Support NeoGAF

[BocoDragon]

I'll just drop this here, for no reason other than I learned it last night:

Steve Bannon was on Bill Maher five years ago, sitting right next to the likes of Anthony Bourdain and Niel DeGrasse Tyson.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=h4mqrCL6-Zk

 

[Fat_Caddis]

There's a whole lot of people in here essentially arguing on behalf of good faith who haven't had theirs stepped on in a manner so violent that it ventured into truly disturbing territory.

You can't just offer up good faith to everyone who says they have an idea, and not every idea is worthy of that faith.

People in here arguing like the mere presence of an idea obligates someone to give that idea equal shine to all others.

It's like this weird tumorous growth ballooning out from the misunderstanding that there can't be "wrong" opinions, and that equal consideration must be paid to those holding them, and the biggest sin in those situations isn't the dismissal or denial of those bad and wrong opinions, but the pride of the person who is so unfairly bold as to declare them wrong and shut them out.

It is, as a lot of these discussions become, a case of misplaced, confused empathy: People much more easily insert themselves into a mindset where they identify with the person being shut out of a conversation by someone convinced they're in the right, and approach the dilemma from that P.O.V. Because to them, the bigger sin in play is presumption. Pretension.

It's an pseudo-intellectual's argument for anti-intellectualism.

Perfectly said. It seriously alarms me how many people in here are criticizing this position. Have they not been paying attention for the last 6 months? Maybe they don't have exposure to "dabating" these people, but I've seen a noticeable increase of Milo fans in the last few months. Some of who were moderate conservatives or libertarians that had been open for productive debate before. And these are law students.

His "ideology" is a poison that thrives off of the other side's good-faith.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

Maher is a shitheel. He'd do anything for ratings, yet claim moral ground on basis of the 1st.

No sir.


If this was Charlie Rose, then it would be different.

 

[onadesertedisland]

Oh no my mentality was affected

I bet you have lots of friends and people like you.

 

[Bartholomuse]

Didn't someone like Oprah have old school skinheads Nazis on her show back in the day? They proceeded to spew shit about people looking like monkeys (maybe Oprah herself?) and general Aryan shit

So I guess there is definite risk of propagating something inadvertently while trying to expose it.

On the upshot, what if Maher kicks his ass and makes Yoplait-pilates say something stupid and incriminating? Isn't it worth the risk for that alone? You know Bill is gonna be gunning for this dude.

 

[TyrantII]

Bill isn't that stupid. This is as much for his ratings as it is for Milo's exposure.

And here's the rub, the dude isn't a monster because of what he's spewing, because he absolutely doesn't believe any of it.

He's a monster because he's in the outrage game, seperating fools from money by hijacking the worst and most toxic rhetoric out there. Giving him a platform is giving him his infomercial and filling his pockets. That's not free speech btw, and it need to be stooped because these leeches are posioning any debate, just for a buck.

 

[Billy_Pilgrim]

Every time you try to silence a political wing that you don't like, you're giving them permission to do the same to you.

 

[DerangedHermit]

Not even surprised anymore at the majority of the posts on this thread.

And he wouldn't be on there if it weren't for the riots at Berkeley trying to silence him. Good job!

No, he wouldn't be there if he wasn't invited to be there. What the hell is this dumb shit?

 

[xDUMPWEEDx]

On the upshot, what if Maher kicks his ass and makes Yoplait-pilates say something stupid and incriminating? Isn't it worth the risk for that alone? You know Bill is gonna be gunning for this dude.

Of course he is. Bill occasionally takes a softball stance on some shit, but I don't think he will this time. He is going to have hardball questions and debate.

 

[Boney]

How can you have a rational discussion about religion? That is a contradiction in itself.

A system where everybody is somehow entitled to interpret everything by themselves is immune to any form of rationality.

For example in the US there are christians who hate the poor.

Those Christians are heretics. Religious fundamentalists pervert and distort religion to serve their own fears and self-aggrandizement

Of course one can have a rational discussion around religion, why wouldn't you. Your premise of entitlement to interpret everything by themselves is wrong for starter, since it undermines the entire social and cultural aspect of religion, which is ultimately what it is. It's some Sam Harris level of infantilism and ignorance on the subject, where their understanding of religion cannot go beyond the notion of people believing in a magical anthropomorphic God. The transformative effects of rites in a community, the bridging values that are institutionalized and made participatory and help social cohesion are rational aspects to it.

Religion, like art, is a way to deal with the non rational. Love, beauty, our mortality and search for meaning. Superstition, indoctrination or tribalism are not inherent aspects of any religious system and attacking it based on the supposed belief of a magical deity that governs us is as regressive as the parasitic institutions that profess those rotten principles.

In Auschwitz, the Jewish people put God on trial and found him guilty. The rabbi after the verdict stood to lead the evening prayers. Christianity for black Americans during slavery allowed them to endure hell by empowering them through the paradoxical nature of the cross, where ultimately they could snatch victory from the oppressors. What religion offers is the symbolic manifestation of the human imagination, the internalization of what was externalized.

One could turn to Kant, Durkheim or Arendt for completely different analysis of religion, all rational. Religion shouldn't be understood as the fundamental rejection of the rational in favour of the mystic.

 

[Zampano]

And he wouldn't be on there if it weren't for the riots at Berkeley trying to silence him. Good job!

 

[Inferno313]

Every time you try to silence a political wing that you don't like, you're giving them permission to do the same to you.

Not inviting someone on your show isn't silencing. I don't invite my racist childhood best friend over anymore, but I'm not negatively impacting him in anyway other than the fact that he doesn't get to get high and play videogames with me anymore.

 

[Lionel Richie]

But their claim that they are being censored is total, unsubstantiated bullshit, so I guess I don't have much faith that, even in being exposed, they won't just latch onto some other piece of irrational bullshit to push their agendas. Their entire platform is built on falsities, so how exactly do you expect them to act reasonably?

I don't expect them to, I think they're a cancer just as much as anyone else. At this point I think having this specific guy in Bill Maher to counter him could do some good at dissuading some people who might be on the fence about supporting "the cause" preached by the alt right.

I just think that something needs to be done because these assholes are sadly not going away easily. I think we're at the point we should be desperate, because this is a legit problem in our society and sadly not just a group of crazy people anymore.

He has plenty of space in Fox news and in Breibart where he is an EDITOR, how much more space he needs and why he wants liberal show to give him time?

I don't want to give him space for him to be him. I want Bill to destroy him and show the world how much of a dickhead he is. I do understand that perhaps I'm having more faith in humanity than I probably should in actually seeing that.

 

[Lime]

Every time you try to silence a political wing that you don't like, you're giving them permission to do the same to you.

What do you think the far-right movements have done for years and are still doing?

And not giving them a platform is not the same as silencing them.

 

[JP_]

Every time you try to silence a political wing that you don't like, you're giving them permission to do the same to you.

Safe to say the right has given all the permission the left needs, then.

 

[captainnapalm]

Totally agree with Maher. Let him live or die by his ideas in the court of public opinion. If his ideas are wrong or bad, let them shown to be such. The truth should never have to fear a lie.

I like the Intercept and what it does but the notion that free thinkers in a free society have no option but to silence Yannapopolopis or whatever his name and that we shouldn't engage with and critically evaluate his thinking is regressive.

 

[unpopularblargh]

There's a whole lot of people in here essentially arguing on behalf of good faith who haven't had theirs stepped on in a manner so violent that it ventured into truly disturbing territory.

You can't just offer up good faith to everyone who says they have an idea, and not every idea is worthy of that faith.

People in here arguing like the mere presence of an idea obligates someone to give that idea equal shine to all others.

It's like this weird tumorous growth ballooning out from the misunderstanding that there can't be "wrong" opinions, and that equal consideration must be paid to those holding them, and the biggest sin in those situations isn't the dismissal or denial of those bad and wrong opinions, but the pride of the person who is so unfairly bold as to declare them wrong and shut them out.

It is, as a lot of these discussions become, a case of misplaced, confused empathy: People much more easily insert themselves into a mindset where they identify with the person being shut out of a conversation by someone convinced they're in the right, and approach the dilemma from that P.O.V. Because to them, the bigger sin in play is presumption. Pretension.

It's an pseudo-intellectual's argument for anti-intellectualism.

But we need to have debate Bobby. Equal representation for all sides. Be it racism, climate change, or vaccines cause autism.

Spoiler

/sarcasm

We all know racism is bad. Bigotry is bad. What is their to debate?

 

[AcademicSaucer]

I'll just drop this here, for no reason other than I learned it last night:

Steve Bannon was on Bill Maher five years ago, sitting right next to the likes of Anthony Bourdain and Niel DeGrasse Tyson.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=h4mqrCL6-Zk

Niel was on fire there

 

[Dominican Power]

Is Malcom Nance going to be on the panel? If so, he's going to destroy Milo.

 

[Timeaisis]

Real Time is a debate show. Bill can debate all the Alt right people he wants in order to expose their views. Fine with me.

 

[NH Apache]

Austin Walker really is the best.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

He has extreme dissenting views from the left.

No fuck this, his views aren't in opposition to the left, the're in opposition to being a decent human being. He ruins peoples lives by outing them in front of an audience. He libels people via twitter to turn a mass of psychopaths on them and harass them off the internet. Repeatedly. Over and over again.
But no keep on telling us that he deserves a chance to get his viewpoints out there, because he's not yet out of second chances now matter how vile a human being he is because every viewpoint is valid blah blah blah blah.

 

[NYR]

Real Time is a debate show. Bill can debate all the Alt right people he wants in order to expose their views. Fine with me.

Very well said, and I agree with you 100%.

 

[Mahonay]

Is Malcom Nance going to be on the panel? If so, he's going to destroy Milo.

Milo will not be on the panel. He is an interview guest before the panel.

 

[Spinluck]

Lol. He had Peirs Morgan and Tomi Lauren on the show. Ann Coulter anyone? Hasn't he had Bill O'Reilly as well?

At this point why is it a big deal? His show wouldn't be what it is if he didn't have shitbags like Milo on. Having an opposing view on the show matters, even as extreme and fucked up as Milo's.

Not having him on won't reduce or increase the number of neo-nazis out there. So I don't see the big deal. Milo will always have a following as long as he is the way he is. His followers will find ways to follow him. Hopefully the guest this episode tells him to fuck off as well.

 

[Kreed]

The move is a part of a more-recent trend from Real Time to have “liberal agitators” such Piers Morgan and Tomi Lahren on the show, guests who Maher tries to eviscerate at every turn. He’ll likely try to do the same with Milo, so surely we can expect a few fireworks.

This is not a "more-recent" trend, this is just Real Time being Real Time (ex: Ann Coulter being a guest since the start of her career). It's just that the conservative party in the US as a whole has gotten "worse" when people like Milo are representatives.

 

[nilbog21]

As soon as I saw the word platform I knew this would be a 10 page thread in a matter of hours

 

[Knuckle Sandwich]

Hopefully Maher makes him look like a fool. Don't really care that he's having him on as it's his show and he can do what he wants.

 

[Loudninja]

Lol. He had Peirs Morgan and Tomi Lauren on the show. Ann Coulter anyone? Hasn't he had Bill O'Reilly as well?

At this point why is it a big deal? His show wouldn't be what it is if he didn't have shitbags like Milo on. Having an opposing view on the show matters, even as extreme and fucked up as Milo's.

Not having him on won't reduce or increase the number of neo-nazis out there. So I don't see the big deal. Milo will always have a following as long as he is the way he is. His followers will find ways to follow him. Hopefully the guest this episode tells him to fuck off as well.

Nope dont agree at all hate speech should not be giving nay platform its not a opposing view its pure hate,

People keep thinking this stuff is ok it was males it the new normal.

 

[Spinluck]

Bill Maher has been on my list of idiots I will not endorse for a while. This is just indefensible though. Well... I guess there is a defense. Ratings.

Is he so stupid he can't see by giving this pos a national... neigh... international platform he's adding some semblance of credence to his bullshit? What sort of stupid do you have to be for this?

I'd like to think that if someone was unaware of Milo before this, and is somehow convinced to follow him based off his ideals. They were probably a terrible person to begin with.

One thing that can come from this that sort of sucks is the fact that Bill is so far left that he flips to the right. And I can see them agreeing on some random bullshit.

 

[NandoGip]

This is a very difficult conversation and I feel like both sides have good points. I really don't know where I stand. To clarify, I mean whether or not to debate dick heads like Milo on national television.

On one hand, you shouldn't give a platform to a hate-monger. It will only give him more fans, and plant seeds in others.

On the other, his clout essentially forces you to debate him to have a check on his speech. I can't see those who are behind him being convinced by Maher, but maybe you can incite others to stand up and fight against the people doing the brain washing.

About Milo, he is really a perfect Trojan Horse. The alt-light points to him and says "See! He's gay, and he likes black dudes, we're not racist or homophobic!". Then, many non-critical-thinkers fall for this shit, and begin to believe the BS about left-leaning people being the real bigots.

Another poster above said fighting lies with facts is so hard because the people you're arguing against can just say something that SOUNDS true and most people won't take the steps to verify it.

We're in such a difficult place right now. Right-wing ideologies are taking over the world right now, and I'm fearful to see what's going to come from all of this.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Hope someone in the audience runs up and punches him..😁

 

[Arttemis]

It's Maher. Hell, seeing Jim Jefferies go at Piers Morgan was magic.

Yelling match in 5, 4, 3, 2...

My expectation is Maher will cave on certain issues that align with his worldview and ultimately find a new bro though.

I highly doubt this. Anyone doing an iota of research regarding that cunt's views will have a mountain of evidence to eviscerate this hypocritical shitbag on air. If Maher doesn't do this, he'll upset many of the people who watch his show.

 

[Lowmelody]

See, this

“Liberals will continue to lose elections as..."

Used to sanctify the normalization of fascism (and racism) is the single most infuriating thing I have heard, non stop, from both nazi GOP and moderates alike. It's such a non starter of a premise.

I will never listen to a single thing said after that insidious and stupid bullshit.

 

[Kurdel]

Real Time is a debate show. Bill can debate all the Alt right people he wants in order to expose their views. Fine with me.

Yeah, I honestly don't think that show can go too far with guest bookings, considering Bill doesn't do softball interviews or weak debate segments.

Milo will get ripped to shreds.

 

[Zampano]

Not even surprised anymore at the majority of the posts on this thread.



No, he wouldn't be there if he wasn't invited to be there. What the hell is this dumb shit?

This dumb shit is my opinion. Ok with you if I voice it?

I remember when Milo was some rent-a-mouth on British Sunday morning TV. Attempts to silence his pathetic trolling have made his career.

 

[Ray Wonder]

No fuck this, his views aren't in opposition to the left, the're in opposition to being a decent human being. He ruins peoples lives by outing them in front of an audience. He libels people via twitter to turn a mass of psychopaths on them and harass them off the internet. Repeatedly. Over and over again.
But no keep on telling us that he deserves a chance to get his viewpoints out there, because he's not yet out of second chances now matter how vile a human being he is because every viewpoint is valid blah blah blah blah.

He's also a shit person, but he has a large following of people that agree with him. And he has extreme dissenting views from the left.

You didn't dispute anything I said, you just said that he's an asshole and also has those views.

 

[Trokil]

Those Christians are heretics. Religious fundamentalists pervert and distort religion to serve their own fears and self-aggrandizement

Of course one can have a rational discussion around religion, why wouldn't you. Your premise of entitlement to interpret everything by themselves is wrong for starter, since it undermines the entire social and cultural aspect of religion, which is ultimately what it is. It's some Sam Harris level of infantilism and ignorance on the subject, where their understanding of religion cannot go beyond the notion of people believing in a magical anthropomorphic God. The transformative effects of rites in a community, the bridging values that are institutionalized and made participatory and help social cohesion are rational aspects to it.

Religion, like art, is a way to deal with the non rational. Love, beauty, our mortality and search for meaning. Superstition, indoctrination or tribalism are not inherent aspects of any religious system and attacking it based on the supposed belief of a magical deity that governs us is as regressive as the parasitic institutions that profess those rotten principles.

In Auschwitz, the Jewish people put God on trial and found him guilty. The rabbi after the verdict stood to lead the evening prayers. Christianity for black Americans during slavery allowed them to endure hell by empowering them through the paradoxical nature of the cross, where ultimately they could snatch victory from the oppressors. What religion offers is the symbolic manifestation of the human imagination, the internalization of what was externalized.

One could turn to Kant, Durkheim or Arendt for completely different analysis of religion, all rational. Religion shouldn't be understood as the fundamental rejection of the rational in favour of the mystic.

The answer this would derail the discussion.

But just to add this, you draw this imaginary line in the sand and try to make a difference between organized religion and spirituality. Which is fine, but you ignore the problem with religion by that and also Maher never ever said anything about spirituality, he often even liked the idea especially within native religions. But the problems of Harris and Maher are based within organized religion and the politics involved. As you yourself stated people use religion to suppress others, but you can not magically separate that from religion in general and so this makes Harris and Maher's points valid.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

You didn't dispute anything I said, you just said that he's an asshole and also has those views.

"I think his voice deserves to be heard." Is what you said. I listed the damage caused by 'his voice,' and am trying to drive home the point that all he does is profit from ruining other people's lives. And I didn't call him an asshole, I said he ruins lives and should not be given continuing fame and outlets to expand that brand of awfulness. There's a world of difference between being simply mean to people and the degree to which Milo has cost people their livelihood. To be given this information and think 'well he's an asshole but he deserves to be heard' is to put your head in the goddamn sand.

 

[The Lamonster]

Hopefully Maher makes him look like a fool. Don't really care that he's having him on as it's his show and he can do what he wants.

Yep. It'll be good television and the whole point is entertainment. Maher can book who he wants. And ratings absolutely should be on his mind when booking guests.

 

[tearsintherain]

I'll be watching, don't watch Maher much anymore but I'll watch this one. I'm not sure how a gay Jewish guy is a neo nazi but I guess I'll find out. If Scahill is out I wonder who Maher got to replace him? Andrew Sullivan would be very interesting to debate Milo.

 

[Raylan]

Neo Nazi? Seriously?

'neo-nazi' is such a lazy term.

Everybody is a nazi these days, as it seems. Dude says some shit = Nazi
Dude spread some bad BS = Nazi
Dude is an asshat = Nazi
I don't like this dude = Nazi

Unbelievable

 

[Gentleman Jack]

I'll be watching, don't watch Maher much anymore but I'll watch this one. I'm not sure how a gay Jewish guy is a neo nazi but I guess I'll find out. If Scahill is out I wonder who Maher got to replace him? Andrew Sullivan would be very interesting to debate Milo.

Yiannopoulos is going to be the top-of-the-show guest, which means there's no panel to get between Milo and Maher.

Milo will not be asked anything by anybody in the panel.

Neo Nazi? Seriously?

Everybody is a nazi these days, as it seems.

I guess it's a lot of work to type 'virulently racist homophobe who profits from driving minority voices from their homes, their jobs and their university.' There's only so many characters permitted in a GAF thread title.

 

[Raven117]

Look, I can understand the appeal of "not giving these guys a platform"...its fun to type on the internet with gusto. You can take the moral high ground and keep your hands clean all at the same time. Essentially, it is an "ignore the problem and it will go away" type approach. This approach may even be valid when it comes to the Richard Spencer types of giving speaches to neo-nazis made up of a few hundred people.

The thing is....Brietbart doesn't need you in anyway to be "legitimized." They were working in the background for years, and it ended up with Trump being elected, and the CEO being his senior adviser. They don't give a fuck about "platforms and legitimize" they are going to do what they do and get stronger if go unchecked.

You bring this guy on Maher, you have smart people up there, and you go at it.

You shine light in the shadows, you don't turn away.

 

[ISOM]

I mean, Maher can have who he wants on his show, but I hope the people ITT saying that it's a good idea to have him on because Maher will EVISCERATE and SKEWER him realize that this is the very definition of existing in a bubble.

The thing is, I'll be saying the same thing. But check r/The_Deluded or any other rightwing echo chamber to get the exact opposite response any time Lahren or whoever-the-fuck goes on one of these liberal-leaning news/comedy programs. It's like clockwork. Host has hatred-spewing guest, acts generally civil but then gets in some surprisingly hard-hitting points to general applause and ooh-ing and aah-ing from the studio audience, idiot guest looks flustered, show ends.

Within hours, articles from most major online news and media outlets post slightly differing versions of the same article: "[Host] EVISCERATES/DESTROYS/SHUTS DOWN [moronic fuckwit guest]!"

In the meantime, the opposite sentiment will be found on increasingly trafficked rightwing outlets, shared on Facebook to the approval of other idiots the world over.

The end result is everyone retreats into their bubble a little bit more.

Like I said, Maher can have on whoever he wants. Hopefully he stands up to Milo's usual bile. My guess is that he'll get a few digs in but also find "common ground" on areas like religion and freedom of speech. But expecting a show like this to EXPOSE someone like Milo is likely nonsense. Best case scenario, the differing interpretations will just bounce around everyone's bubble so they can feel nice about how well the champion of their views performed. Worst case scenario, by giving them a chance to sit there and bullshit, by finding the elements of "common ground" they will inevitably find, it normalizes someone whose platform is based on rejection, divide, and hate; whose views carry inherent violence.

I'll be honest, my opinion on what Maher (or anyone else) should do in this scenario evolves everyday. With people like Milo having more mainstream attention than ever, the question of how much visibility they should get, or how much of a platform should they be afforded, even if to mock or disprove them, is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, with valid points on both sides. I mean, surely most ITT agree that refusing to have Conway on major news outlets due to credibility issues is the right step, no? I understand that the situation we have here is different, but the difference may be more of degree than kind.

You don't even have to wait for this particular episode. The same thing happened after the debates. Most "mainstream" media outlets said Hillary won but rightwing and alt-right media slurped Trump. And nothing changed. If anything Trump gained due to the fact that he was even in the debates.

 

[MUnited83]

And he wouldn't be on there if it weren't for the riots at Berkeley trying to silence him. Good job!

Riots at Berkeley prevented him from literally commiting crimes and target individual students. If the consequence of not letting him harass people is having him go on TV Shows, so be it.

Neo Nazi? Seriously?

Everybody is a nazi these days, as it seems. Dude says some shit = Nazi
Dude spread some bad BS = Nazi
Dude is an asshat = Nazi
I don't like this dude = Nazi

Unbelievable

Milo is absolutely a neo-nazi. No question about it.

 

[Vyer]

People like Milo and spencer and others try to find all these sub labels and categories to apply to themselves so that they can not only distract from what they are at their core, but to also give them wiggle room and a back door to mainstream attention as well as leading to people finding a way to justify them spreading their message and propaganda, even if they supposedly are opposed to it.


What's sad is just how well the strategy works, as we can see from their increased media attention and the defenses for it like we find in this thread.

 

[Spinluck]

Nope dont agree at all hate speech should not be giving nay platform its not a opposing view its pure hate,

People keep thinking this stuff is ok it was males it the new normal.

Milo already has a pretty big platform on the internet. This will make it bigger, unfortunately, but he's nothing but a more extreme conservative. All these views he has falls in line somewhere, and while Ann Coulter for example isn't as bad as him--are they really that far apart? Doesn't he have vids breaking the millions now? I had friends I had to delete on FB because they plastered his shit everywhere.

Trump literally campaigned hate and won. What bigger platform is there than POTUS? A couple of years ago I would've agreed with you. But our president didn't even renounce a fucking KKK leader, and actually watches Alex Jones' YouTube channel. Maher is hit or miss, but this move doesn't make me lose or gain any respect for him. I guess I'll see how he handles having him on the show. I can understand your sentiment though.

 

[alternade]

Yes?

There's just always this innate tendency to have the other side heard, regardless of how heinous there stance is. Why give someone like this a platform and legitimize his voice to millions of people? I know many of you want to see him slaughtered on tv but all youre doing is propping us his cred.

 

[FunkyMonk]

Really now. How many posts in this thread contain "cunt", "shitbag" etc?

Cuff em.

Yes. It's legal to "attack" people. It's another thing to incite violence or panic. Has he done either of those, if no- free speech.

Look, I'm not defending the guy for being a shitty fucking human being. I'm defending the his rights, same as yours. All I'm saying is, if he's going to have any platform (Which is going to happen, like it or not, sadly). Then join him on hat platform and beat the living shit out of him idealogically.

He doxxed and deadnamed transgender student at her university and mocked her as just another guy trying to get into the womens locker room.

He was going to reveal 'illegal' students at Berkley to encourage the crowd to get rid of them.

Pray tell how either of them incidents are simple freedom of speech? Bear in mind this is the same guy who spread fake tweets he attributed to Leslie Jones to incite his followers then utilised the cutesy act to try and get out of it, is that freedom of speech?

Edit: oh and can folk stop calling Milo a neo-nazi. He's not one, I despise him as a narcissistic, egotistical opportunist with no empathy and no ideology beyond self aggrandizement and have done since I met the arsehole years ago before he 'made it' but he's not a neo-nazi. *insert the Big Lebowski quote here*

My prediction is that Milo will dial back the more extreme BS he currently spews to maintain his audience and focus on areas him and Maher have in common - islam and PC culture. Maher better not let him get away with that shite but, to be honest, I don't have high hopes.