I know, they're not really "politicians," but they certainly have had quite a bit to say about politics, so I figured this was the place to put this.

Should both get ousted? Obviously, free speech protects this sort of conversation, but does this harm their credibility? Is it blown out of proportion? Do you think both will be treated the same way by the general public and the news outlets?

[video=youtube;0F4r-skq_mA][/video]

No way Maher gets treated like Milo. Mainly because Milo is more conservative/libertarian and Maher is more liberal (even though he leans libertarian as well).

Just shows that if you make your career in media, there's always something out there that can be used against you at a later date. It's almost always out of context, but the public is too stupid to see anything other than the headline.

Milo got treated that way because he's the anti-thesis of what both sides want their representatives to be.

A homosexual, ultra-conservative, African-American preferring male who is pro-life and supports Trump. Nobody knows what to do with that profile so everyone wants him off-the-radar ASAP.

jmog;1838843 wrote:No way Maher gets treated like Milo. Mainly because Milo is more conservative/libertarian and Maher is more liberal (even though he leans libertarian as well).

I still believe Maher is, at heart, a libertarian. However he's full-blown libtard on that show because it plays to the audience and his employer.

In his defense on this topic, Maher has always defended people's free speech even though he disagrees with them. He had Milo on last week.

I didn't bother looking at the videos, but apparently the Milo thing was grossly taken out of context. But the other key difference is Maher is doing the whole "that 14 yr old is lucky, and women can't rape 14-yr old boys", whereas Milo was [allegedly] talking about gay pedophilia. Both are ostensibly the same thing, but there's a double standard when the abuser is a man vs. a woman even if both cases, as Maher and Milo were referring, are "consensual".

Azubuike24;1838853 wrote:Milo got treated that way because he's the anti-thesis of what both sides want their representatives to be.

There's also the fact that Milo is a troll, and says outrageous things to get a reaction. He's rightly viewed as much more shock-jock than activist.

gut;1838858 wrote:There's also the fact that Milo is a troll, and says outrageous things to get a reaction. He's rightly viewed as much more shock-jock than activist.

Many people, or you say "shock jocks" have made their living talking politics and not having any direct impact.

I've been laid up in bed the last handful of days, so I've yet to hear of this on/in my news.

Azubuike24;1838853 wrote:Milo got treated that way because he's the anti-thesis of what both sides want their representatives to be.

A homosexual, ultra-conservative, African-American preferring male who is pro-life and supports Trump. Nobody knows what to do with that profile so everyone wants him off-the-radar ASAP.

yep