Breitbart employees threaten exit over Yiannopoulos

[Elba]

Ding Dong, the witch is dead.

[DeadmanWalking]

His sudden implosion made my week.

[Espe]

This of course is a buiness decision not a moral one.

The conservative americans love to have token gays to pretend they are modern but still hate them.

When Milo was shit talking women, minorities and islam they all approved and said free speech, now hes made a pedo blarb hes turned on because it was never about free speech.

Him and his followers shit talk behind a screen, but when it came to real life consequences he ran away. These people can't deal with the real world, with real people or real repucussions. His followers are as plastic as he is. Which should be no suprise as the people with these views have them because of thier fears. They are cowards.

Bingo. As if right-wingers could sink any lower, causing the vast majority of domestic terrorism in the US, defending fucking nazis, gleefully pursuing a legislative agenda that causes mass harm to US citizens ,etc.

[zorkuus]

Damn, when even Breitbart has had enough of you you know you fucked up.

Don't celebrate just yet. Breitbart is blaming liberal media for this.

[Edge-]

Don't celebrate just yet. Breitbart is blaming liberal media for this.

I can't get over that. They're literally blaming a liberal conspiracy...for what was started by a pro-Reagan group attending CPAC that didn't like him.

[Glorious Leader]

Don't celebrate just yet. Breitbart is blaming liberal media for this.

Poor conservative victims always at the mercy of omnipotenet omnipresent omniscient libruls. If only libruls had half that fucking power...m

[zenkai]

The hate from the left is what will keep him relevant. I would never have heard of him if it wasn't for all the haters, it's kind of funny the people gloating are the same ones that made him known.

[Ragnarocket]

What's your thoughts on these famous nevertrumpers? Seems like they allowed to make comments like this and no one cares. Not to mention Lena Dunham comments. Curious about the hypocrisy of it all.

I feel like this should be equally addressed as the Milo stuff. I wasn't even aware of this from Takei. How are we not talking about this exactly?

[zenkai]

What's your thoughts on these famous nevertrumpers? Seems like they allowed to make comments like this and no one cares. Not to mention Lena Dunham comments. Curious about the hypocrisy of it all.

[video=youtube_share;6hDSOyuuSi4]https://youtu.be/6hDSOyuuSi4[/]

[IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4jOlMoXAAIgOy0.jpg[/]

Pizzagate is real! j/k

[ShadowofVashj]

I can't get over that. They're literally blaming a liberal conspiracy...for what was started by a pro-Reagan group attending CPAC that didn't like him.

Yeah... but when has the right ever let facts get in the way of anything they want?

[A dot Ham]

I don't care who coined the term. The fact of the matter is that safe spaces have existed for ages, the right was the first to create them, and has made some absolutely ginormous ones.

There you go spoken like a true liberal. Disregard facts and evidence and just do and say whatever you feel or what fits the agenda.

The right wasn't the first to create it... and there are 3 links there and many others that prove this point.

Unless you have some counter evidence... you're wrong.

In the end, you're the one that looks ignorant. Like I said a long winded, "No you!"

- - - Updated - - -

I feel like this should be equally addressed as the Milo stuff. I wasn't even aware of this from Takei. How are we not talking about this exactly?

Because Takei isn't a political radical with a growing following.

Child abuse is a hot button regardless of political spectrum.

It essentially discredits everything Milo has to say.

But if Michael Jackson taught us anything, you can have ambiguously inappropriate relationships with young boys as long as you play your cards right, and people will still love you.

[Dug]

But if Michael Jackson taught us anything, you can have ambiguously inappropriate relationships with young boys as long as you play your cards right, and people will still love you.

It's easier to separate an artists art from their personal lives but it's not easy to do when that person's entire appeal is their political views and talking about controversial subjects.

[A dot Ham]

It's easier to separate an artists art from their personal lives but it's not easy to do when that person's entire appeal is their political views and talking about controversial subjects.

I'm not going to defend this at all... mainly because well I don't want to come across as defending pedophilia either.

I think this is kind of rare for Milo in that he uses anecdotal personal experience (which I am not sure I entirely believe *but why would you lie about that*) instead of facts. Because the data out there actually suggests that perhaps we should raise the age of consent. The problem is that it is a spectrum between 12-24 a person could be or could not be bother cognitively and physically developed.

I will say that if you look at the "problem" objectively from an economic stand point people ARE going to be disadvantaged by age of consent laws. What you have is essentially a price floor. Now for those that just want to fuck kids... we're OK with them being disadvantaged.

Now if a 15 year old girl had 2 options. A single 22 year old teacher/coach with relationship experience, or average student x with guitar and plays on the soccer team... who probably just wants to fuck chicks.

Objectively the 15 year old girl stands to have a healthier more rewarding relationship with teacher/coach emotionally, socially, physically, financially. But because of age of consent laws... the 22 year old is not an option. So because demand must be met with available supply... she chooses student x and has an unrewarding, unsatisfying, potentially damaging relationship with Mr. Jocky McFuck Stick. In this scenario the 15 year old girl is disadvantaged.

Milo's point (which again if studied would probably prove to be the exception rather than the rule) is that a younger person CAN benefit from a relationship with an older individual, and can if it comes to it guide them and teach them in ways that a parent or other adult can't or would be unwilling.

Again... not at all condoning... but one should be able concede THAT IS a possibility. I think its a very small possibility and I don't think the benefits outweigh the overwhelming drawbacks. I think simply removing age of consent opens the door to predators, and for not so wholesome people to take advantage of developing minors. Again... going back to the data evidence suggests that raising not lowering or removing age of consent is appropriate.

[alexw]

There you go spoken like a true liberal. Disregard facts and evidence and just do and say whatever you feel or what fits the agenda.

The right wasn't the first to create it... and there are 3 links there and many others that prove this point.

Unless you have some counter evidence... you're wrong.

In the end, you're the one that looks ignorant. Like I said a long winded, "No you!"

Well done for completely ignoring everything I said. A safe space is still a safe space no matter what you call it. Yes liberals coined the term safe space but that doesn't mean they didn't exist beforehand. So if we look at the past there is one giant humongous safe space to top all safe spaces, and which was created by the right - Fox News.

Everyone knows it was created and populated by right-wingers who hated what the mainstream media says, and its viewership is still no different today. They created it as a safe space for themselves. This is extremely obvious and backed up by the data. Liberals get their media from the same places as the average American does and in roughly the same proportions. Conservatives however, they need a safe space because news media that isn't right-wing really really hurts their feels, so they in the vast majority only get their news from right-wing sources - Fox news mainly, but also places like Drudge and similar.

Ergo, the right-wing media sphere which God knows how many right wingers consume, is one absolutely ginormous safe space. That is its purpose. That is why it exists. Now tell me, how on earth does anything on a college campus come remotely close to comparing to that? Answer - it doesn't.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not going to defend this at all... mainly because well I don't want to come across as defending pedophilia either.

I think this is kind of rare for Milo in that he uses anecdotal personal experience (which I am not sure I entirely believe *but why would you lie about that*) instead of facts. Because the data out there actually suggests that perhaps we should raise the age of consent. The problem is that it is a spectrum between 12-24 a person could be or could not be bother cognitively and physically developed.

I will say that if you look at the "problem" objectively from an economic stand point people ARE going to be disadvantaged by age of consent laws. What you have is essentially a price floor. Now for those that just want to fuck kids... we're OK with them being disadvantaged.

Now if a 15 year old girl had 2 options. A single 22 year old teacher/coach with relationship experience, or average student x with guitar and plays on the soccer team... who probably just wants to fuck chicks.

Objectively the 15 year old girl stands to have a healthier more rewarding relationship with teacher/coach emotionally, socially, physically, financially. But because of age of consent laws... the 22 year old is not an option. So because demand must be met with available supply... she chooses student x and has an unrewarding, unsatisfying, potentially damaging relationship with Mr. Jocky McFuck Stick. In this scenario the 15 year old girl is disadvantaged.

Milo's point (which again if studied would probably prove to be the exception rather than the rule) is that a younger person CAN benefit from a relationship with an older individual, and can if it comes to it guide them and teach them in ways that a parent or other adult can't or would be unwilling.

Again... not at all condoning... but one should be able concede THAT IS a possibility. I think its a very small possibility and I don't think the benefits outweigh the overwhelming drawbacks. I think simply removing age of consent opens the door to predators, and for not so wholesome people to take advantage of developing minors. Again... going back to the data evidence suggests that raising not lowering or removing age of consent is appropriate.

As I live and breathe..... how low will the right go..... we now have one defending grooming.

[mvaliz]

My reaction to the subject line is this:

"So, completely fabricating news stories, telling a woman to know their place in society, Supporting and encouraging white supremacists while demonstrably denegrading every ethnicity and religion out there, encouraging anti-semetic views and being apologists for Hitler's atrocities is OK.... but solicit sex from a 13 year old is what pushed you over the edge? That's the one evil outside of ALL of that evils you support and encourage that makes you quit? Really?"

[A dot Ham]

Well done for completely ignoring everything I said. A safe space is still a safe space no matter what you call it. Yes liberals coined the term safe space but that doesn't mean they didn't exist beforehand. So if we look at the past there is one giant humongous safe space to top all safe spaces, and which was created by the right - Fox News.

Everyone knows it was created and populated by right-wingers who hated what the mainstream media says, and its viewership is still no different today. They created it as a safe space for themselves. This is extremely obvious and backed up by the data. Liberals get their media from the same places as the average American does and in roughly the same proportions. Conservatives however, they need a safe space because news media that isn't right-wing really really hurts their feels, so they in the vast majority only get their news from right-wing sources - Fox news mainly, but also places like Drudge and similar.

Ergo, the right-wing media sphere which God knows how many right wingers consume, is one absolutely ginormous safe space. That is its purpose. That is why it exists. Now tell me, how on earth does anything on a college campus come remotely close to comparing to that? Answer - it doesn't.

Right wing creating their own new media outlet is hardly a safe space. Your data proves nothing. In fact if you look at where Breitbart is on the chart... your data isn't even accurate.

The only thing your chart shows is how people view the political message being propagated by a specific news station... how the equates to your defense on a safe space... well that's just mental gymnastics that only the regressive left is capable of.

Answer me this? Given that a safe-space is defined as a place where someone can freely express their ideals (hare brained or not) without opposition. Why on earth would right-winged idealist need a "safe-space" in 2017? We have Trump in the white house, and the majority in Congress and in the supreme court. Literally the entire nation is about to become a "right wing safe space".

So not only are you completely off base in regards to the origin, definition, and use of "safe-space", the insult you intend to use it as doesn't even make sense.

0/10 on all accounts

[alexw]

Right wing creating their own new media outlet is hardly a safe space. Your data proves nothing. In fact if you look at where Breitbart is on the chart... your data isn't even accurate.

The only thing your chart shows is how people view the political message being propagated by a specific news station... how the equates to your defense on a safe space... well that's just mental gymnastics that only the regressive left is capable of.

Answer me this? Given that a safe-space is defined as a place where someone can freely express their ideals (hare brained or not) without opposition. Why on earth would right-winged idealist need a "safe-space" in 2017? We have Trump in the white house, and the majority in Congress and in the supreme court. Literally the entire nation is about to become a "right wing safe space".

So not only are you completely off base in regards to the origin, definition, and use of "safe-space", the insult you intend to use it as doesn't even make sense.

0/10 on all accounts

Because a safe space is not about expressing ideas but about protecting your feels. That's the whole purpose of them.

As long as non-right-wing media puts forward any left or centrist ideas, the rights feels get hurt when they consume that media. THAT is why they they only partake of right wing media. And THAT is 100% what a safe space is about.

I'll note you don't in any way refute what I said. All you are doing is saying "but your wrong!" without any evidence to back up your assertions.

[A dot Ham]

Because a safe space is not about expressing ideas but about protecting your feels. That's the whole purpose of them.

As long as non-right-wing media puts forward any left or centrist ideas, the rights feels get hurt when they consume that media. THAT is why they they only partake of right wing media. And THAT is 100% what a safe space is about.

I'll note you don't in any way refute what I said. All you are doing is saying "but your wrong!" without any evidence to back up your assertions.

Because you are wrong.

"In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space), safer-space, and positive space originally were terms used to indicate that a teacher, educational institution or student body does not tolerate anti-LGBT violence, harassment or hate speech, thereby creating a safe place for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students. The term safe space has been extended to refer to a space for individuals who feel marginalized to come together to communicate regarding their experiences with marginalization, typically on a university campus. The idea of safe-spaces has seen criticism on the grounds that it stifles freedom of speech."

Ya that all just smacks of right wing idealism.

Until you can scrounge up some data that actually supports your theory that a "safe space" is a right wing creation. You are wrong. I have provided 3 links. You provided a chart that gives public opinion of the political spectrum of a handful of media outlets. That data doesn't support your theory, isn't complete or accurate, and isn't relevant to the conversation in the slightest.

Your unwillingness to accept or recognize the information provided is an example of cognitive dissonance and you should take care of that on your own time before chiming in, much less using words or phrases you don't understand.

- - - Updated - - -

As I live and breathe..... how low will the right go..... we now have one defending grooming.

An eloquent example of your reading comprehension and mental capacity.

[alexw]

Because you are wrong.

"In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space), safer-space, and positive space originally were terms used to indicate that a teacher, educational institution or student body does not tolerate anti-LGBT violence, harassment or hate speech, thereby creating a safe place for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students. The term safe space has been extended to refer to a space for individuals who feel marginalized to come together to communicate regarding their experiences with marginalization, typically on a university campus. The idea of safe-spaces has seen criticism on the grounds that it stifles freedom of speech."

Ya that all just smacks of right wing idealism.

Until you can scrounge up some data that actually supports your theory that a "safe space" is a right wing creation. You are wrong. I have provided 3 links. You provided a chart that gives public opinion of the political spectrum of a handful of media outlets. That data doesn't support your theory, isn't complete or accurate, and isn't relevant to the conversation in the slightest.

Your unwillingness to accept or recognize the information provided is an example of cognitive dissonance and you should take care of that on your own time before chiming in, much less using words or phrases you don't understand.

Again ignoring what I have said. Do I need to repost it for you? Yes I guess I do -

"A safe space is still a safe space no matter what you call it. Yes liberals coined the term safe space but that doesn't mean they didn't exist beforehand. So if we look at the past there is one giant humongous safe space to top all safe spaces, and which was created by the right - Fox News."

And I've provided plenty of evidence that Fox news is a safe space. That's its whole purpose and obviously so. A place where right-wingers can be safe from centrist and leftist words that hurt their feels. Just because you want to ignore inconvenient facts like that doesn't change things.

[A dot Ham]

Again ignoring what I have said. Do I need to repost it for you? Yes I guess I do -

"A safe space is still a safe space no matter what you call it. Yes liberals coined the term safe space but that doesn't mean they didn't exist beforehand. So if we look at the past there is one giant humongous safe space to top all safe spaces, and which was created by the right - Fox News."

And I've provided plenty of evidence that Fox news is a safe space. That's its whole purpose and obviously so. A place where right-wingers can be safe from centrist and leftist words that hurt their feels. Just because you want to ignore inconvenient facts like that doesn't change things.

Except that it doesn't fit the definition of "safe space" and its a prime example of your inability to have a conversation here.

You are simply redefining the phrase "safe space" which just makes you look ignorant.

If having a political bias is having a safe space... then all news media is guilty of being a "safe space" it just sounds obtuse... but go ahead keep using it incorrectly and thinking you're being clever and insulting. Meanwhile left wingers will shake their head in shame at you, and right wingers will just laugh.

As I leave you to wallow in your own ignorance. Just out of curiosity have you ever even been somewhere officially labeled "safe space"?