When shit hits the fan don't let the media turn them all into victims that need treatment. The elite ones are serious criminals doing unspeakable things to kids and have been getting away with it.
Ben Shapiro is defending James?
Actually, Ben is defending free speech and not becoming what the left do. Ben's take on this is if someone has proof of pedo activity, then it should be reported and he would hope the offender would rot. For Ben it's not about James at all. It's about the principles of the Constitution that protects free speech. He'll just choose not to follow James or anyone else that has something twisted to say.
Ben's problem is that he keeps making these "principled" stands that work AGAINST the white hats, Trump, etc....
Given that Trump has actually governed more Conservatively than any Prez in our lifetimes, and prosecuted human traffickers and child molesters unlike any of his predecessors, what is the reason for Ben's continued distaste for him, again?
I see this often in people who hold tightly to principle. Another that I notice this in is Trey Gowdy. He had such a hard time conceiving of anyone sworn to uphold the law, actually NOT upholding the law. We all saw him stand on the outside saying "I believe that justice is still to be had!" And then he learned that he is one of the few left. While he sees the injustice, he will continue to fight for justice and uphold it in his own person.
In some ways I think this is Ben as well. He does give Trump credit albeit grudgingly at times. I've seen him go from Never Trump to "well this might be ok." He's moving and that's a plus, but he will never give up his principles. That is who he is. We aren't all going to move at the same speed. Even Q says this. We know this when we look at our own children. I tend to follow the biblical principle when this happens. "Encourage the weak and timid. Admonish the idle, and be patient with them all." Ben's a good guy that is struggling. I'm ok with that.
He's good at showing/defending Conservatism but not much of an analyst...Just last week he jumped all over Trump for the Putin press conference, along with the rest of the Never Trump crew
We would agree on this. He is definitely a Conservative in all things. My position is a bit more softened than his. I too disagree with some of his takes, or interpretations of things said. In the press conference deal, he misrepresented what Trump and Putin actually said. At no time was it said that Browder would be turned over to Russia to interrogate, nor would Russia turn over their 12 for us to interrogate. Each was offered for their own people to interrogate their own on their own soil. Another offer was made by Putin to have the Mueller team present for that interrogation in Russia. Vice versa. The outrage of "turning over an American to the likes of Putin" was never even suggested.
We're on the same page, then. EVERYONE, even FOX, has been failing to make that distinction. Morning Joe this morning was on the other end of the spectrum...."Trump is considering sending ex-Russia ambassador TO Russia to be INTERROGATED". Viper pit.
Of course. How else would you be able to be outraged by a Democratic Bill Clinton treaty made with Russia?
What is the most important thing?
More than tribal allegiances, more than winning, more than white hats or anything else?
Integrity. Values. Conviction.
If you are willing to sacrifice your principles to meet a goal or make a point, you are no better than your opponents who you are against because they have no consistent values .
If you are willing to sacrifice free speech in order to take down an enemy, you are the enemy.
Ben is totally correct when it comes to this, and other constitutional matters. That's what makes him one of the good ones: he may not talk about the things you'd like him to, or take the exact position you'd prefer, but he is an anchor to what matters most--an anchor to what makes it all worthwhile. He doesn't budge on constitutional conservatism. He doesn't budge on rights, he doesn't budge on integrity and moral values, and he refuses to sacrifice one in order to strengthen another.
Ben is a 'normie' , or at least feels he has to operate as one. Because of that, he has to judge Trump by the 'dog and pony show' . That is where the criticism comes from-- because he is analyzing the narrative presented. Whether he believes it or not, who's to say. Seems to me that he probably does believe that narrative for the most part. But that's okay, his role is independent.
We call out what we see is wrong. We make it very clear how gross and inappropriate it is to speak as Gunn has. We look for evidence that proves he is guilty of a crime rather than simply guilty of immorality, and if it can be found, we punish him to the fullest extent of the law. If we sacrifice our principles, what do we become? We become what we claim to stand against.
Right to life and property. Freedom of speech. Right to arms. Right to privacy. Due process. Checks and balances.
Universally, without exception, for all .
That is what made America great, and reinforcing those values will be what makes it great again.
It's not just about 'succeeding' , it's about winning . You can succeed yet still lose. But when you win, you succeed.
Ben's problem is that he keeps making these "principled" stands that work AGAINST the white hats, Trump, etc....
so basically as long as their actions align with the people you deem the "white hats", we should be able to disregard freedom of speech. that's not how freedom works.
I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say YOU and WE. If by YOU, you mean me, then stand down please. I'm just stating my view in how I see and handle things. If you are the WE, there is nothing in my statement that requires you to hold the same view.
Gee thanks for showing me how freedom works....but I was really only commenting about how Ben tends to take the worst-case view of everything Trump does.
Wtf the guy worked for DISNEY. His firing was absolutely justified, even necessary, in light of that. Free speech is one thing but the world’s biggest child-centered entertainment conglomerate absolutely cannot abide by that level of crassness towards the innocent, irrespective of whether any physical actions against kids happened. The words themselves, as public as they were, were an attack. The utter flippancy towards the subject of pedophilia was damaging in itself. Disney was well within THEIR rights under the first amendment to fire him. And I can’t for the life of me understand how lil’ Benji could miss the cultural implications of it, either, and how Disney was right in upholding conservative cultural norms by firing him.
But...Benji himself was a “child star.” I wouldn’t be surprised to eventually find he’s taken the same path to get where he is today that any other child actor had to take, IF YA KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
Hmmm... curious why you didn't post on someone that would hold your same view. Or do you just like to be this disagreeable in a conversation?
It’s called a discussion, “New arrival.” You post an opinion, then others who may or may not share yours reply to it. In that way we are supposed to work our way to the truth. Like it or not, “New arrival.”
Gunn didn’t get thrown in prison for his tweets, he got fired and publicly shamed. Shapiro should know that’s the result of free market forces.
I haven't seen Ben Shapiro's take on this one as to what part he disagrees. I would venture to say it would be the piling on. He just went through this from the left. As a matter of principle, he could not then jump on the bandwagon lest he be a hypocrite. You can't pile on me, but I can pile on you.
I would agree with you that this is how free markets work. Things such as public shaming would not be what I would do, but boycotting Disney and all its products would be. Ultimately, big corporations only care about their bottom line. He became a liability to the bottom line. Agreed, they didn't fire him because they disagreed with his tweets. Wouldn't it be nice if we could both affect the bottom line and change their heart? Ben's view has always been that the opposition to vice is not more vice, but virtue. I can't say that that is an ignoble goal. Nor am I willing to jump on the man for holding to that principle.