Podcasts > The Ben Shapiro Show > Blotting Out The Sun

Blotting Out The Sun

By Ben Shapiro

On The Ben Shapiro Show, Ben Shapiro critiques Donald Trump's stance on abortion, which views it as an issue to be determined at the state level based on the "will of the people." Shapiro argues Trump is equating political strategy with moral ethics, prioritizing electoral viability over moral principle.

The episode also covers President Biden's efforts to appeal to younger voters with another round of student loan forgiveness, as well as Shapiro's accusations that Biden is damaging U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East through actions like pressuring Israel over Hamas and straining relations with Saudi Arabia.

Listen to the original

Blotting Out The Sun

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Apr 9, 2024 episode of the The Ben Shapiro Show

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

Blotting Out The Sun

1-Page Summary

Donald Trump's stance on abortion

Ben Shapiro's critique

Ben Shapiro criticizes Donald Trump for taking a moral relativist approach on abortion, where he views it as an issue to be decided at the state level based on the "will of the people" in each state. Shapiro argues that Trump's political pragmatism and desire for electoral viability seem to outweigh moral principle.

Shapiro explains that while Trump personally holds a pro-life stance, he does not currently support substantial federal abortion legislation. Trump hopes Americans will gradually coalesce around a stronger federal position over time. However, Shapiro expresses concern that Trump is equating political strategy with moral ethics.

Biden pushes more student loan forgiveness

Aiming to appeal to younger voters ahead of elections, President Biden is defying court rulings to push for another round of student loan forgiveness that could provide debt relief to nearly 30 million borrowers.

Biden's Middle East foreign policy missteps

Allegedly appeasing pro-Hamas base

Shapiro accuses Biden of trying to please his "pro-Hamas base" by pressuring Israel to avoid attacking Hamas' last stronghold in Rafah, Gaza. He claims Biden is politically motivated to protect Hamas, a group Shapiro sees as opposing Western values, in order to gain favor with pro-Hamas voters.

Shapiro also criticizes the State Department for opposing an Israeli military operation in Rafah and pushing humanitarian aid over military action, suggesting the administration fears negative optics over substantive goals.

Straining relations with Saudi Arabia

Shapiro argues the Biden administration's stances, like pushing for a two-state solution opposed by Saudi Arabia and pressuring Israel with other nations, are damaging the crucial alliance with Saudi Arabia. He implies Biden is mismanaging this important strategic relationship in the region.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Ben Shapiro criticizes Donald Trump for his approach to abortion, where Trump supports leaving the decision to the states rather than enacting strong federal legislation. Shapiro believes Trump's focus on electoral viability overshadows moral principles, despite Trump personally holding a pro-life stance. Shapiro is concerned that Trump's strategy may compromise ethical considerations in favor of political expediency.
  • The United States has historically maintained a strong alliance with Israel, rooted in shared democratic values and strategic interests in the Middle East. This relationship includes military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and diplomatic support. On the other hand, the U.S. has also had a complex relationship with Saudi Arabia, based on oil interests, regional stability, and counterterrorism efforts. Saudi Arabia is a key regional ally for the U.S., but differences in approaches to issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can strain this relationship at times.

Counterarguments

  • Trump's position on abortion being a state issue could be seen as a recognition of the diverse views across the United States and a respect for federalism, which allows states to reflect the values and opinions of their residents.
  • The gradual approach to federal abortion legislation might be a strategic way to allow societal consensus to form naturally, which could lead to more sustainable and less divisive policies.
  • Biden's push for student loan forgiveness could be argued as an effort to alleviate the financial burden on a generation that is struggling with unprecedented levels of debt, which could have positive long-term economic effects.
  • The decision to defy court rulings on student loan forgiveness might be seen as an executive action taken in the interest of public welfare, with the belief that the judicial process will eventually align with this perspective.
  • Biden's approach to the Middle East could be interpreted as an attempt to balance complex international relations and to promote peace through diplomatic means rather than military intervention.
  • Engaging with pro-Hamas voters does not necessarily equate to supporting Hamas but could be part of a broader strategy to include diverse perspectives in the political process and to seek a more comprehensive peace agreement.
  • The push for a two-state solution and the engagement with Saudi Arabia could be part of a nuanced foreign policy that seeks to address long-standing issues in the region through multilateral dialogue and cooperation.
  • The criticism of the State Department's preference for humanitarian aid over military action in Rafah could be countered by the argument that humanitarian aid addresses the immediate needs of civilians and can be a component of a larger strategy to stabilize the region.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Blotting Out The Sun

Donald Trump's stance on abortion

Trump says abortion legality should be determined by "will of the people" in each state

Ben Shapiro is critical of Donald Trump's stance on abortion, which focuses on its legality being a state issue rather than a federal one.

His moral relativism on the issue is problematic

Shapiro explains that Trump sees the matter of abortion as one that should be delegated to the states, allowing the will of the people in each state to dictate the law. Trump's political pragmatism on the issue implies that he believes this approach is more politically viable, particularly given his criticism of Lindsey Graham’s support for a 15-week ban. Trump suggests that such unyielding stances could be detrimental to Republicans in elections.

Trump holds a personal pro-life stance, advocating for doing what he can from the executive level to restrict abortion. However, Shapiro mentions that Trump does not currently support substantial abortion legislation, recognizing America's deep division on the issue. He hopes for a future where an elected government might ban abortion, but until then, Trump favors gradual coalescence around a stronger federal abortion position. This st ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Donald Trump's stance on abortion

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Ben Shapiro is critical of Donald Trump's stance on abortion, particularly Trump's view that abortion legality should be decided at the state level. Shapiro believes Trump's approach lacks moral clarity and is more about political pragmatism than a firm ethical stance. Shapiro is concerned that Trump's stance on abortion is more about gaining broader electoral support rather than being rooted in a clear moral principle.
  • Lindsey Graham's support for a 15-week ban refers to his advocacy for legislation that would prohibit abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. This stance aligns with the pro-life position that seeks to restrict abortion access after a certain point in gestation. Graham's support for this specific timeframe indicates his belief in limiting abortion rights at a relatively early stage in pregnancy. This position is part of the broader debate surrounding abortion laws and restrictions in the United States.
  • America's deep division on the abortion issue stems from differing beliefs and values regarding the legality and morality of abortion. This division is reflected in contrasting views on when life begins, individual rights, religious beliefs, and the role of government in regulating reproductive rights. The debate often centers around balancing a woman's right to choose with concerns for the sanctity of life and the rights of the unborn. This complex and emotionally charged issue has led to ongoing debates, legal battles, and political polarization in the United States.
  • Equating Trump's political pragmatism with a moral position means seeing his practical, strategic decisions as reflecting a specific ethical belief or stance. In this context, it suggests that Trump's approach to abortion, focusing on state-level decisions, is being interpreted as a moral stance rather than a pragmatic political move. The criticism here is that Trump's emphasis on state autonomy in abortion laws may not nece ...

Counterarguments

  • The concept of federalism allows for states to have autonomy on certain issues, and one could argue that abortion, being a deeply personal and moral issue, is best decided at the state level where the laws can reflect the values of the local population.
  • It could be argued that Trump's approach to abortion is not necessarily morally relativistic but rather a recognition of the diverse opinions across the country and an attempt to find a middle ground that respects the federal structure of the United States.
  • Some might argue that a gradual approach to changing abortion laws is more effective and sustainable in the long term, as it allows for public opinion to shift and solidify around the issue, potentially leading to more lasting change.
  • Trump's personal pro-life stance, coupled with his executive actions to restrict abortion, could be seen as a demonstration of his commitment to the cause within the constraints of his political power, rather than a contradiction.
  • One could argue that prioritizing electoral viability is a practical necessity for any political figure, and that without being in power, no change, whether moral or otherwise, can be enacted.
  • It might be contended that moral clarity is not always politicall ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Blotting Out The Sun

Biden attempts to appeal to voters by pushing more student loan forgiveness

With an eye on the upcoming elections and recognizing his underwhelming polling numbers among young voters, President Joe Biden is pushing for an additional round of student loan forgiveness, a move that is poised to appeal directly to nearly 30 million Americans burdened with student debt.

He is defying Supreme Court rulings to do so

Despite challenges and Supreme Court rulings, the Biden administration is moving forward with plans to introduce new regulations in the coming months, with the goal of initiating ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Biden attempts to appeal to voters by pushing more student loan forgiveness

Additional Materials

Clarifications

...

Counterarguments

  • The policy could be seen as unfair to those who have already paid off their student loans or chose not to attend college to avoid debt.
  • There may be concerns about the cost of student loan forgiveness to taxpayers, especially if it increases the national debt or requires cuts to other services.
  • Some argue that student loan forgiveness does not address the root causes of high college costs and may encourage universities to continue raising tuition.
  • There is a perspective that loan forgiveness might set a precedent that could lead to moral hazard, where borrowers expect future debts to be forgiven and thus take on more debt irresponsibly.
  • Critics may argue that executive action on student loan forgiveness oversteps the intended balance of power between the executive branch and Congress.
  • There could be a concern that focusing on student loan for ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Blotting Out The Sun

How Biden is mishandling Middle East foreign policy

Shapiro accuses the Biden administration of flawed strategies and dubious priorities in the Middle East that cater to its political base at the expense of strategic alliances and moral clarity.

Seeking to please pro-Hamas base by shielding Hamas from Israeli military

Shapiro strongly criticizes President Biden for efforts to appease what he calls his "pro-Hamas base." He alleges that Biden is trying to buy off this base, finding such actions morally disgusting, especially since they support a group that shouts death to America and stands against Israel, a bastion of Western civilization in the Middle East.

He points out that the Biden administration has reportedly been pressuring Israel to not attack Hamas in Rafah, Gaza Strip's last Hamas stronghold. Shapiro sees this pressure as a move to meet political objectives, particularly to please pro-Hamas voters in Michigan.

Shapiro also holds that the Biden administration is making ceasefire proposals, despite the fact that Hamas has rejected every offer, suggesting that the U.S. is attempting to protect Hamas from the Israeli military. He argues that Hamas, knowing it has what he terms Western weakness on its side, is rejecting deals that could potentially bring peace.

Furthermore, Shapiro berates the State Department for opposing any full-scale military operation inside Rafah, which he argues is required to completely remove Hamas. In his view, the Biden administration is more concerned with the negative image of war on television than the substantive reasons behind Israel's military operations, suggesting the policy is guided by a fear of bad optics.

Hurting relations with Saudi Arabia, an important regional ally

Shapiro claims that the United States is pushing for humanitarian aid to be the primary goal for Israelis in Gaza, a wartime strategy he finds unusual and p ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

How Biden is mishandling Middle East foreign policy

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The text accuses the Biden administration of allegedly trying to appease a pro-Hamas base by reportedly pressuring Israel not to attack Hamas in Gaza. It suggests that the U.S. is making ceasefire proposals despite Hamas rejecting them, which could be seen as protecting Hamas from Israeli military action. Additionally, it mentions criticism of the U.S. State Department for opposing a full-scale military operation to remove Hamas from Rafah.
  • The term "pro-Hamas base" refers to a group of individuals or voters who support the Palestinian militant group Hamas. These supporters typically align with Hamas's political goals and ideologies, which may include anti-Israel sentiments and a desire for Palestinian self-determination. In the context of the text, it suggests that the Biden administration is making decisions to appease or cater to this specific group of supporters, potentially influencing its foreign policy approach in the Middle East. The term implies that there is a segment of the population that sympathizes with or actively supports Hamas, and the administration may be taking actions to align with their views for political reasons.
  • The U.S. opposition to full-scale military operations inside Rafah is based on concerns about the potential humanitarian impact on civilians in the area. The U.S. aims to avoid civilian casualties and collateral damage that could result from such operations. This stance reflects a broader strategy of prioritizing diplomatic solutions and minimizing conflict escalation in the region. The U.S. may also be considering the implications of such military actions on its relationships with other countries and international perceptions.
  • In the context of the Israeli-Gaza conflict, the mention of humanitarian aid being a primary goal can be seen as politically motivated because it can shape perceptions of the conflict and influence public opinion. By emphasizing humanitarian aid, a party may seek to portray itself ...

Counterarguments

  • The Biden administration may argue that its approach to Hamas and Israel is part of a broader strategy to de-escalate tensions and avoid civilian casualties, which aligns with international humanitarian law and long-term peace objectives.
  • It could be argued that pressuring Israel to avoid attacks on Rafah is an attempt to prevent further escalation of violence and protect innocent lives, rather than a move to appease a political base.
  • The administration might contend that ceasefire proposals are a standard diplomatic tool to prevent further bloodshed and that continued efforts are a sign of persistence in seeking peace, not a sign of weakness.
  • The opposition to full-scale military operations in Rafah could be based on the belief that such actions would lead to high civilian casualties and further destabilize the region.
  • Prioritizing humanitarian aid in Gaza could be seen as a moral imperative to alleviate human suffering, rather than a mere political calculation.
  • The stance against Saudi Arabia over human rights issues, such as the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, could be viewed as consistent w ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Shortform Extension CTA