Get your fill of Ben Shapiro, Andrew Klavan, and Michael Knowles as they share a conservative view of today's US politics.
Applies a 50% discount across all subscription packages.
And don't forget - you also get your Leftist Tears Hot and Cold tumbler.
From US $60/year after discount code.
Sponsored by billionaires such as the Koch brothers (or brother), Ben Shapiro impresses those who think talking fast means your smart and that being on Youtube means you are alternative.
You're* … I take it to you must be impressed ;P
as oppose to George Soros?
It's all conjecture.
Doesn't matter who says it or what ideology backs it, once it leaves someone's mouth it's all in the public domain. Just listen to ideas, evaluate and take good and reject the bad.
Yes, all these koch's, shapiru's and soros' (schwartz) driving this divide. I wonder if it must just be a billionaire thing.
People need to communicate more and find common ground and not allow things to divide our society, at the end of the day its just words and idea, you allow it to affect and divide yourself from others. Unfortunately today's left is less tolerate of discussions compared to the right which has shifted from the 90s. Anyone telling you no to talk to people with other ideas with not doing you any favour.
Personally, I see fervent religious beliefs removes rationality, obvious you have the traditional orthodox religious right and the new DIE religious Left (Diversity Inclusion Equity)
Although I use the term Left and Right for convenience, these days the split seem to be also authoritarian vs libertarian (or collective vs individual)
So, would he be any smarter if he weren't sponsored by billionaires?
Should he be more impressive if he spoke slower?
Does his choice of platform define the quality of an opinion?
I think making a poorly veiled insult by calling out irrelevant matters make you think you are smart but it really doesn't. It simply shows you can't effectively fault someone else's opinions so you do the pathetic thing - insult their rate of speech, platform and association.
I'm not going to get into a full blown political debate here, but I think the insinuation of those points are:
Being sponsored by billionaires means he will act in the interests of said billionaires, despite putting on the appearance of acting in the interest of the the common American (obviously, the implication is that the interests of these two groups are divergent).
He will not be more impressive if he spoke slower, rather the point is that Shapiro masks the flaws in his arguments by speaking fast and using an information overflow, thus not allowing the listener to fully process what he's saying lest they fall behind in his rapid-fire speech. You can see this tactic being used in some high level collegiate debates.
Charles Koch and his propaganda network
And the Washington Post is part of the Jeff Bezos propaganda network. So what?
Now do Soros.
Now do non-conspiracy theories.
No conspiracy, it is a matter of public record that Soros is a left-wing billionaire mega donor, having donated more than $32 billion over the decades through his Open Society Foundation to left-wing causes. You might say, the left-wing's own Koch Brothers. Hence, my point.
And the Koch brothers hate Trump.
Too bad at least 95% of media are all owned and controlled by the billionaire elite who are virtually all left leaning.
I wonder why rich hating progressives side with them? They like their money?
who sides with who exactly? Washington Post, MSNBC, Bloomberg are corporate and banking media outlets. I don't think you know what a progressive is if you think we're reading Washington Post or watching MSNBC. Charles Koch donated to Republican senators to the tune of 889 million. Winning the Senate meant Charles was able to get his corp tax cuts. And let's be clear, Bloomberg and Bezos want these corp tax cuts to continue. They will use their vast media network and wealth to scuttle Bernie's or Warren's chances. So no, they're not left leaning.
The media networks divide us on social issues just to distract us from the real game… tax avoidance
So you exclusively read The Communist Times? die red progs watch MSNBC sorry.
Sorry you fail to see that Bernie, Warren and co are controlled opposition. The elites control the candidates and the agenda. Social issues, climate change, taxing the rich, progresiveism are all pop policies the elite use to control the masses. In the end they still stay rich and politicians continue to do their bidding.
Those billionaires are controlled by more powerful folk.
lmao at Bernie who last election took all grassroots Reddit donations and handed them straight to Hillary and the DNC after he lost. Then found out later he was cheated lol. Benevolent Bernie who is worth millions despite small salary and has 3 mansions. Now he's had a heart attack and will do the same with his donations.
and Warren is laughably a failed native american who if you look at her past is also a faux prog.
See the big picture the complete one.
Ask yourself, even if you hate him, why is the worlds elite of all sides of politics so adamant about taking down trump, if he's just another paid buffoon in office? No one in history even the staunchest or dumbest conservative had been perceived a threat. Otherwise they'd believe their polls and vote his arse out easily in a year. You will see why soon.
@jubjub69: Gee whiz. I can see why you've upvoted this post.
You use even more emotive language than The Daily Wire does in their average piece - your poor brain must be tired after having to come up with labels for everything.
@DogGunn: Ad hominems and projection aren't an argument. I don't even like Ben Shapiro you nitwit. Just giving an upvote to trigger you progs.
@knackers
I'm curious to know what outlets you think progressives read and watch?
@rokufan: I think you guys are confusing the Democratic base with progressives. People who vote for establishment candidates(Biden) are more likely to tune into MSNBC, CNN.
American progressives want a number of things;
1. universal healthcare
2. a reduction in tertiary fees
3. big money out of politics
4. corporations to pay their fair share in taxes. Corporations through political donations and influence have whittled down their tax responsibilities from 33% to just 10% of total tax revenue. The flow on affect has been devastating to the middle class. Reduced tax revenue equates to a growing deficit, a crumbling infrastructure, wealth distribution inequality(most of the gains over the last 40 yrs has gone to the top 1%), abysmal education system(America imports 40% of their PhD candidates). Americans are working more and living less. The life expectancy of an average American is 5 years less than a Aussie.
The corporate media(which includes CNN, MSNBC and Fox News) stand opposed to progressives. They're on the side of the 1%, they are the 1%.
@rokufan: I'm no expert on American progressives. If I was to guess i would say they're more likely to trust The Guardian over Politico, Politico over Breitbart. In the youtube-verse they probably watch progressive channels like TYT, Sam Seder, Kyle Kylinksi, David Pakman, David Doel. Plenty to choose from.
@rokufan: Social democracies are a mixture of state run departments(health, defence, law enforcement, fire services) and private enterprise(IBM, Tesla). Are progressives calling for the state to take over Telsa? no. Their policy positions are quite fair. If the rest of the first world can afford to grant universal healthcare to it's citizens i'm sure the richest nation can afford to do so.
@knackers: Would you say progressives broadly agree with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the organisation she is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America? Do you consider AOC to be a progressive? Bernie Sanders?
@rokufan: American socialists and representatives belonging to the Democratic Socialists of America, Socialist Workers Party and Socialist Party USA have criticised Bernie Sanders, arguing that he is not a socialist because he aims to reform capitalism rather than to replace it with an entirely different socialist system.
AOC clarifies her position here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esLJRHU-GvA
I was a government employee(defence engineer) for 5yrs before entering the private sector(same role but more design oriented). There are greater incentives to work harder and produce in the private sector(paid more, cut-throat environment). However I do agree with AOC on a few points, co-ops strike the perfect balance. Employee remuneration tied to company success provides greater incentive to try harder and having workers participate in company directorship can be a good thing.
@knackers: I think the evidence (their own words) shows that both Sanders and AOC are socialists, at least of the half-baked, non-revolutionary variety.
In the video you linked AOC said she was flattered being called a socialist by Trump. And as usual her clarification was about as clear as mud.
Further:
Bit hard to walk this back: AOC: "capitalism is irredeemable." March, 2019.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/433394-ocasio-cortez-capi…
Notably, Sanders reveals little about what socialism means to him, other than giving many things away free. He disarms critics by asserting that he is not a “socialist” but a “Democratic Socialist,” without defining what that means.
But according to the Democratic Socialists of America, democratic socialism is characterised by the public ownership of the means of productions and the elimination of private profits. https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism…
My observation is that "progressive" and "socialist" have become almost interchangeable labels. Particularly, when progressives are identifying socialists as fellow progressives, as you did above. The extent of difference is one of ideological purity. The DSA, an organisation not a political party, are pure and revolutionary. Whereas, Sanders and AOC as politicians have to make their political message more palatable, pragmatic and incremental.
@rokufan: Elizabeth Warren identifies as a progressive and a capitalist, so do the political pundits i mentioned in my previous post. So no, the terms "progressive" and "socialist" are not interchangeable. Sanders has repeated many times that he is in favour of a Scandinavian styled social democracy.
AOC: "capitalism is irredeemable." March, 2019.
The current unfettered capitalist system is untenable. Can it be reformed? I believe it can be. We need a global taxation system that puts an end to tax havens. And we need to remove the influence of big money from our politic.
imagine paying shills who reinforce the rights echo-chambers and just perpetuate racist and classist mentality. good deal +1
Imagine typing meaningless nonsense and emotive buzz-words as a comment on a deal whose content you are clearly unfamiliar with. +1 for your comment.
if you cant comprehend what a echo chamber is, and dismiss racism and classism as 'emotive buzz-words', you obviously show your inability to realise how terrible these people are!!
just some cold hard facts for you to break out of your epistemic bubble x
A very quick bit of digging and
shill(thinkprogress.org)
I Hadn't read this source before, so had a look at their other articles, they were all quite pro left/democrat so think they have a pretty obvious agenda here.
racist(twitter.com)
An old tweet taken out of context read all of the tweets in the thread and you will find he is just referring to Hamas. Perhaps showed him being a douche, but that is about it.
climate change denier(twitter.com)
Nothing about denying climate change in that tweet.
transphobe(twitter.com)
Just pointing to some basic biology as far as I can tell.
racist(thehill.com)
Because he apologised for a video an employee posted?
Crap like this is what drives people further to the right.
Looks like evidence of commonsense to me.
Also, evidence that leftists only have desperate smears.
At least it's voluntary. We all have to pay for their ABC left-wing echo-chamber.
reality has a well-known left leaning bias..
And this exactly what someone in an echo-chamber would say.
Always 'racist'. Never why they are racist. Never any undeniable facts, just vague, bias and emotionally-based interpretations. I hate racists, I will denounce the daily wire if someone can show me some hard core racism!
You will be waiting here a long time for someone to post anything racist from the service being discussed.
Jack Dorsey confirmed on Joe Rogan podcast (the famed Tim Pool and Vijaya episode) that left leaning journalists only follow left leaning journalists where as right leaning journalists follow both left and right, so this would suggest your claim of a right's echo-chamber if there is one is less severe than the left's
It's so obvious that is the case. I used to be on the 'left'. Then about 10 years ago when all this craziness started I moved more to the right. Even though a lot will disagree, it has little to do with my political leanings and I believe more to do with the fact there is a serious problem on the left that borders extremism and needs to be addressed seriously before it gets way too out of hand - if we're not there already.
Unlike the Left, we welcome to you with open arms and won't try to dig up things you've done 10 years ago :)
@[Deactivated]: I jest, I was pretty idealist when I was younger, arguing with my old man about what the world should be …
People fail to realise the world has evolve to the way it is for a reason, a lot of people (I've observed being relatively young) give our prior generations too little credit
@yannyrjl: Haha yeah I know. All good.
Reminds me of a good saying:
'If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.’
That's very true. 'Boomers' seem to be copping a lot of unfair shit lately. It's always someone else's fault, isn't it!
This is nonsense.
You would do well to:
1. Not label everything as right and left. The world isn't so simplistic. It's an Americanism that we really don't need here.
2. Actually look at people who you consider "left". Those with any journalistic integrity do not adhere to what you suggested.
Meanwhile you have places and people like OANN - have you seen some of their Twitter lists? It's full of Q conspiracy theorists and edge cases. I would hardly call OANN "left".
The world doesn't have to be too complicated as well, economics aside there are key political ideas that lie on the political compass test and can be objectively assessed.
Also when you say it's nonsense do you mean everything I mentioned is nonsense? I merely paraphrased Jack Dorsey and that's he's characterisation, I made a statement of fact along with the source, with an my own interpretation to generate some thinking. You've given motherhood statements, why not give me some specifics of mainstream left journlist with your journalistic integrity.
No, I would call OANN "right" and it's fairly clear
Also in another post I did say I use left right more for convenience than anything else, it's more authoritarian vs libertarian or collective vs individualism
Damn! Great deal but I already stocked up on a 24 pack of Woman repellent last week.
A 24 pack of soylent? Wow how much did you get it for?
What a waste!
You paid for something your personality was already achieving for free.
Guess I touched a nerve, sorry if you were offended ;)
It was a joke Sinister - we all know it isn't your personality keeping the ladies away, its your lack of personal hygiene.
:-p
And when there are deals involving SMH, ABC, NYT etc the circlejerk is palpable. Feel for the prog sheep who are losing everyday.
Don't worry 95% of the media, 100% of silicon valley tech and hollywood are still keeping them in their comfort zone, while the overton window is quietly shifting away from them every day. Where will they be when the reckoning is here?
Incorrect. The most downvoted comment is one against the deal. The most upvoted comment is one for the deal. Don’t be such a victim.
Does 60% off my toilet waste make for a good deal too?
That would be Podcast America.
*Pod Save America
I won’t give my hard earned dollars to shapiro and co
isn't it great there is some form free market, unlike every tax payer are forced gives their hard earned dollars to the ABC
"Can aggression and violence be a better option than assertiveness and strong arguments to effect change?"
You'd think that's a soft ball question, unfortunately not according to the all female panel
Fantastic, I guess this deal is not for you then.
Oh man ..all these leftist tears and I don't have my tumbler yet.
but before you get your tumbler I need to talk to you about Birch Gold / Ring / Patriot Supplies …
Don't forget Bravo Company Manufacturing and Black Rifle Coffee!
To be fair, I want some of that Bravo Company and Black Rifle merch down here.
I believe this comment wins, people. Game over.
Imagine paying for this trash lol
I feel exactly the same way about deal posts for Apple products - and yet they keep getting posted.
Life is hard like that.
My feeling on the Apple products too, although I did try to get the $99 AirPods today (time wasted, albeit willingly so)
Sold in 24 seconds. I mean… how?!
@grayadamson: Tried at 2pm and 6pm, first time can't even add to cart despite trying literally 1 second after 2pm, second time managed to add but couldn't checkout quick enough :(
Pretty crap that we can't have genuine deals on firearms anymore but trash like this is allowed.
The guys at the Daily Wire are pretty keen on the Second Amendment.
And thank goodness we don't have anything similar in Australia.
"Trash" like this would have explored the immorality of censorship and advocated against banning firearm deals by providing reasons that extend further than simple name calling.
You sound like you are completely unfamiliar with the contents and may only be exposed to out of context snippets of the show.
Touché!
Maybe their opinions would be more relevant to the masses if they didn't make every single thing ridiculously emotive.
No wonder the registered Republican base is shrinking in the US if this is the type of stuff they read. Must really turn them off.
lol the left invokes emotion in every part of their own and everyone ones else's life. Your triggered reaction is mere proof. You must be deluded psychotic or a paid shill.
How is DogGunn's reaction "triggered"? It's a really chilled comment. Can we save the word "triggered" for people who are using all caps, or typing so fast they make 50 spelling mistakes out of pure emotion, or inexplicably use the words deluded psychotic.
You know, otherwise the word loses all meaning.
Have a think about what you just wrote after considering my comment about being overly emotive.
Yeah, that's you. Loaded words, accusations, etc.
When you got nothing more to add to the discourse, be emotive as you have.
Lol, he has a point though. It's pretty funny to call the right emotive when the left takes emotive to a whole new solar system.
@[Deactivated]: Yeah… nah.
When you read the headlines of The Daily Wire, I'm not sure it's possible to appeal to emotion anymore than them.
It's essentially impossible to find an article of theirs that doesn't denigrate someone, which is not a valid form of journalism.
By the way, did you notice how you went straight to the comparison with the "left"? That's exactly what they want you to do - forgo any element of critical thinking.
@DogGunn: I have a name I like to keep for certain political views, left and right, that's pretty normal and has been around well before the Daily Wire.
Yeah, when the right ban clapping and start choosing genders and calling others bigot's for not agreeing, come see me.
Yeah, when the right ban clapping and start choosing genders and calling others bigot's for not agreeing, come see me.
This is exactly the type of hard-hitting journalism to be expected from The Daily Wire. Divisive nonsense that serves no purpose other than to rile up the extreme end of the spectrum. It's basically virtue signalling these days.
Hopefully you'll get over worrying about what others do. For the supposed freedom loving end of the spectrum, they sure do a whole lot of worrying about what other people want.
@DogGunn: No purpose? You talk about critical thinking and then are going to let some nutcase tell YOU what you need to call them? Or that you can no longer clap in public, the list goes on and on and on.
Passive aggressive little one, aren't you! You really are triggered - I say that in reference to the other comment.
No purpose?
Yep.
You talk about critical thinking and then are going to let some nutcase tell YOU what you need to call them?
Why not? Most of the time I think that type of stuff is stupid. But I have no issues with what people want to call themselves. It is their lives, not mine. I tend to move on rather than get upset that someone got mad at me because I didn't call them what they wanted.
that you can no longer clap in public,
The smart thing to do in a situation like this avoid that place. Instead you get hard hitting journalism from The Daily Wire and similar places to pretend that issues is endemic and representative of their opposites when it is obviously not the case.
You really are triggered - I say that in reference to the other comment.
Honestly, anyone who resorts to calling another person triggered is probably themselves triggered. Your comment is childish.
@DogGunn: Who said I have an issue with what people want to call themselves? I have an issue with policed language, when you are compelled to talk a certain way or be called a bigot, or it be an actual LEGAL requirement like in Canada.
Avoid that place? You don't seem to grasp the gravity of my argument, do you?
Lol, trust me, not triggered at all. Should I be passive aggressive like you, instead? That way I can pretend I don't know what the other person is talking about. We are going nowhere buddy, you keep living in fantasy land, I'll stay in the real world. Have a good day.
Who said I have an issue with what people want to call themselves?
Your post 2 up.
have an issue with policed language, when you are compelled to talk a certain way or be called a bigot
What happened to freedom of speech? After all, wasn't it George Brandis that said we have a right to be bigots. Therefore don't we have a right to call out such bigotry?
or it be an actual LEGAL requirement like in Canada.
Never heard of this before. Care to post a source for this? This is the type of stuff that The Daily Wire has led with before only for it to not actually be true. They use such stuff to rile the base.
You don't seem to grasp the gravity of my argument, do you?
That you get triggered by people requesting you don't clap? Apparently not.
Should I be passive aggressive like you, instead?
Have you read your own posts?
you keep living in fantasy land, I'll stay in the real world. Have a good day.
How childish.
@DogGunn: Let me be specific. If a man transitions or wants, I'll respect that and user their pronoun. I will not call some donkey a she or shim or they etc, because they are bored and need something to do.
Free speech? Are you feeling ok? Free speech does not give you the right to tell OTHERS what to call YOU. I am not a bigot because I won't pander to an attention seeking lunatic.
Bill C 16 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_H…
Hahaha there you go all passive aggressive again, then call me childish. Hilarious. I am wasting my time here, you definitely are triggered, you do a terrible job of hiding it. Have a blessed day :)
Free speech? Are you feeling ok? Free speech does not give you the right to tell OTHERS what to call YOU.
No free speech explicitly does. As does your free speech allow you to not call them that if you so wish.
I am not a bigot because I won't pander to an attention seeking lunatic.
Whatever floats your boat. I'm happy if you're happy.
Bill C 16 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_H…
Of course it was going to be that law. Purposefully misinterpreted for views, clicks and outrage. The law in no way compels you to call a person what they want to be called. If a person wants to be called 'ze' for whatever reason, and I still call them a he, that is not unlawful, nor criminal under the Canadian law. The law makes it unlawful to discriminate against them because they want to be called something. Specifically it does make it unlawful for the Government or associated entities to deny someone something to that person because they wanted to be called 'ze'.
Hahaha there you go all passive aggressive again, then call me childish.
That's exactly what you're being though, childish. Calling people 'triggered' and living in fantasy land.
Hilarious. I am wasting my time here, you definitely are triggered
Saving this for the lols.
@DogGunn: You are too much fun. Before I eat my delicious $3.95 cheese pizza. I will reply one more time for shits n giggles.
Firstly, we do not have free speech in Australia. Secondly, my point was if you don't call them what they want, you become a BIGOT. Do we understand, yet? I can't break it down any further.
"gender identity” or “gender expression" are limited to trans. But instead we have crazy people who identify as whatever they want, and you're ok with that because you can't see it yet. Ask yourself in 5 years time if you're ok with this.
No, no, that's just my free speech, stop hating, BIGOT!
Saving this? As in you're going top save it to reference to it later? Wow, that's kinda sad. You won't even be an afterthought for me. I will forget this in a couple of hours. I almost feel bad now. Almost. Life must be fun! Cya ;)
Firstly, we do not have free speech in Australia.
Protected free speech (in legislation), you mean. We do however have free speech. You are free to not use someones preferred pronoun.
Secondly, my point was if you don't call them what they want, you become a BIGOT. Do we understand, yet? I can't break it down any further.
I am well aware of what you're trying to suggest. Problem is, it is within someone's right to describe you as a bigot if they wish. If you don't like it, maybe move to one of those countries that apparently "police speech" and disallow that person to call you a bigot.
But instead we have crazy people who identify as whatever they want, and you're ok with that because you can't see it yet. Ask yourself in 5 years time if you're ok with this.
That's an interesting assumption. Given I know people who use strange pronouns, other than me thinking it is silly, I couldn't care less.
That you spend your time worrying about people using unusual pronouns says more about you - obviously you feel threatened by them, perhaps it would be worthwhile exploring that issue.
There are many more things to be worried about in life, but apparently at the forefront of your issues is pronouns and banning clapping. That the front page of The Daily Wire is all about pronouns right now rather than issues surrounding the economy, rising wealth inequality, the issues with the gig economy, replacement of human labour with automation, corruption, etc, says all you need to know about sources like The Daily Wire.
Saving this? As in you're going top save it to reference to it later?
Nope, just if you had any dignity, you'd delete the posts where you call people triggered.
I notice for someone who keeps saying they're going, you keep coming back.
@DogGunn: 'That's an interesting assumption. Given I know people who use strange pronouns, other than me thinking it is silly, I couldn't care less.'
That tells me EVERYTHING! I could have guessed, but now it makes a lot more sense.
You don't live in the real world, buddy. You better pray war doesn't break out, because people like you and your 'friends' will have to drop your 'problems' and actually do something useful for a change.
That tells me EVERYTHING! I could have guessed, but now it makes a lot more sense.
What?
You don't live in the real world, buddy. You better pray war doesn't break out, because people like and your 'friends' will have to drop your 'problems' and actually do something useful for a change.
wtf
Are you okay?
@[Deactivated]: You're an absolute bellend. I hope you can grow up soon.
I hope you will survive "The Great Pronoun War of 2020" though.
I hear that Ben Shapiru guy is scared of bears
Similar to how so many got offended with the stop Adani stickers I guess