Here is a wonderful deep dive into that rant.

It’s very enlightening and I don’t dispute anything he says. My only caveat is that he speaks as an anti-capitalist where I point out that his own argument demonstrates that it’s fascism, not capitalism per se, that is the problem.

Like all anti-capitalist leftists, he bemoans the profits made by private corporations and the big salaries of the upper echelon within, but seems totally blind to the fact that the entire middle class is also invested in and profting by these corporations to the extent they have retirement accounts, mutual funds, etc.  Corporate profits aren’t by themselves a bad thing.

The bad thing is when they mate with government interests to pervert and contaminate the natural process.  Diverting profits to undeserving parties, pushing ideological agendas, and prosecuting unneeded wars.  There is nothing wrong with maintaining a military industrial complex, in fact it is mandatory (peace through superior strength) but Brand demonizes it in entirety rather than drawing a distinction between basic readiness and malignant greed resulting in warmongering for the sake of excessive profit. 

I want the MIC to profit, I’m invested in it.  And I want it strong, I’d like to see it active on the southern border. But only to the extent of national self defense.  Brand is spot on about war-venturing on the other side of the world deliberately drawn out to bring an endless money stream, which while I profit a smidge, the wealthy and the corrupt profit immensely AND… my own profits are taxed to recycle some of them right back into the scheme, funneling ever more into the pockets of the elite.

This is fascism, not capitalism.  When will Brand come to that final realization?

Except that she’s hot. Joe is spot on there.

I’m not a single issue voter, EXCEPT for the God-given right to self defense, including self-defense in the face of tyranny.

I’m very anxious to hear Tulsi talk about the Second Amendment, and existing and proposed gun laws.

Hot shmot.  I don’t understand how you guys can think a woman is hot if you disagree with her politics.  The fact that I think Dan Crenshaw is hot despite his traitorous politics is completely different.  Apples and oranges.

I don't cling to any SINGLE issue that I am willing to die for. Such a notion is sure to open up a "Sophie's Choice" in which you will be lost.

I liked her logical approach to issues and her willingness to see the other side rather than robotically doing what the party tells her to.  I liked what I saw as honesty in her approach and I liked her ability to communicate.  I liked the fact that she was a combat veteran that put aside a promising political career to server her country.

And I liked that she was hot!

I liked that she is a military vet too.  Her trajectory about America’s military ventures after 9/11 is identical to mine:  All in to go get the terrorists at first, but then as it dragged on seeing the corruption and money flow and finally realizing that the actual objective had turned into something other than what we were sold: It was no longer about protecting America from terrorists if it ever was.  It was now about keeping the war and profits going at the expense of lives and limbs of people the elites don’t give a shit about.  She saw it first hand from the inside as opposed to civilians here bitching about evil capitalist Halliburton.  Hopefully she is also coming around to see that capitalism isn’t the problem: it’s when the government mates with it (like prosecuting a war) that’s the problem.  I would like to see Gabbard state that she has read Sowell’s “Economics 101” before I completely trust her.

Incidentally that’s the dilemma we have in 2016 (if we’re a Democrat) between Hillary and Bernie Sanders.  Bernie is anti-capitalism but Hillary is pro-fascist (warmonger).  Gabbard also outlined exactly how the DNC pushed Bernie out and got Hillary on the ticket in 2016.

Also like what she said about women (and other diversities) in the military: That job assignment needs to be based on merit; she understands that your life and the mission depend on that.

Compare if she were VP to Kamala Harris and what would happen if the president died and they were president as CIC.  Gabbard is a thousand times better.  They express exactly why Harris would be so dangerous which I won’t spoil.

Until recently she was vehemently anti Second Amendment, so you deserved it. That's one of the issues I'll die on a hill for.

She seems to be experiencing an awakening that a lot of lefties who grew up steeped in leftism experience if and when they start thinking for themselves.  Of course she still has to walk the walk before we can trust her.  But if you listen to the interview all the way through, she is hyper aware of the psyops put on congressmen once they get to DC and it seems she resists them.  It starts around 53.

It’s worse than I thought.  The congressmen of both parties are told to put the party first. It’s all about raising money and voting in the way that will keep that party winning elections.  It is NOT about what your constituents (whom you represent) at home want and it is NOT what is best for the country and it is NOT what is morally right. It is all about keeping your party in power.

(1:10) Intro
(3:45) Starting out as a Democrat
(7:16) The Socialist tradition of Canada
(9:10) 911, enlisting, and the National Guard
(13:10) Fighting terrorism in Iraq
(15:20) Corporate government collusion
(18:00) Women in the armed forces
(24:11) Equity is not equality
(24:45) The issue of women as POWs
(27:55) On the edge of global conflict
(32:20) Following Russia’s war
(35:43) What does western victory look like?
(40:26) The Treaty of Versailles, learning from history
(44:07) We are fighting a proxy war
(45:50) Biden blocking diplomacy?
(48:04) The military-industrial complex
(49:44) Republicans and crony capitalism
(53:02) The freshman class, pressure to corrupt
(56:46) Funding and frustration
(1:03:37) The DNC: checking boxes and walking away
(1:10:01) Hillary Clinton: a record of war
(1:16:46) Positives in the Republican Party
(1:18:35) There is still promise in the system

He's actually kind of pissed at this point and will get madder if no one in a high place steps up to apologize.

Aren’t we all.  I’m not holding my breath.

Just what Dr. Campbell said.

Yeah, I like him. Willing to admit when he’s wrong.

I’m sorry.  This is going way too far.  You can’t hold men responsible for your own “vulnerable” mental state just because they keep asking you for sex and you finally give in.  Now that she’s been fired and made an international laughing stock all of a sudden none of it is her fault.

Her affair with Powell sounds like if anything it damaged him more than her, like he felt manipulated by her. Don’t get me wrong he’s not innocent in this, but she’s certainly no innocent victim herself.  You can’t whore yourself around like that for months and then claim you had no agency of your own when you were a grown ass woman.  Nobody raped her.  They respected her “no” when she said it.  That’s it, end of story.  You don’t “groom” adult women like a pedo would a five year old.  It’s not the same at all and it is quite offensive for adult women to co-opt that term when for whatever reason they allow men to talk them into sex and then happen to regret it later.

I see no claim that her job was threatened.  She admits she was messed up in the head because of marital problems which left her “vulnerable” to these men’s advances.  Okay fine, that does not absolve you of responsibility for your decision to respond to them, and anyway, you already had an “open” marriage so your baseline morality is infidelity in the first place, long before these officers came along.  Now you want to drag them through court looking for a payout I imagine.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11813611/Cop-gone-wild-Maegan-Hall-breaks-silence-fired-sex-scandal.html?ico=related-replace