Milo Yiannopoulos: Why the hate?!


If you read with any regularity, you know I absolutely love Milo.

But before I ever heard him speak, I admit that I had a negative opinion of him.

I confess it was influenced by conservative writers who perpetrated the notion that Milo was some “alt-right, white supremacist.”

But one of the things I’ve learned – often times through trial and error – is I should never form my opinion based solely on the opinions of others.

So instead of listening to the chattering complaints of these self-described curators of conservatism, I decided to sit down and watch a few of Milo’s speeches for myself.

It didn’t take long for me to realize that Milo Yiannopoulos is just the breath of fresh air the conservative movement so desperately needs.

Yesterday, when CPAC confirmed that Milo would be delivering the keynote address at next weekend’s conference, it didn’t take long for purists within the dried-up conservative movement to crap all over the news.

The writers at Erick Erickson’s site are apoplectic over it.

Of course, this is the same website that absolutely knew Trump would be defeated by Hillary Clinton, so what do you expect?

Writer Steve Berman penned a column titled “Goodbye CPAC. You’re now dead to me.” It’s amazing he was able to type this column at all while tightly clutching his pearls.

[And, no. I’m not linking to his column. Why should I give that site any additional hits?]

His fellow Resurgent writer Josh Hammer tweeted out this:

Why? Why is this an “utter disgrace?”

What is with this rabid hatred of Milo Yiannopoulos?

From Leftists, I totally get it.

But from so-called conservatives?

Why all this virulent animosity.

I have watched nearly every single one of Milo’s “Dangerous Faggot Tour” speeches. I think there might be two or three that I missed.

And for the life of me, I do not understand why these guys are so horrified and disgusted by him.

“Abhorrent and shameful?” Come on!

Sure, Milo is over-the-top and outrageous. He uses the “F-word” more than an HBO comedy. And, yeah, he can be campy and irreverent.

But at the same time, he is well-read, extremely knowledgeable, and informed.

Not only that. He combats an ideology that seeks to undermine this nation as founded.

And he is doing it in such a way that appeals to young people whose lives are being ruined by that ideology.

Shouldn’t conservatives applaud that?

For all their prattling on about reaching out and bringing people into the conservative fold, you’d think they’d be thrilled by what Milo is accomplishing.

Young people are most at risk from the Left. Their public schools, as well as their universities are well behind enemy lines. It has become virtually impossible for them to escape the Left’s influence.

And Milo bravely storms the beaches of these Leftist strongholds and takes his message directly to those young people.

Isn’t that a good thing?

Which is more likely to influence a twenty-year-old college student?

Mark Levin’s book Plunder and Deceit or a talk by Milo Yiannopoulos?

Both seek to wake young people up from their stupor and get them thinking about their future and the future of the country.

But Milo meets young people on their own turf and speaks their language.

In other words, he is an effective messenger.

And he is just the right person to battle the Social Justice Warriors on the Left who have had free rein on college campuses for years.

Milo speaks the brutal truth about radical Islam, unfettered immigration and the tyranny and fascism of the SJW Left.

And he is emboldening these young conservatives to fight back against that tyranny and to stand up for Liberty.

So why the outrage? Why the hate?

I can’t help but wonder if part of the animosity toward Milo stems from this belief that we have to be placid, flaccid thinkers who busily polish our principles while taking great pains not to make waves.

But isn’t that precisely why conservatism fell out of favor among young people?

I really wonder if what troubles them is the fact that Milo is having fun.

”Fun?! Conservatives aren’t supposed to be fun!!! We’re supposed to be thoughtful and serious!”

Sure, they prattle on about a “Big Tent.” But I get the feeling these curmudgeons in the conservative movement want to be the gatekeepers of that tent. They want to be the ones to decide who can enter, and how you must behave after you are granted entry.

All this nonsense about Milo being “Alt Right” or a “white supremacist” is just that – nonsense.

It is impossible to sit through one of Milo’s talks and still believe that outrageous slander.

I guarantee you that thousands upon thousands of young people will be livestreaming Milo’s keynote address next week.

But they won’t be the only ones.

I can tell you this 53-year-old woman will be right there with them watching every moment of it.

Milo doesn’t deserve this slander. In fact, he deserves our respect and our full-throated support.

Milo has been disinvited from CPAC. I have written about this development HERE.

Hit the tip jar!

Please consider making a contribution to Hit DONATE button in the side bar. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Books by Dianny:

RANT 2.0: Even More Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
Liberals Gone WILD!!! The Not-So-Silent Conquering of America,
RANT: Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
and two novels: Sliding Home Feet First and Under the Cloud

You can find my e-books at all of these fine stores:, Amazon Kindle Store, Apple iTunes, and Barnes & Noble Nook Store.

Check out

— my Conservative & Christian T-shirt Store.

16 thoughts on “Milo Yiannopoulos: Why the hate?!

  • February 19, 2017 at 1:30 pm

    65 and he is on target. The f word is tough to hear repeated ad nauseam, but the message is fresh air !!

  • February 19, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    It will be “Social Conservatives” against the “gay guy”. And that’s really too bad. A Christian can hate the sin , not the sinner…..

  • February 20, 2017 at 12:05 am

    He manages to announce over and over, he likes to suck black dick. He is hateful toward people in the audience that challenge him. His language is vile. I’ve only seen a couple of his speeches and an interview. He is clownish and vulgar. We have the Log Cabin Republicans who are gay. I should think there is a homosexual Republican somewhere who can speak about being conservative and support Trump and attract young people without vile language and constant reminders that he likes to suck black dick. So the kids find him fun and interesting, that’s great, so is a clown at a kids birthday party. I find his shtick hateful toward people who challenge him. He cuts people down with petty insults and vile language. I am interested in seeing his CPAC behavior, I might be surprised.

  • February 20, 2017 at 1:36 am

    No human is perfect. Any imperfect human that believes in conservative principles is ok in my book. Milo is the perfect Lib head detonator. 😉

  • February 20, 2017 at 1:56 am

    Will you listen to Milo support relationships between “mature 13 year old boys and men” Will you go to the video and listen to him say that Father Michael taught him to give “good head”. The video was posted yesterday on youtube.

    Please watch the video and get back to me.

  • February 20, 2017 at 2:20 am

    Milo says 14 year old boys can give consent to sex with men. Milo says he has witnessed men having sex with young boys but he has not reported it. He will not name names.

  • February 20, 2017 at 2:41 am
    In this video Milo states 14 year old boys can give consent for sex with men. He states he has been at a party where very young boys were being molested by men but he was passive and did not protect the children. Apparently he never reported those young boys being molested.

    Milo is a disaster, he must be stopped from prancing around as the GOP pet homo conservative, he is a pedophile, he has refused to protect children he witnessed being molested. This guy must be dropped like a hot potato now and kicked out of any notion he is a conservative gay guy who will attract young people to the conservative party.

    He should be arrested and charged with pedophilia and worse.

  • February 20, 2017 at 9:45 am

    I cannot look at facebook, not a member.

    You and Milo can make all the excuses and back peddle all you want. This is not “the world against” Milo. This is a man who talked about SEEING young boys being molested and did nothing. So, if he says he was just kidding that makes it alright? Since when do we think jokes about abusing children are acceptable? The man who has been invited to speak at CPAC says he was taught to give good head by his priest. that’s a funny joke? He says boys age 13 or 14 can jive consent to have sex with men. Did you even listen, look at all the tapes?

    Milo is sick in the head. He has SEEN children being sexually molested, he says this.

    “Well-timed “explosive video” always needs to be questioned…”

    Dianny, Really? Honestly? What could he possibly say to walk his support of pedophilia back? How can he possibly minimize his statement about watching young boys being sexually molested by men and doing nothing?

    Have you looked at all of the video links?

    There is no defense for what he said on those videos, none. I cannot see facebook.

    You posted the thread, it is your web site. You gushed about how much you support him. Now defend him. Tell us how you can support and defend him in your own words.

    • February 20, 2017 at 9:57 am

      Fine. Since you won’t click the link (which is visible even to those without a FB account), I will paste his entire post here:

      A note for idiots (UPDATED):
      I do not support pedophilia. Period. It is a vile and disgusting crime, perhaps the very worst. There are selectively edited videos doing the rounds, as part of a co-ordinated effort to discredit me from establishment Republicans, that suggest I am soft on the subject.
      If it somehow comes across (through my own sloppy phrasing or through deceptive editing) that I meant any of the ugly things alleged, let me set the record straight: I am completely disgusted by the abuse of children.
      Some facts to consider:
      1. I have outed THREE pedophiles in my career as a journalist. That’s three more than any of my critics and a peculiar strategy for a supposed pedophile apologist.
      (a) Luke Bozier, former business partner of Louise Mensch…/menshn-co-founder-embroile…/…/…/3746/luke-bozier-arrested/
      (b) Nicholas Nyberg, anti-GamerGate activist who self-described as a pedophile and white nationalist…/leading-gamergate-critic-sarah-…/
      (c) Chris Leydon, a London photographer who has a rape trial starting March 13 thanks to my reporting.…/tech-city-darling-chris-leydon-…/
      2. I have repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophiles in my journalism.…/heres-why-the-progressive-left-…/
      3. I have never defended and would never defend child abusers, as my reporting history shows. The world is messy and complicated, and I recognize it as such, as this furore demonstrates. But that is a red line for any decent person.
      4. The videos do not show what people say they show. I *did* joke about giving better head as a result of clerical sexual abuse committed against me when I was a teen. If I choose to deal in an edgy way on an internet livestream with a crime I was the victim of that’s my prerogative. It’s no different to gallows humor from AIDS sufferers.
      5. National Review, whose journalists are tweeting about this, published an article defending Salon for giving a pedophile a platform.
      6. I did say that there are relationships between younger men and older men that can help a young gay man escape from a lack of support or understanding at home. That’s perfectly true and every gay man knows it. But I was not talking about anything illegal and I was not referring to pre-pubescent boys.
      7. I said in the same “Drunken Peasants” podcast from which the footage is taken that I agree with the current age of consent.
      8. I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” when I talked about those relationships between older men and younger gay men. (I was talking about my own relationship when I was 17 with a man who was 29. The age of consent in the UK is 16.) That was a mistake. Gay men often use the word “boy” when they refer to consenting adults. I understand that heterosexual people might not know that, so it was a sloppy choice of words that I regret.
      9. This rush to judgment from establishment conservatives who hate Trump as much as they hate me, before I have had any chance to provide context or a response, is one of the big reasons gays vote Democrat.
      10. In case there is any lingering doubt, here’s me, in the same interview the other footage is taken from, affirming that the current legal age of consent is about right: “And I think the law is probably about right. It’s probably roughly the right age. I think it’s probably about ok. But there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age. I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who were sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world, by the way.”

  • February 20, 2017 at 10:41 am

    This is one where I have to disagree with you, Dianny. (Which is VERY rare.)

    Let me first say that, for me, at least, this is not about “hating” gays. (I FIRMLY believe that the average gay American is someone who wants to live their life in peace. They are NOT the ones who take to the streets to protest. They are not members of The Gay Gestapo. The people I’ve known, who are gay, are mostly genuinely nice people who don’t bother others, and just want to be left alone.) This is about the very core of what is…or used to be…the heart of the conservative movement. The very foundation of conservatism is the family.

    To not only embrace a group of people whose lifestyle is in direct opposition to God’s design for mankind…one man, one woman, in marriage, which is the optimal situation for raising and nurturing children…but to hold up this person up as the standard for the “tolerance” and “diversity” of conservatism (and I can only assume that someone very high up in the movement thought it would be a great idea) is to not only cave to our principles, but is to, in essence, join the other side. (And you surprised me by insinuating that “principles” are not really important with your quote about those “placid, flaccid thinkers…” And this is not the first time that you’ve seemingly mocked principle. After the primaries, you mocked Cruz, whom you had been a staunch supporter of, for standing his ground, and refusing to vote for Mr Trump. And please know that I mean you NO disrespect! Each of us is entitled to our opinions. But if we give up our principles, what do we have left? I contend that America is in DEEP trouble because somewhere along the way, we began to let our principles slide. I believe principles DO matter.)

    To most of our country, this issue of homosexuality is a non-issue. And yet that, in itself, shows how far our country has drifted away from its moral moorings. But to those of us who know God’s Word…which includes you, Dianny; I’ve read, many times through the last several years that you have studied Scripture…if we knowingly and willingly embrace what we know to be against God’s most basic tenants…how can we ever expect him to heal our nation so that it CAN be made great again?

    As much as I wish it were true, neither a nation, nor an individual, can be blessed when living in direct rebellion against God. And this is where America is, and has been, now, for some time. God is the ONLY one that can make America great again. (Not even President Trump can do that.)

    I believe it was Alexander De Touqueville who said about America, around the time of the revolutionary war, that “America is great, because she is good. When she ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” How can anyone not see that, by THAT standard, America hasn’t been great in a VERY long time. When our major political parties have caved into the ideology of depravity, how can God possibly bless us, and restore us?

    For what it’s worth, though I was terribly suspicious of President Trump, I don’t hate the man. So far, it looks like the President is working on keeping his campaign promises. No body will be happier than me to see him succeed. And I’m no establishment Republican, as I changed my party affiliation last year to Libertarian. But this issue of the Party embracing homosexuality was, for me, a deal-breaker.

    Again, I hope you will not be offended by what I’ve said. I’m probably your biggest fan and supporter.

  • February 20, 2017 at 10:43 am

    Dianny, I did go back and found out I can look at what he has posted. Doesn’t change my mind.

    His statements were taken out of context? Selectively edited. Cute, when caught talking about doing illegal disgusting things, being out of context works every time. Planned Parenthood out of context, you believe them don’t you?

    He carefully stated he was not talking about prepubescent boys, he did not deny saying he supported, said it was OK for boys age 13 – 14 giving consent for sex with men.

    The man doesn’t belong within a mile of Conservative -PAC. He is not the victim here. He is not a conservative.

    You gushed about how much you support Milo. His facebook excuses have been duly noted. Now can you defend and support him in your own words?

  • February 20, 2017 at 10:46 am

    And where can we go to see both uncut interviews?

    • February 20, 2017 at 3:33 pm

      You can see videos at Milo’s YouTube page.

Comments are closed.