The problem with Ben Shapiro

25-01-2021 11:28am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The worst of Ben was the hacky doctor point he made recently (did you know his wife is a doctor? :rolleyes:). The whole “If somebody was having a heart attack, could a PhD help?”. No, Ben, and you’d quickly move on. People would move past it in seconds. He presents himself as learned but apparently is unaware that people with doctorates called themselves doctors long before physicians ever did.

The BEST of Shapiro remains Andrew Neil ripping him apart. My favourite part of the interview is where Neil talks about a coarsening of American political discourse and reads out the titles of some Ben Shapiro videos from YouTube like “Ben Shapiro DESTROYS whoever”. Shapiro asks if he was the one to upload those videos and Neil has so much to work with that he doesn’t need to point out that, yes, some of those videos are uploaded by the YouTube channel Shapiro started. The whole interview is a delight and totally strips Shapiro of his “facts don’t care about your feelings” BS because he clearly gets very rattled. Not so easy when it’s not a 20 year old college student, eh Ben?

I dunno. He got very upsetted with Neil’s line of questioning. If that was act, he made himself look very foolish.

the andrew neil interview wasnt particularly difficult or ripping apart,any half decent politian or author here would have handled it as opposed to accusing interviewer of dishonesty

Imagine what likes of vincent brown would have done with him

Abel Ruiz · 25-01-2021 11:29am

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I have just realized ....prob will get banned for this ....but ben shapiro looks like greta thunberg here.

Youre an absolute disgrace. Who cares what Ben or Greta(a child) looks like!?

Do not worry, you wont get banned, no doubt about that.

Pawwed Rig · 25-01-2021 11:53am

CruelCoin wrote: »

He's made his position fairly clear, he dislikes Trump, but prefers his policies.
That's a perfectly rational position to have.
He's doesn't make any secret of the fact he thinks Trump is an idiot, he's never hidden that.

This

In democracies you often have to vote for the candidate you dislike the least rather than a candidate you like the best. It was certainly the case in my constituency. I would not try to justify some of the policies of the candidate I voted for.

25-01-2021 11:57am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I think it’s very obvious that he is very religious.

Fair enough. I think it was possibly the third Joe Rogan interview of his before the penny dropped for me. It doesn't come up much in his DESTROYS videos.

Pawwed Rig · 25-01-2021 12:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Fair enough. I think it was possibly the third Joe Rogan interview of his before the penny dropped for me. It doesn't come up much in his DESTROYS videos.

He doesn't use his beliefs in his arguments as he recognises that someone without those beliefs will not have the same viewpoint as him so cannot be swayed using his bible as a source but he always wears the skull cap and mentions regularly that he is an orthodox jew which explains his views on abortion/homosexuality and other matters.

CruelCoin · 25-01-2021 12:47pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Fair enough. I think it was possibly the third Joe Rogan interview of his before the penny dropped for me. It doesn't come up much in his DESTROYS videos.

I think you put too much stock in the "DESTROY" bit.

It's sensationalist click-bait, and if it gets your attention then its doing its job.

No different than those sensationalist thumbnails on youtube videos.
It's so ubiquitous now, that you just need to ignore it as fluff and look past it to the actual content.

25-01-2021 1:59pm

CruelCoin wrote: »

I think you put too much stock in the "DESTROY" bit.

It's sensationalist click-bait, and if it gets your attention then its doing its job.

No different than those sensationalist thumbnails on youtube videos.
It's so ubiquitous now, that you just need to ignore it as fluff and look past it to the actual content.

I find them a useful marker for content to avoid.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 25-01-2021 4:40pm

Deleted User wrote: »

the andrew neil interview wasnt particularly difficult or ripping apart,any half decent politian or author here would have handled it as opposed to accusing interviewer of dishonesty

Imagine what likes of vincent brown would have done with him

I don’t think Vincent Browne would have been any better, having seen both him and Andrew Neil in action. Neil tends to not give a fuck and is very thick-skinned and that’s why he was able to rattle Shapiro so well.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 25-01-2021 4:46pm

CruelCoin wrote: »

I think you put too much stock in the "DESTROY" bit.

It's sensationalist click-bait, and if it gets your attention then its doing its job.

No different than those sensationalist thumbnails on youtube videos.
It's so ubiquitous now, that you just need to ignore it as fluff and look past it to the actual content.

I actually saw a Shapiro video where a lot of the comments underneath were from conservatives informing the uploader that they were unsubscribing from the channel because it was a particularly egregious example of there being no “destroying” happening in the video, just a polite back and forth. They were saying it was the dishonesty of the title that annoyed them more than anything else.

Snickers Man · 25-01-2021 5:51pm

DrPhilG wrote: »

That's what I'm wondering.

Most of this thread has been criticism of his squeaky voice, how fast he speaks and the fact that he has a serious air of arrogance.

Much less disagreement of his actual opinions.

He is an ultralibertarian conservative, meaning:
no to any form of welfare-state legislation;
no to public health care;
no to public education;
no to abortion.
Yes to the right of any free citizen to carry a loaded firearm;
Yes to completely privatised public transport;
Yes to more tax cuts for the extremely wealthy.

He is a fully committed "culture warrior", meaning that many of his arguments are against the universal straw man of "The Left" , so ANY such argument can be dismissed IMHO as the ultimate in self-gratification ("Hey I'm so clever at demolishing all the arguments of the other side because, after all, I dreamed them up myself to make it easy for me") and contempt for his audience.

He cares and knows about only two countries, the USA and Israel, so his arguments are hardly universal. Gun rights, for example, are a very American issue and largely impertinent in most civilised societies. He is of course a militant supporter of any and all aggressive actions carried out by Israel in furtherance of its goal of making Palestine "From the river to the Sea" completely "Arab-rein" but his knowledge of the political situation and discourse in other countries, including the UK--supposedly America's Special Friend--is so sketchy that he recently accused Andrew Neil of being a left winger!!

Oh and he has a face like a weasel and a voice like the squeak of a rat, but that's just by the by.

Snickers Man · 25-01-2021 6:28pm

Steyr 556 wrote: »

His sister is a ride.

Meh. You reckon?

DrPhilG · 25-01-2021 9:10pm

Snickers Man wrote: »

many of his arguments are against the universal straw man of "The Left"

In fairness I've seen him a few times make a clear distinction between Liberals and "Leftists", in other words liberals are people who he has a politician disagreement with but can have a perfectly civil discussion with, whereas Leftists are the mad wokey nutters that seem to shout the loudest online.

I can't disagree with that definition.

Its like separating conservatives with far right nut jobs invading the Capitol in viking hats or whatever the feck that was.

Tony EH · 25-01-2021 11:54pm

That's a stupid definition.

12gauge dave · 25-01-2021 11:59pm

He's a breath of fresh air in a world of political correctness and cancel culture.

CruelCoin · 26-01-2021 1:24am

Snickers Man wrote: »

Meh. You reckon?

Have you seen those knockers?

RWCNT · 26-01-2021 1:43am

Deleted User wrote: »

the andrew neil interview wasnt particularly difficult or ripping apart,any half decent politian or author here would have handled it as opposed to accusing interviewer of dishonesty

Imagine what likes of vincent brown would have done with him

From what I've seen of American news, the guests they invite are basically there to parrot whatever editorial the news channel in question are trying to push at the given time.

Ben would be far more accustomed to hopping onto Fox for a lovely chat with a host about the loony left destroying America than being asked questions about his own views and past statements. I think it's this culture shock that triggered the meltdown and accusing Andrew Neil of all people of being a leftist

robertpatterson · 26-01-2021 3:15am

I like listening to him , he makes some good points in between some of the white noise.
Its nice to have a counterpoint sometimes to all the blm justice for George Caitlin jenner stuff
Hes a man of his convictions and hes polite to people who don't agree with rather than the 'cancel culture' mob who are more likely to shout you out of it

Chris_Heilong · 26-01-2021 3:34am

He is grand, a bit too much of a conservative and follows all the Dogma that goes with that but we need more people calling out some of the BS when they see it and if he gets paid for that then he is just following his nature. The funniest part is when he might be talking about a tragedy and suddenly he turns to the camera and starts doing an advertisement, Some people see him as an enemy because he might be on the other side of "the culture war" to them but that is just childish as the guy seems harmless.

gozunda · 26-01-2021 3:48am

DrPhilG wrote: »

In fairness I've seen him a few times make a clear distinction between Liberals and "Leftists", in other words liberals are people who he has a politician disagreement with but can have a perfectly civil discussion with, whereas Leftists are the mad wokey nutters that seem to shout the loudest online.

I can't disagree with that definition.

Its like separating conservatives with far right nut jobs invading the Capitol in viking hats or whatever the feck that was.

12gauge dave wrote: »

He's a breath of fresh air in a world of political correctness and cancel culture.

If his only value is to provide a counter-point to the worst extremes of the looney woke left then he is useful.

One thing for sure the same hate him with a passion while generally applying character assassination techniques. The exchanges on Twitter and elsewhere are comedy gold.

26-01-2021 4:10am

He's very funny a lot of the time too..

randd1 · 26-01-2021 11:55am

Wasn't there a thing about his wife that he said there recently that had everyone posting funny sexual based memes?

Have to say I find he occasionally makes some very good points, mostly though talks utter shi*e, and has a very punchable face.

DrPhilG · 26-01-2021 4:02pm

Tony EH wrote: »

That's a stupid definition.

I kneel in the presence of such mind bending logical debate.

Tony EH · 26-01-2021 4:47pm

RWCNT wrote: »

From what I've seen of American news, the guests they invite are basically there to parrot whatever editorial the news channel in question are trying to push at the given time.

Ben would be far more accustomed to hopping onto Fox for a lovely chat with a host about the loony left destroying America than being asked questions about his own views and past statements. I think it's this culture shock that triggered the meltdown and accusing Andrew Neil of all people of being a leftist

This kind of thing just exposes these people for what they are. If you ask them any questions, even about their own POV, then your a "leftist", which basically just means everything they hate or can't deal with.

Shapiro made a fool of himself and got found out real bad. And Neil wasn't even going hard on him. It was pathetic. All these types can do is hold up an extremity, like some ridiculous woke Twitter statement, and then try to strawman "tHe lEft" with it. But if they're actually challenged, even lightly, they fall apart.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 26-01-2021 5:08pm

randd1 wrote: »

Wasn't there a thing about his wife that he said there recently that had everyone posting funny sexual based memes?

Have to say I find he occasionally makes some very good points, mostly though talks utter shi*e, and has a very punchable face.

Oh yeah, that was him being apparently oblivious that for sex to be a success, the woman needs to get wet. And he apparently admitted he has never done that to his wife.

Personally, I think he has probably done that to his wife. We know they’ve successfully had sex. They have kids. But he just made himself look clueless, prudish and crap in bed. LOL.

54762025-3-E0-B-4261-A772-77-FCF15-B1325.jpg?dl=1

54762025-3-E0-B-4261-A772-77-FCF15-B1325.jpg?dl=1

Snickers Man · 26-01-2021 5:17pm

DrPhilG wrote: »

In fairness I've seen him a few times make a clear distinction between Liberals and "Leftists", in other words liberals are people who he has a politician disagreement with but can have a perfectly civil discussion with, whereas Leftists are the mad wokey nutters that seem to shout the loudest online.

I can't disagree with that definition.

Its like separating conservatives with far right nut jobs invading the Capitol in viking hats or whatever the feck that was.

In the mad crazy bipolar world of the US (and to a slightly lesser extent UK) it doesn't matter. Because, there is no way practically to differentiate between a "leftist" or a "Liberal" at election time; they will each be represented by the same party. And the nutty selection process that endures in the US just makes that more divisive.

I saw on Bill Maher a few months ago an interview with a retired Republican Congressman (can't remember his name) who said something very illuminating. He said that the only way he would EVER lose an election was at the primary stage. Once he got the Republican nomination for wherever he represented, he was a shoe-in.

This of course means that there is an inbuilt reluctance to promote policies that might appeal to "the other side of the aisle" because you have to retain the support of your base. To take just one controversial issue (at least in the US) gun control. It is quite possible that a Republican candidate might favour some slightly more stringent regulation than is currently permitted. But if he or she said that out loud during campaigning, they would never get selected, because unfettered "Second Amendment Rights" are a sine qua non for Republicans.

So they shut up and nothing happens. On a position that a majority of Americans, if asked separately, would favour.

And I don't know in what instances you have seen Mr Shapiro differentiate between "Liberals" and "Leftists". In my mind he tends to lump them both together in his arguments. Like Fish and Chips, or Strawberries and Cream.

In other words, they seem in his mind to be, if not interchangeable terms, at least two points of view that are hard to be separated.

Snickers Man · 26-01-2021 5:23pm

12gauge dave wrote: »

He's a breath of fresh air in a world of political correctness and cancel culture.

In contrast to stale, flatulent statements like that?

DrPhilG · 26-01-2021 5:35pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Oh yeah, that was him being apparently oblivious that for sex to be a success, the woman needs to get wet. And he apparently admitted he has never done that to his wife.

Personally, I think he has probably done that to his wife. We know they’ve successfully had sex. They have kids. But he just made himself look clueless, prudish and crap in bed. LOL.

Stuff like this is just stupid. I actually saw the episode where he discussed the Cardi B song. My friend sent me a link and in fairness it was quite funny.

He did not say that his wife never got wet. He said that if you're gushing enough fluid from your loins "to require a mop and bucket", then you have a medical issue.

One thing that gets on my tits is deliberate misquoting of people who do a good enough job of saying daft things already.

Trump being the prime example. The man was a walking dose of verbal diarrhoea, but when the press twisted his words to make them sound even worse, it just fed into the "fake news" defence.

Snickers Man · 26-01-2021 5:42pm

CruelCoin wrote: »

Have you seen those knockers?

:eek: :eek:

26-01-2021 5:49pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Oh yeah, that was him being apparently oblivious that for sex to be a success, the woman needs to get wet. And he apparently admitted he has never done that to his wife.

Personally, I think he has probably done that to his wife. We know they’ve successfully had sex. They have kids. But he just made himself look clueless, prudish and crap in bed. LOL.

[]

He's taking the p1ss..

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 26-01-2021 5:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

He's taking the p1ss..

Sure he is.

I don’t think any man would make themselves look bad in bed for the sake of a joke. Maybe a comedian would but that ain’t Ben.

The problem with Ben Shapiro

Comments