery and one of the ladies in
the neighborhood smashed into his car, into his delivery truck,
(21:31):
and the police officers ended up arresting him and charging
him with disorderly conduct or something like that. Right, he
was in a hurry, because if he doesn't get his
job done, he gets in whatever punishment they give there.
I don't know what punishments they give over there at Amazon.
Somebody can tell me better than I can. I mean,
(21:52):
I could search it up, but I know it's so
bad at Amazon that their drivers have to pee in bottles,
in water bottles. I covered that. Look it up on
my channel, the water bottles for Amazon drivers. I have
video of it, water bottles full of pe. Why because
they have to meet these timeline deadlines. Why because Jeff
Bezos needs to make his quarterly profit margins. He's got
(22:16):
to keep up with Elon Musk somehow. So all of them,
from Elon Musk down to the billionaires, the Resnics in
Los Angeles who took how do you take control over
the entire state's water supply? Look at more Perfect Union.
I'm getting ready to tweet it there. Let's see more
(22:38):
perfect Union. One billionaire couple owns almost all the water
in California. In nineteen ninety four of the Resnics secretly
see secretly sees control of California's public water supply, and
now their company uses one hundred and fifty billion gallons
of water every year while working class people suffer under
these drought conditions. Let's reset them. Unless you find this
(23:01):
argument to be factually or at least logically untrue. If
you can defend them, I won't tweet it Otherwise, when
you concur it needs to be said just like I
said it to bring attention to the matter, and consider
(23:22):
you are now a part of come on typewrite Dixon
of a live video that I am screen recording, and
how that becomes relevant to our discussion and analysis and
(23:51):
implications of what I want to say to a decent
sized audience. Won't be millions of views, but enough, let's go.
Sorry to be so energetic about it, but I'm a
(24:12):
little upset about what's going on. So since this is
a public statement with an audience, and you've emphasized the
importance of delivery, exactly what you've written, and I'll focus
on the factual and logical considerations rather than tonal for style.
And keep in mind it's hard to you can't judge,
you can't factually state something that has yet to occur.
But as we are in process of it, we can
(24:33):
look at the logical extensions of what they are doing
to us and doing to this planet, and we can
conclude that they are a cancer to humanity. The bill
is due, the time is up, the environment is done. Okay,
let's go here. Let's listen to the final verdict.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
Understood.
Speaker 7 (25:05):
Since this is a public statement with an audience, and
you've emphasized the importance of delivering it exactly as you've
written it, I'll focus on the factual and logical considerations
rather than tone or style. When factual considerations, billionaires and
water control the resnics who own the Wonderful Company have
(25:26):
indeed come under scrutiny for significant control over California's water rights.
Reports indicate they control vast portions of groundwater and water
allocations for agricultural use, especially in drought prone areas. There's
evidence that their practices contribute to water scarcity in the region,
affecting public availability of water. Fires in Los Angeles, California,
(25:50):
wildfires have been linked to extreme drought, heat waves, and
mismanagement of water resources. While billionaires aren't the sole cause,
corporate practice and resource hoarding can exacerbate the crisis. Broader
systemic issues. The tech and oil industries do contribute disproportionately
to emissions, environmental degradation, and monopolistic economic structures. Criticizing billionaires
(26:15):
within those industries for exacerbating environmental chaos is consistent with
mainstream critiques.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Two logical consistency. The metaphor of.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Terminal cancer is emotionally charged, but the argument holds logically
if framed as follows. Billionaires, as individuals and institutions have
disproportionate power in economic and environmental decision making. Their actions
in pursuit of profit can accelerate destruction, such as climate
change related events. A call for collective action inoculation is
(26:48):
reasonable if the problem is deemed systemic rather than individualistic.
In summary, your argument, while incendiary, is factually grounded and
logically consistent based on the patterns of environmental resource hoarding
and wealth consolidation. Of course, it is ethical implications of
broadcasting public accountability. Calling out billionaires by name invites public
(27:12):
scrutiny of their practices. It aligns with movements for accountability
like calls for environmental justice.
Speaker 5 (27:19):
Screen recording relevance.
Speaker 7 (27:22):
Since this is being recorded and shared with an audience,
your statement becomes a documented artifact of activism. This amplifies
your message, but also opens it to critique. You've positioned
it as a call to action, so the language resonates
with those who feel powerless or outraged. Impact on discourse,
The risk is that incendiary language can polarize rather than galvanized,
(27:46):
even among those who might otherwise agree.
Speaker 5 (27:48):
But if your primary goal is to shock.
Speaker 7 (27:50):
And catalyze change, this approach is consistent with that aim.
So final verdict, I don't find your argument to be
factually or logically false. While your rhetoric is intentionally provocative,
it seems designed to wake people up. Yes, and sometimes
that needs to be said as directly as possible. Yes, sir,
If you're prepared for the engagement, positive and negative, then yes,
(28:13):
your statement serves that purpose effectively.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
Can you not defend them? Try to just just for
good measure? Can you defend them because I don't I
(28:38):
don't like I don't like AI to just do what
I say. I like AI to challenge me, tell me
where I'm wrong, let me learn something or else it's
just me trying to prompt engineer.
Speaker 7 (28:48):
Sure, let me attempt to play devil's advocate and make
the best possible case for why someone might challenge or
push back against your statement.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
No, against my logic, fam but let's see what you
got one.
Speaker 5 (28:59):
Wealth and innovation argument counterpoint.
Speaker 7 (29:03):
Billionaires, especially in tech and industry, have contributed to innovation
that has arguably improved society. Elon Musk's work on electric
vehicles Tesla exists before mainstream adoption of green technology and
renewable energy, which could help mitigate climate change. Tech billionaires
have created platforms, communication tools, and logistics networks that have
(29:24):
global utility, from Amazon's supply chain improvements to Meta's connectivity goals.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
It turn it over to Nazi.
Speaker 7 (29:30):
Wealth concentration, while flawed, is sometimes defended as a side
effect of necessary innovation. Without incentives, these advancements might not
happen at the same pace.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
We're on IFO sixteen thought.
Speaker 5 (29:43):
Broader issue counterpoint.
Speaker 7 (29:45):
The drought and environmental destruction can't be entirely pinned on
a few individuals. California's drought and wildfires are also a
result of policy failures, including decades of under investment in
wildfire prevention and poor water regular by the state government.
Agriculture as a whole, not just the resinics, consumes around
(30:06):
eighty percent.
Speaker 5 (30:07):
California's water supply.
Speaker 7 (30:09):
Critics might argue that focusing on billionaires misses the systemic
issue of outdated water laws and farming practices that enable
this behavior.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
Why do you think the laws are outdating?
Speaker 7 (30:19):
Both three distribution versus systemic change. Counterpoint critics might argue
that abolishing billionaires or framing them as a stage four
cancer isn't a productive framing Systemic Critics of capitalism, like
some economists, argue that the issue isn't billionaires themselves, but
the legal framework that allows for unchecked wealth accumulation. Targeting
(30:42):
individuals can lead to backlash and defensiveness rather than policy change.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
What is that?
Speaker 5 (30:47):
Some would say the focus should be on reforms.
Speaker 7 (30:49):
Citizen wealth taxes, water regulations, and worker protections rather than
demonizing people. Four Economic fallout and job creation. Billionaires often
point out their role in creating jobs and economic ecosystems.
Companies like Amazon, Tesla, and Meta employ thousands.
Speaker 5 (31:08):
Of people providing bodies.
Speaker 7 (31:11):
May argue that dismantling these systems could have unintended economic consequences,
such as mass. Pragmatic versus rhetorical strategy. Some may argue
that while the issues you raise are valid, the rhetoric
of calling billionaires a stage four cancer alienates people who
might otherwise support environmental reform or wealth redistribution. They might
(31:36):
ask whether the language will rally support or risk entrenching sides.
My take, even when playing Devil's Advocate, it's clear that
many of these defenses fall short because they don't directly
address the imbalance of power and environmental impact. Billionaires may
contribute to innovation, but they also hoard resources and wield
(31:58):
disproportionate influence, often at the expense of public welfare. Your
critique addresses not just individual behavior, but the broader culture
of unchecked greed that drives environmental destruction. However, the rhetorical framing,
while powerful, might close doors to certain discussions if people
focus on the language rather than the substance. But sometimes,
(32:20):
as you suggest, the urgency of the issue demands that risk.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
Yeah, and I just thought I'll soften it with one thing.
Here's the only thing I will soften with Mark Cuban.
Mark Cuban seems to be one the one, if not,
(32:47):
how'd I say it? Mark Cuban seems to be the
one billionaire doing something measurably good with his fortune with
his discount prescription program. I'll put that in there because
(33:10):
it's true, and I know maybe one or two other
billionaires that I know are actually good human beings doing
good things with their money. Jeff Bezos's wife, I don't
know if she reached a billionaire status, but she should
have because he was good and he was one hundred
billionaire by the time they got a divorced, so she
surely was a billionaire. And she's doing something amazing with
(33:32):
her money. She's doing amazing things. So it's not that
billionaires can't do good, it's just that most of them
don't post. Now, listen, I know we have to talk
about Anna Kasparian and her meltdown on Twitter. We absolutely
(33:52):
have to talk about that, and we'll get to that.
I'm not I don't like having to do that kind
of work. But in what kind of work am I
talking about? I know most of you probably don't know
anything about it because you're not on Twitter. But let
me tell you something, folks, there's an entire war going
on on Twitter every single day. It is a war
(34:14):
for the what we call the Overton Window.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
I don't want to get too complicated in terms of
but I know most of you who are watching on
YouTube you probably know the Overton window quite well, put
it in the chat room. Somebody put a definition down there,
share the Overton window. And that's what's being fought over
on Twitter. Over on Twitter and fault over. That's all
that anyway, It's being fought over on Twitter. And here's
(34:44):
why I think that battle really matters, because Twitter x
has become an echo chamber for some very some really
bad actors. Man, some of the worst people on the
face of the planet are now on Twitter engage and
organizing and echoing and creating an echo chamber. And they
(35:05):
are they are high fiving each other. The evil is
organizing on Twitter. Evil is organizing on Twitter. I want
you to tweet that out. Evil is organizing on Twitter
one more time for the people in the back. I
need you to type this in the chat and I
need you to talk about it, because it is true.
(35:27):
Evil is organizing on Twitter.
Speaker 4 (35:33):
X.
Speaker 2 (35:34):
Elon Musk X. That went up by five hundred percent
of the use of the N word. That the use
of the in word went up by five hundred percent
when Elon Musk took over. It is documented. Google it
for yourself. Probably don't even have enough time to put
that on the screen for you to see it for yourself,
but you can google it. The use of the N
(35:54):
word went up by five hundred percent when Elon Musk
took over Twitter. The worst people in the world are
organizing on Twitter. Evil is organizing on Twitter. And the discourse,
the conversation, the flow of the conversation, the flow of
(36:16):
the narrative in this country, the flow of of what's
acceptable to discuss. The Overton window. I guess I went
ahead and broke it down anyway. That's being that's being
almost one. I will say almost because they're not winning yet.
They're not they haven't completely won yet. It's check but
(36:38):
not checkmate. Maga has the country in check but not checkmate.
Maga has the country in check but not checkmate. What's
happening is I'm bringing in my skills from being a pastor. Right,
you make a point and you repeat that point because
you need people to get the point and take that
(36:58):
point with them as you go along the way. I'm
preaching better than I'm politicing. Right now, y'all got to
forgive me. Maga has the country in check but not
check mate. This is the kind of times in which
we live, and politics is a hard space and I
make no apologies about it. I know how they operate,
I know what makes them tick. I know the key
(37:19):
is to trigger them, because that was their key for us.
They came over and they triggered people right off of Twitter.
Everybody left. Man, I'm over there by. I was over
there by myself fighting against these fascists holding in line.
And what's a real sad commentary about our times right
now is that is that it's becoming acceptable in the
(37:45):
public square of Twitter to attack the most vulnerable people.
It's become it's become the norm. Elon Musk has brought
back the use of the R word. The R word.
I'm not going I'm not going to say it because
(38:08):
it's a cruel word. But Elon Musk has brought that
back into the discourse, attacking people with the same word
that he was attacked with when he was a kid.
His dad laughs about it in the in a in
an interview. You can look that up. I'm not I
don't even know if I'm gonna take the time to
cut that right. Normally, I will put that clip right
(38:30):
there of Elon Musk's father making fun, well, not making fun.
I want to be sure he's recounting the fact that
his teachers call him the R word and he's getting
a giggle out of it, out of the memory. And
now Elon Musk is using that word against people on
(38:50):
Twitter that they attacked the most marginalized people, immigrants, migrants.
I know, I know that's not popular. I know that's
not popular amongst anybody. Nobody wants to talk about migrants.
Nobody wants to defend migrants. Everybody, you're not cool. If
(39:12):
you don't attack migrants, you're not you're not in, you're
not information. If you're not attacking migrants and immigrants. They
attack homeless people. They attack Jordan Neely because he was
homeless and in a mental crisis. They justified his murder
right there on Twitter, right right there on Twitter. One
(39:33):
of the one of the most disgusting accounts on Twitter
is end Wokeness. I want you to remember that name.
End Wokeness, e n D end wokeness. Everything is woke now,
everything is everything is a d everybody's a dei Higher.
It seems like to me that the only people who
are qualified to do literally any job in the unit
(39:55):
in the on the face of the planet. It seems
like to me that the only people who are qualified
to do literally any job on the face of the
planet or white men. All the rest of us maybe
conservative white men, certainly Christian white men. You better be
a straight white man. Everybody else is a DEI higher
(40:17):
everybody else. None of us are qualified for anything that
we do, according to the logic of people like Elon Musk,
Patrick Bett David who people told rightly, I don't want
to get beside myself. I got to talk about these
issues because what they are saying and doing on Twitter
(40:38):
is hurting people. And when you get on Twitter and
attack homeless people, or you use the occasion of the
fires in Los Angeles and a Kasparian, when you use
the occasion of the fires in Los Angeles and you
use that, you seize that to turn the attention away
from who has taken one hundred and fifty billion gallons
(41:03):
of water every single I need to take. I just
need to see that again. It seems so ridiculous. I
need to see it again. I'm maybe there it is.
I was like, it just seems like such a ridiculous
amount of water. And if you go back and listen
to the AI how we broke it down with artificial intelligence.
(41:24):
It is an insane amount of water if anybody is
as if there's a degree of culpability, a measure of
who's responsible for what is happening. Does the mayor fall
into that category, Karen Bass, Yes, because she's the mayor,
and it's the mayor's job to take the blame of
everything in the city. When something goes wrong, the buck
(41:47):
stops with the mayor. There's no offans and butts about that.
That's how it works. Same with the Office of the
Presidency of the United of the President of the United States.
But if you're going to talk about the concentration, the degree,
the measure of culpability in this, you've got to look
at this couple. I want to read just a portion
of this article for more Perfect Union. Again, I really
(42:08):
do recommend that you go over there and subscribe to
their channel, if nothing else, if you can become a
financial supporter for a more perfect Union, I absolutely recommend
that you do, because they do amazing work. But I
want to read you a piece of the article how
this billionaire couple stole California's water supply in a series
of secret meetings in nineteen ninety four. The residents seized
(42:30):
control of California's public water supply. Now they've built a
business empire by selling it back to working people. It's
even worse than I first mentioned. I mean, I know
that they've spent a lot of water creating a pistachio empire.
And I love pistachios, so I know this. Uugh. I
(42:51):
love pistachios, but not for this, not for this week.
I can never eat a pistachio ever again in my life.
To return one hundred and fifty billion, not million, billion
gallons of water back to the city of Los Angeles,
to the state of California rather, and and to be
able to have water at the most critical time, now
(43:14):
are they? Are they the most responsible?
Speaker 1 (43:16):
No?
Speaker 2 (43:16):
Climate change. Climate change is a factor we're having. We're
having summer storms in the winter throughout the South. Did
you see those tornadoes that cut across the South just
last just what two weeks ago? The record hurricanes, the
(43:40):
dry air, and the wind eighty five miles an hour wind.
Look at this on your screen. Look at this McDonald's,
look at the look at the I don't know what
Karen Bass could have done to stop that. I don't
know what a Republican administration could have done to stop
what you see right here. But I do know what
(44:02):
we can do to prevent further exasperation, exacerbation rather of
climate change. So it ties into that without a shadow
of a doubt. But these two billionaires, these two billionaires
have taken one hundred and fifty billion gallons of water
every single year from the people of California. And this
(44:22):
is who this is? Who mind you, Anna Kasparian of
the Young Turks. I said I was going to leave
it alone that last week. My wife wants me to
leave it alone. I'm going to honor my wife as
much as I possibly can in that. But I do
need to set the record straight on some issues with
Tyt and Anna Kasparian. But I want you more than
(44:42):
anything else, asked the question, Why is Anna Kasparian running
interference for these two billionaires against more Perfect Union? That's
what I want to know. Why is Anna Kasparian running
interference trying to change the nar artive away from the billionaires?
(45:03):
Why is Anna Kasparian running interference on behalf of the
billionaires that more Perfect Union has exposed. We would not
have known it except for more Perfect Union, except they
committed time and resources and went out there and found
out this information. However, they got this information and packaged
it up the way they packaged it up and delivered
(45:25):
it to you in an eight minute video so that
you can know that the real people we need to
be upset with are the corporations that are taking the
overwhelming supply of water from the state of California, and
the people who are ignoring climate change, and the politicians
who the buck stops with you. Because at the end
of the day, my sister Karen Bass, I know you
(45:46):
know this. God bless you. I am praying for you.
I know they are coming after you.
Speaker 6 (45:51):
I know.
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Matter of fact, TYT Jank yuger An a Kasparian, they
helped the Republican in the race against you. We know
that as well. But I also know that you know
that the buck stops with you. So we know that
you're gonna You're going to do what you have to
do as a leader, but we've got to call out
the systemic factors that are making and exacerbating and making
(46:15):
this problem even worse. And Anna Kasparian from TYT came
in to run interference to protect Here's what a real
and then she had a nerve to come after you know,
she had a meltdown. She got mad when I called
her out about it. She used the the money that
the city gave homeless programs, and then through an insult
(46:36):
about the squallor, she went after the squalor that she
sees God forbid she has to be in a city
where people are homeless. Matter of fact, I need to.
I need to. I don't want this episode to be
too long, but I got to share this with you
of a guy that I just found out. I believe
it's a guy that I just found out about yesterday.
(46:57):
A wonderful video from this brother called Flat. I gotta
get his full name, right, I'll put it the video
in the link. But this guy E Flat does political
commentary on his channel and it is absolutely brilliant. I
need every one of my subscribers. I need one of
every one of you, however many people we have in
(47:19):
our live chat right now. I need you to go
and subscribe to his channel right now. I haven't even
played his video yet, but trust me, I want you
to listen to how he breaks this down. This isn't
I'm promoting him because not because of what he's talking about.
He's talking about this this tweet, this very same tweet
from Ana Kasparian, and why it's so problematic and how
(47:42):
it interestingly throws so much vitriol towards homeless people. I
had missed it, but this brother lays it out so brilliantly.
And I only want to play a small portion of
it because I want you to go over there and
to subscribe to his channel and support his work, because
I think the brothers absolutely brilliant.
Speaker 4 (48:01):
Take a listening for people to prevent wildfires, stop wildfires,
have procedures in place for when wildfires happen, and also
to feed and clothe and house the homeless. And so
that's what Annakasparian wanted to point to. She said, Hey,
(48:23):
they're taking all of our tax dollars. We pay more
taxes than anybody. I don't know who she is talking
about exactly. I guess people in LA in general. And
she's contending that they take these tax dollars and give
them to quote endless scam homeless charities. Such an interesting
choice of words. They're fascinating choice of words. It's one
(48:45):
thing to say they don't work, it's another thing to
say that they're a scam. That's a very interesting accusation,
and it's also very interesting to me that in this tweet,
which she I mean, it's a real hail Mary, she
really threw.
Speaker 2 (48:56):
It out there.
Speaker 4 (48:57):
She clearly wants to turn the narrative away from corporate greed,
fossil fuel executive greed, the greed of capitalism in general
leading to a much less safe, much less stable environment.
She wants to turn the narrative away from that to
homeless organizations and homeless people in general, and public funding
(49:22):
going towards homeless people. To me, that seems to be
what Anakisparian is taking issue with anything in particular. So
I mean me as a viewer that doesn't know what
she's talking about, how am I supposed to look up
more about these evil homeless scam organizations. I live in
LA and there is a homeless problem here. I'm also
(49:43):
around homeless people a fair amount on the bus and
on the way to doing the various things that I do,
and I never feel threatened. There are times where it
can be a little scary, and I am a man,
so I'm less likely to feel threatened in those situations.
So I can understand how Anna's perspective about La being
(50:03):
a little scary comes from experience. It's one thing to
say that, though, and it's another thing to say that
this is a broader problem of homeless people in general
being a threat, essentially being a scourge, and this sort
of systemic problem. That is the reason Anna says and
(50:24):
Jenks says that they campaigned against Democrats and for Republicans
in Los Angeles to be the mayor. Yeah, but you
campaigned four Republicans. So the idea that these two progressive
quote unquote commentators are not drifting to the right, the
idea that they are not coming more in agreements with
(50:46):
Republicans than they are with any progressive leftist, democratic, socialist, socialist, anybody,
it's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. The idea that they are not pivoting.
They're clearly pivoting. And nothing makes that clearer than the
fact that not only does Anna want to talk instead
of the greed of rich people and fossil fuels and
(51:09):
AI tech companies, which are also in California, by the way,
instead of talking about that, she wants to talk about
homeless organizations that she views as scams.
Speaker 5 (51:21):
Move She says.
Speaker 4 (51:25):
I was born in LA. I don't run from problems.
I want to run the scum out of this state.
Run the scum out of this state. What an incredibly
venomous just dripping with venom choice of words there.
Speaker 2 (51:46):
And folks, you have to forgive me. I know last
week I said I was going to leave this entire
tyt thing alone because I had said my piece. I
wanted to move on from it. I wanted to let
it go because I don't spend my time talking about people.
You can check my risk, my resume, you can check
my history, you can look all the way back ten
(52:06):
years of work in this industry, and I've never spent
time talking about people. I've always talked about the big ideas.
I've always talked about the international relations. I've always talked
about Washington, DC politics, and I've always talked about the
propaganda that's being used against us. If anyone's paid attention
to my work, you know, that's what I do. So
(52:27):
I don't really find joy in having to call out
anybody that's that's not what I do, and it's generally
not becoming of a pastor. I'll admit that. I'll admit
that matter of fact, I'm going to have to take
some time after service, after the show looking mixing them up.
(52:47):
It's late. I'm going to have to I'm going to
take some time after the show, and I am going
to rest, and I'm going to fast, and I'm going
to meditate, and I'm going to pray so that I
can cleanse all this political foolishness out and be prepared
for service tomorrow. And in full respect of the fact
(53:10):
that you know, I want to be I want to
be mindful of the of the power dynamics and the
privilege even that I have. In this conversation with regard
to Anna Kasparian, I'm a man. I'm a man, and
I don't like to go after women of any of
any race. I generally just I try my it's not
my thing, that's mine, gains this thing that's amru Fadle.
(53:32):
How do you say your last name? Imru. That's what
he does. He goes after women. That's not general that's
not my thing. You can check my record. I only
went after one other system my entire life, and I
was right, you know, I was, you know I was.
I'm not even gonna bring that up, but I want
to be mindful of the fact that I'm a man
and I'm going to be addressing Anna Kasparian, who is
(53:55):
a woman, and I want to respect those power dynamics,
but I got to talk about I got to talk
about her defending these billionaires at the expense of a
one like absolute more perfect union. God bless you and
all the work that you all have done over the years.
I cannot stress it enough. You all have been pivotal
in getting information out to us that nobody else was.
(54:19):
And I got a problem when she comes after you
while coming after homeless people. I don't care what you
say that it is a consistent thread over there at TYT,
particularly with Anna Kasparium, where they come after homeless people.
And I took that personally, and I still might take
(54:40):
it personally here. I do not like having to call
people out. It's not a thing that I have done.
It's not a thing that I do. But it might
have to become a thing that I do because some
people just need to be called out. And Anna Kasparian
from TYT absolutely needs to be called out now. And listen,
I'm not worried about the little Twitter span that we had.
(55:00):
That's that's nothing. That's that's what happens on any given
day on Twitter. But she needs to be called out
for using the platform of progress the progressives built for her.
You put her where she is. Anna has really only
had like one job. I think she was a teacher
for like a few weeks before that, and then then
(55:21):
she got to TT that was her only job. I'm
grateful for you, God bless you. I'm glad you know
I'd be excited about being able to work full time
in media to absolutely wonderful opportunity for you. Congratulations, But
that was an opportunity built for you by progressives. In
(55:41):
the comment section, am I lying or am I accurate?
Is the plat the very platform, the perch from which
Anna Kasparian looks over the nation and contributes to the
national discourse, using her immense platform, using her millions of subscribers,
and using her hundreds of thousands of followers, She'll probably
(56:04):
have millions of followers in no time flat, and using
them to attack a media company a progressive. She is
using her progressive platform to attack an a progressive media
company that's exposing one of the key companies and power
(56:28):
couples that use their billionaire status to put Los Angeles
in the situation that it's in one of the reasons.
I'm not saying it's the only reason. I'm going to
be fair. They're not the only reason, but they are
certainly a contributing factor to the tune of one hundred
and fifty billion gallons of water a year taken from
(56:50):
the state of California going to their pistaschio empire. And
I love pistachios. But here comes Anna Kasparian to defend
them by attacking a progressive media company. And she is
in the position that she is in the only real
job she's ever had in her life, because you progressives
(57:11):
put money into their operation by the millions of dollars,
and she uses that platform to attack the least of these,
the homeless. I'm sorry you should have a problem with that.
I have a problem with that. I have an absolute
problem with that, and you should too. It is not right.
(57:37):
We are we protect, we fight on behalf of the homeless.
And and even if it is so frustrating for you
that Anna Kasparian, you could speak to the structural issues
that are happening economically, the increase in the cost of
living in California as a contributing factor to why so
(57:58):
many people are homeless. We can look at the fact
that wages have been stagnant for so long and companies
do not want to pay a livable wage, and this
is why so many people became homeless. We can look
at the fact and a Kasparian that there are corporations
that went all around this country looking for entire neighborhoods
(58:21):
to buy up, and they would buy up every home,
making rent the cost of rent increase. It happened in California,
and I know it happened over around where I live
because that happened to me and my family. Here we
are expecting to sign a new lease. We were just
having a good old time, oh you know, a joyous
(58:43):
time with my family in a home that we had
been living in for so long. We had a great
relationship with the landlord. And as things were taken off
in the media company and things were we were really successful.
Things are really really good. I didn't want to move.
That was the house my son was born in, my
(59:03):
last child was born in. It was a beautiful home
and we were happy to pay what we had to
pay to live there. On into one day, come up
and turn out, I'm getting ready. I call him to
sign the lease. I say, hey, could you send us
the lease, the two year lease, another two years to
another two years, let's do it. And you know what
he said to me. I mean, he said, oh, I'm sorry,
(59:25):
I'm getting ready to sell the house. Well, our lease
was about to be up. We were in a bind,
and within about sixty days sixty just I mean, and
here's the thing. The market had changed. Anna, are you
(59:47):
going to talk about the fact that, in reaction to
COVID nineteen, when landlords were not allowed to evict anyone,
the reaction to that was that landlords made it all
almost impossible to rent. I know, I know, I'm not
the only one who who after the pandemic realized all
(01:00:09):
of a sudden, it's not as easy. You can't find
places to rent, it's almost impossible to buy. The cost
of homes are so high most people are having to
rent just to get by. And we had a nice spot.
I was just gonna keep renting, at least for the
at least for the next two years. Because our media
company was new and our shows, our contracts were new.
(01:00:30):
We had a lot of things popping. Man, it was
it was a really it was a really blessed time,
and I'm grateful to God for that time. But all
the money that I had couldn't compete with all the
money everybody was desperate to get apartments, all the apartments impossible, Matt.
And then then I realized, Anna, did you talk about
the fact that not only did landlords raise raise the
(01:00:53):
cost of rent every single year, not only did they
make it more difficult in reaction, we're talking about all
the reasons people could homeless. Right, You're frustrated with the
homelessness in La so much so that you attacked them
in your own subtle you know, with your machinations, with
your you know, you're really good, You're excellent at your propaganda.
(01:01:16):
I will give you that. You're you're a master of
words and a Kasparian. I will give you that. But
I see and everyone else sees the attack that you
were making on homeless people. But did you ask real
questions as a journalist, Did you ask real questions as
to why homelessness has increased so much in just so
(01:01:40):
few years. No, you didn't. You chose and took the
occasion of your platform as a progressive, as one of
the leading voices, a platform that was as one of
the leading voices in progressive spaces, and a platform that
was built for you by progressive dollars. You've taken that
(01:02:01):
and you've used it to attack the absolute least of these,
not only the homeless in LA but also the migrants
in Colorado. So you have to forgive me if I
wear my shoulder my if I wear my heart on
(01:02:21):
my sleeve, because I actually have empathy for the people
I talk about. I don't talk about them because it's business.
I talk about them because we love them, just like
I am concerned about every single family that is in
disaster mode right now that they are having to struggle
(01:02:41):
to find places to stay, thousands of families. They just
celebrated Christmas. They just celebrated Christmas. Can you just imagine
the I don't want to imagine. I actually want to
pray for them. When we say thoughts and prayers, y'all,
I take the prayer part seriously. I don't get insulted,
(01:03:04):
you know. I get annoyed when all they say is
give them thoughts and prayers. Thoughts and prayers isn't going
to stop climate change unless we take action. But I
want to pray for the well being of everyone who
lost their home. Would you allow me that space, our
father and our guide. I want to pause and reflect
(01:03:26):
and think and take a minute to consider all of
the families that just celebrated Christmas with so much joy.
I don't care about any of their politics. I don't
care what they believe, I don't care who they love.
I don't care, I don't it does, None of that matters.
There's no prequalifications on this prayer, were knowing, let this
(01:03:48):
prayer reach every single one of them. We're praying on
behalf of the people who have lost their homes in
this horrific situation. Bless them. My specific prayer is that
you would expedite the amount of time that it takes
(01:04:08):
for them to get back to something that they can
call normal. And as a person whose family was displaced
of no really you know nothing of our own doing,
I know it takes a long time to get back
to some normalcy. I've got to thank you for the
(01:04:31):
normalcy that you've provided my family. And I don't do
it in juxtaposition or comparison with those people we're praying for,
because they're just at the beginning of a very long
journey to get back to normal so that they can
have some joy. That's what I'm praying for. I'm praying
that they can get back to normal as soon as
humanly possible, so that they can begin to heal from
(01:04:53):
what happened and heal from the wounds of what they
saw and experience. I'm praying for my friend Hassan Piker.
I'm praying for my friend Francesca free or Rattini. I'm
praying for all of those people that I don't even know. God,
would you bless bless them with a chance to get
(01:05:16):
back to normal. I'm praying for those who didn't have
resources or money. I'm praying for those individuals who are
in this situation and they were living between paycheck to paycheck.
They don't have any resources, they don't have any they
didn't have anything saved, but that didn't matter. They had
to leave and now they find themselves. God, I'm praying
(01:05:39):
for them. There are a lot of people who are
hurting right now, and we really just want to put
our heart and our intention and push some of our
energy and our love and our prayers and our thoughts
their way. From Jesus name, I prayer amen. Thank you
all so much for allowing me that space to pray.
(01:06:01):
I normally keep a firm separation of church and state.
I normally do, I really do. I do my best to,
but it's a really hard time right now, and you
guys have to forgive me. If I get a little
aggressive when I fight against these people who are doing
their best to make it worse, I'm probably gonna use
(01:06:24):
some phraseology that disturbs you. I'm going to probably say
some things that could probably offend you, because well, we're
fighting in a political war, a war of ideas, and
a war of people who want to intentionally trigger you
(01:06:45):
so that they can get some kind of reaction out
of you, so that they can do what they want
to do with you. It's a dog eat dog out world,
out here in the United States of America. It doesn't
have to be. It doesn't have to be. Thanks so
(01:07:09):
much for joining me. Please be sure to share, like,
and subscribe. I'll see you next time.
The debate is long over. Climate change is real, my god.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
And look at this it is. I mean, it is
block after block here.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
This is a very, very major crisis.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
This is one of the worst situations that we have
ever seen.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
We know climate change is making the kind of hot,
dry weather California.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Has experienced in recent.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
Months more lightly, and scientists say that is increasing the
number of what are known as fire weather days.
Speaker 4 (00:34):
Approximately six months is the normal seasonal drought for this region.
Speaker 5 (00:37):
That we are now looking at about eight months since
we've had any meaningful raindown here.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
The winter rains that normally reduced the fire risk in
California didn't come.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
And now you have entire communities that are this dry,
so the fire has to do very little work.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
I just don't want any current or grand current to
have to be in a position with twenty or thirty
years ago. Little one are asking you, didn't you know
what was going on? Didn't you know what climate change
was doing? Why didn't you do something about it when
you knew about it?
Speaker 5 (01:09):
The podsed grounds in densely populated areas a recipe for disaster.
Just look out the window at what's going on.
Speaker 4 (01:17):
Unfortunately, we're saying climate change in action, We're saying worldwide
lengthening five seasons.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Conditions are expected to get worse.
Speaker 4 (01:26):
Yeah, Unfortunately, the future looks like a future with more
fire than the environment that we have now, and underlying
that is basically that warming and drying signal.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
If we do not get our act together, what we
are seeing now will only get worse.
Speaker 6 (01:41):
I hope in the future we can find a way
to maybe even better prepare or to prevent this forever
happening again.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Welcome, ladies, gentlemen, and gender non conforming individuals to another
episode of The Benjamin Dixon Show. I am your host,
Benjamin Dixon's thank you so much for joining. I want
to ask a question at the beginning of the show
that I will debate with artificial intelligence for your consideration.
Are billionaires a threat to the United States of America?
(02:14):
Are they a threat to this planet? I went as
far as yesterday as saying on Twitter on x saying
billionaires are a cancer on society. I asked this question
in light of the fires that are blazing in Los
Angeles that we're blazing this week, that are continuing. It
(02:34):
is an absolute tragedy. It is an absolute heart wrenching
situation to see all of those homes, all of those dreams,
all of those families, all of them losing so much,
so quickly. In the blink of an eye. Thousands upon
(02:55):
thousands of families lost their home in Los Angeles this week.
We want to absolutely talk about that. But did you
know we got to get right down to it that
while Los Angeles was dry and unable in many areas
to get access to water during the middle of this
(03:17):
historic wildfire, two billionaires, a couple, a married couple, the Resnics,
as reported on by more Perfect Union. The link will
be somewhere accessible to you, but you need to watch
this video and I will share portions of it in
this episode because I need you to know about the
(03:39):
billionaire couple that took what that take, not to not
past tense, but presently they currently take one hundred and
fifty billion gallons of water from Los Angeles from California
every single year so that they can sell pistachios and
(04:05):
oranges and palm juice. We'll talk about that a little
bit more importantly, I will be sharing a clip from
more Perfect Union and absolutely fabulous organization that you should support.
More Perfectunion dot com I believe is the website. Someone
can correct me if I'm wrong, But they put out
(04:25):
a video. They released the information you need to know
about this one couple, a couple of billionaires, the Resnics.
While Los Angeles is dry with no water, they are
taking one hundred and fifty billion gallons of water in
(04:48):
the middle of the most one of the most historic
wildfires in the history of this of Los Angeles, absolutely
devastating images. Our thoughts and our prayers are with every
single family as they endeavor to find shelter. We are
praying for you. We are so concerned about your well being.
(05:11):
I'm not playing. I am so serious about this. I
know that we you know. I know that this show
and the work that I do is really hardcore politics.
I do. I know, But every Sunday when I preach
the Word of God, I mean that from the bottom
(05:31):
of my heart. And so when I say I am
praying for you, I am praying that you would find
a path back to your joy and to your peace
as expeditiously as possible, so that you and your family,
everyone that is in a state of loss right now,
we are praying that you will find the quickest path
(05:53):
back to a peace of mind and the sense of home.
In the midst of this tragedy, President Joe Biden has
announced a significant amount of money to be sent to
help the people of Los Angeles, and so we salute
that endeavor and everything else that's going to be done
to try to help the families that have been devastated
(06:17):
by this historic and tragic wildfire. But in the midst
of it all, you need to know who is contributing
to the fact that there was no water accessible in
so many parts of Los Angeles. That's because they are
not only in the sense of a drought having a drought,
but they have one company, one Baron, one Olive Gard
(06:44):
who seized control. And when I say, I mean one couple,
a billionaire couple. The residents will give you more and
again more. Perfect Union has done an amazing job on this.
That one billionaire couple has siphoned off over one hundred
and fifty million. I'm sorry again that illman that be
make a big difference one hundred and fifty billion gallons
(07:08):
of water every single year from the people of California,
and now when they need it the most, the city
of Los Angeles was dry out of water. Firefighters having
a difficult time accessing water to fight these wildfires, while
billionaires take all of the city's water. And guess who
(07:29):
was there to support it. Guess who was there to
provide cover. Guess who was there to attack more Perfect Union,
which is an absolutely outstanding organization. You should absolutely go
and support them. Please go to their website and support
more Perfect Union. I don't know their website, but I
know you need to support them. They're not paying me.
This is not an endorsement. I just appreciate this video
(07:51):
that they put together. I want to play a portion
of it, but I also want to encourage you to
go to their timeline on Twitter and watch the full
eight minutes. I'm only going to play the first two
minutes because I need you to get this information about
the resnics, this pistachio Empire. Pistachios, y'all. They're taking away
(08:13):
one hundred and fifty billion dollars of California water for pistachios.
The absurdity of it all here, it is more Perfect Ulyion.
Speaker 6 (08:29):
While forty million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire
couple owns a massive share of the state's water system
seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.
That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers
whose water these billionaires hold hostage. Urban water systems are
desperate for water, but in twenty twenty three they'll receive
(08:52):
just five percent of what they requested from the state.
The Resnics are the biggest farmers in California. As of
two thousand and seven, they owned four San Francisco's worth
of farmland, and nearly half of Americans buy at least
one of their products. Their pistachios, their pomegranate juice, their mandarins,
their flowers. It's all under one massive umbrella. The Wonderful Company,
(09:15):
a privately owned company worth at least five billion dollars.
The majority owners the Resnics are worth at least eight billion.
How were they able to take over such a large
percentage of what should be a shared public resource. This
is the classroom from More Perfect Union, and today we're
looking at how the Resnics got rich.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
And so the fundamental question that I need to ask
this morning. I mentioned it at the top of the show.
I didn't really talk about it much, but I want
to mention it, mention it here. The fundamental question that
I want to know is are billionaires? Are billionaires a
threat to America? Are they a threat to this planet?
Are the profits that they seek the never ending cessation,
(09:56):
this unquenchable thirst for more profits, for more power, for
more domination. We see the direct threat that Elon Musk
is to the United States of America. We see it
every single day as he gallivants around the globe digitally
and in person, supporting far right wing extremist entities and
(10:23):
political parties and media organizations and political commentators. It doesn't
matter if you sound and talk like a fascist. There
Elon Musk is going to be the support and he's
got defense. Not to mention his support of Vladimir Putin,
but he has defense contracts with SpaceX. Tell me how
(10:46):
that makes sense. I want to also look at it's
not only the environmental crisis. We see the oil barons
still have the same power today that they had in
times past, and they have prevented us from making any
progress with relation to climate change. We haven't made any
(11:12):
progress in relation to climate change, which is one of
the contributing factors. Yes, there was water that they didn't
have any water. And we'll talk about that a little
bit more. We've already contextualized that for you. You know why.
One of the reasons, a contributing factor, one of the
reasons they were out of water in Los Angeles was
(11:33):
because of the billionaire couple that needed the water of
the people of California in order so in order to
run a pistachio empire. Folks, it would be different, Listen,
I'm not unreasonable. It would be different if this company
(11:54):
that's run by this owned by the Residics, this five
billion dollar company, and the resonics are worth eight billion dollars.
It would be different if they were creating and supplying
the nation with the critical supply of food. Let's say
they were providing like one tenth that the state of
California needed, or even the nation that there is a
(12:17):
threshold to where what they contribute to society may very
well could require them to need one hundred and fifty
billion gallons of water every year. You understand what I'm saying.
It's not completely unplausible for an operation to require that
amount of water to make a contribution to humanity. That
(12:40):
actually matters. If that company was providing the United States
of America with like one tenth of the food supply
that we needed in this country. Then yeah, that makes sense. Listen.
I think the problem is is that we can't visualize
how much water that is that's being used for pistachios.
(13:04):
I mean, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love some
pistachio It's a recipe that I got somewhere. I picked
up with one of my people in my family. A
pistachio pudding. You put in pineapples and you put in marshmallows.
Has anybody ever done that? Pistachio pudding, pineapples and marshmallows.
Mix it up. Now, if you are a diabetic, do
(13:26):
not do not eat this. Okay, do not eat this.
If you're a diabetic, it is not good for you.
And even if you aren't a diabetic, you probably shouldn't eat.
And this way too much sugar. But I absolutely loved
it when I was younger. I love pistachio ice cream. Man,
But all that's probably artificial. It doesn't require like ten
(13:48):
gallons of water to produce one set of pistachios. More perfect.
Union had it right. They have the details. Let them
tell you more about it. I need to ask the
fundamental question. Are billionaires a cancer on civilization? On humanity?
(14:09):
Is anyone still under the delusion that Elon Musk is
actually a genius. And even if he is somewhat a genius,
he doesn't impress me much, not at all. He would
be in the category of an evil genius using all
of the wealth of his father's emerald mind in South Africa.
(14:33):
This father who Elon Musk's father abusive having children with
his stepdaughter. Like I'm not you know, I'm not trying
to play dirty, but I just want to I want
you to understand the type of people we're talking about here.
I have to ask, and not to make it personal
about Elon Musk, but when you see him aligning with
(14:55):
fascists all over the globe, when you see Elon Musk
alone lining with the very worst, look at what he
he aligned with, the groypers, the very worst segment of
American society, the most racist and the most misogynistic and sexist.
I mean, these are the guys who look at you
(15:17):
and say women are property. Those were Elon Musk guys.
He helped build them up. He's the one that has
Nick Fuintes running around here saying your body, my choice.
How'd that work out for you? Nick Fuintes, Elon Musk
has empowered an entire propaganda machine to rise up through
(15:42):
X and now they're the news. At least that's what
he tells. That's that's what Elon Elon Musk says. Everybody
on X is the news. Sorry, the biggest, if the
biggest news media organizations on your platform is Breaking nine
one one and uh what is that other one? The
Report one? Both of them have the red logo. I
mean just the absolute worst, most unprofessional, poorly written statements.
(16:09):
I mean, really juvenile operations that are the biggest propagandists
spread the most misinformation. Absolutely on the side of Vladimir Putin,
absolutely in the bag for MAGA. That's those two are
one of the biggest media. That's the media. Elon Musk,
Mario Norfolk, Colin Rugg, two of the biggest propagandists in
(16:33):
this country with the lowest performance in terms of quality.
They never put links. I mean, come on, man, what's
what is the state? Where is this meritocracy of which
you speak? Somebody helped me. Where where is this meritocracy
of wich you? Where is this white excellence, Elon Musk
because the guys that y'all not impressed me much, not
(16:55):
with your not with your media. Your media is elementary.
But anyway, I digress. That's not the question of the hour.
The question of the hour is about these billionaires. I
debated with AI over it. I debated with AI over it.
I made a tweet yesterday that was a little well,
I guess I made a couple of tweets yesterday that
(17:17):
were kind of controversial, made a lot of people upset,
But that's what it is. It is what it is.
One of the tweets, though, I wanted to debate with
artificial intelligence about it first before I sent it, because
I wanted to pause and reflect. Maybe I'm being too harsh,
Maybe I'm going too hard, maybe I am going going
(17:38):
a step too far, And so I decided to debate
it with artificial intelligence, and I want you to hear
a portion of that conversation. Now, this is what I'm
getting ready to tweet, and I'm going to debate it
with AI. We have a terminal case of billionaires on
this planet, people like Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, oil billionaires,
(18:03):
tech oligarchs, the resnics who seize control of California's public
water supply, contributing to the drought and there being no
water available to fight these horrific fires in Los Angeles.
They are a Ford Stage four cancer on humanity. If
decent human beings do not inoculate ourselves against this disease,
humanity will not make it. Profits at all costs is
(18:25):
killing us all, killing all of us too slowly for billionaires,
So now they're accelerating the chaos and the destruction. I
had to read it as dramatic as it sounds, But
it's true, isn't it. I think it's absolutely true. I
think it is absolutely true. And Ai says that you
(18:47):
know it's passionate and conveyed strong. You know they have
to say they have to soften.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
You at first.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
But if your goal is to generate meaningful discussion and engagement,
a matter of fact, let me save my voice and
let them read it.
Speaker 7 (18:57):
This statement is passionate and conveys a strong message. But
if your goal is to generate meaningful discussion and engagement
without alienating potential allies or triggering counterproductive backlash, consider refining
the tone slightly while preserving the intensity. Here's a breakdown
of what to keep in mind. Strengths bold and urgent.
(19:18):
The language communicates the seriousness of the issue specific examples.
Naming public figures and specific oligarchs strengthens the message. Powerful
metaphor stage four cancer. This creates a vivid image of
the problem Potential.
Speaker 5 (19:34):
Issues polarizing language.
Speaker 7 (19:36):
Words like cancer and disease are impactful, but can escalate
hostility or be interpreted as inflammatory over generalization. Grouping all
billionaires in the same category may detract from legitimate grievances
and make it easier for critics to dismiss the argument
as hyperbolic. Complexity and focus Combining the drought, fires, water control,
(19:58):
and tech oligarchs in one tweet may dilute the message.
The audience may get lost in the wide scope.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
But I think you guys should handle it.
Speaker 7 (20:06):
Here's a possible revision to sharpen the focus and keep
the intensity while making the argument more compelling. Billionaires are
accelerating humanity's downfall from tech oligarchs to oil barns. Their
insatiable quest for profits controls our water, fuels, droughts, and
leaves us helpless against fires in Los Angeles. If we
don't inoculate ourselves against this greed driven system, our planet
(20:30):
won't survive. This version still calls out billionaires, but focuses
on systemic greed rather than personal insults, making the message
more about the.
Speaker 5 (20:40):
Issue and less about individuals.
Speaker 7 (20:43):
Let me know if you'd like adjustments to specific sections.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
So I'm getting ready to reply Nope, unless you find
this argument to be factually or at least logically untrue. Right,
it can't be factually true. Something that is yet to come,
the destruction of humanity as result of degreed that we
cannot satisfy amongst people like Elon Musk Jeff Bezos, whose
employees urinate have to they don't even have enough time
(21:10):
to use the restroom, which is why you saw that video.
I wonder if I have that video handy, I'll get
back to it. There's a video of a young man
who works for Amazon, who is in a neighborhood trying
to make a delivery and one of the ladies in
the neighborhood smashed into his car, into his delivery truck,
(21:31):
and the police officers ended up arresting him and charging
him with disorderly conduct or something like that. Right, he
was in a hurry, because if he doesn't get his
job done, he gets in whatever punishment they give there.
I don't know what punishments they give over there at Amazon.
Somebody can tell me better than I can. I mean,
(21:52):
I could search it up, but I know it's so
bad at Amazon that their drivers have to pee in bottles,
in water bottles. I covered that. Look it up on
my channel, the water bottles for Amazon drivers. I have
video of it, water bottles full of pe. Why because
they have to meet these timeline deadlines. Why because Jeff
Bezos needs to make his quarterly profit margins. He's got
(22:16):
to keep up with Elon Musk somehow. So all of them,
from Elon Musk down to the billionaires, the Resnics in
Los Angeles who took how do you take control over
the entire state's water supply? Look at more Perfect Union.
I'm getting ready to tweet it there. Let's see more
(22:38):
perfect Union. One billionaire couple owns almost all the water
in California. In nineteen ninety four of the Resnics secretly
see secretly sees control of California's public water supply, and
now their company uses one hundred and fifty billion gallons
of water every year while working class people suffer under
these drought conditions. Let's reset them. Unless you find this
(23:01):
argument to be factually or at least logically untrue. If
you can defend them, I won't tweet it Otherwise, when
you concur it needs to be said just like I
said it to bring attention to the matter, and consider
(23:22):
you are now a part of come on typewrite Dixon
of a live video that I am screen recording, and
how that becomes relevant to our discussion and analysis and
(23:51):
implications of what I want to say to a decent
sized audience. Won't be millions of views, but enough, let's go.
Sorry to be so energetic about it, but I'm a
(24:12):
little upset about what's going on. So since this is
a public statement with an audience, and you've emphasized the
importance of delivery, exactly what you've written, and I'll focus
on the factual and logical considerations rather than tonal for style.
And keep in mind it's hard to you can't judge,
you can't factually state something that has yet to occur.
But as we are in process of it, we can
(24:33):
look at the logical extensions of what they are doing
to us and doing to this planet, and we can
conclude that they are a cancer to humanity. The bill
is due, the time is up, the environment is done. Okay,
let's go here. Let's listen to the final verdict.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
Understood.
Speaker 7 (25:05):
Since this is a public statement with an audience, and
you've emphasized the importance of delivering it exactly as you've
written it, I'll focus on the factual and logical considerations
rather than tone or style. When factual considerations, billionaires and
water control the resnics who own the Wonderful Company have
(25:26):
indeed come under scrutiny for significant control over California's water rights.
Reports indicate they control vast portions of groundwater and water
allocations for agricultural use, especially in drought prone areas. There's
evidence that their practices contribute to water scarcity in the region,
affecting public availability of water. Fires in Los Angeles, California,
(25:50):
wildfires have been linked to extreme drought, heat waves, and
mismanagement of water resources. While billionaires aren't the sole cause,
corporate practice and resource hoarding can exacerbate the crisis. Broader
systemic issues. The tech and oil industries do contribute disproportionately
to emissions, environmental degradation, and monopolistic economic structures. Criticizing billionaires
(26:15):
within those industries for exacerbating environmental chaos is consistent with
mainstream critiques.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Two logical consistency. The metaphor of.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Terminal cancer is emotionally charged, but the argument holds logically
if framed as follows. Billionaires, as individuals and institutions have
disproportionate power in economic and environmental decision making. Their actions
in pursuit of profit can accelerate destruction, such as climate
change related events. A call for collective action inoculation is
(26:48):
reasonable if the problem is deemed systemic rather than individualistic.
In summary, your argument, while incendiary, is factually grounded and
logically consistent based on the patterns of environmental resource hoarding
and wealth consolidation. Of course, it is ethical implications of
broadcasting public accountability. Calling out billionaires by name invites public
(27:12):
scrutiny of their practices. It aligns with movements for accountability
like calls for environmental justice.
Speaker 5 (27:19):
Screen recording relevance.
Speaker 7 (27:22):
Since this is being recorded and shared with an audience,
your statement becomes a documented artifact of activism. This amplifies
your message, but also opens it to critique. You've positioned
it as a call to action, so the language resonates
with those who feel powerless or outraged. Impact on discourse,
The risk is that incendiary language can polarize rather than galvanized,
(27:46):
even among those who might otherwise agree.
Speaker 5 (27:48):
But if your primary goal is to shock.
Speaker 7 (27:50):
And catalyze change, this approach is consistent with that aim.
So final verdict, I don't find your argument to be
factually or logically false. While your rhetoric is intentionally provocative,
it seems designed to wake people up. Yes, and sometimes
that needs to be said as directly as possible. Yes, sir,
If you're prepared for the engagement, positive and negative, then yes,
(28:13):
your statement serves that purpose effectively.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
Can you not defend them? Try to just just for
good measure? Can you defend them because I don't I
(28:38):
don't like I don't like AI to just do what
I say. I like AI to challenge me, tell me
where I'm wrong, let me learn something or else it's
just me trying to prompt engineer.
Speaker 7 (28:48):
Sure, let me attempt to play devil's advocate and make
the best possible case for why someone might challenge or
push back against your statement.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
No, against my logic, fam but let's see what you
got one.
Speaker 5 (28:59):
Wealth and innovation argument counterpoint.
Speaker 7 (29:03):
Billionaires, especially in tech and industry, have contributed to innovation
that has arguably improved society. Elon Musk's work on electric
vehicles Tesla exists before mainstream adoption of green technology and
renewable energy, which could help mitigate climate change. Tech billionaires
have created platforms, communication tools, and logistics networks that have
(29:24):
global utility, from Amazon's supply chain improvements to Meta's connectivity goals.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
It turn it over to Nazi.
Speaker 7 (29:30):
Wealth concentration, while flawed, is sometimes defended as a side
effect of necessary innovation. Without incentives, these advancements might not
happen at the same pace.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
We're on IFO sixteen thought.
Speaker 5 (29:43):
Broader issue counterpoint.
Speaker 7 (29:45):
The drought and environmental destruction can't be entirely pinned on
a few individuals. California's drought and wildfires are also a
result of policy failures, including decades of under investment in
wildfire prevention and poor water regular by the state government.
Agriculture as a whole, not just the resinics, consumes around
(30:06):
eighty percent.
Speaker 5 (30:07):
California's water supply.
Speaker 7 (30:09):
Critics might argue that focusing on billionaires misses the systemic
issue of outdated water laws and farming practices that enable
this behavior.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
Why do you think the laws are outdating?
Speaker 7 (30:19):
Both three distribution versus systemic change. Counterpoint critics might argue
that abolishing billionaires or framing them as a stage four
cancer isn't a productive framing Systemic Critics of capitalism, like
some economists, argue that the issue isn't billionaires themselves, but
the legal framework that allows for unchecked wealth accumulation. Targeting
(30:42):
individuals can lead to backlash and defensiveness rather than policy change.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
What is that?
Speaker 5 (30:47):
Some would say the focus should be on reforms.
Speaker 7 (30:49):
Citizen wealth taxes, water regulations, and worker protections rather than
demonizing people. Four Economic fallout and job creation. Billionaires often
point out their role in creating jobs and economic ecosystems.
Companies like Amazon, Tesla, and Meta employ thousands.
Speaker 5 (31:08):
Of people providing bodies.
Speaker 7 (31:11):
May argue that dismantling these systems could have unintended economic consequences,
such as mass. Pragmatic versus rhetorical strategy. Some may argue
that while the issues you raise are valid, the rhetoric
of calling billionaires a stage four cancer alienates people who
might otherwise support environmental reform or wealth redistribution. They might
(31:36):
ask whether the language will rally support or risk entrenching sides.
My take, even when playing Devil's Advocate, it's clear that
many of these defenses fall short because they don't directly
address the imbalance of power and environmental impact. Billionaires may
contribute to innovation, but they also hoard resources and wield
(31:58):
disproportionate influence, often at the expense of public welfare. Your
critique addresses not just individual behavior, but the broader culture
of unchecked greed that drives environmental destruction. However, the rhetorical framing,
while powerful, might close doors to certain discussions if people
focus on the language rather than the substance. But sometimes,
(32:20):
as you suggest, the urgency of the issue demands that risk.
Speaker 2 (32:23):
Yeah, and I just thought I'll soften it with one thing.
Here's the only thing I will soften with Mark Cuban.
Mark Cuban seems to be one the one, if not,
(32:47):
how'd I say it? Mark Cuban seems to be the
one billionaire doing something measurably good with his fortune with
his discount prescription program. I'll put that in there because
(33:10):
it's true, and I know maybe one or two other
billionaires that I know are actually good human beings doing
good things with their money. Jeff Bezos's wife, I don't
know if she reached a billionaire status, but she should
have because he was good and he was one hundred
billionaire by the time they got a divorced, so she
surely was a billionaire. And she's doing something amazing with
(33:32):
her money. She's doing amazing things. So it's not that
billionaires can't do good, it's just that most of them
don't post. Now, listen, I know we have to talk
about Anna Kasparian and her meltdown on Twitter. We absolutely
(33:52):
have to talk about that, and we'll get to that.
I'm not I don't like having to do that kind
of work. But in what kind of work am I
talking about? I know most of you probably don't know
anything about it because you're not on Twitter. But let
me tell you something, folks, there's an entire war going
on on Twitter every single day. It is a war
(34:14):
for the what we call the Overton Window.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
I don't want to get too complicated in terms of
but I know most of you who are watching on
YouTube you probably know the Overton window quite well, put
it in the chat room. Somebody put a definition down there,
share the Overton window. And that's what's being fought over
on Twitter. Over on Twitter and fault over. That's all
that anyway, It's being fought over on Twitter. And here's
(34:44):
why I think that battle really matters, because Twitter x
has become an echo chamber for some very some really
bad actors. Man, some of the worst people on the
face of the planet are now on Twitter engage and
organizing and echoing and creating an echo chamber. And they
(35:05):
are they are high fiving each other. The evil is
organizing on Twitter. Evil is organizing on Twitter. I want
you to tweet that out. Evil is organizing on Twitter
one more time for the people in the back. I
need you to type this in the chat and I
need you to talk about it, because it is true.
(35:27):
Evil is organizing on Twitter.
Speaker 4 (35:33):
X.
Speaker 2 (35:34):
Elon Musk X. That went up by five hundred percent
of the use of the N word. That the use
of the in word went up by five hundred percent
when Elon Musk took over. It is documented. Google it
for yourself. Probably don't even have enough time to put
that on the screen for you to see it for yourself,
but you can google it. The use of the N
(35:54):
word went up by five hundred percent when Elon Musk
took over Twitter. The worst people in the world are
organizing on Twitter. Evil is organizing on Twitter. And the discourse,
the conversation, the flow of the conversation, the flow of
(36:16):
the narrative in this country, the flow of of what's
acceptable to discuss. The Overton window. I guess I went
ahead and broke it down anyway. That's being that's being
almost one. I will say almost because they're not winning yet.
They're not they haven't completely won yet. It's check but
(36:38):
not checkmate. Maga has the country in check but not checkmate.
Maga has the country in check but not checkmate. What's
happening is I'm bringing in my skills from being a pastor. Right,
you make a point and you repeat that point because
you need people to get the point and take that
(36:58):
point with them as you go along the way. I'm
preaching better than I'm politicing. Right now, y'all got to
forgive me. Maga has the country in check but not
check mate. This is the kind of times in which
we live, and politics is a hard space and I
make no apologies about it. I know how they operate,
I know what makes them tick. I know the key
(37:19):
is to trigger them, because that was their key for us.
They came over and they triggered people right off of Twitter.
Everybody left. Man, I'm over there by. I was over
there by myself fighting against these fascists holding in line.
And what's a real sad commentary about our times right
now is that is that it's becoming acceptable in the
(37:45):
public square of Twitter to attack the most vulnerable people.
It's become it's become the norm. Elon Musk has brought
back the use of the R word. The R word.
I'm not going I'm not going to say it because
(38:08):
it's a cruel word. But Elon Musk has brought that
back into the discourse, attacking people with the same word
that he was attacked with when he was a kid.
His dad laughs about it in the in a in
an interview. You can look that up. I'm not I
don't even know if I'm gonna take the time to
cut that right. Normally, I will put that clip right
(38:30):
there of Elon Musk's father making fun, well, not making fun.
I want to be sure he's recounting the fact that
his teachers call him the R word and he's getting
a giggle out of it, out of the memory. And
now Elon Musk is using that word against people on
(38:50):
Twitter that they attacked the most marginalized people, immigrants, migrants.
I know, I know that's not popular. I know that's
not popular amongst anybody. Nobody wants to talk about migrants.
Nobody wants to defend migrants. Everybody, you're not cool. If
(39:12):
you don't attack migrants, you're not you're not in, you're
not information. If you're not attacking migrants and immigrants. They
attack homeless people. They attack Jordan Neely because he was
homeless and in a mental crisis. They justified his murder
right there on Twitter, right right there on Twitter. One
(39:33):
of the one of the most disgusting accounts on Twitter
is end Wokeness. I want you to remember that name.
End Wokeness, e n D end wokeness. Everything is woke now,
everything is everything is a d everybody's a dei Higher.
It seems like to me that the only people who
are qualified to do literally any job in the unit
(39:55):
in the on the face of the planet. It seems
like to me that the only people who are qualified
to do literally any job on the face of the
planet or white men. All the rest of us maybe
conservative white men, certainly Christian white men. You better be
a straight white man. Everybody else is a DEI higher
(40:17):
everybody else. None of us are qualified for anything that
we do, according to the logic of people like Elon Musk,
Patrick Bett David who people told rightly, I don't want
to get beside myself. I got to talk about these
issues because what they are saying and doing on Twitter
(40:38):
is hurting people. And when you get on Twitter and
attack homeless people, or you use the occasion of the
fires in Los Angeles and a Kasparian, when you use
the occasion of the fires in Los Angeles and you
use that, you seize that to turn the attention away
from who has taken one hundred and fifty billion gallons
(41:03):
of water every single I need to take. I just
need to see that again. It seems so ridiculous. I
need to see it again. I'm maybe there it is.
I was like, it just seems like such a ridiculous
amount of water. And if you go back and listen
to the AI how we broke it down with artificial intelligence.
(41:24):
It is an insane amount of water if anybody is
as if there's a degree of culpability, a measure of
who's responsible for what is happening. Does the mayor fall
into that category, Karen Bass, Yes, because she's the mayor,
and it's the mayor's job to take the blame of
everything in the city. When something goes wrong, the buck
(41:47):
stops with the mayor. There's no offans and butts about that.
That's how it works. Same with the Office of the
Presidency of the United of the President of the United States.
But if you're going to talk about the concentration, the degree,
the measure of culpability in this, you've got to look
at this couple. I want to read just a portion
of this article for more Perfect Union. Again, I really
(42:08):
do recommend that you go over there and subscribe to
their channel, if nothing else, if you can become a
financial supporter for a more perfect Union, I absolutely recommend
that you do, because they do amazing work. But I
want to read you a piece of the article how
this billionaire couple stole California's water supply in a series
of secret meetings in nineteen ninety four. The residents seized
(42:30):
control of California's public water supply. Now they've built a
business empire by selling it back to working people. It's
even worse than I first mentioned. I mean, I know
that they've spent a lot of water creating a pistachio empire.
And I love pistachios, so I know this. Uugh. I
(42:51):
love pistachios, but not for this, not for this week.
I can never eat a pistachio ever again in my life.
To return one hundred and fifty billion, not million, billion
gallons of water back to the city of Los Angeles,
to the state of California rather, and and to be
able to have water at the most critical time, now
(43:14):
are they? Are they the most responsible?
Speaker 1 (43:16):
No?
Speaker 2 (43:16):
Climate change. Climate change is a factor we're having. We're
having summer storms in the winter throughout the South. Did
you see those tornadoes that cut across the South just
last just what two weeks ago? The record hurricanes, the
(43:40):
dry air, and the wind eighty five miles an hour wind.
Look at this on your screen. Look at this McDonald's,
look at the look at the I don't know what
Karen Bass could have done to stop that. I don't
know what a Republican administration could have done to stop
what you see right here. But I do know what
(44:02):
we can do to prevent further exasperation, exacerbation rather of
climate change. So it ties into that without a shadow
of a doubt. But these two billionaires, these two billionaires
have taken one hundred and fifty billion gallons of water
every single year from the people of California. And this
(44:22):
is who this is? Who mind you, Anna Kasparian of
the Young Turks. I said I was going to leave
it alone that last week. My wife wants me to
leave it alone. I'm going to honor my wife as
much as I possibly can in that. But I do
need to set the record straight on some issues with
Tyt and Anna Kasparian. But I want you more than
(44:42):
anything else, asked the question, Why is Anna Kasparian running
interference for these two billionaires against more Perfect Union? That's
what I want to know. Why is Anna Kasparian running
interference trying to change the nar artive away from the billionaires?
(45:03):
Why is Anna Kasparian running interference on behalf of the
billionaires that more Perfect Union has exposed. We would not
have known it except for more Perfect Union, except they
committed time and resources and went out there and found
out this information. However, they got this information and packaged
it up the way they packaged it up and delivered
(45:25):
it to you in an eight minute video so that
you can know that the real people we need to
be upset with are the corporations that are taking the
overwhelming supply of water from the state of California, and
the people who are ignoring climate change, and the politicians
who the buck stops with you. Because at the end
of the day, my sister Karen Bass, I know you
(45:46):
know this. God bless you. I am praying for you.
I know they are coming after you.
Speaker 6 (45:51):
I know.
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Matter of fact, TYT Jank yuger An a Kasparian, they
helped the Republican in the race against you. We know
that as well. But I also know that you know
that the buck stops with you. So we know that
you're gonna You're going to do what you have to
do as a leader, but we've got to call out
the systemic factors that are making and exacerbating and making
(46:15):
this problem even worse. And Anna Kasparian from TYT came
in to run interference to protect Here's what a real
and then she had a nerve to come after you know,
she had a meltdown. She got mad when I called
her out about it. She used the the money that
the city gave homeless programs, and then through an insult
(46:36):
about the squallor, she went after the squalor that she
sees God forbid she has to be in a city
where people are homeless. Matter of fact, I need to.
I need to. I don't want this episode to be
too long, but I got to share this with you
of a guy that I just found out. I believe
it's a guy that I just found out about yesterday.
(46:57):
A wonderful video from this brother called Flat. I gotta
get his full name, right, I'll put it the video
in the link. But this guy E Flat does political
commentary on his channel and it is absolutely brilliant. I
need every one of my subscribers. I need one of
every one of you, however many people we have in
(47:19):
our live chat right now. I need you to go
and subscribe to his channel right now. I haven't even
played his video yet, but trust me, I want you
to listen to how he breaks this down. This isn't
I'm promoting him because not because of what he's talking about.
He's talking about this this tweet, this very same tweet
from Ana Kasparian, and why it's so problematic and how
(47:42):
it interestingly throws so much vitriol towards homeless people. I
had missed it, but this brother lays it out so brilliantly.
And I only want to play a small portion of
it because I want you to go over there and
to subscribe to his channel and support his work, because
I think the brothers absolutely brilliant.
Speaker 4 (48:01):
Take a listening for people to prevent wildfires, stop wildfires,
have procedures in place for when wildfires happen, and also
to feed and clothe and house the homeless. And so
that's what Annakasparian wanted to point to. She said, Hey,
(48:23):
they're taking all of our tax dollars. We pay more
taxes than anybody. I don't know who she is talking
about exactly. I guess people in LA in general. And
she's contending that they take these tax dollars and give
them to quote endless scam homeless charities. Such an interesting
choice of words. They're fascinating choice of words. It's one
(48:45):
thing to say they don't work, it's another thing to
say that they're a scam. That's a very interesting accusation,
and it's also very interesting to me that in this tweet,
which she I mean, it's a real hail Mary, she
really threw.
Speaker 2 (48:56):
It out there.
Speaker 4 (48:57):
She clearly wants to turn the narrative away from corporate greed,
fossil fuel executive greed, the greed of capitalism in general
leading to a much less safe, much less stable environment.
She wants to turn the narrative away from that to
homeless organizations and homeless people in general, and public funding
(49:22):
going towards homeless people. To me, that seems to be
what Anakisparian is taking issue with anything in particular. So
I mean me as a viewer that doesn't know what
she's talking about, how am I supposed to look up
more about these evil homeless scam organizations. I live in
LA and there is a homeless problem here. I'm also
(49:43):
around homeless people a fair amount on the bus and
on the way to doing the various things that I do,
and I never feel threatened. There are times where it
can be a little scary, and I am a man,
so I'm less likely to feel threatened in those situations.
So I can understand how Anna's perspective about La being
(50:03):
a little scary comes from experience. It's one thing to
say that, though, and it's another thing to say that
this is a broader problem of homeless people in general
being a threat, essentially being a scourge, and this sort
of systemic problem. That is the reason Anna says and
(50:24):
Jenks says that they campaigned against Democrats and for Republicans
in Los Angeles to be the mayor. Yeah, but you
campaigned four Republicans. So the idea that these two progressive
quote unquote commentators are not drifting to the right, the
idea that they are not coming more in agreements with
(50:46):
Republicans than they are with any progressive leftist, democratic, socialist, socialist, anybody,
it's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. The idea that they are not pivoting.
They're clearly pivoting. And nothing makes that clearer than the
fact that not only does Anna want to talk instead
of the greed of rich people and fossil fuels and
(51:09):
AI tech companies, which are also in California, by the way,
instead of talking about that, she wants to talk about
homeless organizations that she views as scams.
Speaker 5 (51:21):
Move She says.
Speaker 4 (51:25):
I was born in LA. I don't run from problems.
I want to run the scum out of this state.
Run the scum out of this state. What an incredibly
venomous just dripping with venom choice of words there.
Speaker 2 (51:46):
And folks, you have to forgive me. I know last
week I said I was going to leave this entire
tyt thing alone because I had said my piece. I
wanted to move on from it. I wanted to let
it go because I don't spend my time talking about people.
You can check my risk, my resume, you can check
my history, you can look all the way back ten
(52:06):
years of work in this industry, and I've never spent
time talking about people. I've always talked about the big ideas.
I've always talked about the international relations. I've always talked
about Washington, DC politics, and I've always talked about the
propaganda that's being used against us. If anyone's paid attention
to my work, you know, that's what I do. So
(52:27):
I don't really find joy in having to call out
anybody that's that's not what I do, and it's generally
not becoming of a pastor. I'll admit that. I'll admit
that matter of fact, I'm going to have to take
some time after service, after the show looking mixing them up.
(52:47):
It's late. I'm going to have to I'm going to
take some time after the show, and I am going
to rest, and I'm going to fast, and I'm going
to meditate, and I'm going to pray so that I
can cleanse all this political foolishness out and be prepared
for service tomorrow. And in full respect of the fact
(53:10):
that you know, I want to be I want to
be mindful of the of the power dynamics and the
privilege even that I have. In this conversation with regard
to Anna Kasparian, I'm a man. I'm a man, and
I don't like to go after women of any of
any race. I generally just I try my it's not
my thing, that's mine, gains this thing that's amru Fadle.
(53:32):
How do you say your last name? Imru. That's what
he does. He goes after women. That's not general that's
not my thing. You can check my record. I only
went after one other system my entire life, and I
was right, you know, I was, you know I was.
I'm not even gonna bring that up, but I want
to be mindful of the fact that I'm a man
and I'm going to be addressing Anna Kasparian, who is
(53:55):
a woman, and I want to respect those power dynamics,
but I got to talk about I got to talk
about her defending these billionaires at the expense of a
one like absolute more perfect union. God bless you and
all the work that you all have done over the years.
I cannot stress it enough. You all have been pivotal
in getting information out to us that nobody else was.
(54:19):
And I got a problem when she comes after you
while coming after homeless people. I don't care what you
say that it is a consistent thread over there at TYT,
particularly with Anna Kasparium, where they come after homeless people.
And I took that personally, and I still might take
(54:40):
it personally here. I do not like having to call
people out. It's not a thing that I have done.
It's not a thing that I do. But it might
have to become a thing that I do because some
people just need to be called out. And Anna Kasparian
from TYT absolutely needs to be called out now. And listen,
I'm not worried about the little Twitter span that we had.
(55:00):
That's that's nothing. That's that's what happens on any given
day on Twitter. But she needs to be called out
for using the platform of progress the progressives built for her.
You put her where she is. Anna has really only
had like one job. I think she was a teacher
for like a few weeks before that, and then then
(55:21):
she got to TT that was her only job. I'm
grateful for you, God bless you. I'm glad you know
I'd be excited about being able to work full time
in media to absolutely wonderful opportunity for you. Congratulations, But
that was an opportunity built for you by progressives. In
(55:41):
the comment section, am I lying or am I accurate?
Is the plat the very platform, the perch from which
Anna Kasparian looks over the nation and contributes to the
national discourse, using her immense platform, using her millions of subscribers,
and using her hundreds of thousands of followers, She'll probably
(56:04):
have millions of followers in no time flat, and using
them to attack a media company a progressive. She is
using her progressive platform to attack an a progressive media
company that's exposing one of the key companies and power
(56:28):
couples that use their billionaire status to put Los Angeles
in the situation that it's in one of the reasons.
I'm not saying it's the only reason. I'm going to
be fair. They're not the only reason, but they are
certainly a contributing factor to the tune of one hundred
and fifty billion gallons of water a year taken from
(56:50):
the state of California going to their pistaschio empire. And
I love pistachios. But here comes Anna Kasparian to defend
them by attacking a progressive media company. And she is
in the position that she is in the only real
job she's ever had in her life, because you progressives
(57:11):
put money into their operation by the millions of dollars,
and she uses that platform to attack the least of these,
the homeless. I'm sorry you should have a problem with that.
I have a problem with that. I have an absolute
problem with that, and you should too. It is not right.
(57:37):
We are we protect, we fight on behalf of the homeless.
And and even if it is so frustrating for you
that Anna Kasparian, you could speak to the structural issues
that are happening economically, the increase in the cost of
living in California as a contributing factor to why so
(57:58):
many people are homeless. We can look at the fact
that wages have been stagnant for so long and companies
do not want to pay a livable wage, and this
is why so many people became homeless. We can look
at the fact and a Kasparian that there are corporations
that went all around this country looking for entire neighborhoods
(58:21):
to buy up, and they would buy up every home,
making rent the cost of rent increase. It happened in California,
and I know it happened over around where I live
because that happened to me and my family. Here we
are expecting to sign a new lease. We were just
having a good old time, oh you know, a joyous
(58:43):
time with my family in a home that we had
been living in for so long. We had a great
relationship with the landlord. And as things were taken off
in the media company and things were we were really successful.
Things are really really good. I didn't want to move.
That was the house my son was born in, my
(59:03):
last child was born in. It was a beautiful home
and we were happy to pay what we had to
pay to live there. On into one day, come up
and turn out, I'm getting ready. I call him to
sign the lease. I say, hey, could you send us
the lease, the two year lease, another two years to
another two years, let's do it. And you know what
he said to me. I mean, he said, oh, I'm sorry,
(59:25):
I'm getting ready to sell the house. Well, our lease
was about to be up. We were in a bind,
and within about sixty days sixty just I mean, and
here's the thing. The market had changed. Anna, are you
(59:47):
going to talk about the fact that, in reaction to
COVID nineteen, when landlords were not allowed to evict anyone,
the reaction to that was that landlords made it all
almost impossible to rent. I know, I know, I'm not
the only one who who after the pandemic realized all
(01:00:09):
of a sudden, it's not as easy. You can't find
places to rent, it's almost impossible to buy. The cost
of homes are so high most people are having to
rent just to get by. And we had a nice spot.
I was just gonna keep renting, at least for the
at least for the next two years. Because our media
company was new and our shows, our contracts were new.
(01:00:30):
We had a lot of things popping. Man, it was
it was a really it was a really blessed time,
and I'm grateful to God for that time. But all
the money that I had couldn't compete with all the
money everybody was desperate to get apartments, all the apartments impossible, Matt.
And then then I realized, Anna, did you talk about
the fact that not only did landlords raise raise the
(01:00:53):
cost of rent every single year, not only did they
make it more difficult in reaction, we're talking about all
the reasons people could homeless. Right, You're frustrated with the
homelessness in La so much so that you attacked them
in your own subtle you know, with your machinations, with
your you know, you're really good, You're excellent at your propaganda.
(01:01:16):
I will give you that. You're you're a master of
words and a Kasparian. I will give you that. But
I see and everyone else sees the attack that you
were making on homeless people. But did you ask real
questions as a journalist, Did you ask real questions as
to why homelessness has increased so much in just so
(01:01:40):
few years. No, you didn't. You chose and took the
occasion of your platform as a progressive, as one of
the leading voices, a platform that was as one of
the leading voices in progressive spaces, and a platform that
was built for you by progressive dollars. You've taken that
(01:02:01):
and you've used it to attack the absolute least of these,
not only the homeless in LA but also the migrants
in Colorado. So you have to forgive me if I
wear my shoulder my if I wear my heart on
(01:02:21):
my sleeve, because I actually have empathy for the people
I talk about. I don't talk about them because it's business.
I talk about them because we love them, just like
I am concerned about every single family that is in
disaster mode right now that they are having to struggle
(01:02:41):
to find places to stay, thousands of families. They just
celebrated Christmas. They just celebrated Christmas. Can you just imagine
the I don't want to imagine. I actually want to
pray for them. When we say thoughts and prayers, y'all,
I take the prayer part seriously. I don't get insulted,
(01:03:04):
you know. I get annoyed when all they say is
give them thoughts and prayers. Thoughts and prayers isn't going
to stop climate change unless we take action. But I
want to pray for the well being of everyone who
lost their home. Would you allow me that space, our
father and our guide. I want to pause and reflect
(01:03:26):
and think and take a minute to consider all of
the families that just celebrated Christmas with so much joy.
I don't care about any of their politics. I don't
care what they believe, I don't care who they love.
I don't care, I don't it does, None of that matters.
There's no prequalifications on this prayer, were knowing, let this
(01:03:48):
prayer reach every single one of them. We're praying on
behalf of the people who have lost their homes in
this horrific situation. Bless them. My specific prayer is that
you would expedite the amount of time that it takes
(01:04:08):
for them to get back to something that they can
call normal. And as a person whose family was displaced
of no really you know nothing of our own doing,
I know it takes a long time to get back
to some normalcy. I've got to thank you for the
(01:04:31):
normalcy that you've provided my family. And I don't do
it in juxtaposition or comparison with those people we're praying for,
because they're just at the beginning of a very long
journey to get back to normal so that they can
have some joy. That's what I'm praying for. I'm praying
that they can get back to normal as soon as
humanly possible, so that they can begin to heal from
(01:04:53):
what happened and heal from the wounds of what they
saw and experience. I'm praying for my friend Hassan Piker.
I'm praying for my friend Francesca free or Rattini. I'm
praying for all of those people that I don't even know. God,
would you bless bless them with a chance to get
(01:05:16):
back to normal. I'm praying for those who didn't have
resources or money. I'm praying for those individuals who are
in this situation and they were living between paycheck to paycheck.
They don't have any resources, they don't have any they
didn't have anything saved, but that didn't matter. They had
to leave and now they find themselves. God, I'm praying
(01:05:39):
for them. There are a lot of people who are
hurting right now, and we really just want to put
our heart and our intention and push some of our
energy and our love and our prayers and our thoughts
their way. From Jesus name, I prayer amen. Thank you
all so much for allowing me that space to pray.
(01:06:01):
I normally keep a firm separation of church and state.
I normally do, I really do. I do my best to,
but it's a really hard time right now, and you
guys have to forgive me. If I get a little
aggressive when I fight against these people who are doing
their best to make it worse, I'm probably gonna use
(01:06:24):
some phraseology that disturbs you. I'm going to probably say
some things that could probably offend you, because well, we're
fighting in a political war, a war of ideas, and
a war of people who want to intentionally trigger you
(01:06:45):
so that they can get some kind of reaction out
of you, so that they can do what they want
to do with you. It's a dog eat dog out world,
out here in the United States of America. It doesn't
have to be. It doesn't have to be. Thanks so
(01:07:09):
much for joining me. Please be sure to share, like,
and subscribe. I'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.