Ben Sharipo's take on mandatory vaccination back in 2015 was positive. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15190163
Mr. Benjamin Shapiro, like his fellow 'conservative' talk show hosts, is an entertainer. His function is to bring an audience to advertisers. What he says may have nothing at all to do with reality, but if it is not pleasing to his audience, he will no longer be on the air.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
#15190624
Torus34 wrote:Mr. Benjamin Shapiro, like his fellow 'conservative' talk show hosts, is an entertainer. His function is to bring an audience to advertisers. What he says may have nothing at all to do with reality, but if it is not pleasing to his audience, he will no longer be on the air.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

Well, so what?
His viewers don't believe that.
This is evidence to use when talking to his viewers that vaccine mandates are legal. And correct.

OTOH, it has come to my attention that, the 'name' of one vaccine is mrna.

From this someone started the idea that it changes a person's RNA.
This is not true. It also would not matter anyway because RNA is not DNA, so your genetic code is not being changed for 2 reasons.

This outlandish claim includes an unstated assumption. It is that all the US's and the World's medical ethics watch dogs would let this experiment on people without informed consent go forward, when there are alternative vaccines. The *fact* that these watch dogs are not raising hell, means the claim is false.

However, the Repud fools believe this.
Someone here said so last week in a reply to me, which I ignored since you can't convince a Repud that he is wrong.

I'm only saying this here in case some lurker can be convinced.
#15190690
Steve_American wrote:Well, so what?
His viewers don't believe that.
This is evidence to use when talking to his viewers that vaccine mandates are legal. And correct.

OTOH, it has come to my attention that, the 'name' of one vaccine is mrna.

From this someone started the idea that it changes a person's RNA.
This is not true. It also would not matter anyway because RNA is not DNA, so your genetic code is not being changed for 2 reasons.

This outlandish claim includes an unstated assumption. It is that all the US's and the World's medical ethics watch dogs would let this experiment on people without informed consent go forward, when there are alternative vaccines. The *fact* that these watch dogs are not raising hell, means the claim is false.

However, the Repud fools believe this.
Someone here said so last week in a reply to me, which I ignored since you can't convince a Repud that he is wrong.

I'm only saying this here in case some lurker can be convinced.


Hi, Steve American.

Thank you for taking time to comment.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
#15190693
Torus34 wrote:Hi, Steve American.

Thank you for taking time to comment.

The point of my post was that what Mr. Shapiro says tells us more about his audience than about his own actual views on any given topic. I recall many years ago when an AM radio station changed its format from top 40 to country. The same on-air staff remained, but had become country fans overnight, complete in a few instances with the hint of an accent.

And so it goes ...

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
#15190739
Why does anyone give a fuck what a dumb teenager like Ben thinks about? What is his field of expertise? Why does his opinion and/or actions carry any weight what so ever?
These idiots like to talk about sheep.... then, they tune in to whoever the loudest idiot is, and follow them, and care for their opinion. His main skill is to talk really fast about his retarded ideas.
#15190742
XogGyux wrote:Why does anyone give a fuck what a dumb teenager like Ben thinks about? What is his field of expertise? Why does his opinion and/or actions carry any weight what so ever?
These idiots like to talk about sheep.... then, they tune in to whoever the loudest idiot is, and follow them, and care for their opinion. His main skill is to talk really fast about his retarded ideas.


Because he's a corporate neoconservative uber-zionist and has wealthy donors like Sheldon Adelson and Jared Kushner. His audience is pretty much Christian Zionists and Jewish Zionists together, and mostly Republicans. I think he sucks, and mainly because he's pretty boring. Still he's not a coward at least, that took balls to go up against Tur-Hulk.
#15190744
colliric wrote:Because he's a corporate neoconservative uber-zionist and has wealthy donors like Sheldon Adelson and Jared Kushner. His audience is pretty much Christian Zionists and Jewish Zionists together, and mostly Republicans. I think he sucks, and mainly because he's pretty boring. Still he's not a coward at least, that took balls to go up against Tur-Hulk.

And he is all of that because of idiots that follow him. It is a circular argument. The guy is ultimately a non-sensical idiot, he just happened to get a whole bunch of easy-to-control people mesmerized by his fast, loud talk.
#15190861
XogGyux wrote:Why does anyone give a fuck what a dumb teenager like Ben thinks about? What is his field of expertise? Why does his opinion and/or actions carry any weight what so ever?
These idiots like to talk about sheep.... then, they tune in to whoever the loudest idiot is, and follow them, and care for their opinion. His main skill is to talk really fast about his retarded ideas.


Basically yes. I think another reason people listen to him is that he is genuinely smart (went to college when he was like 15).

His skill is that he can set up straw men arguments masterfully. He does it so well that people don't realize he just straw manned them. As a result, people don't call him on the straw men arguments and just take what he say's as correct. This makes it look as though Ben has "won" the argument on merit/logic, when really he was just bullshitting and manipulating the conversation. This skill allows him to push whoever he is arguing with into a box of his choosing. Then he uses predetermined arguments and ideas to destroy the box. People that argue with him, allow themselves to be pushed into his box even when they do not agree with that box.

When he discusses a topic he doesn't go into it with the goal of exchanging ideas and thoughts, but with the mindset of "how am I going to make myself look right?" Which, if we are to have true civil discourse in our society, is the wrong thing to do. This why we see this contradiction between between Ben in 2015, and Ben in 2021. He is more concerned with "winning" an argument than anything else. He's great at dressing that fundamental truth in obfuscated points.
"Whether we like it or not"

You are weird, why are you quoting me then? :lol[…]

If i were a celeb I wouldn't say anything politica[…]

1] It seems to be a lot easier to claim I make […]

I personally can't wait for a country known for i[…]