Terry Crews Gets Pissed Off at Luke Rudkowski

In this video Luke Rudkowski takes on actor and former NFL player Terry Crews and has a very interesting conversation.

follow luke on https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange


Luke Rudkowski is an independent journalist, activist, live streamer and founder of WeAreChange.org.

81 Comments on "Terry Crews Gets Pissed Off at Luke Rudkowski"

  1. American Cannibal | Feb 13, 2014 at 7:42 pm |

    “Obama is lying to you”

    The only Terry Crews quote worth quoting.

    • Catharsiopa Stern | Feb 13, 2014 at 7:56 pm |

      I was awe-struck, I don’t know this guy, but I’m pretty sure that’s the smartest thing he ever said and will say in his entire life . although I’m quite sure he was very unaware about the fact himself though 😛

      • American Cannibal | Feb 13, 2014 at 7:59 pm |

        Can’t blame Terry too much, tho. His profession scrambled his brains.

  2. Mick-Doscious | Feb 13, 2014 at 8:04 pm |

    Hard to dig on Terry Crews he’s known as a very stand-up guy, you can tell he doesn’t care about the politics and just wants to entertain people. Terry has helped and donated to many worthy causes, plus, hes freaking hilarious to boot.

    • BuzzCoastin | Feb 13, 2014 at 9:05 pm |

      that’s exactly the reaction TC was goin for

      shills are great
      aren’t they?

      • Mick-Doscious | Feb 13, 2014 at 10:18 pm |

        ROFL, I’m certainly not paid by anyone for my views, I sure wish I was, I just think TC is funny and a decent person even though he is well known, which isn’t common for most Hollywood scum.

        • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:17 am |

          you’re not the shill
          of course
          but you have bought into his shill
          he’s an entertrainer
          give ya that feel good feeling
          watching his minstrel show
          while he sells you shit you don’t need

          the only place you see more blacks featured
          than at the Super Minstrel Show XXXXXXXX
          is in prison

    • Silent Waft | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:16 am |

      Surveillance isn’t politics

  3. BuzzCoastin | Feb 13, 2014 at 9:10 pm |

    One who poses to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle. v. shilled, shill·ing,

  4. Anti-Crowley | Feb 13, 2014 at 9:19 pm |

    Question, does Luke ask that to every person he talks to? If not, why would anyone care what Terry Crews thinks about it? It was a question out of left field at a function completely unrelated, what did he expect? As a note, Terry didn’t really get that upset, he just pointed out the things I just mentioned.

    • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:27 am |

      well thank god terry has some to stick up for him
      how dare he pull a stuttering john
      on some glad handing pitchman
      for a tax except charity
      the nfl
      & the nflz clients

      • Anti-Crowley | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:32 am |

        Not sticking up or some shallow aesthetic quasi famous person. I just don’t see his opinion as one that will change anything. Go after the folks who are part of the system. Anyone who would change there opinion of the Prism program based on Terry’s view isn’t the kind of person who is going to have an effect anyway. What people really need to do is refuse to use the services of companies involved…money or lack there of makes the world go round.

        • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:27 pm |

          What people really need to do is refuse to use the services of companies involved…

          till this little fluff piece
          I had no idea terry crews existed
          I was & am
          definately with your suggested program

          the fact that you think a likable shill
          isn’t part of the program of oppression
          shows how good a shill he is

          • He played a character in a movie that is very subversive, which paints a damning picture of where our culture could end up. Yet you wouldn’t know that, and would have others ignorant of because your medium is your message.

            It’s called Idiocracy


          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:08 pm |

            I saw Idiocracy
            I live in an Idiocracy
            he’s an actor playing a part in a movie
            he’s an actor playing a part in the system
            seems like that’s a difficult fact for people to comprehend

          • People that are not you?

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:10 pm |

            people that are defending a shill they don’t really know
            as if he was their prrsonal pal

          • Right, and you can make an opinionated judgement because you personally know them?

          • President Camacho Has My Vote!

            He’s going to solve the plant’s electrolyte problem.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 1:22 pm |

            I saw someone on Dr. Oz bragging about electrolytes. Then I turned over to shark tank and this lady was selling some kind of electrolyte-infused flavored water.

          • He’s currently in a show that’s very progressive show called Brooklyn Nine Nine. Which touches on police corruption, LGBT issues, diversity, subverts the angry black man narrative, feminism, and more.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 1:23 pm |

            Now I just feel sorry for him.

  5. misinformation | Feb 13, 2014 at 9:21 pm |

    “I want real questions” aka. I want questions that don’t make me examine things too deeply…let’s party!

  6. Next, Luke will be offended at a party in Sochi since Latvian hockey players weren’t interested in pontificating on drone strikes in Yemen for him. Vapid YouTube video to follow.

  7. I now understand why some famous people slap the shit out of some of the people who push a camera in their faces.

    • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:32 am |

      that guy gets paid millions to have cameras in his face
      it was his life’s dream
      luke was a brief fart
      in his deep slumber in lalaland

      • You have a lot of opinions?

        • BuzzCoastin | Feb 14, 2014 at 2:50 am |

          I now understand why some famous people slap the shit out of some of the people who ask retorical questions:D

          • I have 2 pair of pants, a few shirts, underwear, sox, shoes, 2 jackets, about 20 books, a computer, a phone, a laptop, a suitcase, and a duffle bag. It can all easily fit in the back of a truck. Which I don’t own. I don’t even own a bike.

            I could use an another pair of blue jeans. Not because some actor tells me that I do. I could give two shits what they think about the president or the NSA. I’ve already got an idea of what’s going on.


          • American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 7:19 am |

            Curious: How old are you?

          • Buzz is full of himself. I am 36, and don’t you dare turn this into one of your not funny jokes.

          • American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:52 am |

            I’m 35.

            No, I’m just curious to know your real age, so I can better customize my comments towards you. That’s all. No joke here, just research. I need a better understand of where you are at in Life to make this game more enjoyable to you.


          • American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:13 pm |

            Are you lying? Hmmm… I think you are. But I don’t have time for your little games… hehehe ((hoho-gigglles!!))… Echar. OK? Let’s play later.

          • That’s my real age.

          • You guy’s all make me feel like a young’un

          • Some of the brightest, most aware, and open minded are young. Some of the most closed minded and singular vision are old. I have learned that these words do not necessarily apply to physical age. I’ve met plenty of people who are in their 50’s that are perpetually 15 years old. Or trying to be. Not that I am any great example of responsibility or forwarding actions, from the ass end of gen-x.

          • I guess that makes me an old fart.

          • Do you shake your fist, and tell the dern kids to get off your lawn?

          • No. But then I have a succulent garden in front of the house.

          • I’d like to, just to see what it’s like. That would suck if some whipper snappers were tromping through your garden.

          • I just tell them to watch out because the euphorbias in the garden have a toxic white latex as sap that irritates skin, burns eyes, and causes vomiting if ingested. Without pointing out exactly which plants are euphorbias, of course.

          • That’s genius. Also those are some fantastic looking plants. A vibrant green.

          • Well, the largest is a Euphorbia tirucalli, which gets pretty far from green. And it has some of the most noxious latex.

            Now if I had a good sized grandicornis out there, people would probably cross the street just to be safe.

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 14, 2014 at 3:36 pm |

            I wonder if you could genetically hybridize a succulent with scorpion stingers. Motion activated of course.

          • I would have went for lasers, but that’s how I roll.

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 14, 2014 at 6:30 pm |

            I am rather adventurous in my fantasies for the evolution of plant life…but this going to take some thought to conceptualize mechanisms and pathways.

          • A carnivorous plant augmented with nano tech bio-chip AI.

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 14, 2014 at 6:55 pm |

            I was hoping to proceed au naturel. DNA has been shown to have weak emission of coherent photons. You could have protein strands with biometallics for evanescent coupling. The pumping environment could be a respiratory gas with stimulation energy provided by electrogenic cells. Optical cavity; perhaps cells like nocturnal animal retina tapetum lucidum.
            Now generating enough energy for destructive effect….meh how bout laser communication hive insects that bring them food and defend them in exchange for symbiotic production of advanced neurotransmitters.

          • Sounds like a winner.

          • Rhoid Rager | Feb 15, 2014 at 4:16 am |

            The mammalian version.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 12:44 pm |

            I TOLD you not to give the kid coffee. Now look what happened.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 12:43 pm |

            I think they have plants like that. My grandmother had one in her yard. She called it a ‘cactus’.

          • Both mentioned look fantastic.

          • I just watched Begotten. That was a new experience for me. It’s disquieting. The soundtrack reminded me of Tarde o Temprano (sooner or Later) by Bob Ostertag.

            You can listen to it, and download here for free.

            The sounds in this piece come from a recording of a young boy in El Salvador burying his father, who had been killed by the National Guard. There is the sound of the boy’s voice, the shovel digging the grave, and a fly buzzing nearby. In Part 2, there is an additionalsound from a 3-scond sample of the guitar playing of Fred Frith.

            For the most part, the recording is played back with little
            electronic alteration or “processing.” Rather, the music is made by breaking the original recording into very small events, and stringing these events into musical structures, creating shapes radically different from the original. To use a film analogy, it is as if the frames of a film were re-ordered so that the characters do altogether different actions. Or you might imagine the source sounds as physical objects viewed from different angles. I have placed you not only at different positions around the object, but have made windows of different sizes through which you look, and occasionally curved the galls into lenses of various types.

            The choice of sound source comes from my experiences during the1980s, most of which I spent working in or around El Salvador. During that time I saw a lot of death. And in that culture, which is both Catholic and highly politicized, death gets surrounded with all kinds of trappings that are intended to make it heroic and purposeful. Death is explained as God’s will, or as irrelevant since the dead “live on in struggle.”

          • I have a copy of Tarde o Temprano!

          • The movie is clearly a labor of love. I read on the wiki that something like each minute took 10 hours to rephotograph to get the effect. Also the Son had to have taken some abuse, even if it’s an act. Thanks for the recommend. Also, Ostertag is a genius.

          • American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 11:53 am |

            Buzz is full of himself, but also very right on this topic.

          • I choose what’s right. Repetition of message suggests suspicion. He’s on my nope list.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 12:40 pm |

            This video does not exist. That’s how awesome it is.

      • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 12:50 pm |

        If the camera man was paying him millions to put the camera in his face, I don’t think he’d have a problem with it.

        Paparazzi be like NSA and Ted Bundy. Major boundary issues.

  8. Silent Waft | Feb 14, 2014 at 12:20 am |

    Well, that was a waste of time.

  9. American Cannibal | Feb 14, 2014 at 8:09 am |

    Hey Terry! This is dedicated to you, Sir.

    Keep up the good work.


  10. Dude, welcome back. I was wondering where you’d been.

  11. Rhoid Rager | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:37 pm |

    Yeah, let’s cut the rich and famous some slack, cuz money seems to have worked for the world’s problems so far….

  12. emperorreagan | Feb 14, 2014 at 1:44 pm |

    I don’t know who Terry Crews is so I looked him up and realized there’s a good reason I don’t know who he is.

  13. Why waste precious bytes asking a millionaire athlete about something that has nothing to do with throwing a ball? How many millions did not watch the super bowel (sic)?

  14. Rhoid Rager | Feb 15, 2014 at 9:17 am |

    Both are equally good, because both have their roles. So pissed-off
    progressives can follow Palast, and disaffected dirtbags can follow
    Rudkowski. If inequality is in our faces all the time, so ought to be
    journalism. There’s more at stake than comfort levels and following
    rules of decorum. But you probably know that tune already.

    • Tishamingo | Feb 18, 2014 at 2:25 am |

      These are not rules of decorum. Those do not matter. The rules are to show what you are about, the quality of your work and how seriously you want others to take what you have to say.

      Unless you have an agenda… Which is my viewpoint on Luke.

      • Rhoid Rager | Feb 18, 2014 at 2:39 am |

        Everyone has an agenda, whether it be liberal democrat, libertarian minarchist, or out-and-out anarchist. Luke might come in the middle of those, but who cares? You can accept the ‘rules’ of journalism, but the way I look at it is that when some people take the up-in-your-face approach its for a reason. The same reason people choose to become career activists, fight pigs and break windows. You can categorize them as the ‘other’ and demonize them as ‘agenda-driven’ underhanders, or you can take what they are trying to say and the means they are using to say it at face value. If you select the former, you cling to the narrative of centralized society, and hope that society recovers from the process of ripping itself apart from the inside out. If you choose the latter, you see them as a symptom of the irrevocable trainwreck that is modern society, and praise them as prophets. I choose the latter and stay on the margins, keep to myself, and leave my meager wisdom to my progeny.

        • Tishamingo | Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 am |

          Actually I don’t cling to GD thing, I think Luke and his mentor Alex Jones, are controlled opposition, nothing more. I give Luke Hell as often as i do because I too am a member of We Are Change although I no longer support their efforts due to the un-productive methods they use. But I see why they use them and it is not intended to help the cause, any cause.

        • Prophets, or engineers?

          • Rhoid Rager | Feb 18, 2014 at 3:13 am |

            no such thing as engineers (social, anyways)…. only people who convince and people who are convinced…

          • I experience you as intelligent. I have also read here that you have degrees in social sciences. I am confused why you would say there are no engineers in relation to social sciences.

            I am aware that wikipedia isn’t the greatest of sources, however I feel it is worthy as a springboard.

            Social engineering (political science)

            Social engineering is a discipline in social science that refers to efforts to influence popular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale, whether by governments or private groups.


            Political engineering

            Political engineering is a concept in political science
            that deals with the designing of political institutions in a society and often involves the use of paper decrees, in the form of laws, referendums, ordinances, or otherwise, to try to achieve some desired effect within a society.


          • Rhoid Rager | Feb 18, 2014 at 4:51 am |

            I have found that there can be a lot of confusion about the social sciences–almost certainly due to its false monicker ‘science’. There is no broad consensus in the social sciences as might be seen in the natural sciences. In fact, the SS have been plagued by continuous fracturing into differing camps and schools of thought since its inception as a scholarly field in the late 19th century.

            In sociology, for example, some try to draw broad lines across a thematic axis, such as social dynamics, to yield conflict theory (marxism etc.) vs. functionalism (Talcott Parsons’s structural functionalism etc.), or along a methodological axis, such as the positivists (who use quantitative analysis–stats etc.) vs. the post-positivists (who use discourse analysis–narrative deconstruction and criticism etc.). But, these are all competing narratives desperately trying to describe the slippery reality that is the human condition. People tend to act differently in different contexts, but there is no determinate law which would lend itself to be clearly stated as a parsimonious theory. This is what makes the social sciences fold in my opinion–which is also the reason I dropped out of my PhD program in International Politics. This was after 6 years of racking my brain to see why these competing schools couldn’t be reconciled.

            I came to the conclusion in myself that the whole point of social reality being slippery, and the inability to apply a rule to understand it is also equivalent to not being able to apply a law to control it. For me, there is a deep, mystical truth to the seemingly-quaint phrase: laws are made to be broken. The fact that society cannot be encapsulated in a theory is the same thing as why society cannot be encapsulated by a rule or a law. It is a methodological impossibility in the social sciences insofar as it is a praxiological impossibility in the real world.

            Therefore, there is no engineering. There is posing as an engineer; there are high-minded academics pretending that they can predict what will happen in society: and there are all the people who listen attentively to what these people have to say, and turn their prescriptions into self-fulfilling prophesies. But, ironically, their capitulation to these narratives that purported engineers and academics spout about the way society is, or ought to be, is the clearest sign of their own agency. It is in the slipperiness of reality–between the lines of oppression and resistance–that human agency lies. It’s there to be discovered, and every defiant act that is shown to others wakes this potential within them.

            Everyone has agency, which always supersedes any kind of structural theory or set of laws applied to them, and while results may vary according to how this agency is put to task, agency never disappears. Obedience is a choice. This is a description of reality that is not suitable within the social sciences.

          • I thought as much, it’s a tricky semantics issue. Thank you for the wonderful words. Let’s look at it this way.

            Is a fortune teller telling a fortune, or telling the client what they want to hear?

            Is a prophet prophesying or are they influencing minds?

            The fact that society cannot be encapsulated in a theory is the same thing as why society cannot be encapsulated by a rule or a law.

            Of course, nature is simple and convoluted all at once.

          • Joe Crowe | Jun 5, 2014 at 1:17 pm |

            … and people who are not convinced.

        • Or maybe cogs in an altogether separate machine?

Comments are closed.