The downfall of Milo

Milo Yiannopoulos, the weapons-grade asshole who was banned from Twitter last year, has suffered another blow to his overinflated and dishonest ego: he has been forced to leave breitbart.com!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39043496

Milo Yiannopoulos quits Breitbart News

A senior editor at a conservative website has resigned and apologised after a furore over comments that appeared to condone paedophilia.

Milo Yiannopoulos said in a statement his “poor choice of words” was detracting from his colleagues’ work, so he was quitting immediately.

He had already lost a book deal and a speaking engagement over the row.

Videos surfaced of him discussing the merits of gay relationships between adults and boys.

But Mr Yiannopoulos, the tech editor, denied he had endorsed child abuse and said one video had been edited to give a misleading impression.

“I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors,” the 32-year-old wrote in his resignation statement on Facebook on Tuesday.

At a press conference on Tuesday, he explained that he had been referring to his own experiences as a victim of child sexual abuse.

He said that two men, including a priest, had touched him inappropriately when he was in his young teens.

“I haven’t ever apologised before, and I don’t intend on ever doing it again,” the hero of the so-called alt-right movement read to a room full of reporters.

“To be a victim of child abuse and at the same time be accused of being an apologist for child abuse is absurd.”

But the mea culpa came too late to save him from being axed in the line-up at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland.

The organising group, the American Conservative Union, said his response had been “insufficient”.

Milo is known to be openly gay, and I suspect that his comments about pedophilia were intended to play into the all too common stereotype that gays (and transgendered people, who he has also attacked) are mostly child molesters. But this was a serious miscalculation on his part. If you are trying to stir up hatred, doing it against some group you are actually a part of, even if you disown the group, is stupid. It will ultimately backfire on you, as we see here.

You do not merely quit an organization that made you famous in the first place. It is clear the operators of breitbart.com finally figured out that Milo had become more of a liability than an asset to them. He was out of control and needed to be stopped.

Now, if only we could do that also to Donald Trump!

Falsehoods about the “regressive left”

1. Progressives are now using the same subversive and highly inflammatory tactics that they have seen conservatives use against their liberal opponents for decades. But for some reason they are condemned as “intolerant” for this. That’s like going to fight with someone else when you have only a dagger when your opponent has a gun; you should not be condemned for insisting that you need a gun too!

2. Progressives are not a monolith; they are individuals and may disagree with each other as well as with conservatives. If one progressive activist claims something is racist, sexist, or otherwise prejudicial, that only reflects the opinion of that one activist; others may not agree.

3. Criticism is not censorship! If Progressive activists attack right-wing opponents via the media, that is not an indication that they are calling upon the government to shut their opponents down. Unless and until you actually hear the progressive ask for any such thing, you lie when you claim such. Freedom of speech is just that and must apply to all.

4. The media has NEVER been dominated by liberals. Back in the 1960s and 70s, the media simply reported the truth about what was going on in America and around the world, often causing conservatives to look bad. In the 1980s, President Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine, which insisted that all media outlets be fair and balanced. With that gone, corporations could then gobble up or create all sorts of media outlets (like FOX News) and force them to represent only views they could tolerate, resulting in the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of the press becoming a non-issue. Even worse, conservatives made their own “echo chambers” on the internet like Breitbart.com, NewsMax, RedState and others that are just like the Soviet Union’s Pravda. Only a bogus ideology dedicated to corruption and violating human rights needs to do such things.

There is no such thing as the “regressive left”; that very concept is not valid and never can be. Just as there is no such thing as “liberal fascism”. Conservatives have been lying outright about their opponents for decades; we should no longer accept any of that.

Some Right-wing Bigots have NO Shame!

Sometimes Conservatives are so desperate for validation of their extremist crusade against their political opponents that they will grab at straws and refer to things that have NOTHING to do with their politics. Below is an example of this chicanery:

http://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2017/01/11/leah-reminis-scientology-fight-front-andrew-breitbarts-war/

How Leah Remini’s Scientology Fight Is A Front in Andrew Breitbart’s #WAR

Please note that RedState is yet another one of those right-wing propaganda mills, like breitbart.com, FOX News, WorldNetDaily, NewsMax, and others.

I don’t know any Scientologists that I’m aware of and my only connection to L. Ron Hubbard is having read his bad science fiction novel Battlefield Earth back in the ’80s and later—primarily out of morbid curiosity—watching the even worse film adaptation starring Scientologist John Travolta.

The writer starts off with something that looks completely reasonable and true. If it had stuck to the actual issue of the Church of Scientology vs. Ms. Remini, I would highly recommend it. Instead….the article goes into left field, pun intended!

Last night while watching episode 7 it dawned on me why I am so involved with this show: What Leah Remini is doing is the most Andrew Breitbart-esque thing I have seen anyone do since his untimely passing. Like Andrew did with the Democrat-media complex, Remini is throwing down the gauntlet and challenging a corrupt institution to prove her wrong.

I only met Andrew Breitbart a couple of times, both of which were in chaotic and noisy environments, so I can’t claim to have been his friend or to have really known him personally. Still, he is one of relatively few people I would consider to be personally inspiring to me.

And what did Breitbart do to be so inspiring? Save one or more lives? Create an invention to make millions of lives better? Write a fictional story to entertain and impress readers? Hold public office and push for legislation to make government better for the people?  No, none of these things! He was a writer and publisher of propaganda attacking liberals!

I have no idea what Remini’s politics are. Maybe when you publicly pick a fight with a global cult that has virtually unlimited resources, there isn’t even room for politics in your life. Whether she knows it or not though, Remini’s fight is the same fight for liberty and truth that Andrew Breitbart fought, just on a different front. She is in effect saying to a the cult of Scientology, “I’m going to follow the facts where they lead and if you don’t like it, f*** you. Bring it on. Accuse me of whatever you want, I’m not going to be intimidated. I’m just going to take what you throw at me and use it to show everyone who you are and why you need to be taken down.”

She is executing her takedown just like Andrew would, by telling stories. Data and analysis don’t change people’s minds anywhere near as well as good storytelling.

Scientology is responding with the same sort of tactics the institutional left used against Andrew. According to the people whose stories Remini is telling, anyone who leaves Scientology or speaks ill of it is declared to be a “suppressive person” and is considered “fair game.” Scientologists then use any and all means to intimidate, discredit, or personally destroy those people. They employ private investigators to dig up dirt. They falsely accuse them of crimes. They follow them with cameras in order to capture embarrassing video.  It is like an even more fanatical version of the Saul Alinsky tactics employed by far left progressives.

As I recall, it was Breitbart and his cronies that engaged in disruptive and deceitful tactics against liberals. Like having a guy pose as a pimp to misrepresent how ACORN did its business.

Remember when “Joe the Plumber” tripped up candidate Obama into being honest about wealth redistribution? In just a few days the media investigated the background of a private citizen more thoroughly than they ever did Obama’s. How about when the New York Times crowdsourced their sleazy fishing expedition into Sarah Palin’s emails from when she was Governor of Alaska? Have you ever heard of a black conservative who hasn’t been smeared as an “Uncle Tom?” Or a scientist skeptical about man’s role in climate change who hasn’t been accused of being in the pocket of Big Oil? Racism, sexism, misogyny, are all part of the litany against those who have a different opinion. It’s all the same though. Speak out against progressive orthodoxy and you will be smeared or destroyed. The more effectively you speak out, the more weapons they will bring to bear, not to refute what you say but to silence you from saying it.

Of course, the first two sentences are assertions not backed up with proof. The reference to Sarah Palin’s emails is ironic considering how obsessed Republicans have been about Hillary Clinton’s emails. Hypocrisy much? Also, black conservatives may have sexist (if male), religious (if Christian fundamentalist) or economic (if rich) reasons to sell out the best interests of their own race, much like Milo Yiannopoulos does in backstabbing the gay community despite being gay himself, because he is a white man too. And Big Oil is indeed rich enough to corrupt both governments and scientists; the evidence for man-made climate change is solid. It’s OK to have a different opinion as long as it does not hurt people or render them powerless, as conservative policies often do. And most obvious of all……CRITICISM IS NOT CENSORSHIP! Unless Andrew Breitbart or the others that work for his propaganda site could show attempts on their lives or even death threats sent to them by known liberals, they cannot legitimately claim to be targets of attempts to silence them. That’s just dishonest hyperbole.

I can’t help but think Andrew would be a huge fan of what she is doing. He might even be helping her if he was still with us.

Did he ever attack Scientology before he died? Did he ever attack any extremist cult? If not, that assertion is entirely baseless. The implication that liberals are also members of some extremist cult is nothing but libel.

National Geographic has sold out!

Read this horrible story:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/09/438853832/national-geographic-reshapes-itself-in-725-million-deal-with-21st-century-fox

In a $725 million deal, the 127-year-old National Geographic magazine is leaving behind its nonprofit status and becoming a key piece of a new venture between its parent organization and 21st Century Fox.

The dramatic shift will place the venerable magazine, with its iconic yellow-rimmed covers, under a new venture called National Geographic Partners. Fox will own 73 percent of the new company, with the National Geographic Society owning 27 percent.

Those proportions are similar to the ownership split of National Geographic’s cable TV channels. The new deal is being called an extension of that partnership, which began 18 years ago and now reportedly reaches more than 500 million homes worldwide.

James Murdoch, who took over the post of CEO of 21st Century Fox from his father, Rupert, this summer, said:

“We are privileged to have the opportunity to expand our partnership to continue to bring to audiences around the world, ‘The world and all that is in it,’ as National Geographic Society’s second president Alexander Graham Bell stated more than a century ago. We believe in the Society’s mission of bringing the world to audiences through science, education and exploration.”

The new media company will be headed by CEO Declan Moore, a 20-year veteran of National Geographic who is currently its chief media officer. Gary Knell, the CEO of the National Geographic Society, will remain in that role.

“We will now have the scale and reach to fulfill our mission long into the future,” Knell said. “The Society’s work will be the engine that feeds our content creation efforts, enabling us to share that work with even larger audiences and achieve more impact. It’s a virtuous cycle.”

National Geographic Partners will combine the National Geographic TV channels with a list of media properties that, according to a news release, includes “National Geographic magazines; National Geographic Studios; related digital and social media platforms; books; maps; children’s media; and ancillary activities, including travel, location-based entertainment, archival sales, catalog, licensing and ecommerce businesses.”

The deal will raise the value of the National Geographic Society’s endowment to nearly $1 billion.

 21st Century Fox is in turn owned by News Corporation, which also owns…..FOX News! 

Hasn’t the Murdoch family and their companies done enough damage to the mass media already?! Why take over National Geographic, one of the most respected publications in history?! HOW DARE THEY?!!

Let us not forget what happened to MySpace when it was part of the FOX empire.