Come Hell or High Water: You go, Milo!

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree... government funding for the university makes all the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

You are right that no one has the constitutional right to get an auditorium to speak. The university can decide to not allow any speakers and the "problem" will be solved. However, if they allow students to invite speakers of one political persuasion then they are required to allow students to invite speakers of the opposite political persuasion.

Milo isn't of any political persuasion. He is a self-promoting con artist.

He is certainly a troll but...

No. Not but's. You admit he is a troll. Why in the hell should a University be required to give a troll a podium?!

Because the students did invite him. Yes, I see him as a troll but that is my opinion while the students apparently see him as a political pundit. I also see some of America's leading politicians as imbeciles but they are still elected by people who swallow their nonsense.

You didn't answer the question.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree... government funding for the university makes all the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

You are right that no one has the constitutional right to get an auditorium to speak. The university can decide to not allow any speakers and the "problem" will be solved. However, if they allow students to invite speakers of one political persuasion then they are required to allow students to invite speakers of the opposite political persuasion.

Milo isn't of any political persuasion. He is a self-promoting con artist.

He is certainly a troll but...

No. Not but's. You admit he is a troll. Why in the hell should a University be required to give a troll a podium?!

Because the students did invite him. Yes, I see him as a troll but that is my opinion while the students apparently see him as a political pundit. I also see some of America's leading politicians as imbeciles but they are still elected by people who swallow their nonsense.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[skepticalbip]

I agree... government funding for the university makes all the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

You are right that no one has the constitutional right to get an auditorium to speak. The university can decide to not allow any speakers and the "problem" will be solved. However, if they allow students to invite speakers of one political persuasion then they are required to allow students to invite speakers of the opposite political persuasion.

Milo isn't of any political persuasion. He is a self-promoting con artist.

He is certainly a troll but...

No. Not but's. You admit he is a troll. Why in the hell should a University be required to give a troll a podium?!

Because the students did invite him. Yes, I see him as a troll but that is my opinion while the students apparently see him as a political pundit. I also see some of America's leading politicians as imbeciles but they are still elected by people who swallow their nonsense.

You didn't answer the question.

I did answer the question. You just didn't like the answer.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree... government funding for the university makes all the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

You are right that no one has the constitutional right to get an auditorium to speak. The university can decide to not allow any speakers and the "problem" will be solved. However, if they allow students to invite speakers of one political persuasion then they are required to allow students to invite speakers of the opposite political persuasion.

Milo isn't of any political persuasion. He is a self-promoting con artist.

He is certainly a troll but...

No. Not but's. You admit he is a troll. Why in the hell should a University be required to give a troll a podium?!

Because the students did invite him. Yes, I see him as a troll but that is my opinion while the students apparently see him as a political pundit. I also see some of America's leading politicians as imbeciles but they are still elected by people who swallow their nonsense.

You didn't answer the question.

I did answer the question. You just didn't like the answer.

You said because the students invited him. The school has no veto power? You say your characterization of him as a troll is an "opinion". He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

 

[sharon45]

He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

A fact of an opinion of Twitter's, as if Twitter actually stands for anything near honorable.

 

[skepticalbip]

I did answer the question. You just didn't like the answer.

You said because the students invited him. The school has no veto power? You say your characterization of him as a troll is an "opinion". He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

He is a troll but a troll that is promoting his particular political position in a way that intentionally "triggers" the intolerant in the opposition. Many of the tolerant opposition think it is funny. He does have a political position and states it - that is what his whole "act" is about.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You said because the students invited him. The school has no veto power? You say your characterization of him as a troll is an "opinion". He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

He is a troll but a troll that is promoting his particular political position in a way that intentionally "triggers" the intolerant in the opposition.

He doesn't have a position. His whole act is to be a poor copy of Andy Kaufmann.

- - - Updated - - -

He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

A fact of an opinion of Twitter's, as if Twitter actually stands for anything near honorable.

Do you realize how hard it is to get banned from Twitter?

 

[laughing dog]

He is a troll but a troll that is promoting his particular political position in a way that intentionally "triggers" the intolerant in the opposition.

He doesn't have a position. His whole act is to be a poor copy of Andy Kaufmann.

- - - Updated - - -

He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

A fact of an opinion of Twitter's, as if Twitter actually stands for anything near honorable.

Do you realize how hard it is to get banned from Twitter?

None of this really matters. There is no disinterested evidence or findings that UC Berkeley denied Milo the permission to speak at all, let alone that their reasons were based on the expected content of his speech. The student group making the complaint has not provided an evidence to support their claims. Zilch. The University has not provided any evidence to support their claims either.

 

[Arctish]

You said because the students invited him. The school has no veto power? You say your characterization of him as a troll is an "opinion". He is one of the only people to be banned from Twitter. So that isn't an opinion, it is fact.

He is a troll but a troll that is promoting his particular political position in a way that intentionally "triggers" the intolerant in the opposition. Many of the tolerant opposition think it is funny. He does have a political position and states it - that is what his whole "act" is about.

His opinion is whatever will get him the most attention and entertain his fans. But you're right that his specific intention is to inflame and offend, not to discuss or inform. That's probably why, when he couldn't access a public address system at Berkeley and was limited to speaking to nearby fans, all he did was sign autographs and pose for pictures for about 20 minutes. He doesn't really have anything of substance to say.

 

[skepticalbip]

He is a troll but a troll that is promoting his particular political position in a way that intentionally "triggers" the intolerant in the opposition.

He doesn't have a position. His whole act is to be a poor copy of Andy Kaufmann.

You don't seem to have ever actually listened to him. He certainly does have a political position. He presents it in his talks (not so much in his interviews) in an extremely provocative way, however.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Disagree--I think the religious nuts are a bigger danger than the white nuts.

Because you are one of the white nuts.

I'm not saying the white nuts aren't dangerous. I'm just saying I think the religious nuts are more dangerous.

 

[blastula]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uc...’s-coming-anyway/ar-AAsocBs?OCID=ansmsnnews11

You fell for his stupid scam.

 

[blastula]

Yeah - how many four-day straight events do Universities get, that expect people not related to the University, require any Large space, and occur during the school year, does a school get? My guess is things in dedicated spaces like Hillel House, career fairs that are planned far in advance, possibly exams (also planned far in advance), a couple of other annual events...

These fools were still trying to set everything up ten days in advance? WHAT!?

"Oh, they're trying to block conservatives." Ben Shapiro was there on the 15th to give a lecture, so no.

Shapiro's earlier scheduled speech was cancelled by UC after antifa rioted. This resulted in a lawsuit being filed against UC... the result of this filing - Shapiro spoke on the 15th.

What lawsuit?

 

[skepticalbip]

Shapiro's earlier scheduled speech was cancelled by UC after antifa rioted. This resulted in a lawsuit being filed against UC... the result of this filing - Shapiro spoke on the 15th.

What lawsuit?

Would an article from July 2, 2017 describing UC Berkeley's attempt to have the lawsuit dismissed be acceptable? This was after several conservative speaker engagements (including Ben Shapiro) had been canceled.

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/07/02/campus-moves-dismiss-first-amendment-lawsuit/

 

[blastula]

No. I mean I thought you meant a lawsuit about Shapiro. Did you not? When was his event cancelled? How do you connect that lawsuit with Shapiro?

 

[skepticalbip]

No. I mean I thought you meant a lawsuit about Shapiro. Did you not? When was his event cancelled? How do you connect that lawsuit with Shapiro?

No I didn't specifically mean Shapiro even though Shapiro was one of several conservatives whose engagements were cancelled earlier in the year that the lawsuit addressed. The suit most likely paved the way to making Shapiro's engagement on the 15th possible.

 

[sharon45]

Because you are one of the white nuts.

I'm not saying the white nuts aren't dangerous. I'm just saying I think the religious nuts are more dangerous.

And, whoa, the religious white nuts are like Coke and Mentos.

 

[laughing dog]

No. I mean I thought you meant a lawsuit about Shapiro. Did you not? When was his event cancelled? How do you connect that lawsuit with Shapiro?

No I didn't specifically mean Shapiro even though Shapiro was one of several conservatives whose engagements were cancelled earlier in the year that the lawsuit addressed. The suit most likely paved the way to making Shapiro's engagement on the 15th possible.

Has the lawsuit been decided? If so, what was the outcome. If not, on what basis do you draw your conclusion?

 

[blastula]

No. I mean I thought you meant a lawsuit about Shapiro. Did you not? When was his event cancelled? How do you connect that lawsuit with Shapiro?

No I didn't specifically mean Shapiro even though Shapiro was one of several conservatives whose engagements were cancelled earlier in the year that the lawsuit addressed. The suit most likely paved the way to making Shapiro's engagement on the 15th possible.

What event of his was cancelled? And so what makes you think that this lawsuit has anything to do with his recent speech occurring?

 

[skepticalbip]

No I didn't specifically mean Shapiro even though Shapiro was one of several conservatives whose engagements were cancelled earlier in the year that the lawsuit addressed. The suit most likely paved the way to making Shapiro's engagement on the 15th possible.

What event of his was cancelled?

One earlier in the year (I think Feb. but not certain of the month). Google for his itinerary if you really want to know his schedule.

And so what makes you think that this lawsuit has anything to do with his recent speech occurring?

Because UC Berkeley has been in high gear with their PR since the lawsuit.

 

[laughing dog]

What event of his was cancelled?

One earlier in the year (I think Feb. but not certain of the month). Google for his itinerary if you really want to know his schedule.

And so what makes you think that this lawsuit has anything to do with his recent speech occurring?

Because UC Berkeley has been in high gear with their PR since the lawsuit.

In other words, the post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy in action.