Milo Yiannopoulos tapped to keynote CPAC

[ABX]

Controversial author and Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos will be the keynote speaker at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, which first reported the news, Yiannopoulos will focus his address on his "experiences in America battling feminists, Black Lives Matter, the media, professors and the entertainment industry."....

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/milo-yiannopoulos-cpac-keynote-report-235173

[corbe]

   They ought to rename it the SDAC, Skinny Deviant Action Committee.



                                     I'm sure she'd approve.

[geronl]

A man with hate for conservatives, wow

[Cyber Liberty]

A man with hate for conservatives, wow

CPAC has really gone downhill lately.  I heard Coulter on Hannity yesterday (Commute home, captive audience) and her gushing made me have to make a stop at the dry cleaner.  Geesh.  What a mess.

[TomSea]

People protest his appearances, I hope the organizers realize what they are doing. Usually CPAC is an entertaining event, a lot of luminaries have been there as well besides the odd one every so often.

[Norm Lenhart]

Why not? CPAC has been hostile to conservatives and their values/principles for several years now. He'll fit right in with the psuedocons there.

[Silver Pines]

Steve Deace ‏@SteveDeaceShow  4h4 hours ago
A moral reprobate who's not a conservative keynoting the conservative conference.
Everything's fine, we're all fine here. How are you?


Steve Deace ‏@SteveDeaceShow  4h4 hours ago
 Proof conservatism isn't a movement but an industry: human click bait will keynote CPAC next week.


Steve Deace ‏@SteveDeaceShow  3h3 hours ago
 The irony of making human click your keynote is CPAC openly admitting now conservatism isn't about principles but triggering liberals.


Steve Deace ‏@SteveDeaceShow  3h3 hours ago
 Maybe if Larry Flynt decides he hates political correctness too he can keynote CPAC next year?

[truth_seeker]

Who defines "conservative"

Where do I find that definition?

If I cite the "father of modern conservatism" I will be instantly corrected.

[Mesaclone]

I know Steve Deace. Personally....though, thankfully, not deeply. He is an absolute tool. Citing anything he says is intellectually synonymous with using a strand of spaghetti to hammer a nail.

Conservatiism is a political philosophy that is in no way anti-Gay....in fact, conservatism does not define people by their sexual orientation, race, gender or any other superficial trait...these qualities are irrelevant to good governance. It does and should oppose silly governmental policies that seek to advance a "gay agenda".

So why is it a problem to have a gay speaker at CPAC?

[endicom]

   They ought to rename it the SDAC, Skinny Deviant Action Committee.

You got the skinny on it?

[Norm Lenhart]

I know Steve Deace. Personally....though, thankfully, not deeply. He is an absolute tool. Citing anything he says is intellectually synonymous with using a strand of spaghetti to hammer a nail.

Conservatiism is a political philosophy that is in no way anti-Gay....in fact, conservatism does not define people by their sexual orientation, race, gender or any other superficial trait...these qualities are irrelevant to good governance. It does and should oppose silly governmental policies that seek to advance a "gay agenda".

So why is it a problem to have a gay speaker at CPAC?

Because he's a militant that is very pro gay agenda. Because having a gay that brags in interviiews about corrupting his priest is pretty much against the very concept of conservatism. Because 'Gay' as a whole has no more place in politics than 'building a ship in a bottle'. "Gay' is a lifestyle choice.

But hey, if you want to alienate the SoCon wing (and many here do) and replace us with the Gay lobby, because WINNING!!!, be my guest but don't call it conservative. Call it the identity politics of liberalism that it is.

[Silver Pines]

I know Steve Deace. Personally....though, thankfully, not deeply. He is an absolute tool.

Lol

No doubt.

[American Faith Today]

I know Steve Deace. Personally....though, thankfully, not deeply. He is an absolute tool. Citing anything he says is intellectually synonymous with using a strand of spaghetti to hammer a nail.

Conservatiism is a political philosophy that is in no way anti-Gay....in fact, conservatism does not define people by their sexual orientation, race, gender or any other superficial trait...these qualities are irrelevant to good governance. It does and should oppose silly governmental policies that seek to advance a "gay agenda".

So why is it a problem to have a gay speaker at CPAC?

Maybe because the guy is just another fire bomb throwing attention whore and drama queen trying to make that the new "conservatism".  The fact that some conservatives are so enamored with him isn't really a good thing.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/24507-the-waning-west-the-problem-of-milo-yiannopoulos

[Mesaclone]

Because he's a militant that is very pro gay agenda. Because having a gay that brags in interviiews about corrupting his priest is pretty much against the very concept of conservatism. Because 'Gay' as a whole has no more place in politics than 'building a ship in a bottle'. "Gay' is a lifestyle choice.

But hey, if you want to alienate the SoCon wing (and many here do) and replace us with the Gay lobby, because WINNING!!!, be my guest but don't call it conservative. Call it the identity politics of liberalism that it is.

The concept of conservatism in an American setting is that of smaller government, self-reliance and personal freedom, respect for property rights, deference to the original intent of the constitution, strong national defense and a respect for letting others do and believe as they will in terms of religious preference. Not sure where being gay interferes with conservatism as a governing philosophy.

I'm not a Milo fan...I find him crude and self inflated and I object to him on intellectual grounds...but I could say that about Bill Kristol and some other conservative voices. The fact that he's gay...and the others are not...just isn't relevant.

[skeeter]

I do get a kick out of the reaction this guy gets from the leftwing radicals.

But I wouldn't expect too much from him as an ideological ally - he strikes me as just as likely to suddenly turn into Maoist just to be outrageous.

[Norm Lenhart]

Not sure where being gay interferes with conservatism as a governing philosophy.

Thats exactly the point. It has no place. Milo makes 'gay' the front and center of eerything he does. From his flamboyance, to his commentary. Haing had gay family members I know all too well how 'gay' quickly disrupts all aspects of ones existence. When most conversations begin with some iteration of "Speaking as a gay man/woman I..."

I don't care what Milo or any other gay does or who they do it with as long as I don't have to have it put in my face 24/7. NO ONE can say Milo isn't on fire 24/7.

Conservatism has nothing to do with sex acts. Being gay by definition is about sex acts because lets face it. Without sex, two gays cannot be differentiated from two good friends. One could try to argue that feelings and the emotionalism surrounding the sex is as important a part of 'gay' as the sex itself. However...

Conservatism does not consider sex, nor feelings, nor emotionalism of straight people. It's a political philosophy. So why would or SHOULD gay be given special consideration? It cannot be both ways.

Gays demand special rights and treatment that run counter to everything conservatism stands for. Being gay should carry no more consideration than being a motorcyclist...another lifestyle choice that has far more adherents than homosexuality, but no more relevance to or place in a political movement. What bike you ride has no bearing on anything conservative.

However with homosexuals, the moment they begin agitating (and they always have/do/will) to be heard based on their sex practices, the concept of conservatism is rendered meaningless.

Does conservatism or the American political sustem/government need choices made by peoples sex choices? If so then yes, we should homofy all parties. If not, then gay/identity politics has no place at any political table.

[endicom]

I don't care what Milo or any other gay does or who they do it with as long as I don't have to have it put in my face 24/7. NO ONE can say Milo isn't on fire 24/7.

I think that Milo will, if you'll pardon the expression, flame out in good time. In the meantime he's mostly antagonizing the right people.

[Norm Lenhart]

I think that Milo will, if you'll pardon the expression, flame out in good time. In the meantime he's mostly antagonizing the right people.

He is. And sure, it's fun to watch the left go spastic trying to deal with him. But he is ALSO damaging both conservatism and the country and we do enough of that without needing his assistance. The problem is in how much damage he is doing/will do before he joins Paris Hilton on the 'has been' train.

[endicom]

The latest is that Milo will not be the keynote speaker. Swen Ekaf.

[ABX]

CPAC 2011: Mitch Daniels
CPAC 2017: Milo#CPAC pic.twitter.com/pN9vC045Ik

— Matt Mackowiak (@MattMackowiak)

February 19, 2017

[truth_seeker]

Some would say "conservatism" favors maximum personal freedom, to keep your earnings, live where and how you like.

Others "conservatives" would favor a narrowly defined Biblical path, using government to enforce it.

So there is not a single definition of "conservatism."

[Norm Lenhart]

Some would say "conservatism" favors maximum personal freedom, to keep your earnings, live where and how you like.

Others "conservatives" would favor a narrowly defined Biblical path, using government to enforce it.

So there is not a single definition of "conservatism."

But there are core principles, concepts and ideas. There is also no definition of conservatism that includes having a guy who embodies the antithesis of conservative principles speak at conservative gatherings. Boasting in public about seducing priests, broadcasting ones love of black penis and self promotion/bandwagoning arent foundations of the conservatism I was taught. Nor, would I guess, what anyone outside the alt-right was taught.

Milo is free to be who he likes. More power to him. But he doesn't get to redefine conservatism in his image, nor does anyone else.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

[Cripplecreek]

And this is why I'm abandoning the term conservatism.

So many I once believed were conservatives are proving themselves to be neo progressives.

[Cripplecreek]

Why not? CPAC has been hostile to conservatives and their values/principles for several years now. He'll fit right in with the psuedocons there.

At the GOP convention this year one of Trump's guests literally told conservatives "There is the door"