Ain’t nobody get in this game to be an average mu’fucka.
This is yet another example of Republicans trying to solve problems we don’t have by creating problems we don’t want to have. Why can’t Republicans offer bills to reauthorize programs that work without adding anti-woman or anti-immigrant provisions that will make it work less well? We need to reauthorize VAWA without re-victimizing the survivors of abuse and discouraging others from seeking help in the first place.
Ending violence against women shouldn’t be controversial. Whether they live in tribal or urban areas, whether they are U.S. citizens or not, whether they speak English or another language, all women deserve the chance to live free of violence. This was true the last time we passed the Violence Against Women Act and it’s true today. There is a national consensus that our society will not tolerate violence against women. I ask my Republican colleagues to explain whether they’ll join the rest of the country in protecting all women equally or continue to pretend that some violence doesn’t deserve to be prosecuted.
What is a ‘vato’?
via Urban Dictionary:
- Mexican OG for duuude
- the word mexicans use for homeboy
- Mexican slang for ‘man’… there is some kind of respect implicit on this word to the guy referred as vato. Vato is a guy who means business. The instance Bato instead of Vato should be more appropiate as it sounds on the streets. But grammatically, both words are correct because this word hasn’t been ruled by any Language academy so far. Vato is not the same as güey. Güey does not implies respect. Güey is more alike to be pejorative or familiar depending the way it is applied.