I have watched him. Not sure if he is serious or just trying to get rich. Pretty much an asshat IMO
Which of you Nutz agree with agree with this Milo dude?
- Thread starter Original Mountaineer1
- Start date
I've never actually read his stuff on Breitbart so I can't comment on that but I've seen some of his videos and I think he's doing a service to a certain degree by combating political correctness. I especially like that he goes on college campuses because some of them are the most intolerant places in the country and those folks need tweaking.
He comes off as a purposeful provocateur, which seems a bit pointless but the fact that he gets such a strong reaction shows why it's necessary. If people would just ignore then then he'd go away but if people would just ignore him then there would be no need for him to do what he does in the first place.
The fact that it drives so many people crazy when someone is politically incorrect illustrates the need for someone to be so politically incorrect.
He comes off as a purposeful provocateur, which seems a bit pointless but the fact that he gets such a strong reaction shows why it's necessary. If people would just ignore then then he'd go away but if people would just ignore him then there would be no need for him to do what he does in the first place.
The fact that it drives so many people crazy when someone is politically incorrect illustrates the need for someone to be so politically incorrect.
This Milo guy is an obvious troll and an idiot. But, I think he actually does a service for the LGBT community. He has shown the right will get on board just because they agree with part of what he says and he is inadvertently pointing out the hypocrisy of the right.
As far as Trump's tweet, I actually agree with it; if a public university is going to impede free speech, as much as I dislike hate speech it is protected, they should be at risk for losing public funds.
But the real irony here is Trump himself. He threatens a public university for impeding free speech but attacks the media and calls them the enemy and corrupt.
Dumbest President ever.
How many of you "nutz" on the Left agree with this bigoted racist?
Not sure if hates all White people, or just Americans who are White.
Pretty much a Socialist just like all of you on the Left.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West
I've told him he was really bright...just too steeped in Leftist marinade and has been soaked in it so long he doesn't realize how saturated he is!
People like Milo, Ben Carson, KellyAnne Conway, etc do a good job of showing the hypocrisy of many on the left. Many of those on the left are quick to call any conservative a homophobe, racist, misogynistic, bigot.
Then comes along any gay, black, female conservative and the left viciously rips them. It's all starting to backfire as more and more of those people are seeing how the left operates.
Then comes along any gay, black, female conservative and the left viciously rips them. It's all starting to backfire as more and more of those people are seeing how the left operates.
The WVU speech he gave, I didn't really hear what I would classify as hate speech. Could you pull some of his quotes to point out what you consider such?
They have no intellectual honesty or integrity. Justice Clarence Thomas, Dr. Ben Carson, Col. Allen West....none of them even exist as Black Americans of accomplishment on the Left.
But they promote the likes of Congressman Keith Ellison and Prof. Cornel West.... both avowed racists.
Leftist frauds
I just don't get the strategy of saying incendiary things with the whole purpose of complaining about the fire. That said, he's doing a very good job of helping the right be right in regards to PC and liberal bias on college campuses. So, I guess it's a great strategy for a political cog or fame seeker. But I don't see why he's so motivated to do what he's doing otherwise.
When he isn't running off on tangents and calling people faggots (I guess that's like a black person saying ******) what is he saying that's incendiary? I asked Country to provide some of the quotes from one of his appearances pointing out the "hate speech". I'd ask you to do the same. I'd like to see what he says that you consider hate speech or incendiary speech.
It's a comic angle, so most of what he says that's offensive is thrown out as simple jokes. But he makes jokes about Muslims sticking their asses in the air three times a day. How Muslims will cut your head off for smoking or other small offenses. For me it's the jokes about feminists that is incendiary for me. How rape on college campuses are lies. How strong women are cutting the balls off their husbands, and are happier in the kitchen. All stereotypes women have been seeking to eliminate for a very long time. I've never read anything he's said about race (other than the knocks on Muslims - if that is categorized as racism). I called him a racist on here once and got the **** kicked out of me for it.
I think it's the attempts to prevent islamophobia in our current political climate that sparks the fires the most, but I also understand the anger he brings out in women as well. I think people see his aggressive attacks on PC as possibly opening an opportunity for racism to return more overtly. I don't think any of it is hate speech, I just think he wants to be controversial. I wouldn't block him, but I'm not sure the man deserves to take the stage on college campuses. He dropped out of college twice, and it essentially a Breitbart front man sent it to kick up bs. He does make some good jokes, but a comedy club is where he belongs imo.
There's a reason that a large majority of American women don't identify as feminists. It's because the feminist movement has been hi-jacked by fat, unattractive dikes who aren't fighting for equality but instead are fighting for superiority They are man hating extremists that most American women don't relate to. Milo hilariously exposes them as to who they are.
It's the jokes I have a problem with. They just aren't funny and not because they are offensive. I think you can certainly have some cringe humor and controversial humor and still be funny, (child molestation, 9/11, etc. I've seen all be discussed and be hilarious) not sure if it's his delivery or what. Just, be more funnyX
The thing I watched of him at the WVU speech, his speech was calling out Universities trying to block conservative ideals and speech, and also pointing out the rash of fake "hate crimes" in the wake of the election.
None of the topics he presented required the reaction he got. I think he could polish them and be a little less Perez Hilton and still get an effective message out there. Maybe though, that's just behavior of a swishy gay man.
I think the dangerous thing about him to me, is that there are legitimate points in his writings. We have gotten away from being open to ideas on campuses. But he takes those legitimate points and wraps them up with ridiculous assertions, a little sexism and racism and rolls it up in a big burrito and acts like he's serving only legitimate points.
That being said. Let him speak, and he won't draw enough crowds to stick around anyway.
What leftist marinade? Being socially liberal in the sense of letting people do what they want as long as they're not hurting other people? That's not leftist marinade, it's common sense. In fact, it's classic conservatism. Proposing a carbon tax? That's not leftist marinade, it's a proposed free market solution to a serious problem. In fact, it's the rightist solution among those on the Right that don't deny a problem exists in the first place.
My saying that it's good for Milo to go on college campuses to tweak intolerant people doesn't have anything to do with him being on the Right and college campuses being on the Left. It has to do with college campuses being intolerant and political correctness in general running amok. I'm sure we could find places that are on the Right and are intolerant and they need tweaking too.
How about small, rural towns where everybody in the town is openly a Bible thumper (or pretending to be since in those places the social pressure is so strong) and they can't resist beginning the town council meeting with a prayer and then the ACLU comes in and sues them and makes them stop. I think the ACLU is doing good when it does that. Isn't it enough that 99% of the town is already religious? Do you really have to bring it into town government too?
It's not a Left or Right thing, rather it's people that are intolerant of those that are different and they need push back to lighten up. But such small towns don't make much difference in the larger scheme of things whereas colleges are educating young people so I think it's more important they get tweaked.
Isn't it people like you on the right thatbare sooo tired of being categorized as sexist and racist because of your political group of choice? I'm married to a feminist..she's not fat, she's not ugly, and she's not a dike (even in spite of my consistent encouragement). She IS however, a strong American women who just wants the same opportunities as men.
There are still "boys clubs" in the workplace. She is as hard a worker as anyone else, but is denied certain opportunities because she's seen as a woman. Basically not being judged on merit, but rather having to exceed performance in order to be given opportunities. Not a legal "right", but something men take for granted.
I've explained this already. As any economist will tell you, having the buyers of a product pay the true cost of the product is preferable to having the buyer pay less than the true cost while having the rest of the true cost pushed off onto the rest of society.
If the word "tax" is bothering you then re-word it say "charge sellers of a product the cost of the pollution their product generates rather than making the rest of society pay for the pollution."
First of all it is not "freedom of choice" forcing someone buy something or pay for something at a non competitive market driven price they are not first willing to freely choose or pay for themselves.
There is no correlation to a free market economy that is driven by product and price competition where you can argue this 'carbon tax' is the same scenario. It is a bastardization of free market economic principles, just as your warped explanation of "supply and demand" was. Carbon taxes are nothing more than forced income redistribution, and you can't argue it as any other thing-- negative externalities included.
Then there is nothing in the carbon tax business model that says the 'choice' offered is either preferred or a viable product for consumers that results in a satisfactory business transaction that fills either their wants, needs, or desires at a competitive market price they are freely willing to pay.
Finally, there is no evidence carbon taxes can or ever will reduce whatever global warming is alleged. None of the alarmist computer models shows this end result even if 100% of all carbon taxes available were freely given and collected.
Not one.
Last edited:
You're not forcing anyone to buy anything. You're just forcing the sellers of a product to pay the full cost of producing the product rather than foisting some of the cost onto the rest of society.
I'm close to rescinding my opinion of your intelligence each time you post about free market economics.
Any provider of any product or service produced by any manufacturer or seller of that product or service pays the full costs of producing it. It's not up to consumers to recover their costs for the production of the product or good or service they offer. It's up to the seller (producer) to market that product, or good, or service at a price that both recovers their production costs and hopefully, also allows them to make a profit once consumers freely choose to purchase that product or service in the open free market against other competitive choices.
The free choices of those consumers then eventually repays all recoverable costs to the producers, not some arbitrary tax forced on consumers or producers which provides neither a purchased product for the consumer or ROI for the producer.
You either understand this fundamental dynamic of a free enterprise economy or you aren't as bright as I initially thought.
But if you agree with him, he will give you a "Correct!" And a like, so you know your praised by the boards lord of right and the right.
Yep, and most times she's right!
But on economics, free choice, or carbon taxes not being a free economic choice...I'm right.
He's on ignore. My experience on this board is so much better. The poor guy has a serious logic problem.