Savage on "double-talking slut" Barbara Walters: "[T]he woman is vermin"
On the March 16 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage played audio clips from Barbara Walters' interview with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, portions of which aired on the March 16 edition of ABC's Good Morning America. In one clip that Savage aired, Walters said to Chavez, "You are a very dignified man, but we have heard you call the president of the United States a devil, a donkey, a drunk, a liar, a coward, a murderer -- what does all this name-calling accomplish?" In response, Savage said: "She used this dictator in Venezuela as a forum, as a fulcrum, in order to call the president those names." Savage added: "Notice what this double-talking slut just did, this mind-slut Barbara Walters. And I stick by those words. She's an empty mind-slut. She'd peddle anything for a ratings point." Savage went on to call Walters a "mental prostitute" and said, "I think that the woman is vermin. I think she's dirt."
Savage also gave Walters "the Quisling award" -- a reference to Vidkun Quisling, described on Britannica.com as a "Norwegian army officer whose collaboration with the Germans in their occupation of Norway during World War II established his name as a synonym for 'traitor.' " Savage said: "I rest my case. All of the chief, chiefs from CBS, whether it's this one, Walters, or the other one, the meatloaf thrower, the manic-depressive meatloaf thrower Mike Wallace [of CBS' 60 Minutes], who went over to [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, all of them are quislings in the estimation of yours truly, Michael Savage."
As Media Matters for America noted, in his February 16 broadcast, Savage attacked ABC News correspondent Diane Sawyer for her February 13 interview with Ahmadinejad, calling her "a lying whore," "a prostitute," and "a witch," and saying she was "disgusting" and "full of crap." He also said: "I stand by those words, and if you don't like it, sue me. Take me to a court of law for calling you a whore, because you are an intellectual prostitute for what you have done for ratings."
As Media Matters has noted, Savage was signed by Hollywood's Creative Artists Agency (CAA) for "representation in all areas" -- including television and film -- but was reportedly dropped after Media Matters documented his comments attacking singer and CAA client Melissa Etheridge for thanking her wife during her Academy Awards acceptance speech. Savage also responded to Etheridge's speech by stating that homosexual marriage "makes me want to puke" and saying that married gay couples' raising of children amounts to "child abuse."
The Savage Nation reaches more than 8 million listeners each week, according to Talkers Magazine, making it the third-most-listened-to talk radio show in the nation, behind only The Rush Limbaugh Show and The Sean Hannity Show.
From the March 16 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: So Braba Bwalters [sic] goes and interviews [Hugo] Chavez, who's a good friend of Ahmadinejad -- but let's put aside Ahmadinejad. Chavez has said he wants to overthrow America, OK? You get it? And so she goes down there, and listen to her kissing his behind in clip 25:
WALTERS: You are a very dignified man, but we have heard you call the president of the United States a devil, a donkey, a drunk, a liar, a coward, a murderer -- what does all this name-calling accomplish?
CHAVEZ: Yes, I called him a devil --
SAVAGE: Do you notice what she just did? She used this dictator in Venezuela as a forum, as a fulcrum, in order to call the president those names.
Now, I don't like Bush's policies in most cases, but I would never call him those names. Notice what this double-talking slut just did, this mind-slut Barbara Walters. And I stick by those words. She's an empty mind-slut. She'd peddle anything for a ratings point.
Listen to clip 28:
WALTERS: Would you like some coffee first? I understand you drink too much coffee.
CHAVEZ: Yes, but you didn't drink yours.
WALTERS: No, I --
CHAVEZ: Yours must be cold.
WALTERS: You want mine?
CHAVEZ: Yes, you didn't drink yours. It must be cold.
WALTERS: It is cold. We'll get --
CHAVEZ: Yes, give it to me. I will drink it.
WALTERS: OK.
SAVAGE: See that? See how nice that prostitute is? That mental prostitute, Bra-buh-buh-buh Walters? It sickens me. And I'm not going to mince words because she thinks she's the queen of all media. I think that the woman is vermin, I think she's dirt. And I give her the Quisling award today.
Who is Quisling? Vidkun Quisling, 1887-1945, was a Norwegian army officer. He was a fascist politician. He held the office -- well, let me just cut to the chase. He collaborated with the Nazis in World War II. His surname has become an eponym for "traitor."
Why? Well, he worked with the Nazis before they took over Norway. And after they took over Norway, he encouraged many Norwegians to join the SS division, the Norwegian SS division. He collaborated in the deportation of Jews from Norway. He was responsible for the execution of Norwegian patriots, who actually fought in the underground against Nazis. Consequently, he was given the death penalty.
The name "Quisling" now means "traitor," especially a collaborationist.
I rest my case. All of the chief, chiefs from CBS, whether it's this one, Walters, or the other one, the meatloaf thrower, the manic-depressive meatloaf thrower Mike Wallace, who went over to Ahmadinejad, all of them are quislings in the estimation of yours truly, Michael Savage. Have a nice break.
Even the right-wingers agree: Savage is just putting on an act. Performance art, baby.
Sorry Tim.
As performance art, I would say he was a genius, savagely (pun intended) extrapolating conservative ideology to extreme conclusions and positions. However, I am afraid even if Weiner does not really believe the stuff he spouts, a good part of his audience does.
Is Klinghoffer trying to argue that the reason why Sewage is so vile is that he's really a liberal POSING as a conservative?
Yah, OK.
That's a pretty sad piece of conservative CYA. Trying to make it sound like Weiner is not the voice of a significant part of their number.
Weinerdog is calling someone ELSE vermin? The man gives pondscum a bad name.
Dear Mr. Savage,
You have surpassed your lifetime usage of the word vermin. Please use a different word to describe your hatred of others.
Thank You
Websters Dictionary Club
Why doesn't this dude come out and say emphatically what he really means? He would love to see liberals exterminated because in his eyes, we are traitors.
The anger in this man serves no purpose save for the perpetuation of violence to humans.
Not only he thinks liberals are traitors. Anyone who supports our military think you are traitors also. No where is there a group of people so anti-military than the liberal group. A bunch of hypocrits whose only credo is "serve me, first". Savage couldn't be more right in his assessment of the liberal mind. I'm sure you've heard it.
I've seen, at this site, that those who claim the loudest to support our troops are actually only doing it because it is popular among yourselves. Trying to claim that they 'care about the military and want them saved from harm so we need them removed from Iraq'. What a bunch of malarky! Liberals care so much about the military that you keep getting more and more public schools to forbid the military from coming on campus during recruitment time. Hypocrits! Yeah, Savage has your number. And you hate it that he is telling others EXACTLY what you are like.
Many of us "traitors" are disgusted that rabid, cowardly chicken-hawks have led us into another war where we cannot win unless we're willing to destroy the people we're there to "save".
Who the hell are you to question the patriotism of anyone? Where have you served?
Auto, would you support an increase in your taxes to fund the troops? Would you send your children to war in Iraq, Iran, Syria or any where that Bush wants to?
Yes, I most certainly would. I would rather fight the war in any of the countries you just listed rather than let them bring it to us...AGAIN! Apparrantly, many democrats are afraid of al queda and what they can do and would prefer to retreat than fight. Typical, very typical.
So then it was IRAQ that hit us on 9/11?? No it wasnt, in fact the 2002 threat assessment listed 60 countries al Queda was active in and Iraq wasnt on the list. The Senate committee looking into it said definitively that Iraq DIDNT have ongoing nor collaborative ties to al Queda sadly too many conservatives are the same kind of ignorant ill informed LIARS you are. You keep denigrating us lefties like the sad pathetic moron you are and yet MY posts get deleted. A more ignorant cowardly, cognitively challenged poster than you I have rarely seen. Keep up the troll posts moron. Its all you've got
Thanks for the kind words (I can see why yours are deleted). I think you missed the point all together. Al Queda is IN Iraq, now. So, we must fight them there. If they didn't have connections in Iraq before, then they sure developed them awful quickly. We seem to be total opposites: I know where the Nile is, you know what denial is, I don't live there...you do.
I'm so glad you and Savage can read my "liberal" mind. My support of the troops includes bringing them home safely, soon. It's not just a bumper stick or ribbon magnet on my car. Talk is cheap - how about contacting Congress to make sure Walter Reed is taken care of, the body armor is provided and the troops get the care they deserve? How's that for a liberal thought?
Autopsychic, I am flattered you took the time to respond to my post.
Just like me, you must be appalled to witness the neglect and lack of care our injured sons and daughters suffer when they return home. And like me I am sure you have relatives, whom you love dearly, serving in Iraq today. That is why I am sure you sacrifice, do without and send prayers of a safe return on behalf of all military families. I'm certain the care packages you send are received with lasting gratitude. I know this because you obviously care about the safety of all Americans.
I know you respect my right to disagree with this conflict in Iraq as much as I cherish your right to agree with it. You have the right as an American to say, believe and do anything at all, so long as you respect the rights of your fellow citizens and do them no harm. That is the kind of freedom this country was founded on, that is liberty.
What kind of country, what kind of person would seek to terminate dissenting opinion with the threat of violence or execution? A person of weak mind and insecure intellect, that's who. But that isn't you or I is it, Auto? We are Americans. We share a common heritage, more than that, we share in the soul of a beautiful nation. We are brothers.
He is so disgusting. This must be one sick man.
8 million people regularly listen to a scared little man who cannot make a distinction between asking questions in a civil way (no matter who the subject is) and completely supporting or collaborating with that person.
I understand a little better now how the Weiner fans who come here and get completely logically spanked can come back the next day and talk down to the same posters who did the spanking as if nothing happened.
This is genuine dementia.
Only 8 million, at most 8 million. Those are numbers cooked up to sell advertising. Follow the money, all this supposed right wing biased media is really profit biased. This is the perfect capitalist solution to news. Sex sells, and so does vile over the top shock jock programs, look at the money Howard got from that satellite outfit. Savage, Rush, Beck and the rest are all after that big check.
Thank you, Autopsychic and Braid.
Sometimes I post a comment about the Weiner fans, and afterwards I think " maybe I exaggerated a little about them".
Then they come along and demonstrate the very obliviousness that I was describing.
I couldn't ask for better backup . They might as well appear wearing big signs around their necks reading "Exhibit A"
This guy has gone of the deep end. Wow. He sure hates women. Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters, Malissa Ethridge. I wonder if his loathing of women comes from Mommy's overly-strict potty training. Or perhaps he feels powerless and verbally abuses women to make up for his 'shortcomings'. Either way, he is a deeply disturbed man. Won't someone help him?? Please. The man needs therapy....
Isn't sexism one of the 14 points of fascism?
Seems like he has completed all 14 points...
Wow. Can everyone, just for a minute, forget whatever you think about Savage or what you may have said about him in the past? The issue at hand in this piece is the fact that we have an American journalist (gender not important because Savage would attack a male for this too) trying to understand and and make sense out of chavez. Chavez is a third world dictator who openly hates America. I don't care about your political viewpoint...if this doesn't make you sick, how can you say you care about America? Chavez should be hung for what he is doing and will continue to do with his socialist agenda.
So please, can we look past the name calling that everyone expects from Savage, and look at the real issue here? Are you people supporting Barbara Walters trying to make nice with our enemy? Do you think Chavez deserves face time in any American media outlet?
A) he was elected
B) dumbaya tried at least once to assasinate him
C) no he he is not a nice man, but not being nice does not justify deposing him
D) he sits on a lot of oil, so of course dumbaya will try anyway
Actually Chavez stole elections. Ignoring Chavez's Plan - February 20, 2007 - The New York Sun
Chavez declares laws by decree. Therefore, he's a dictator. He hates Jews. He's friends with Fidel Castro and the President of Iran. He's aiding terrorists. He's stolen private property. He has a paraoid hatred for President Bush. He's a scumbag, and even Nancy Pelosi said that he's a thug.
"Assasinate" is not a word. Learn to spell.
You live in a world of complete delusion. Perhaps one day you will go beyond listening to rightwing screechmonkeys and actually find out what is happening in the world. Chavez is NOT a dictator he is an elected leader who is very popular in his country. He doesnt hate America he hates Bush who was connected to those who had ties with those who made an abortive coup against him. He sent low cost fuel to the Northwest the last two years and to New Orleans after Katrina. He isnt a model leader true but he is far from the monster the rightwing wants to paint him as. We have supported far worse in Central America including Rios Montt who killed tens of thousands in his country NO ONE ANYWHERE is accusing Chavez of wholescale murder in his country. If only because of the vast misinformation spewed by those who have no idea who Chavez really is, like for instance YOU and the misconceptions about him, like the ones you repeated, the interview was a good idea. Weinerdog is insane. He needs to increase his medication badly. Lets suppose however the delusions, lies really that you spew about Chavez were true, how in the world does that make it a bad thing that he be interviewed by an American journalist? Are you saying that propaganda and the governments line is the ONLY information people should have?
Chavez is not popular. Once again, he stole elections. He declares laws by decree. He's a dictator. Why do liberals like Chavez anyway? He's against abortion.
You stupid right-wing idiots will trash on socialism(which has the same cons as democracy) and then protect a war in the middle-east that is killing thousands of american soldiers to set up a bunch of muslim theocracies. What the hell is wrong with you?
Well, gee, you left wing loonies have no problem forgetting that 3 thousand died at the hands of an enemy attack. You think it's ok to kill 3 thousand? It seems you don't like it, when the 3 thousand are fighting back for having fellow Americans killed. You fear al queda so much you are willing to run from them in hopes that they will forgive us and no longer attack us anymore. You know, the same group that loads children into a car so they can cross a checkpoint, then blows them up. You left wing loonies sure love a weird group of people.
And you think we are delusional!
So your solution is to leave the area where their leadership is known to be and attack a country where they have no presence; so that the entire muslim world can use our invasion as a rally cry to join their ranks?
How does this one sound? Let's get out of this little Vietnam II that this hypocritical moron lied us into and put our resources back where they belong. Tracking down the people who actually were responsible for attacking us. Maybe you heard of the country they were in...Afghanistan? You know...bin Ladin? The guy that bubbleya said "I don't really think about him much."
By your logic when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor we should have attacked Peru.
" Maybe you heard of the country they were in...Afghanistan? "
Yeah, key word: were. I do believe that the terrorists are now fighting in Iraq and other countries.
" By your logic when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor we should have attacked Peru. "
You didn't complain when we attacked the Philippines, Burma, New Gunea (and an inumerable number of little islands) during the war with Japan, did you? By your logic, terrorists are good people and should be left alone to do as they please. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/21/MNGO7OOV2B1.DTL
Our Enemy?
Or George Bush's?
George Bush has shown his own open contempt for America and it's constitution, as have Savage and his supporters.
Barbara Walters is guilty only of talking, something that our leaders should do more of. Savage doesn't believe in talk or negotiation. He believes in requiring absolute obedience to eternal war.
If you really believe that we should not be talking to "our enemies" then you had better be in uniform, if not, you are, like your savior Dr. Weiner and your lords and rulers Bush & Cheney, a coward.
Michael Savage loves the Constitution.
"should be hung for what he is doing"...I guess you were speaking of Chavez. I'll bet you that the quote "should be hung for what he is doing" can also be found in Arabic but referring to George Bush. Both you and those people are the real problem...you let someone else decide what is good for you. Open your ears....you might find out what thinking can do for you.
"Chavez is a third world dictator who openly hates America."
Can you back that up?
Ah the great threat. It is needed when you stand on such wobbly ground that you need something for the people to focus on. The great threat. Find it and the sheep will follow without question and to stiffle desent. It used to be terrorists in afghanistan, then saddam, then (post saddam) the foreign insurgents.
Germans fought WW2 thinking they were under threat from the communists. Go figure.
Savage obviously has no clue what it takes to land interviews with people like Chavez and Ahmadinejad. Without at least some form of welcoming demeanor, like that shown by Sawyer and Walters, there simply would be no interview.
Since he talks such a big game when it comes to interviewing, why don't we see any action? Because this man is a pathetic, vile hate merchant. All he can do is b***h about how other people conduct interviews because he wouldn't even be able to land an interview with a member of Chavez's janitorial staff.
what's the point of interviews if nothing is said or extrapolated from the interviewee? Bush/Cheney/Condi cycle through ALL the Fox pundits for "EXCLUSIVE" interviews, yet I don't bother to watch any of them (except Oreilly's bush interview since he presses him on illegals), why are they useless interviews? Because Bush gets away with mostly easy questions and NOTHING NEW IS SAID! Same with Walters/Sawyer. Useless.
Savage is smart to shy away from phony interviews used to grab ratings
yes they make those rounds ONLY to friendly audiences, with signed loyalty oaths, or pseudo-journalists/opinion spewers to give us such gems as 'the smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud' and 'heck of a job brownie!", and 'greeted with candy and flowers'. Yep, such valuable TV.
Savage is insane, Elmer Fudd wouldnt do an interview with him and HE is a fictional character. Weinerdog isnt fit to speak Walters name and I am not a huge Walters fan.
"Savage is smart to shy away from phony interviews"
Savage's appeal (to you and to other haters) is hating and name-calling--from the seclusion of his studio, of course--not face-to-face.
Doing it face-to-face would take guts - something Weiner and his acolytes do not have.
well, she is probably a s**t, but factually she is a DOUBLE talker. she told rosie one thing and donald another.
Come on, you really think Walters drops trou for the easter bunny? All of the women I am friendly with who are her age could give a rats ass about sex anymore.
All right wingers are "patriotic" and "liberty-loving"? LOL!! Are you kidding? What about Rove, Scooter and Armitage outing a CIA agent or Gingrich saying there should be a limit to freedom of speech? We haven't seen patriots like these since our founding fathers. LOL!!
As one poster previously stated, Savage is akin to Howard Stern. What I find fascinating is the amount of play MMFA gives this obvious right wing extremist. Sort of like the time they spend commenting on Atomic Annie. I agree with Tommy's assessment on these cretins; ignore them and maybe, just maybe, they'll go away. I know, I know, "but what if they don't go away?". Fine, they didn't get noticed and valuable time wasn't wasted on them and their kindred spirits. There is also the self-satisfaction of staying above their vile rhetoric and vitriol.
No one - NO ONE - should concede to these liars even the next breath! Let them first establish status as human beings, rather than the alien impersonators they so well . . . impersonate.
In the past when these cretins make their pronouncements and they go unchallenged, their next step is to make another statement saying that since their original words were not refuted, they must be true.
This re-enforces all of their delusions to their followers. Nothing will make these people go away. And lying down and taking their abuse is the most dangerous advice.
ob1, your link is broken. How will Yoda know where you are?
The reason MMFA continues to sporadically report on the content of this particular program is so that no one else here has to listen to it.
Why would we want to listen? To find out what the other side is thinking!!
I wonder though if there is a formal or informal agreement among these fringe dwellers. It seems they would be unable to turn on each other occaisionally, yet one never hears Sean attack Rush, or Ann c criticize savage. Fodder for the right wing conspiracy theory.
Yeah because that worked so well with Limbaugh
I should have thought before I posted on this topic. The liberal American left hates Bush, so does Chavez. The American left is against using military force to curtail terrorist activity, Chavez is against US military force as well. Policy of the American left would lead to socialism (i.e. - government provided healthcare for all, no outlet for speaking out against left -- think about 'global warming'), and Chavez loves socialism. So, I guess I can see why you people here support Chavez and Watlers.
Chavez is working to develope a submarine fleet...doesn't that worry anyone about his future intentions? And oh yeah, Chavez admires Castro. What a quality individual to mimmick.
Also, I have noticed that MMFA has only posted critisism on Savage when he makes fun of women and homosexuals...for over a month now. These topics are the most opinionated issues in America today, without much cold hard evidence to back up beliefs. Can't we move on from these over-argued opinion peices to something with substance?
I'm now sitting here afraid to go out. If I wasn't terrified before reading your rather illuminating post, I am now.
Venezuelan submarines? My God! Not to mention Chavez's affection for Fidel. I don't even want to think about what these two could cook up in their schemes to harm America. Maybe they could destabilize the American oil and cigar market?
You're a welcome addition Braid, the adult diapers are in isle 4 and I'd suggest buying in bulk. You seem like you'll be needing large quantities.
Your own preconceptions cloud your perceptions. Making "fun" of women is substantially different than using the language of hate to abuse women. Making "fun" of homosexuals is also far from Savage's routine words of hatred. And here I thought YOU were positioning yourself as somehow above all this "hate"?
Who is Savage "abusing?" I don't see Barbara Walters walking around with a black eye or belt lashings. You meant to say, "language that might possibly hurt some feelings." I was scolded for hurting feelings in 1st grade, let's grow up. It is free speech...something you think right-wingers want to take away, even though they make use of it every day.
And, if Chavez is anti-American military power...what if he took just one of his subs and fired just one missile at one of our naval ports and killed just one person? Thats one too many for a jealous third world 'leader' to kill, in my books.
Like Weiner, all Chavez has done is talk. Let's grow up.
The foremost reason Savage's slur against Walters won't even pass the filters on this site? It is sexist, and abusive. Free speech means many different things to different people, but only the inarticulate or the haters, use such slurs without specific basis, intending only to demean. Which would you suppose applies to Savage?
Did someone here say Weinerdog had no RIGHT to spew his insanity. I didnt see that, but see free speech goes both ways, is Weinerdog walking around with a black eye or are we just using OUR free speech rights to point out the man is insane? See he gets to spew his insanity and then WE get to tell everyone what WE think about it. MAYBE is a dumb argument to attack someone MAYBE Martians will shoot death rays at us, and THAT might kill thousands. YOU have just as much evidence of Martian death rays as that Chavez plans to kill any Americans his antipathy has not been aimed at Americans but at BUSH. Here is another clue BUSH is NOT America.
The American left is against using military force to curtail terrorist activity...
No we aren't.
"I should have thought before I posted on this topic."(Braid)
Why ruin your perfect streak?
"American left hates Bush"
The "left" hates what Bush is doing to our country. That's what makes us different from Savage & his followers, whose thing is hating people.
I think you are wrong there. You perceive us to be simple bigoted people haters. The truth about people like me is that I despise what Bush is doing to this country as well. He has mismanaged a war so badly and continues to drag out his mistake (probably for personal reasons including profits) while Americans are dying. He is causing America to slowly lose its identity and become a more dangerous place by letting illegal immigration slide. The man must enjoy digging his own grave to be remembered as one of the worst presidents. But for the people in here to defend Chavez and Walters, and say that Savage or myself is wrong for hating them holds no ground. Chavez is a third world peice of garabage who runs his mouth with anti-American rhetoric. Barbara Walters wants to interview and understand him. There is one thing real Americans understand, Barbara, you're either with us or against us. I hate those who are against us and theres nothing wrong with it.
Who elected you spokesman for "real" Americans?
who elected you spokesman to tell me that the whole left isn't against using military force to curtail terrorism?
I am a real American, and a member of "the left," and as such I could disprove your baseless claim.
The left is against MIS-using military force to combat terrorism.
We were engaged in Afghanistan fighting the terrorists who attacked us but we had to redeploy to fight a secular regime in Iraq with almost nothing to do with terrorism.
Our leaders were given the best possible military advice possible before the fiasco. That advice was not to invade iraq. Those military leaders were replaced.
The right is only in support of the use of military force if it's someone else who is doing the fighting and the dying.
Who are YOU to make such an incredibly ignorant claim? And exactly how could you even CLAIM to know? PROVE you have amazing mind reading powers or else show yourself out in shame.
There is one thing real Americans understand, Barbara, you're either with us or against us. I hate those who are against us and theres nothing wrong with it.
Absolutely, and without doubt or qualifications, THE most ignorant thing to come from a humans mouth.
You think he is wrong there becuase with your amazing mind reading powers you are able to discern better how WE feel that WE can? Stop it, you dont HAVE amazing mind reading powers. You want to assign venal motives because you cant hope to win the argument on FACTS, mostly because you dont HAVE ANY. You are with us or against us is one of the problems simpleminded people foist upon the dialogue. Why make ememies be DEFINGING people as enemies? Chavez is a great example, he hates BUSH who tried to have him overthrown. NOT America, in your simplemindedness hating Bush means he hates America. They are NOT the same thing. Chavez is no threat to attack the us. If you demand every country whose leader says bad things about Bush be treated like an enemy that would be pretty much the rest of the world. What I consider REAL AMERICANS despise the simpleminde brainwashed zombies who act like sheep. So to ME REAL AMERICANS dont like people like YOU who dont qaulify as a real American in my book. You claim to love America yet you so clearly hate Americans. AS for me I dont hate Bush, he isnt my brother-in-law, he isnt my neighbor, he isnt coming over for dinner. He only EXISTS as concerns his policies. I have no problem believing people who know him like him personally. I. DONT. CARE. None of that means anything to me. You are stuck in the simpleminded Manichean way of thinking. Everything isnt black or white. Everything isnt so easily put in this box or that box. It isnt a matter of either I support Bush or I hate him. Its also not as simple as if Chavez despises BUSH that means he is Americas enemy. Thinking of everything in such simplistic black/white terms is so inherently limiting you will NEVER understand political dynamics until you get past it. The world isnt black or white. About 90% of the world exists in shades of grey
The liberal American left hates Bush, so does Chavez.
Both are amazing judges of character, wouldn't you say?
The American left is against using military force to curtail terrorist activity
...because it doesn't work very well. Intelligence is a far superior defense against terrorism.
Policy of the American left would lead to socialism (i.e. - government provided healthcare for all, no outlet for speaking out against left -- think about 'global warming'),
No, policy of the American left would lead to peace, prosperity, honesty and transparency in government, cleaner environment, equality between business and the consumer and labor - wow! Just like it has for the past 200 years! And where in liberal policy do you find a threat to outlets to speak against the left? And global warming has been given a lot of thought, by others more qualified than you. If you feel you don't have a forum in the scientific world, by all means schedule yourself for a spot during the next symposium on climate science. Write a book about your knowledge of it. or a short sentence.
Chavez is working to develope a submarine fleet...doesn't that worry anyone about his future intentions?
No. In fact, if you were smart, you'd start your own submarine company to get the contract to build them. But you're not.
Also, I have noticed that MMFA has only posted critisism on Savage when he makes fun of women and homosexuals...for over a month now.
Because that's the bulk of Weiner material. Throw in his whining about immigration, and you've got a trifecta of prejudiced ignorance.
These topics are the most opinionated issues in America today, without much cold hard evidence to back up beliefs.
They wouldn't be so opinionated if people like you weren't so ignorant about them. The lack of "cold hard evidence to back up beliefs" falls only on the conservative side.
Can't we move on from these over-argued opinion peices to something with substance?
Irony at it's very best.
May I just say, "ABSO-*-LUTELY"!
conservatives hate America and freedom and only want to get as many Americans killed as possible. There, a couple of baseless assertions. Mischaracterizations as worthless and without substance as the idiocy you just spewed. Its really easy to do. Just state an extreme opinion as fact and then let fly with the mindless propaganda repitition. I dont know ANY leftists who were against going after al Queda only using terrorism as an excuse for invading countries NOT a threat to us. Just because you mindlessly repeat the propaganda that ANYTHING Bush decides to do is using force against TERRORISTS doesnt mean it has the least bit of connection to reality. You do understand that every industrial country in the world except the US provides health care to its citizens right? What is wrong with saying that Health care should be a right you have not a commodity you buy? Here is a clue. YOU repeating propaganda doesnt make it true, no matter how often you repeat it, it will NOT magically become true. When called on not knowing what you are talking about you move on to the next repitition sequence. As for talking about something with substance. Weinerdog is insane, his rantings dont usually come in the context of substance. When he trots out misinformation about substance MMFA will cover it as long as he spews insanity like how we ought to kill one hundred million Muslims that is what gets covered.
Solon,
Thank you for telling me what I beleive as a conservative. For someone who has constantly heckled me for mind reading and assuming things, you've set a wonderful example of hipocrisy.
[link to www.pbs.org] Read that, and tell me that chavez isn't anti-US. Come on, he's in collusion with Iran, China, Castro, and other anti-west nations/groups. I know he's not coming up to your front door and telling you that he hates America and your way of life, but you have got to be able to read between the lines here. He is dependent on our money, therefore he can't do anything to wild. But make no mistake, this guy is not our friend.
As for your argument in favor of socialized healthcare, I ask you this: Do you want your hard earned tax dollars paying for people who are taking the free ride? Even worse, people who are here illegally taking the free ride? You are already paying for illegal children's education...doesn't that bother you? Personally, I don't want to give one measley penny that I earn to a free loader or an illegal. Maybe we could offer healthcare for all LEGAL citizens that HAVE A FULL TIME JOB, and that could be a nice middle road.
Man you not only cant MAKE a point you cant even RECOGNIZE one when it slaps you upside the head. YOU were telling us how WE think in your post so I turned it around on you to show how worthless the tactic is EVEN SAYING that was what I was doing. Exactly what did you think THIS meant? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There, a couple of baseless assertions. Mischaracterizations as worthless and without substance as the idiocy you just spewed. Its really easy to do. Just state an extreme opinion as fact and then let fly with the mindless propaganda repitition. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Your link only shows hositilty to our policies and the Bush administration he keeps saying Bush or our government that is THIS adminstration, the one that tried to depose him. There isnt any question we have a history of hegemony in the region we overthrew democratic governments and installed military dictatorships in Guatemala in 53, Brazil in 64. The Dominican Republic in 64 and Chile in 73. He opposes that good for him so do I lets stop doing that. YOU keep trying to blur the distinction between who we are and what some adminstrations sometimes DOES. Its this simplemindedness that keeps you repeating the propaganda. Bush is not America his adminstration is NOT AMERICA.
I dont care what you think of socialism. YOU ask if I want to use my taxes to give people a free ride, a quaint mischaracterization. I could do the same and ask if YOU want to starve hungry children? That is all worthless, try using your brain and finding the REAL question. Are we going to help those who NEED help or arent we? Your mischaracterizations of our positions are either due to constant lapping up of the propaganda or not enough thought put into the questions.
maybe I don't listen to his sociopathic rantings enough, but WTF is a "meatloaf thrower"???
This might answer the meatloaf question.
[link to www.washingtonpost.com]
Meatloaf thrower, I think, refers to an incident in NYC. Mike Wallace's driver was double parked in front of a restaurant so he could pick up his favorite dish, meatloaf, from a joint that supposedly makes the best. He got into a shouting match with a law enforcement officer re: having a limo double parked while he picked up his meatloaf. I'm not sure how Dr. Weiner got to the part about throwing it. Perhaps Dr. Weenie suggested Mike Wallace should throw it at the cop next time.
Barbara Walters wants to interview and understand him. There is one thing real Americans understand, Barbara, you're either with us or against us. I hate those who are against us and theres nothing wrong with it.
God forbid we "understand" our 'enemy". Isn't that the point of National Intelligence? I guess intelligence it is not needed when discussing our "enemies" in neo-con circles. It wasn't used when we invaded Iraq. Why should neo-cons start using it now? Also, the word enemy is used so loosely by neo-cons: Muslims, Latinos, homosexuals, Blacks, Hollywood, comedians, judges, kittens, puppies, etc.... These days, who isn't their "enemy"?
Just look at what happened when we tried to understand polio, or malaria, or measles. Look where we ended up by trying to understand arsonists, or serial killers. How foolish were we to try to understand malnutrition or the plague? We nearly gave up everything once we understood aerodynamics and combustion priciples.
Keep America safe. Stay ignorant.
BRAID
Your right, this site needs to stop cherry picking the things that Savage says when he gets into one of his over the edge moods which isn't what he does most of the time. I realize you liberals on this site don't plan on listening to show when it is live. But that is the best way to find out just exactly what he is all about. I am not denying that he says those things. If you spend your time listening to him you will notice that he is not a pimp to the republican party like Limbaugh and Hannity. I don't know how anyone can listen to those two everyday when all it basically is is republicans good democrats bad. For me its quite boring. Mondays show was probably one of the best he has ever done, listen to it on talk radio network. He feels that Bush is a failure as a president and a shameful failure as a commander in chief. He also feels that a commander in chief is the one that goes out into the battlefield and commands the army in battle. The very thought of bush being a commander in chief makes him want to puke and so do I. He says Rumsfield or as Savage calls him,"Rumsfled", should pay for his mistakes and fight along side the Marines driving around in an unarmed Humvy, I hope I spelled that right. When Bush announced his new "strategy" for the war in Iraq, Savage was the only conservative voice in the media that was against it and he said that if Limbaugh and Hannity are so for sending in more troops then they shoud go volunteer and fight themselves. See this is just a taste of what you'll get when listening to Savage. You liberals need to stop relying on websites such as this one that only cherry picks. I believe the reason why some of you don't want to listen to him is because your afraid that you'll get sucked in just as I was two years ago. I live in Davis, CA a very liberal town but not like Marin county. This town is also the home of the Whole Earth Festival, which is actually quite fun. The point that I am trying to get at is that when I moved here three years ago I had a ponytail and had a peace sign on my bumper. I was into all of that. But when one of the workers at a local coffee shop I go to turned his show on my first initial reaction was, "Who is this guy and what is he doing speaking and expressing himself like nobody I ever heard before". He gave me a headache at first but then I kept listening to him everyday and I couldn't figure out why. Then I started looking at things through his eyes and I have never looked back since. The last hing I want to say is that before I started listening to him I was watching all those reality shows on Television, the ridiculous sitcoms and I am also man enough to admit that I was even watching two soap operas that I had been watching since I was 11, I'm 23 by the way. I have since stopped watching the reality shows, the two soap operas, "B&B and ATWT". Also within the last month I have stopped watching the cable news shows, even the local news. The only time I turn on the TV is to when I pop in a movie and maybe 2 specific shows I like. Some of you may say that Savage is a brainwasher. To me he is a braincleanser.
Chris, believe it or not I enjoy your posts, so I apologize if this sounds mean, but do you realize your testimony sounds exactly like that of a cult member?
His "shtick" is that he's not a republican apologist. And that's exactly what it is: shtick. He uses it to separate himself from the other conserative pundits because he's not good enough to compete with limpaugh and hannity, first and foremost, and secondly because his format doesn't take any prep or research. In other words, he's untalented and lazy.
As far as his being your savior, who keepeth thine eyes from soap operas and reality shows, most of us liberals who don't watch that garbage avoid them of our own accord and recognition that they are mindless and juvenile, not because of some venom spewing psycho-character on the radio.
Take another look at your pony tail and peace symbol, and measure the damage they were doing as compared to a fame-hungry self-aggrandizing head case calling barbara walters a sl*t.
By the way, he gets 30 minutes of my ear every day during my commute. I have yet to hear anything of any substance from him.
Chris,
I know exactly where you are coming from...I'm quite similar in the sense that just over a year ago, my views were basically liberal. I started paying attention more to what was going on, and realized there is a whole other side to every story that you wont find in the mainstream media. That, coupled with me being in the process of earning a bachelor's degree in history and learning about mistakes nations have made in the past, has made me realize that liberal movement of today has the chance to crumble a great country. And for those wondering, I accepted conservative values before I started listening to Savage. Savage is a great independent thinker who helps expand on conservative ideals.
It basically narrows down to this, and I would like to see what everyone else here thinks about this statement:
Freedom for a conservative translates to the fact that our country needs laws set in place to uphold the values, character, and traditions of our country....and people are free to do whatever it is they want to do in their private life.
Freedom for a liberal translates to the fact that a person has freedom to do whatever they please...however; whatever that may be, there should be a law to protect it, therefore forcing society as a whole to accept it.
I don't claim to read minds (even though I do happen to be a practicing magician..not kidding), so tell me what I can add/subtract from these definitions of freedom if you don't like them.
Freedom for a conservative translates to the fact that our country needs laws set in place to uphold the values, character, and traditions of our country....and people are free to do whatever it is they want to do in their private life.
Glad to hear it. You won't mind then when we set in place some laws to uphold MY values, right? Mine are so far superior to yours that I'm sure you'll be pleased in the end. I'm not sure what upholding the character means. Is that the character of the northeast, south, midwest, southwest, northwest....? Maybe territorial laws can solve that problem. And we definitely need laws to uphold the traditions of children working 12hour shifts at the factory, women without the right to vote, separate black drinking fountains and bus seats, shooting buffalo from the train, burning our trash in the backyard, and utilizing the police to break union strikes. In fact, unions will be outlawed, as in the traditions of the late 19th century. Don't forget to pick off a few Indians when plugging the buffalo. If you can't shoot them, smallpox-laced blankets will do in a pinch. Oh, and one more thing: Chris has traditionally been a girls name. The new laws will reflect that, and you'll be required to get either a name change, or a sex-change. I'm still liberal, so I'll leave the choice up to you.
Yep, I think this is going to work out great. It truly will be a savage nation.
How can you stand to live in this evil country? Aren't you overcome with guilt every minute, for havingtaken part in the atrocities you describe (don't deny that the propensity, and therefore the responsibility, to transgress is in your genes; therefore there is personal guilt to be mitigated).
And since Savage's "Borders, Language, and Culture" is laughable to you, may I assume you will be supporting Bush in his NORTH AMERICAN UNION?
"Freedom for a conservative translates to the fact that our country needs laws set in place to uphold the values, character, and traditions of our country....and people are free to do whatever it is they want to do in their private life."
Huh? Who decides what those 'national values, character and traditions' are? Conservatives? White, middle class America? Enforced by law no less. Truly scary.
Freedom for a liberal translates to the fact that a person has freedom to do whatever they please...however; whatever that may be, there should be a law to protect it, therefore forcing society as a whole to accept it.
Why don't you just come out and say it: No abortion, no gay marriage, prayer in schools, English language only, etc...
Sure, i'll agree to all that. But how about tradition defined as hard working people who make their own way in life and don't rely on government to make their ends meet. That includes immigrants who come here legally to work and make a better life for themselves. I have no problem with that, and I am all for basic rights for women and non-whites. Just no special treatment. Special Interest groups can have their special interests and nobody will bother them.
Because no one EVER gets a dibilitating disease, or in a bad accident at the wrong time of their life and NEEDS a little temporary help right? OF COURSE THEY DO. The real question ISNT there anyone who legitimatly needs help there isnt any question that sometimes they do. The question is WILL we help those in legitimate need or wont we. Now once that question is answered lets talk about ways to separate those who take advantage with those who actually need help. I am all for it. Everyone I know is. That isnt what you are doing though is it. No you are PRETENDING that EVERYONE is just taking advantage. The idea that it is a way of life for legions of parasites is not consistant with the facts.
The fundamental flaw on conservative thinking is this two headed monster you conjure: Man makes his own way, man as a dependent.
We are interdependent. Not a single soul on this planet achieves or receives anything without direct or indirect help from their fellow man. Just as your labor benefits others, everything you consume or utilize is there but for the labor of somebody else. This country is teeming with kind, tireless, hard working salt of the earth people. Some have been successful , some not so successful but to willfully neglect your fellow countrymen and countrywomen because you deem them lazy is reckless. The foundation of a great society, to which we all contribute variously, is health, education, security and liberty. Can anyone attain these elements on their own?
Yes, we will have a tiny proportion of individuals who will game the system. But is it more important, is it in our national economic interest to assure nobody has support when they take risks and fail or are stricken ill, just so we can say there are no free lunches?
Personal responsibility means being responsible for actions, or inaction, that cause harm to other people. Personal responsibility is social responsibilty.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372
During the 1960s median black family income rose 53 percent; black employment in professional, technical, and clerical occupations doubled; and average black educational attainment increased by four years. The proportion of blacks below the poverty line fell from 55 percent in 1960 to 27 percent in 1968. The black unemployment rate fell 34 percent. The country had taken major strides toward extending equality of opportunity to black Americans. In addition, the number of whites below the poverty line dropped dramatically, and such poverty-plagued regions as Appalachia made significant economic strides.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060403fa_fact
Between 1964 and 1973, as Johnson’s Great Society programs went into effect, the poverty rate fell from nineteen per cent of the population to 11.1 per cent.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372
In 1960, 40 million Americans, 20 percent of the population, were classified as poor. By 1969, their number had fallen to 24 million, 12 percent of the population. Johnson also pledged to qualify the poor for new and better jobs, to extend health insurance to the poor and elderly to cover hospital and doctor costs, and to provide better housing for low-income families. Here too Johnson could say he had delivered. Infant mortality among the poor, which had barely declined between 1950 and 1965, fell by one?third in the decade after 1965 as a result of expanded federal medical and nutritional programs. Before 1965, 20 percent of the poor had never seen a doctor; by 1970 the figure had been cut to 8 percent. The proportion of families living in houses lacking indoor plumbing also declined steeply, from 20 percent in 1960 to 11 percent a decade later.
http://home.att.net/~Resurgence/L-welfarepoverty.htm
Myth: Welfare increases poverty.Fact: The more welfare, the less poverty -- both historically and internationally. Summary The historical evidence is clear: welfare reduces poverty, and the lack of it increases it. In the 1920s, fully half of all Americans could not make ends meet. Roosevelt's New Deal programs had reduced poverty to about 20 percent in the 50s. Johnson's Great Society reduced this to 11.1 percent by 1973. Since the rise of the corporate special interest system in 1975, individual welfare benefits have been shrinking, and poverty has been steadily rising, to over 15 percent today.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372
During the 1960s median black family income rose 53 percent; black employment in professional, technical, and clerical occupations doubled; and average black educational attainment increased by four years. The proportion of blacks below the poverty line fell from 55 percent in 1960 to 27 percent in 1968. The black unemployment rate fell 34 percent. The country had taken major strides toward extending equality of opportunity to black Americans. In addition, the number of whites below the poverty line dropped dramatically, and such poverty-plagued regions as Appalachia made significant economic strides.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060403fa_fact
Between 1964 and 1973, as Johnson’s Great Society programs went into effect, the poverty rate fell from nineteen per cent of the population to 11.1 per cent.
I don't care whether or not welfare reduces poverty. Lazy bums don't deserve a government paycheck. It's their own fault that they're poor. I'd rather have them stay in poverty than get welfare.
If you love welfare so much, why are you a fan of Clinton? He signed welfare reform.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372
In 1960, 40 million Americans, 20 percent of the population, were classified as poor. By 1969, their number had fallen to 24 million, 12 percent of the population. Johnson also pledged to qualify the poor for new and better jobs, to extend health insurance to the poor and elderly to cover hospital and doctor costs, and to provide better housing for low-income families. Here too Johnson could say he had delivered. Infant mortality among the poor, which had barely declined between 1950 and 1965, fell by one?third in the decade after 1965 as a result of expanded federal medical and nutritional programs. Before 1965, 20 percent of the poor had never seen a doctor; by 1970 the figure had been cut to 8 percent. The proportion of families living in houses lacking indoor plumbing also declined steeply, from 20 percent in 1960 to 11 percent a decade later.
Myth: Welfare increases poverty.Fact: The more welfare, the less poverty -- both historically and internationally. Summary The historical evidence is clear: welfare reduces poverty, and the lack of it increases it. In the 1920s, fully half of all Americans could not make ends meet. Roosevelt's New Deal programs had reduced poverty to about 20 percent in the 50s. Johnson's Great Society reduced this to 11.1 percent by 1973. Since the rise of the corporate special interest system in 1975, individual welfare benefits have been shrinking, and poverty has been steadily rising, to over 15 percent today.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=372
In 1960, 40 million Americans, 20 percent of the population, were classified as poor. By 1969, their number had fallen to 24 million, 12 percent of the population. Johnson also pledged to qualify the poor for new and better jobs, to extend health insurance to the poor and elderly to cover hospital and doctor costs, and to provide better housing for low-income families. Here too Johnson could say he had delivered. Infant mortality among the poor, which had barely declined between 1950 and 1965, fell by one?third in the decade after 1965 as a result of expanded federal medical and nutritional programs. Before 1965, 20 percent of the poor had never seen a doctor; by 1970 the figure had been cut to 8 percent. The proportion of families living in houses lacking indoor plumbing also declined steeply, from 20 percent in 1960 to 11 percent a decade later.
I'm sorry, but numbers (which can be manipulated in so many ways) just can't match up to the cold hard facts of history. You're going to hate every word of this, but i'll present a story that Savage often refers to and is presented in his books (and I suspect millions of other Americans have gone through similar situations as well):
When Savage was young, his father had a heart attack...the kind of unexpected tragedy that you refered to earlier. Savage notes that obviously, there was no socialized healthcare back then and his family didnt have the money to pay for hospital costs. However, his family dug into their savings and worked extra long hours on the job to pay for the costs. Nobody else had to fund that family's tragedy. Solon, my friend, that is the right way of doing things. If one of my family members had a tragedy happen to them, I wouldn't want or expect one dime in free help. Can you just come out and say that you and those who you feel are in need really just want things handed to them for nothing? Please just admit that and we can move one more step up the ladder of understanding eachother.
If one of my family members had a tragedy happen to them, I wouldn't want or expect one dime in free help.
What if you NEEDED "free help"? Would you just let your loved one die? What if you had no savings or were already working long hours? Heck, why should a family have to make sacrifices for the basic human right to health care?
Anecdotal evidence can be manipulated even more easily than numbers, and thus proves less.
Handouts? Pishaw.
Why would you gleefully chose to make life a struggle for your family? I've found that folks who have problems accepting help also have problems providing help. That's fine it's your right to clamp your soul shut, to live as separatist, but you're missing the plot.
I work for a company that provides medical and dental benefits, stock and stock options at the lowest possible rate. They offer paid time off, tuition reimbursement, maternity leave and on and on goes the list. They have created a support network for us in exchange for our labor. In short they take care of us not because they are forced to but because they know that investing in us promotes a healthy profitable environment.
Why should we view our fellow countrymen as unworthy of similar consideration? The guy who cleans your dishes in your favorite restaurant provides a service for your convenience and health. Where is the appreciation for the people who serve coffee, drive trucks, build houses, clean toilets, where is the appreciation for the American laborer?
We work for each other, homie. We deserve mutual respect.
Why do you keep repeating this vapid, inane talking point? The argument is dumb. Making sense is what he is supposed to do, THAT is what he gets PAID to do, he doesnt get extra credit for doing that which he can THEN cash in so as NOT to get called on his insanity, bigotry and hatemongering. Its about like saying to a policeman, hey I know I drove drunk and went up on the sidewalk running over six or seven pedestrians but you dont talk about the thousands of times I drove to work WITHOUT killing anyone.
Also this is NOT your website, its not UP to you how MMFA runs it. Feel free to start your OWN website, I suggest calling it WeinerdogWorshipperSupreme.dum. To even things up be sure to tell us your url so we can drop in and tell YOU how we think you ought to run it.
Chris,
You're an adult now..clean your own brain.
Tweo things here. FIrst, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Weiner obviously has a problem with women. This is probably due to some physical limitations such as a very teeny weeny.
Second, what else did Chavez have to say? Weiner didn't air Chavez's full response. And for crying out load. BW wasn't calling Bush names and using Chavez as a fulcrum to do so. She was quoting CHavez. I think Chavez and Weiner would probably make good "friends for life."
Hmmm...as I've already posted before I don't always agree with Savage. In fact I disagree with him often, for example I don't, in fact, think that Walters is a "double talking s*ut". I would also however venture to say that Savage probably doesn't either. Simply put, Savage is a mixture between a shock jock and commentator who happens to be right on the most important issues (borders, language and culture). Add that to the fact that he's liable to say anything and he not only has cons listening but libs as well. To this end he's vastly increased his audience which is one reason he's so highly rated (stop crying Al Franken). I was too busy yesterday to check the site and didn't have a chance to respond to the topic but even I will admit that sometimes Savage goes too far. This is one of those times. Lucky for Dr. Savage, we do have free speech in this countr, and he's already made it very clear he's got good lawyers
I think that was a reasonable posting SR. I would say that when they look at their respective BOOK SALES it is Weiner who does the crying but that is another story.
Quit it! It really isn't fair picking on Savage because no one in his audience can read!
Well, as long as we're talking "scoreboard" I'd like to remind you that Franken has 2 best selling books to Savage's 4. In addition, when they went head to head on the radio Savage buried Franken in the ratings war, probably one reason he left radio for politics, he just can't compete.
How many times are you going to repeat "Savage isn't a bad guy, he just goes too far" before you stop? Borders, language, culture, borders, language, culture. If I told you Clinton had a great recipe for chile con carne, would you vote for her? Maybe Savage doesn't deny the Holocaust like some other scum. That doesn't mean he's not scum at all. This is NOT an isolated incident. Weiner does NOT fly off the handle at times. This may not be typical, but it happens A LOT, he KNOWS what he's doing, and HE DOESN'T APOLOGIZE.
Please think of a new catchphrase before you post next time.
"Borders, Language, and Culture" is apparently a hallmark of bigotry to you.
From that I am assuming that you will be supporting Dubya and his NORTH AMERICAN UNION.
What were the chances of THAT?
I have no idea what you are talking about. WeinerRocks just sounded like a broken record to me. "I don't agree with Savage" is another of his signature catchphrases, not a hallmark of bigotry (otherwise there would be only a few non-bigots around here) but that doesn't mean he can keep repeating it until he wins the argument.
I was unaware that you MUST apologize if you hurt someone's feelings, maybe you think the Dr. should be sent to a reeducation camp. The reason I repeat the "borders, language, culture" mantra when defending Savage is because it's infinately more important than any other message out there today. Comparing it to a chile con carne recipe is completely ridiculous. Does Savage make mistakes? yes. Does he say things which the brown shirts would want to put him in jail for? Yes. However, the fact that Savage has the right to say such things is a testament to the importance of the first amendment. If Savage were silenced for saying such thing there would then be a precedence to silence others, even on the opposite end of the spectrum. How do you libs say it? "Slippery slope"?
I was unaware that you MUST apologize if you hurt someone's feelings, No, but you SHOULD apologize if you make an @$$ of yourself. My point was, you keep yapping about how BS like this isn't typical Weiner-speak, even though HE SAYS IT ALL THE TIME and KNOWS HE'S SAYING IT. You sound like a battered wife making excuses like "he still loves me" and "he doesn't know his own strength".
maybe you think the Dr. should be sent to a reeducation camp. Well, I'd say he desperately needs some kind of education that's about something besides nutrition (no offense to any nutrition experts who may be reading this site).
The reason I repeat the "borders, language, culture" mantra when defending Savage is because it's infinately more important than any other message out there today. Are you saying that Weiner's insanity is excused by these talking points? If yes, then you can surely find a sane person to champion them. If not, then it's irrelevant.
Does Savage make mistakes? yes. And you make excuses for him.
Does he say things which the brown shirts would want to put him in jail for? Yes. The UPS people?
However, the fact that Savage has the right to say such things is a testament to the importance of the first amendment. If Savage were silenced for saying such thing there would then be a precedence to silence others, even on the opposite end of the spectrum. How do you libs say it? "Slippery slope"? Another stupid straw man argument. Nobody here wants to infringe upon Weiner's freedom of speech (at least not me). The point is, he is getting PRIVILEGE. Radio personalities make good money, and his money is being made by, or despite of his, smearing others. He shouldn't be silenced, but neither should he be given such power to spread his hate.
Unless you think a citizen's right to a radio show is protected under the first amendment. In which case, where's The iflurry Nation? Shouldn't you be helping me get my own radio show so I can tell the nation about same-sex marriage and medicinal marijuana?
Iflurry, you have a first amendment right to speech, but the free market still applies to talk radio. If you have talent, then send a demo tape to radio stations across the country, just like Savage did. Maybe one station will give you a show. If you're interesting, you can become successful like Dr. Savage. Michael Savage for President! Borders, language, culture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reading Savage's comments I wonder when a psychiatrist is going to put him on the couch to see just what's wrong with him. He obviously has an issue with gays, but methinks he doth protest too much. I'm sure there are old issues there he doesn't want to fess up to.
I tried to send emails about his comments, but they all come back undeliverable. It must be nice to have only your opinion and never hear the other side. This boy needs major help.
HAHA HA....HAHA I LOVE SAVAGE...ew gross