I’m Still with Milo

 

It’s whiplash-inducing how fast Milo had been tossed under the bus.

Before judging, make sure you know all the facts. Unfortunately too many people on the right (mea culpa, I’m as guilty of this as most) take the liberal headlines at face value and recoil from certain individuals. This happened with Mike Flynn and now it’s happening with Milo. In both cases people have made judgments based on partial information, which is what the other side wants. It isn’t for nothing that the late Andrew Breitbart referred to this as “war.”

I love many of the pundits and podcasters who make their home here on Ricochet. I hold them in high regard, especially the more curmudgeonly types (looking at you, Kevin). But it needs to be said that anytime news reports come out painting someone who identifies as being on the right in a negative light we need to stop, wait and be 100 percent certain that we have all the facts.

I hate that this next bit sounds somewhat conspiratorial, but here goes. The institutional left fronted by the whining, virtue-signaling press corps and backed by the meretricious satraps of the deep state has shown that their philosophy is that the ends always justify the means. Democracy, honesty, decency, morality, probity, these are, in their eyes, weapons to be used when they work and set aside when they don’t.

It pains me to say, but I don’t think this is a war we can win playing by the Marquess of Queensbury rules at this point.

So, I look for my allies where I can find them and make common cause with those who would work with me to muck out the Augean Stables for the left.

.

There are 95 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    I think there’s still plenty of room for Milo to create new opportunities for himself, but it would have been supremely foolish for CPAC to go to bat for him at this point. They had to act quickly, and it’s almost always better to set someone adrift rather than spend precious resources defending them with very little promise of reward. (Secure your own airmask before helping others.) It’s up to Milo to rehabilitate his reputation and position, not CPAC’s.

    I also think Milo understands this, which is precisely why he handled his resignation from Breitbart so gracefully, without throwing retaliatory bombs at conservatives on his way out the door.

    He still has options. Assuming that there aren’t more skeletons in his closet, his best course of action going forward would be to reinvent himself as an advocate for victims of childhood sexual abuse. That could very successfully draw the line between what it means to be a principled “gay conservative” vs. all the hypocritical leftists who cheerfully enable sexual abuse by celebrating folk like Roman Polanski.

    If he forcefully comes out and says, “this sort of behaviour is common in the LGBT community, and it’s wrong, and we have to fight it,” it could go a long way. It would also really anger the Left who would likely scream “homophobia!”

    The question is, is Milo willing to make an enemy of the LGBT establishment?

    • #1
  2. Evan Pokroy Inactive
    Evan Pokroy
    @EvanPokroy

    That’s more or less what he said in the first half of his press conference.

    • #2
  3. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    When you make a living from trying to shock and/or offend you can’t be surprised when there is a backlash.  No matter what his actual stance on these issues, he was very flippant and careless about it while playing his role as a “click bait” shock jock.  I don’t wish him ill in the future, the whole idea of CPAC inviting him to give a keynote address was wrongheaded to begin with and the blame falls on them.

    • #3
  4. Valiuth Inactive
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Flynn and Milo were all fired by the very people/institutions that claim to be immune to PC pressure. Either this proves these people and institutions are full of BS or the situation with each individual is much worse than the public reporting.

    I think with respect to Flynn the personal situation is far worse than it seems, and the administration is lying about the causes of his firing to avoid the real issue for its occurrence. I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution. What differentiates them from CNN though is that they respond to a different set of PC pressures. Milo just happened to cross a line that was real for Breitbart.com. The fact that he is apologizing is proof that he knows he crossed the PC boundaries of his main audience, which he must respect or lose all access to it.

    Each of these cases is self inflicted I presume, and the the only thing the left is guilty of is gloating and reporting on it.

    • #4
  5. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Flynn and Milo were all fired by the very people/institutions that claim to be immune to PC pressure. Either this proves these people and institutions are full of BS or the situation with each individual is much worse than the public reporting.

    I have concerns about this, but I don’t think Milo makes a great case study.  Much of what he’s said has been disagreeable to many on the right, and the latest is unforgivable to some.  One is expected to defend an ally from the enemy, but are we expected to defend one ally from many other allies?  I think Milo’s ouster from Breitbart is more about the latter.

    • #5
  6. Evan Pokroy Inactive
    Evan Pokroy
    @EvanPokroy

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution.

     

    Milo resigned, Breitbart stood behind him.

    • #6
  7. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Evan Pokroy (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution.

    Milo resigned, Breitbart stood behind him.

    Right.  He wanted to spend more time with his blender, or something like that.

    • #7
  8. Valiuth Inactive
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Evan Pokroy (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution.

    Milo resigned, Breitbart stood behind him.

    Right… he resigned because he didn’t like the job? Flynn technically resigned too. If Breitbart didn’t want him out he would not have resigned.

    • #8
  9. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Flynn and Milo were all fired by the very people/institutions that claim to be immune to PC pressure.

    Milo wasn’t brought down by “PC pressure”. It’s very PC to celebrate distasteful and/or illegal LGBT practices. If he was a leftist like George Takei he’d be a hero to the Forces of PC. If this had been about PC pressure, the Left would be demanding that Milo has a right to speak at CPAC.

    As for Flynn, if it’s true that he lied to the Administration, then that’s pretty damning.

    • #9
  10. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Evan Pokroy (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution.

    Milo resigned, Breitbart stood behind him.

    Right.  Sure.  Whatever.  I will be on my ocean front property in Arizona if you need me.

    • #10
  11. Valiuth Inactive
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Flynn and Milo were all fired by the very people/institutions that claim to be immune to PC pressure.

    Milo wasn’t brought down by “PC pressure”. It’s very PC to celebrate distasteful and/or illegal LGBT practices. If he was a leftist like George Takei he’d be a hero to the Forces of PC. If this had been about PC pressure, the Left would be demanding that Milo has a right to speak at CPAC.

    As for Flynn, if it’s true that he lied to the Administration, then that’s pretty damning.

    You miss understand PC I think. PC is a relative term every group has their bugaboos. What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    • #11
  12. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    You miss understand PC I think. PC is a relative term every group has their bugaboos. What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label to boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    Disagree.

    PC means that truth doesn’t matter. Only the narrative matters. Something can be “correct” or it can be “politically correct”.

    To blame “PC” is to claim that Milo is being punished for speaking the truth, and that the right are trying to suppress truth.

    That’s not what happened, IMHO.

    (OTOH, I can be sympathetic to the claim that what he said and what was reported he said don’t quite match up. In that regard, one could argue that the folk who edited the footage were putting the narrative ahead of the truth.)

    • #12
  13. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label to boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    In the last day or so there is audio of George Takei (good leftist) saying almost exactly the same thing about his first underage sexual contacts with adult men that Milo said.

    Not seeing the freakout.

     

    • #13
  14. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    The narrative that no one on the right ever does anything wrong without it being an Alinskyite media hatchet job is growing far more tiresome than the alternative.

    • #14
  15. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    In the last day or so there is audio of George Takei (good leftist) saying almost exactly the same thing about his first underage sexual contacts with adult men that Milo said.

    Not seeing the freakout.

    Not seeing anyone suggest that George Takei should be given a speaker slot at CPAC either.

    • #15
  16. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label to boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    In the last day or so there is audio of George Takei (good leftist) saying almost exactly the same thing about his first underage sexual contacts with adult men that Milo said.

    Not seeing the freakout.

    What George Takei says is worse. Takei says flat-out that the camp counselor wasn’t a molester “because he was very attractive”.

    By contrast, Milo acknowledges that what happened to him was child sex abuse, and claims that his flippancy about it is a coping mechanism.  Not everybody believes him, but still…

    • #16
  17. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    @evinpokroy, I am with you 100%. But you will get grief for this. And every post you may there will be someone who will want to have the “last word” even if it is repetitive of their earlier points.

    Trump is a Rorschach test, Milo is a Rorschach test.I have a vision for our country that most closely aligns with my understanding of conservatarianism. But we are unilaterally disarming ourselves by refusing alliances with anyone who is not pure enough. Churchill may have been clearer-eyed about Stalin than FDR was, but both allied with him to defeat Hitler. We don’t seem to want to win anymore — even if our country depends on it.

    • #17
  18. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Rodin (View Comment):
    Trump is a Rorschach test, Milo is a Rorschach test.I have a vision for our country that most closely aligns with my understanding of conservatarianism. But we are unilaterally disarming ourselves by refusing alliances with anyone who is not pure enough. Churchill may have been clearer-eyed about Stalin than FDR was, but both allied with him to defeat Hitler. We don’t seem to want to win anymore — even if our country depends on it.

    If Milo had as many troops at his disposal as Stalin did, folk might be more willing to go to bat for him. That’s kinda the whole point.

    In politics, your only value is what you bring to the table. There was no upside for CPAC to defend an alleged pedophilia-apologist. It would have been an untenable drain on their resources to deal with such a scenario.

    If Milo is able to rehabilitate his reputation and position, he can be invited back another year. I think plenty of folk are willing to give him that chance, but the onus is on him to do it. You can’t be anti-establishment and then expect the establishment to come to your rescue when you get into trouble. That’s the price of being a “maverick”.

    But heck, if Ted Kennedy can come back from (allegedly) killing a teenaged girl…

    • #18
  19. Brad2971 Member
    Brad2971
    @

    Rodin (View Comment):
    @evinpokroy, I am with you 100%. But you will get grief for this. And every post you may there will be someone who will want to have the “last word” even if it is repetitive of their earlier points.

    Trump is a Rorschach test, Milo is a Rorschach test.I have a vision for our country that most closely aligns with my understanding of conservatarianism. But we are unilaterally disarming ourselves by refusing alliances with anyone who is not pure enough. Churchill may have been clearer-eyed about Stalin than FDR was, but both allied with him to defeat Hitler. We don’t seem to want to win anymore — even if our country depends on it.

    Our country can get along just fine, thank you very much, without conservatism, or its desire to win.

    • #19
  20. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):
    @evinpokroy, I am with you 100%. But you will get grief for this. And every post you may there will be someone who will want to have the “last word” even if it is repetitive of their earlier points.

    Trump is a Rorschach test, Milo is a Rorschach test.I have a vision for our country that most closely aligns with my understanding of conservatarianism. But we are unilaterally disarming ourselves by refusing alliances with anyone who is not pure enough. Churchill may have been clearer-eyed about Stalin than FDR was, but both allied with him to defeat Hitler. We don’t seem to want to win anymore — even if our country depends on it.

    If Milo had as many troops at his disposal as Stalin did, folk might be more willing to go to bat for him. That’s kinda the whole point.

    In politics, your only value is what you bring to the table. There was no upside for CPAC to defend an alleged pedophilia-apologist. It would have been an untenable drain on their resources to deal with such a scenario.

    If Milo is able to rehabilitate his reputation and position, he can be invited back another year. I think plenty of folk are willing to give him that chance, but the onus is on him to do it. That’s the price of being a “maverick”.

    Heck, if Ted Kennedy can come back from (allegedly) killing a teenaged girl…

    Kennedy was a liberal.  Killing or abusing women is a resume enhancer for a liberal Democrat.

    • #20
  21. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Flynn and Milo were all fired by the very people/institutions that claim to be immune to PC pressure. Either this proves these people and institutions are full of BS or the situation with each individual is much worse than the public reporting.

    I think with respect to Flynn the personal situation is far worse than it seems, and the administration is lying about the causes of his firing to avoid the real issue for its occurrence. I think with Milo we see that Breitbart is really just as vulnerable to PC pressure as any other media institution. What differentiates them from CNN though is that they respond to a different set of PC pressures. Milo just happened to cross a line that was real for Breitbart.com. The fact that he is apologizing is proof that he knows he crossed the PC boundaries of his main audience, which he must respect or lose all access to it.

    Each of these cases is self inflicted I presume, and the the only thing the left is guilty of is gloating and reporting on it.

    This comment is full of ‘I think”s without any underlying substance. Confirmation bias at its best.

    • #21
  22. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    You miss understand PC I think. PC is a relative term every group has their bugaboos. What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label to boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    Disagree.

    PC means that truth doesn’t matter. Only the narrative matters. Something can be “correct” or it can be “politically correct”.

    To blame “PC” is to claim that Milo is being punished for speaking the truth, and that the right are trying to suppress truth.

    That’s not what happened, IMHO.

    (OTOH, I can be sympathetic to the claim that what he said and what was reported he said don’t quite match up. In that regard, one could argue that the folk who edited the footage were putting the narrative ahead of the truth.)

    Misthiocracy knows PC.

    • #22
  23. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    Ironically, a co-worker at Breitbart.com, one of those calling for his firing, is quoted as saying that “every right-thinking person would want to vomit” at whatever it was that Milo said on the unearthed tape. (I’m not following this one closely. Too many squirrels for this old dog to hunt these days.)

    Whenever I hear the term “right-thinking person,” I stiffen in anticipation that I am about to be conscripted.

    Karen Adams’ “Milo and Me” (on the Main Feed right now) gives excellent testimony why knee-jerking and taboo fearing inhibit clear thinking.

     

    • #23
  24. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):
    But heck, if Ted Kennedy can come back from (allegedly) killing a teenaged girl…

    She was in her twenties. And he drove a car off a ferry dock, swam away, and left her to die while he went and sobered up and called his lawyer hours later, even though he had to walk right past houses with phones.  She probably lived for an hour or so while Teddy let her just suffocate and drown.

    Allegedly nothing. He got away with at least man slaughter.

    Sorry. Rant/Off.

    • #24
  25. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):
    But heck, if Ted Kennedy can come back from (allegedly) killing a teenaged girl…

    She was in her twenties. And he drove a car off a ferry dock, swam away, and left her to die while he went and sobered up and called his lawyer hours later, even though he had to walk right past houses with phones. She probably lived for an hour or so while Teddy let her just suffocate and drown.

    Allegedly nothing. He got away with at least man slaughter.

    Sorry. Rant/Off.

    I suppose there’s little chance ol’ Teddy’s ghost is gonna sue for libel at this point, so fair enough.

    • #25
  26. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You miss understand PC I think. PC is a relative term every group has their bugaboos. What Milo did was cross a line that exists for his audience. The reason PC pressure works is because the public or some significant portion of it that a media celebrity is interested in appealing to holds to those boundaries, and will react negatively when people cross them. PC is just away to negatively label to boundaries of someone else that you don’t share. It is all about crossing social taboos on behavior or expression.

    I don’t expect to start using “PC” in this way, but I accept your explanation.  That said, if you substitute the word “market” for “audience” it becomes plain that this is how things are meant to work.  Milo is a product, and Breitbart can’t make their audience want that product.

    • #26
  27. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    GFHandle (View Comment):
    Ironically, a co-worker at Breitbart.com, one of those calling for his firing, is quoted as saying that “every right-thinking person would want to vomit” at whatever it was that Milo said on the unearthed tape. (I’m not following this one closely. Too many squirrels for this old dog to hunt these days.)

    Whenever I hear the term “right-thinking person,” I stiffen in anticipation that I am about to be conscripted.

     

    Yeah, we all know how those politically correct, line toeing, pearl clutchers at Brietbart are.

    • #27
  28. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):
    If Milo had as many troops at his disposal as Stalin did, folk might be more willing to go to bat for him. That’s kinda the whole point.

    In politics, your only value is what you bring to the table. There was no upside for CPAC to defend an alleged pedophilia-apologist. It would have been an untenable drain on their resources to deal with such a scenario.

    You have a point, but I think a better analogy in this case is the French resistance in WWII.  They didn’t fight because they were strong.  They fought because somebody had to.

    One front in the culture war is free speech.  Unfortunately, battles on this front must be fought in public.  Guerrilla attacks by an underground resistance won’t even be noticed, let alone effective.  There aren’t many conservatives willing to fight in the open.  We may lend moral support, but the lines are thinly manned.  The reason I’m generally supportive of Milo Yiannopoulos and President Trump despite political disagreements with them is because they are willing to fight when few others are.

     

    • #28
  29. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):
    If Milo had as many troops at his disposal as Stalin did, folk might be more willing to go to bat for him. That’s kinda the whole point.

    In politics, your only value is what you bring to the table. There was no upside for CPAC to defend an alleged pedophilia-apologist. It would have been an untenable drain on their resources to deal with such a scenario.

    You have a point, but I think a better analogy in this case is the French resistance in WWII. They didn’t fight because they were strong. They fought because somebody had to.

    They were also highly expendable. The Allies didn’t tend to expend precious resources on mounting rescues when one of ’em got captured.

     

    • #29
  30. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy (View Comment):
    If Milo had as many troops at his disposal as Stalin did, folk might be more willing to go to bat for him. That’s kinda the whole point.

    In politics, your only value is what you bring to the table. There was no upside for CPAC to defend an alleged pedophilia-apologist. It would have been an untenable drain on their resources to deal with such a scenario.

    You have a point, but I think a better analogy in this case is the French resistance in WWII. They didn’t fight because they were strong. They fought because somebody had to.

    They were also highly expendable.

    Yes, but expend them in a fight with the enemy, don’t execute them and deplete your assets in the fight.

    • #30

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.