Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The problem with Ben Shapiro

24

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 165 ✭✭Deemed as Normal


    biko wrote: »
    I'm not a fan, except for the Boy Scouts things. That was funny as hell.

    What did she say?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Of course. But there are also attempts by pundits and politicians to get as far away as possible from seeing how things 'really are', because the person delivering such a message knows that certain people listening are ignorant! For example, presenting a simple solution to a complex problem... like Trump 'draining the swamp'.

    No. Because opinions are like aseholes - everyone has one on how things 'really are".. Though I wouldn't agree that some of those listening to such views are more 'ignorant' than those listening to any other political commentator or are automatically going agree with everything he says.
    So you're saying there's nothing wrong with polarising matters because the other side (the left) is most likely polarising things too? and that Ben has to also exaggerate an equal amount to make up for so??? Or else he wouldn't survive in his profession??? Is that what you're saying? Assuming the answer to that is yes, then does that mean that you are acknowledging that Ben is a spoofer?

    No - that is not what was said. Take a read again.
    Well obviously. But then that begs another question; should we take the opinions of people who are proven pahtological liars as serious as those who are not? The purpose of this thread is to question how much of a liar Ben is, and how he (for example) lies using statistics.
    And that's okay, as long as you also listen to what everyone has to say, and that you fact check people (like Trump) who are known liars after hearing what they've said.

    I believe the issue you posed was "The problem with Ben Shapiro". You further detailed that he was an "attention seeker" but that you
    "agree with a lot of the points he makes"

    So how is that you now believe Shapiro is a "proven pathological liar"? If so why agree with anything he says?

    That would appear to fall into the realm of assuming that he is of "bad character" as detailed previously - because you don't agree with some or all of what he says or believes. Or is Shapiro simply another political commentator albeit one not to your personal liking?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 165 ✭✭Deemed as Normal


    gozunda wrote: »
    No - that is not what was said. Take a read again.
    That's a bit snooty! Here I am trying to understand the ambiguity to what you said and you just redirect me back to it.

    You said something to the effect of:

    he has strong opinions, and that that isn't uncommon with the current political landscape.

    So what's your point by saying that? To suggest that he has strong opinions does not tell me whether or not you think he polarises things or not? They're
    two different things. You should have made it clear whether or not you think he polarises matters or not.

    You also said "the issue isn't with whether he polarises everything". It is certainly one of the issues at the moment in America, and it's also the issue being discussed in this thread. You can't rule out something that doesn't interest you as not being an issue... just like I can't say that "people not listening to all points of view" isn't an issue too. Once you start ruling stuff out, you're acting as if things are black and white matters.

    Let's get a straight answer out of you. Do you think Ben polarises stuff? And if so, do you think there's an issue with doing so?
    gozunda wrote: »
    So how is that you now believe Shapiro is a "proven pathological liar"? If so why agree with anything he says?
    You were going wide by referring to how we should listen "all points of view", which includes everyone (going away from Shapiro), which caused me to think of a hypothetical pathological liar sharing his point of view.... I should have been clear I didn't mean Ben. I do not believe that he lies as a habit, but I do suspect that he misleads people with certain information.
    gozunda wrote: »
    I believe the issue you posed was "The problem with Ben Shapiro". You further detailed that he was an "attention seeker" but that you
    "agree with a lot of the points he makes"
    If you think about it, that doesn't mean I contradicted myself.


  • Registered Users Posts: 322 ✭✭BobbyMalone




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam



    Oh wow. What an unfortunate tweet if you have a sister. Ew


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    I find he makes some good points and it can be amusing to see him totally squash someone else on a panel. I don't agree with most of what he says though in particular the health care, environmental and religious topics.

    He is ideally suited to US TV where all debate is in short bursts where speaking fast and being quick witted is a huge benefit. Similar to Milo really.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭Sky King


    Hate how polarised US political discourse is in the media.

    Either you're a staunch hardline Conservative or a loonie left socialist. Zero room for nuance or middle ground. Thats the two party system I guess. Glad we don't have that here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    That's a bit snooty! Here I am trying to understand the ambiguity to what you said and you just redirect me back to it. You said something to the effect of:

    he has strong opinions, and that that isn't uncommon with the current political landscape.

    So what's your point by saying that? To suggest that he has strong opinions does not tell me whether or not you think he polarises things or not? They'retwo different things. You should have made it clear whether or not you think he polarises matters or not.

    You also said "the issue isn't with whether he polarises everything". It is certainly one of the issues at the moment in America, and it's also the issue being discussed in this thread. 

    Let's get a straight answer out of you. Do you think Ben polarises stuff? And if so, do you think there's an issue with doing so?

    "Snooty". "Let's get a straight answer out of you". Whoa back up buddy. This is a discussion not a Q&A session.

    My comment suggested that you to read it again as you clearly went off on a tangent completely remote from what was said (but not as you misquoted me saying viz. "the issue isn't with whether he polarises everything")
    gozunda wrote:
    Neither is the problem whether he does or does not "polarise everything". The guy is most certainly vastly opinionated but looking at the US - that's nothing unusual in the socio-political landscape there.

    So let me simplify that. Whether he does or does not "polarise everything" (and I don't see any strong evidence he does tbh) is largely irrelevant to whether you believe he is of bad character. The worst we can say of that is he is highly opinionated and really does not stand out from the panoply of other such commentators.
    You were going wide by referring to how we should listen "all points of view", which includes everyone (going away from Shapiro), which caused me to think of a hypothetical pathological liar sharing his point of view.... I should have been clear I didn't mean Ben. I do not believe that he lies as a habit, but I do suspect that he misleads people with certain information. If you think about it, that doesn't mean I contradicted myself.

    Nope. Listening to a wide variety of views is generally healthy and reminds me of something from Barack Obama where he says that "Anybody who comes to speak to you and you disagree with, you should have an argument with ‘em. But you shouldn’t silence them by saying, 'You can’t come because I'm too sensitive to hear what you have to say.' That’s not the way we learn either."

    As to being a 'liar' etc - the above was in reply to your previous comment viz.
    That begs another question; should we take the opinions of people who are proven pahtological liars as serious as those who are not? The purpose of this thread is to question how much of a liar Ben is, and how he (for example) lies using statistics.

    ...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    biko wrote: »
    I'm not a fan, except for the Boy Scouts things. That was funny as hell.


    Then he got her with changing his age return


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,844 ✭✭✭py2006


    He is an annoying little twat who can spew out facts at 200 miles per hour which bamboozles opponents (not wins arguments).

    However, I do enjoy it when he takes down feminism and wokeism


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    What did she say?

    Not a lot really, but he gets a kick out of winding up militant feminists, who doesn't?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,274 ✭✭✭Hangdogroad




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Jaysus!

    To be fair the man is an orthodox jew. Incest featured in the old testament and was not seen to be as bad as homosexuality. The holy books are fairly explicit in how homosexuals should be treated and it would be more hypocritical of a religious individual to ignore these sections.

    Luckily few in Ireland give a crap what the bible says so we can accommodate all of the citizens to some degree.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Hyperbollix


    If he wasn't American, he'd almost have me convinced. But since he's just another money hungry Yankee media whore who would deny gravity if there as a bob to made off it, I'm certain it's an act.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    KungPao wrote: »
    Who the **** is Ben Shapiro?

    An American right-wing shock jock. As opposed to the vastly different American left-wing shock jock.

    Two reprehensible species who live in a symbiotic (ie mutually enforcing) world of straw-men arguments, bilious presentation, unfunny invective, self-righteous and self-regarding high dudgeon and an absolute belief that THEIR way--the bipolar, Blue v Red, there is no other possible point of view American Way--is the exemplar of the Free World to which all other lesser nations aspire.

    Meanwhile the rest of the world is increasingly laughing at them.

    (How do you say "He's behind you!" in Chinese?)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,440 ✭✭✭Homelander


    I don't really care for him but he can be funny and the video where he clashes with the trans woman is a classic.

    After debate on sex/gender in which Shapiro is very clearly pushing for a reaction:

    "You keep that up young man and you'll be going home in an ambulance"

    "That seems mildly inappropriate for a political debate"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    I find myself agreeing with most of his views on all this new age woke fad etc but would I sit down and have a beer with him? Nope.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,460 ✭✭✭✭DrPhilG


    Buddy Bubs wrote: »
    I find myself agreeing with most of his views on all this new age woke fad etc but would I sit down and have a beer with him? Nope.

    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 165 ✭✭Deemed as Normal


    IAMAMORON wrote: »
    Not a lot really, but he gets a kick out of winding up militant feminists, who doesn't?
    So you don't know, but you still have to post.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 942 ✭✭✭Real Life


    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.

    Personally I would disagree with almost all of his opinions or certainly the ones Ive heard, I haven't seen a huge amount from him apart from on Joe Rogan and the odd tweet that gets posted as a meme online and I can't stand him at all. How he sounds, how he argues or his opinions.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    He inadvertently admitted he couldn't make his wife wet.
    Genius!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 165 ✭✭Deemed as Normal


    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.
    I assume most people in Ireland would disagree with his stance on the following:

    Trump
    Abortion
    Same sex marriage
    Guns
    Climate Change
    Health Service

    Although I haven't heard much explanations here for why his reasoning on these issues is flawed. However, maybe some people in Ireland might agree with him a little on the gender pay gap issue!


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    I assume most people in Ireland would disagree with his stance on the following:

    Trump
    Abortion
    Same sex marriage
    Guns
    Climate Change
    Health Service

    Although I've haven't heard much explanations here for why his reasoning on these issues is flawed. However, maybe some people in Ireland might agree with him a little on the gender pay gap issue!


    Trump - you are probably correct
    Abortion - anti abortion has a strong following
    Same sex marriage - see referendum results
    Guns - meh. If Americans want guns who are we to argue?
    Climate Change - you are hopefully correct
    Health Service - again if they want to run their health service differently leave them at it. I would be more concerned about the state of ours.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 165 ✭✭Deemed as Normal


    gozunda wrote: »
    Nope. Listening to a wide variety of views is generally healthy
    Point out to me where I stated that people shouldn't listen to all points of view???
    gozunda wrote: »
    No. Because opinions are like aseholes - everyone has one on how things 'really are".
    We're going around in circles now. Once again, yes everyone has an opinion, but the point is that some opinions are well informed, and others are largely misinformed. And we can agree that the more well informed the opinion is, the more likely the individual is to end up making the correct decision?? But of course, someone like you will always be able to say that there is "no one verifiable view point of how things 'really are'", and that's true. But people should at least strive to get it.

    But all of that goes without saying to me. The point I'm making is that Shapiro deliberately makes people view things in a simplified and untrue way. So if there ever is a verifiable view point of how things really are, Shapiro is driving people away from that. I believe he speaks fast, and with an indignant tone in order to disguise his flawed arguments.

    I'm not necessarily saying Shapiro's opinions are mis-informed... because I don't know what they are. At this stage he might be selectively ignoring certain facts in order to keep the ideology (that he's lived by for years) neat and tidy. But what I am saying is he has no problem misinforming others in order to make a money.

    The main reason I listened to him, was to study his deceptive tactics. And I don't think that's why others listen to him!!! Most people who listen to Shapiro are already die hard right wingers... and yes he further deludes them. And yes, you can say that every reporter has a bias, but it's normally a healthy bias. Shapiro takes it too far!
    gozunda wrote: »
    "Let's get a straight answer out of you". Whoa back up buddy. This is a discussion not a Q&A session.
    What's the big secret? Do you think Ben Shapiro polarises stuff? You said "the issue is not whether he polarises stuff".
    And if you're answer is 'yes', then what's your justification for it being okay?
    gozunda wrote: »
    he has strong opinions, and that that isn't uncommon with the current political landscape.
    Tell me something I don't know. What's your point?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,566 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    He's an absolute gowl. Typical of these nouveaux internet right winger types. All garnish and no meat. They're only in their element when they're talking to people who will agree with them and don't face an challenges to their "ideas". But they're all at sea when they come across someone who can see through their flimsy points of view.

    That Andrew Neil interview completely exposed him for the twat he is.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Point out to me where I stated that people shouldn't listen to all points of view???

    Not implied. This is what what you did say. Hence my reply.
    You were going wide by referring to how we should listen "all points of view", which includes everyone (going away from Shapiro), which caused me to think of a hypothetical pathological liar sharing his point of view.... I should have been clear I didn't mean Ben. I do not believe that he lies as a habit, but I do suspect that he misleads people with certain information. If you think about it, that doesn't mean I contradicted myself.
    We're going around in circles now. Once again, yes everyone has an opinion, but the point is that some opinions are well informed, and others are largely misinformed. And we can agree that the more well informed the opinion is, the more likely the individual is to end up making the correct decision?? But of course, someone like you will always be able to say that there is "no one verifiable view point of how things 'really are'", and that's true. But people should at least strive to get it.

    Indeed.
    But all of that goes without saying to me. The point I'm making is that Shapiro deliberately makes people view things in a simplified and untrue way. So if there ever is a verifiable view point of how things really are, Shapiro is driving people away from that. I believe he speaks fast, and with an indignant tone in order to disguise his flawed arguments.

    I'm not necessarily saying Shapiro's opinions are mis-informed... because I don't know what they are. At this stage he might be selectively ignoring certain facts in order to keep the ideology (that he's lived by for years) neat and tidy. But what I am saying is he has no problem misinforming others in order to make a money.

    The main reason I listened to him, was to study his deceptive tactics. And I don't think that's why others listen to him!!! Most people who listen to Shapiro are already die hard right wingers... and yes he further deludes them. And yes, you can say that every reporter has a bias, but it's normally a healthy bias. Shapiro takes it too far!

    That's an unhealthy dose of self contradiction there tbf and says more about your own political bias than his imho.
    What's the big secret? Do you think Ben Shapiro polarises stuff? You said "the issue is not whether he polarises stuff". And if you're answer is 'yes', then what's your justification for it being okay?

    Odd - you now think there is some 'secret? That btw was in reply to your tone. My previous comment suggested that you read what was stated again - as you clearly went off on a tangent remote from what was said (and not as you misquoted me firstly saying - "the issue isn't with whether he polarises everything" or even "the issue is not whether he polarises stuff" above. You evidently have not done that. The point stands.
    gozunda wrote:
    he has strong opinions, and that that isn't uncommon with the current political landscape.
    Tell me something I don't know. What's your point?

    Relax! I get it you don't like the guy! Not a huge fan myself of a lot of his arguments. As said imho he's no better or worse than most US presenters.

    I'm glad we seem to agree on something ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,202 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    The problem with shapiro is ..

    The right is not creative.

    Hollywood is ruled by the left ..so is music why?

    Because the left is creative.

    Black music LGBT music etc. That is what makes money.

    So the RIGHT ...has to find some OTHER way to communicate with young people.

    For some unknown reason Ben Shapiro thinks what he is doing is it. God love them.

    Kids get leftest culture all day every day in film books music etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    I'd agree with Shapiro on some topics and disagree with him on others.

    I usually find him entertaining if nothing else.


  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Tony EH wrote: »
    That Andrew Neil interview completely exposed him for the twat he is.


    That was brutal,screaming at a thatcherite they were leftist,when he dared to critique him or his book



    Iirc he walked off in the end?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,202 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    That was brutal,screaming at a thatcherite they were leftist,when he dared to critique him or his book



    Iirc he walked off in the end?
    I have just realized ....prob will get banned for this ....but ben shapiro looks like greta thunberg here.




    i can't unsee it......

    And yes ....he was out witted easily which shows you how bad american media is


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


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




    i can't unsee it......

    And yes ....he was out witted easily which shows you how bad american media is




    What he says at 6:45 is fairly prophetic. No arguing that the man has a brain in there.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,318 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    Two Question first of all

    Who is he?

    Is he the ban appearing randomly on Space X and other posts of FB.

    I hate it. What the hell is that about like it's just stupid.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    AMKC wrote: »
    Two Question first of all

    Who is he?

    Is he the ban appearing randomly on Space X and other posts of FB.

    I hate it. What the hell is that about like it's just stupid.

    He is a relatively young conservative US media presenter who espouses a lot of non liberal and sometimes what are seen as conflicting viewpoints. Has stated he holds deep reservations about Trumps personality and character - he later did a turn around on his position on Trumps politics. Accepts global warming but is critical of EoTW hyperbole. He famously got hammered in an interview by UK media journalist host Andrew Neil and admitted same.

    Worth watching as a window on US politics and society as are some of his equivalent but diametrically opposed US media show hosts


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    The problem with shapiro is ..

    The right is not creative.

    Hollywood is ruled by the left ..so is music why?

    Because the left is creative.

    Black music LGBT music etc. That is what makes money.
    .

    LOL You appropriate Black Music in its entirety for "the left", pretty racist that.

    I do enjoy such a blissful lack of self awareness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    he was out witted easily which shows you how bad american media is

    They get soft-ball 'interviews' off other so-called conservatives and avoid difficult interviews/debates. They're the equivalent of average boxer defeating bums and having fights fixed for them and then claiming to be the greatest.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    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?
    It's largely an act. He's made good money out of it too.

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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    He rarely mentions how his opinions are largely driven by his religious beliefs. He's very, very religious but doesn't let on. It's becomes clear in some of his Joe Rogan interviews. Like no sex before marriage. Homosexuality is an abomination. Morality can only come from God. All the usuals. I'm never going to put much stock in anyone coming from that position.

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


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    What he says at 6:45 is fairly prophetic. No arguing that the man has a brain in there.

    This guy was on the money:



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,468 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    So this makes it funny because he kind of has to admit that Trump is an idiot, and then rationalise it somehow.

    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I know next to nothing about him. I have little time for the types of videos that say "Watch how X destroys Y's argument in 47 seconds."

    Anyone with an education will realise how facile an argument that is guaranteed to be.


  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    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


  • Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭Abel Ruiz


    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.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    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.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


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

    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.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,468 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    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.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    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.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement