Ben Shapiro

Ben Shapiro should be ridiculed at every turn for being a midget with terrible opinions about everything.
 
there's plenty of daft shit to ridicule him over no need to bring his appearance into it, the kermit sounding racist midget cnut.. oops sorry
 
2 man midfield said:
What?
Click to expand...
I'll clarify and say that I don't advocate making fun of people for things they can't do anything about. But Ben Shapiro is a massive tool, and he's really insecure about his height, to the point of lying about it. So when he, say, tells a trans-woman that she's a mentally ill man, I think it's perfectly fair to mock him for his height (or rather lack thereof).
 
Halftrack said:
I'll clarify and say that I don't advocate making fun of people for things they can't do anything about. But Ben Shapiro is a massive tool, and he's really insecure about his height, to the point of lying about it. So when he, say, tells a trans-woman that she's a mentally ill man, I think it's perfectly fair to mock him for his height (or rather lack thereof).
Click to expand...
I was just wondering where it came from really. Mock him if you want to, I'm not defending him.
 
Snivelling American nerd knows shit-all about South America or her politics. Least surprising news of the week.
 
MrMarcello said:
Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Shows that you don't need to be on the right side of an argument to win it. That's basically Shapiro's thing. He can outtalk people even if they're right. Loath as I am to admit it, he's quite talented at doing this.

Right, I need to take a shower after saying that.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Shows that you don't need to be on the right side of an argument to win it. That's basically Shapiro's thing. He can outtalk people even if they're right. Loath as I am to admit it, he's quite talented at doing this.

Right, I need to take a shower after saying that.
Click to expand...

There’s no shame in saying that, a number of us have said words to that effect numerous times.

He’s honed his craft as a debater, there’s far better intellects out there who have a fundamental understanding of subjects Shapiro doesn’t have the slightest hope in ever understanding the basics of. But, by applying his debating techniques he could create the illusion that he is winning an argument against them in their subject.

That doesn’t make him smart and that doesn’t make him worth listening to for anything other than learning how to debate. It sure as hell doesn’t make him an authority on anything, it just makes him dangerous.
It’s dangerous because there are plenty of impressionable people out there who aren’t able to distinct a difference between a clever argument and a clever thought.
 
MrMarcello said:
Thoughts?

Click to expand...


Shapiro being a great debater is probably more down to the fact that he debates very bad debaters. If he got into a proper debate with a pro he would be found out pretty quickly imo....especially since he's on the wrong side of most issues.
 
i did this once in a college course i took. im an obnoxious loudmouth and it was a freshman level politics class. we had one class a week that was basically 15 minutes of debate prep and 15 minutes of debate x3. i could argue both sides and easily "destroy" someone who didnt follow politics. at the end the class would vote for who won. it was pointless. i didnt learn anything, the class voted for my side and by the time class was over no one even remembered or cared about the issue. its just a matter of having a good memory, spouting numbers that the other person doesnt have off the top of their head and finishing with a rhetorical flourish. huge waste of time and eventually i realized what an asshole i was and what an asshole the professor was for putting us all through that. fortunately i realized at 19 to not be that guy. ben shapiro has made a career out of being that guy and having thousands of the worst people on earth support him.
 
So I watched some clips of this guy to see what he's about. He's clearly sharp and quick, but boy are his counterparts (is this the right word?) always so unprepared? Half the time it's just Shapiro pounding on some technicality or semantic difference.
 
And Gore is not alone. Much of the language of the "loyal opposition" has been anything but loyal. In September 2002, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) called President Bush a liar on Saddam Hussein's turf, then added that Hussein's regime was worthy of American trust. On "Face the Nation" back in December, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) stated that American troops were "going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of, of, of historical customs, religious customs …" Howard Dean, the head of the DNC, averred in December that the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong."

At some point, opposition must be considered disloyal. At some point, the American people must say "enough." At some point, Republicans in Congress must stop delicately tiptoeing with regard to sedition and must pass legislation to prosecute such sedition.

"Freedom of speech!" the American Civil Liberties Union will protest. Before we buy into the slogan, we must remember our history. President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and allowed governmental officials to arrest Rep. Clement Vallandigham after Vallandigham called the Civil War "cruel" and "wicked," shut down hundreds of opposition newspapers, and had members of the Maryland legislature placed in prison to prevent Maryland's secession. The Union won the Civil War.

Under the Espionage Act of 1917, opponents of World War I were routinely prosecuted, and the Supreme Court routinely upheld their convictions. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes rightly wrote, "When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right." The Allies won World War I.
Click to expand...

- Ben Shapiro, guardian of free speech.

https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2006/02/15/should-we-prosecute-sedition-n1214384
 
He's such a prick. I'd love to see him argued down! Disliked him more and more since starting this thread.
Cheers @Raoul for the share
 
kouroux said:
Who is better/worse between him and Crowder ?
Click to expand...
Crowder’s videos are weirdly entertaining in an odd sort of way, the few I’ve seen. The ones where he sits at his desk and trolls people with a shit-eating grin. It’s like...why would you get up there, you know he wants to make you cry on the internet. Why wouldn’t you just keep walking?
 
Another thing is Christians have this fascination with a prophecy. Last time I was in church a couple of months back, the preacher mentioned it.
 
So this is only the 2nd clip of Shapiro I watch, but is this his allmight shtick? Ad Hominems? And this is how he destroys all these SJW's? Or was this just him having a bad day?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.