Savage: Media Matters "is a fascist front group"
On the November 14 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage referred to Media Matters for America as a "fascist front group." As Media Matters has documented, on the September 26 edition of his radio show, while discussing Fox News host Bill O'Reilly's controversial comments on his own radio show about his visit to Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem, Savage called Media Matters for America a "gay, fascist website." Savage has also labeled the organization a "hate group," a "group of gay Mafiaso," "the homosexual Mafia," and "a gay smear sheet." On the January 30 broadcast of his show, Savage called Media Matters a "little website" and claimed, "I'm not even going to read its name anymore."
On his November 14 show, Savage later added: "Media Matters was created by Hillary Clinton, and they're after Michael Savage. They're after Bill O'Reilly. They're after anybody that doesn't toe the Hillary, left-wing party line." As it has repeatedly noted, Media Matters is a progressive nonprofit organization and is not affiliated with any candidate or political party.
The Savage Nation reaches more than 8 million listeners each week, according to Talkers Magazine, making it one of the most listened-to talk radio shows in the nation, behind only The Rush Limbaugh Show and The Sean Hannity Show.
From the November 14 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: I'll go to the callers. Marcus in Cincinnati on WKRC, go ahead please.
CALLER: Dr. Savage, I wanted to let you know that I'm a socially - I'm socially liberal, fiscally conservative, and I wanted to let you know that I feel like you're a real iconoclast. You're beholden to no man, and we really appreciate. There are few socially liberal folks in the country who really appreciate what you do every night.
SAVAGE: Well, I hope so. Some of my family members are socially liberal and fiscally conservative, but it doesn't mean I hate them.
CALLER: No, absolutely not, I understand that. I thought it was important to let you know you talk to a lot of people who are extremely angry at you on the show, and I don't feel like it's fair.
SAVAGE: Well, they're the extremists, like in the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They're trying to destroy my show, because they claim to be into religious freedom, or groups like Media Matters, which is a fascist front group, which was created in part by Hillary Clinton. I can't believe you'd want to line yourself up with them. They're not social liberals. I don't think you would agree with that. I mean, I don't think you'd agree that they're socially liberal groups.
CALLER: Well, I absolutely don't. I don't trust Hillary Clinton as far as I can throw her.
SAVAGE: Well, Media Matters was created by Hillary Clinton, and they're after Michael Savage. They're after Bill O'Reilly. They're after anybody that doesn't toe the Hillary, left-wing party line. Thank you. Are you originally from Ireland?
CALLER: Yes.
SAVAGE: That's why you like iconoclasts.
CALLER: What's that?
SAVAGE: That's why you like iconoclasts like me.
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
SAVAGE: Well, Media Matters was created by Hillary Clinton, and they're after Michael Savage. They're after Bill O'Reilly. They're after anybody that doesn't toe the Hillary, left-wing party line. Thank you. Are you originally from Ireland?
Ok we all agree Savage is a sick man , but is it not true that MMFA is not after OReilly? They hate him
Is it not true that O'Reilly is one of the leading disseminators of 'conservative mis-information' in today's society?
You state the obvious.
Are you kidding? They LOVE him! If it weren't for all of his lies and penchant for right-wing propagande they'd have a lot less to write about.
Get it strait: O'Reilly ends up on this site BECAUSE HE LIES. Pure and simple, and proven many times over.
"Liking" him or "hating" doesn't enter into it.
I agree. If Bill gets a story on him every other day its only because he is so obviously full of crap.
I heard Savage say this the other night and got a good chuckle out of it. When the man's right, he's right. Everybody's out to get him taken off the air, but, alas, it won't happen.
And likewise, despite all the rightwing hatred of Media Matters, they will never succeed in silencing this site.
When the Wienerdog is a lunatic he is a lunatic and that is all the time. I dont care if he stays on the air or goes to a nice rubber room and gets the help he so desperatly needs. His paranoia seems to be contagious though, looks like you caught it.
Paranoia??? This whole site is one, little, paranoic rant about conservatives in the media. Meanwhile, all the liberal moonbattery goes unchallenged. Out of sight, out of mind. But, being out of their minds, let the liberals blather away amongst themselves: they don't MATTER(S) anyway.
Oh lordy, but you guys on the rightwing batwagon have tons of rightwing sites that do what you claim doesn't exist. Several well knowns ones as well. That THEY lie as well seems be overlooked by the rightwing whackjobs so long as they say things the rightwingers feel justifies their worldview.
Truthiness exists and exists well on the rightwing sites that claim to expose democrats.
Sure les is a moron. I am certain you give MRC and AIM the same little speech. No then again I bet you dont. It isnt paranoia to see rightwing misinformation in the media. IF you are saying there is leftwing misinformation fine. Start your own website and talk about it. Good luck with that. Dont forget to call us all in to tell you what a moron you are for your paranoia. Your stupidity doesnt constitute a problem of ours.
MMFA has "conservative" counterparts out there. Go find some. They are always lame though, because there is a total lack of material unless you crop or misrepresent things.
So go enjoy those. MMFA is like a robot. OReily says some stupid sh*t and MMFA posts the transcripts, video, etc.
Um..... LES,
Ever wonder why that is (about liberal media).....
That perhaps you never hear much in the way of it being exposed is because it (liberal media) actually uses facts when writing/speaking about issues.... so by nature there is little to no reason for liberal media to lie..... since facts usually do the job!
Do you people all drink from the same kool-aid jug in here? Left-wingnuts use facts like they use their brains: they don't have any.
But seriously, after listening to the recent CNN Dem debate aren't you disappointed with the current crop of Dem dunces running for Prez? Hillary now wears a cancer-causing pant-suit ( hence her rabid push for "universal healthcare") and can't even answer a straight question. Obama has no real idea what he's talking about, and no idea how to go after Hillary. Edwards is finished, and Richardson is all over the map, and apparently, in love with himself for some reason.
Biden is the only one who makes sense once in a while, but he loves himself even more than Richardson.
Why don't you focus on helping out the leftist party instead of wasting valuable time cherry-picking some of the things that right wingers say? Some of which is meant for effect, anyway.
MMFA does not hate Bill O'reilly - they hate what he says and what he does.
What frightens me is this statement
The Savage Nation reaches more than 8 million listeners each week, according to [link to www.talkers.com] title="http://mediamatters.org/rd?[link to www.talkers.com] color="#0052a3">Talkers Magazine, making it one of the most listened-to talk radio shows in the nation, behind only The Rush Limbaugh Show and The Sean Hannity Show.
If the right has more listeners than the left, and no one refutes what they say on the air. We have a big problem.
I live in a very Red county in MD, and I can tell you my neighbors, think the liberals are nuts. they REALLY do not believe in Universal heath care, do not believe that we should pull out of Iraq, beleive we should defeat Iran.
We as deocrats need to make sure we are really on messege to insure a win
Is it also not true that Hillary helped start mmfa? she admits it here - [link to www.youtube.com]
youtube.com/watch?v=jbzC6-N9mwM
One more time, the genesis of MMFA is well documented.
[link to query.nytimes.com]
I don't know why the far right is acting like it's discovered gold when the facts have been available to any interested part for years now.
Give it time, Johnny, the internets are still new to them.
JOHNNY:
YOU FIBBED!
You said, "I don't know why the far right is acting like it's discovered gold when the facts have been available to any interested part for years now."
You know EXACTLY why the Rightwing is not moved, informed, or persuaded by mere FACTS. They have their own NARRATIVE to follow, and it is held together by a scattering of shreds of "gotchas" that they focus upon to the exclusion of all else. By this, they have created their alternative reality, the universe which reflects their world view and, they think, justifies their so-called "policy positions."
Does Hillary "SUPPORT" Media Matters? I have no doubt; a great many Americans support this site for its good work exposing the lies and misinformation of the rightwing.
She did say "create and support" ... and the rightwing has a big problem with the word "create", which they believe synonymous with the word "invent," (and also, in some instances, confuse with "science".)
The really SAD part is, what if their "gotcha" is completely true? (It ISN'T, but this is a "what if?".) What if it's not George Soros, but Hillary Clinton who is "behind" creating/inventing Media Matters? So the hell what?
They believe, these rightwingers, that if they can just tie a site they don't like to a PERSON they don't like, they have created/invented a NEXUS which then allows them to ignore and discount everything they see and hear. They can disconnect their brains and disregard the FACTS presented here, and smugly say, "Ah, that comes from Hillary/Soros, so there cannot be any truth." They say this to fool THEMSELVES, because anyone with the cognitive ability of a first grader knows that what is presented here is the VERBATIM WORDS of the persons themselves.
So, really Johnny, you DO know why the Rightwing believes things that have been proven over and over to be untrue. Because they MUST. Because to introduce TRUTH into their lives would mean they have been living lives based on LIES, and that would be too much of a shock for them to contemplate.
She helped MMFA get started the same way we all did: Posting, visiting, telling others, and some of us made contribtions.
Big Deal. (but please, keep beating it to death, since that's the worst you could come up with)
Speak for yourself Therrick.
Are you NOT posting here?
That is an idiotic question unto itself, I am obvously posting here; what where you questioning? my post! and with what where you just answered? another of my posts!
General, SIR, then using your Repug-logic, Al Gore did invent the internet...You must agree SIR, because he said it. Yes SIR.
Al Gore? The man who also invented "man-made GW?" I can't wait to hear his solution to the coming "man-made global cooling."
Less, is you were any lesser you'd be a black hole.
The solution to global cooling? Give Al Gore a microphone and a soapbox and all that hot air will melt the ice caps.
No it is not true.
Come on Mikey get it correctly!
Liberals are Commies
Conservatives are Facists
So MMFA is a Commie Front Group
First poster that throws a hissy fit over my post can kiss my arse.
;-)
Reminds me of All In The Family - "You liberal pinko commie meathead!" "...Those were the days..." (sung to the tune) :)
I still catch the reruns whenever I can :-)
The scary thing is some of the stuff said on that 1970's sitcom is still being uttered today.
Ha! Guess we haven't come as far as we thought. ;-)
THANK YOU!
I'm tired of all the right-wing hack jobs calling anything leftist or liberal FASCIST! Get it right morons - FASCISTS were RIGHT WINGERS!!! You sound (more) like idiots when you get that wrong! If you have to resort to 3rd grade playground slurs at least get it right and call us COMMIES!!!
Idiots.
I thought we were Socialists !?!
Commies, Socialists, Liberals...it's all the same :-O
Just kidding. Please don't anyone have a nervous breakdown ;-)
Nazism is considered to be the epitome of facism.
The Nazi Party = National Socialist German Workers' Party.
Facism, communism, socialism. Different names for the same group of 'progressive', leftist people. The same progressives that are anti-war and yet abdicate violence towards those not of thier 'progressive' ideals. The same people who want to feed a man but starve his soul. You're looters and moochers. The absolute dregs of society and a body of rot.
On the right, we're the last defenders of real human freedom. We're the real humanitarians. We're the producers.
Conservitism is freedom.
I guess that means that "The People's Republic of China" is made up of Republicans?
It's funny that conservatives are the ones who fight against Progressive regulations for business and try to claim that the unregulated market paradise of China is the object of our leftwing affection.
We fight for good worker rights and safety, while Republicans, just like the Chinese, attempt to hold down the rights and power of laborers.
sanosuke is way off base.
That would follow insanosuck's logic, Nerzog. The Nazis were apparently anti-war as well. Who knew?
The wonderful things we learn from the wingnuts!
Sort of the way Conservatives practice conservation. lol
Abdicate violence?
You inadvertently wrote absolute truth. The Progressive left advocates a participation is power ethic and abdicates the violence is power credo of the rightwing.
Progressives brought us the expanded civil rights, such as the right to vote for women and black people. Progressives brought us the eight hour work day and child labor laws. The Progressove left gave us clean water and safe food. High standards is what Progressives give government because we believe in the common good.
What have conservatives given the people? Unitary Executive authority? Community ripping every man for himself market competition.? Higher concetration of wealth at the very top and crumbs for the self same hard working Americans that enable the wealthy to prosper?
Conservatives forsook community and family values when they adopted the notion that good business is purely about profit maximization instead of community and environmental stewardship.
BTW I'll pretend you weren't spreading another staple of the radical right: eliminationist rhetoric.
'What have conservatives given the people?'
for starters... how about the emancipation proclamation. think real hard about which group would have voted for that - even as recently as algore's daddy and sen. byrd.
So you're out there on the front lines defending freedom, right?
Amazing!
Those that are always going on about freedom needing to be defended are usually the last ones to put their own asses on the line.
Go sell that crap to the Chickenhawks on the right.
Well San you packed a whole lot of ignorance in that post. First of all the Nazis were socialists in name only they put socialists and Communists in concentration camps right next to Jews. Conservatism is a virulent form of stupidity, like yours, in fact you are a good example. It wants to starve children and start wars for no reason other than killing people and making profits. At least that is as grounded in reality as the bilge you just spewed.
Someone's been hanging out at FrontPage Magazine too much or just has his head stuck up David Horowitz's arse.
If you are going to use words like "left" and "right" in any reasonable way then you must recognize them as part of a political spectrum. I know it's tempting to blame one's boogeyman for EVERYTHING, but really...Hilter was not "left" of center.
Michael Savage says it best "Liberalism is a mental disorder". Liberal politicians are still on their meds which clouds the truth. America will soon be flushed down the sewer if the liberals keep making clouded(by meds) decisions.
How many times do I have to tell you Jeter?
I don't like being called a commie unless it's followed by the word "bastard".
Ok King, but only because you're one of my favorite posters:
King, you are a Commie Bastard!
;-)
You are all commie bastards!! (notice the lack of smiley face [meaning i am serious])
after the fall of soviet russia the communists where without home and they spread like a vile spore across the earth, disguising themselves in percievably benighn liberalism. why do libs like china so much? simply because it is a riencarnation of soviet russia, and all things socialist are darlings of liberalism (socialized healthcare, international courts, etc.).
Hitting the weiner fumes early tonight, aren't you? Liberals like China? commie spore becoming liberalism? wha?
This is quite a theory. I think Thomas Jefferson (a liberal) would be surprised to learn that he was a commie even before Karl Marx wrote his tome.
Utopianism and true communism are forms of governments not without merit, yet i dislike them for they call for the eradication of classes and the proletoriat, and this is really not fair, for if you cannot make it in life then you should not hold down those who can. A classless society will have no room for personal (financial) success and personal betterment, the next communist on the street would be unwilling to support himself and will drag you down as you are forced to support him with your greater profitability. A classless society is directly contrary to human nature, there will always be something to eny of another person, this is why communism is incompatibal with humanity and thus dysfunctional. Perhaps on another civilized specie, it could work but even Marx himself acknowledged the improbability of his communist theory working. also communism is very susceptible to a hijaaking by power hungry individuals, there would be no strong class in a classless society, thus once the people are isolated from eachother they have no power individually, and the hijackers easily transform the government into a socialist, totalitarian state.
finarfin, you're adorable! I know you're just doing sctick, but that is a dead-on terrified old geezer from the 50s.
Imagine , grown people used to swallow that crap. Har!
why thank you, je suis tres mignon, i cannot deny.
I stated my personal views as to why communism is dysfunctional and as to why i would dislike to have a communist government, it is not the red scare type, if you really want for me to give you the whole communism shpiel i shall, just ask, but i find it tiring.
No thanks, I've heard the whole spiel,or at least seen it in old movies. Do you know one about alligators in the sewers or the banshee in the well?
"as to why i would dislike to have a communist government"
Nice try...except coumminism isn't a form of government. It's an economic system.
Which are you - one of Bush's "have's" or "have-mores"?
FINARFIN:
I poste here often, and everyone knows I am strongly LIBERAL. Yet, I could have written your last post. I agree entirely, "communism" will fail whereever tried, because its tenets go counter to human nature.
Human beings are driven to compete, to improve themselves and the lives of their family, and to gain MATERIAL confirmation of their efforts.
Capitalism is the best economic system devised to allow the most prosperity for all, to encourage inventiveness, to foster progress. AMERICAN LIBERALS, like myself, are strong supporters of Capitalism, and reject Communism, and even embrace varying levels of "financial success".
What I'm saying, then, is that you're entirely correct about Communism, but completely WRONG in tying communism to American Liberalism. You have identified a wolf, and then rail against the Labrador as being "the same."
You are simply WRONG.
Well TEX yuo may find that HBL's posts are pproving my point, liberal acceptance of communism is widespread. It is the left wing radicals that are the true proponents of communism, It would justify many of thair radical goals (worldwide enviormental restrictions, an international court etc.) if the world was a communist state, imagine, equality for all, no evil capitalist corporations, no rich, etc. While not all liberals desire communism, if you analyze it carefully, communism(utopianism) is liberalism in the extreme, just as fascism is conservatism in the extreme.
I think you miss the argument. Let me try an analogy we have used before. If you are trying to get to the top of a very steep hill all the arguments about whether a Chevy or a Ford would be a better way to get there are detracting from the time and effort needed to GET TO THE TOP OF THE HILL, also the more you deify the vehicle the more of a straitjacket you put on yourself and the less likely you are to get to the top of the hill. The vehicles are the economic forms and the top of a hill is a just society. I dont care about the vehicle most importantly I dont care about DENYING one vehicle or another to other countries. Free people have every right to make a mistake and if they make one to correct it. Let them be communists. It isnt our problem. WE shouldnt be distacted from OUR goals by going into other countries and telling them they CANT use the Ford. A country isnt free if we are telling them they are only free to do what WE tell them. That is a HUGE waste of our resouces. Military, financial, and in moral suasion. Let other countries make their own mistakes and pay for them. THAT is the position most liberals I know support. As for your claim that liberalism is like communism in the way conservatism is like Fascism even if true is irrelevant. A Cow is more like an Elephant than a Gnat is. That doesnt make a cow an Elephant or makes reasonable any fear of cows based on a fear of Elephants.
Right on...but those countries are seen as an idealogical threats as well as economic ones. Also, when the wealth is redistributed in latin america or south america, some American companies with holdings in those countries are not happy.
I'll let the tragedy of Cuba speak for itself.
I also think that we should stay out of other countries business, but there is a point as that particular nation is climbing the (steep) "hill" with it's "Ford" it is killing the very masses it promises to benefit, It is a part of bieng compassionate to pressure a crazed dictator of one sort or another to stop massacreing his people. Also there is the desire to stay on top of the highest hill, we will always squander our position, we do not want other nations becoming a threat to our might, it will eventually lead to a conflict and one or another will lose.
Communism is not a form of government it is a form of ECONOMY. The USSR before its break up had the same FORM of government we have. A bicameral Congress, an executive branch and a Supreme Court. Utopianism is a term which basically means an ideal and perfect society. It also is not a form of government per say. So as for the rest of your blather except for saying you disagree with Marx, which is fine, you mostly make the point that you never seem to know what you are talking about. I suspect it comes from two facts. A) you dont. And B) you simply regurgitate what the hivemind has told you to think without understanding it.
Solon,
You are completely wrong. First of all, socialism would be considered a form of economy, though it certainly leaves some room for governmental policy. Communism's very name disproves you. Community = economy? Also http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html disproves you. Stop pretending to hold the wisdom of the Anointed. Talking like a pompous jerk when you're completely wrong is embarrassing. To address your point about the USSR: it wasn't communist. It was an authoritarian nation-state with a puppet show for a government.
The level of your bigotry, ignorance, and hate never ceases to amaze me. I remember when you told me I didn't know what partisanship meant. One trip to the dictionary confirmed I was right. It doesn't matter to you, though; why think with your brain when you have a heart?
We already KNEW you were a moron. Just because YOU are too stupid to understand, well virtually anything, in no way means I was wrong. I am NOT wrong. Communism is in FACT a form of economy and NOT a form of government.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Communism&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
An economic system in which capital is owned by private government. Contrasts with capitalism.[link to www-personal.umich.edu] color="#008000">www-personal.umich.edu/~alandear/glossary/c.html
An economic theory which stresses that the control of the means of producing economic goods in a society should reside in the hands of those who invest their labor for production. ...www.ilstu.edu/class/hist127/terms.html
So moron, feel free to find someone with a normal IQ to explain all that to you. You are ignorant. You could have a monarchial communism like the Incas did, you could have a democratic communism, or an oligarchic communism.
While I understand the claim that the USSR wasnt communistic, that is they eschewed many of Marx's theories like worker owned factories it doesnt really conform to reality to just say the USSR wasnt communistic. We certainly CALLED it communistic. How often did All the Presidents from Truman through Raygun say they WERE? What were they all lying? Just because YOU are stupid doesnt mean I am wrong. Get over yourself moron.
Did you know capitalizing words all over your posts to show your passion and emphasis doesn't make your point any less wrong? You sure do it a lot, so I just wanted to check. And you knew I was a moron before I said anything? Does clairvoyance pervade this community? I guess positing that someone is stupid solely based on his beliefs is a great way to argue. I myself prefer to let you demonstrate your stupidity before calling you out on it.
Democratic communism? Monarchial communism? Oh, you mean like a form of government. By the way, you're wrong. It's democratic socialism, not communism. Marxist-Leninist theory calls for a complete revolution whose leader gains legitimacy through his charismatic capabilities. But I'm sure you knew that since even I, the ignorant one, did.
The article I gave you before (which is extremely Leftist by the way) specifically states that "a common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system."
Here's one from Illinois State University: [link to lilt.ilstu.edu] a form of government, inspires some people with the zeal of a religion." That's why we tend to view Marxism as totalitarian; there is no room for dissent. That doesn't sound like an economic system to me.
If you want to Google something, type in socialism vs. communism and actually read what comes up instead of cherry-picking definitions like you did in that last post (yes, I actually read the definitions that came up, and almost all of them contained the word "political"). And quit playing around with political theory, you idiot. Even a basic government course would show you are wrong. The fact that you get so worked up when someone calls you out on it gives me a warm, tingling feeling of affirmation. Good day.
Gee, you mean this is the FIRST time you have ever posted here? Why no it isnt. I guess stupidity is just something that comes natural to you. I knew you were stupid before you posted THIS post because I have seen your other stupid posts. I dont need to read or google anything I read the Communist Manifesto when I was sixteen. There is NO reason why communism would have to be totalitarian, that it has been does not mean it has to be. There are plent of totalitarian CAPITALIST countries too. While the communist manifesto calls for a centralization in the beggining it also calls for a localization of decision making once the means of production and distribution has been taken from private hands and put into communal ownership. I am not saying I believe that would happen. I am not saying I support any of this but I UNDERSTAND IT. I dont care how it has been characterized by your webpages nor whether they are lefty or righty. Communism is a form of economy. Its very definition is a form of economy. It is just that simple. It can exist under any form of government. I am not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.
Are you blind? Can you not see how in my first response to you I mentioned that we had talked before? Obviously that means I've posted here prior to this about another thing you had gotten incorrect--specifically what partisanship meant.
Anyway, glad to know you read the entirety of the Communist Manifesto last year. Since economic systems aren't types of government. you ceded me the point by admitting that Communism can be totalitarian (the other two types being democratic and authoritarian). And it is. Always. If you actually read the Manifesto you would know that. What you are referring to is still, as it always will be, socialism, the primary form of economy by which the political and social system of communism operates. Most democracies operate with capitalism, but they can work with socialism as well. That you cannot comprehend this basic fact will always amaze me.
My GOODNESS you are getting stupider by the post. Marx used the terms interchangeably. They have grown apart only as we have come to see it isnt an all or nothing proposition. Economics can be used in a totalitarian way as can governments. Like I said there are many totalitarian Capitalist regimes. I read the Communist Manifesto more than 30 years ago moron. Bottom line communism is about how you divide up the cookies and who owns the means of production. This theory can exist under ANY form of government because IT ISNT A FORM OF GOVERNMENT. IT never HAS been. Your ignorance notwithstanding it is economics not government theory. The Soviet Union WAS communist, even if it didnt fully conform to Marx theories and it had the SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT WE HAD. A bicameral Congress, a Supreme Court and an Executive Branch. They even voted. Those elections were fixed that is more a function of WHO had power than WHAT that power was doing economically. The Sandanistas were a DEMOCRATIC Marxist regime. They TOOK power in a revolution then had an election which they won handily. When they LOST the next election THEY LEFT POWER.The FACTS being ignored are being ignored by YOU.
Three types of nation-states (not economic systems):
Democratic, authoritarian, and totalitarian
Why is Marxism inherently totalitarian? Because it calls for a violent revolution as the only means of the transfer of power from the elite to the worker. Anyone who disagrees with this ideology is therefore an enemy of the revolution. It requires a total, pseudo-religious devotion to the cause. It is not exclusively economic because the economy has nothing to do with a revolution, does it? And total governmental control of all property until that end-point (another trademark of totalitarianism) of no state is achieved has very little to do with it either.
Thirty years? Riiight. But if you're not lying then maybe it's time to brush up.
If you are not IGNORANT its time for YOU to brush up and learned to READ. I am not saying it is a GOOD form of economy. I am not advocating it at all. I am saying it is an ECONOMY and not a government. Sure it takes a revolution. Power concedes NOTHING without a demand NOTHING. That means very little. I would say MOST revolutions come from ECONOMIC reasons. Didnt the French revolution? Economic oppression hits a lot more people than political repression. Even a brutal regime usually kills a few thousand a year. But MILLIONS will be held in the bondage of an unjust economic system. It was the economics that fueled the revolution in Nicaragua and the failed ones in El Salvador and Guatemala. Perhaps we are getting caught up in semantics. There is no question I am right that Communism is a form of ECONOMY which can exist under any form of government. It has existed under all the forms you listed. Democratic in Nicaragua, totalitarian like the Incas or Cuba and authoritarian like the USSR. However it is not in dispute, at least by me that the two are inextricably linked and mixed together. It is STILL a mistake to confuse one with another just because ther lines between them are not bright lines but blurred. The lines between spirituality and religion are mixed but they are still not the same thing.
Yeah, and Capitalism has worked out wonderfully for the 20% of the planet that gets enough to eat every day. The other eighty percent? Worthless slackers who ought to die anyway, because they weren't smart enough to steal as well as the Capitalists. Just taking up space- and many of them are slacking off on OUR OIL too! Talk about nerve!
Oh, and I'll spare you the "biting" retort- yes, I am a Socialist, and damn proud of it too. I'm sure you won't mind if I don't join you on the I've Got Mine, F*** the Rest of the World bandwagon.
And how much of that starving 80% are in communist countries or dictatorships? And how much of that 80% are non european? The West was so successful because it embraced capitalism. They self perpetuate thair poverty, if they cannot dig themselves out than it is thair own personal failure and inability, not that fault of some evil system that is against them. You want to steal my hard earned wealth and give it to Lazy joe shmoe? I'll tell you there is a place you should go too, It is called North korea, better yet, China. You know, maybe if they did'nt slack off on "our" oil they would actually make some money and be able to feed themselves.
[meaning i am serious]) Finarfin
NO, You're NUTS!
{meaning me] i am logical!
No, you are paranoid.
No Fin not in this lifetime you arent.
You really are stupid Fin. I mean you take ignorance to an all new level. Exactly who told you we all liked China so much. It was LIBERALS who were throwing a fit when it was given favored nation status but then dont let facts get in the way of your vast stupidity. Your ignorance is actually pretty impressive. I would have thought someone as stupid as you would never be able to use a keyboard. I am impressed you can read well enough to respond to posts. It is clear you never understand them but still you are in the general vicinity of what is said. I think you should pray someday you gain the ability for higher brain function as of now you just embarass yourself here.
First poster that throws a hissy fit over my post can kiss my arse.;-)
You're a kinky little devil Jeter.;-)
Pearlene, what's going on here? Didn't I warn you about acting all hoochy with that Jeter boy?
Liberal=Communist?
Not so fast, bucko....
Once again, Savage proves that he is stale. We've heard the same trash from him about MMFA a zillion times. Yawn.
Time for some new material, Mikey.
Time for MMFA to stop reporting about it. they put up a little article they are sure they can refute periodically. savage repeats himself on more than this, he says "liberalism is a mental disorder" often, why don't they write about that?
Why doesn't he quit saying it?
because he belives in it, it is the nature of his business that he must inform new listeners of his opinions on this or that topic. I'll have you know Savage said this sort of commment about media matters many times before, and they did not post them.
So, Fin, Weiner can say ridiculous things as many times as he wants, but you want to prohibit this website from noticing it more than once?
The Old Soviets would have loved you.I have a hard time believing that your fear of Communism has to do with others dragging you down.Is the guy on the onion ring fryer slacking off?
As a matter of fact, the old soviets would not have loved me, as they did not love my parents. you assume I am older than i actually am, i am not 30 and working in a fast food chain, rather i am on my way to bieng quite successful in business.
On your way, huh?
Let's hope you make it before the workers rise up and take control.
Or before those who control the "free markets" bankrupt industry.
"Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses."
-Dennis the Peasant
And, it wouldn't hurt you if you were to take a course in remedial spelling.
Or better yet, use Firefox with it's built in spell check.
I must inform you good sir, spelling is just not important. I do not know if you were previously aware of such a concept, but especially online, spelling is not one of the criterions of a good argument.
Answer the friggin' question that was asked of you, moron.
Uh, MMFA can report it as long as The Sewer Nation keeps spewing it. Don't like it? There are other sites that cater to your impaired thinking... go patronise them.
If you are not aware of it, i was answering to a previous poster's comment about WHY does MMFA keep posting about savage when he says that it is a fascist gay smear sheet.
Did 'Tommy' finish off that lobotomy and change her name to 'finarfin'?
YOU dont get to tell MMFA what to do. Why dont YOU start a website so we can all come and tell you how to run it.
Tell MMFA what to do? There's no need for anyone to do that. It's all driven by consrevatives who say things that liberals can't deal with; or just can't compute. It's basically one, long, liberal kvetch of a site.
Nice job, Soros.
Sure that is the way ignorant hiveminders like YOU see it. You guys LOVE to be lied to and it just makes you hysterical when anyone exposes your lies and distortions. WWAAHHHH stop showing how little sense we make is a hivemind mantra.
"They're after anybody that doesn't toe the Hillary, left-wing party line."
This is really amusing coming from someone like the Savage Weiner.
Who does the Weiner "go after" on a regular basis that does not toe his line? That list must be huge.
Nothing "front group" about it.
They march the far right nut job posters off the site, line them up against the wall and let them have it.
Huh? Seems to me to be far more opposition content on this site than I've ever seen on any right-wing or conservative site.
Some of the conservative posts are even a little bit intelligent. (This isn't one of them.)
Some people may get banned, but I see way too many posts from righties to support what you're saying. The rules are posted. They're pretty strait forward. Don't break them and then cry "evil liberals" when you get banned.
Eddie,
Johnny resides on the far left, his post was a head scratcher indeed, and I have no idea what he was saying, but then I rarely do.....so you can't go by me.
Johnny's post was sarcasm relating to the fascist comment by weiner.
Yeah, I didn't find it to be that much of a "head-scratcher". I think Eddie and Tommy might just be sleepy. ;0)
It's possible, I am out of my time-zone and jet-lagged. Still, pardon me all to heck for taking someone's post at face value. :) (Sarcasm can be tough to detect, w/o tone of voice, or just knowing the person really well. Or a tag, for us 'sleepyheads'.) Oh well. If any of the real righties take his post at face value, hopefully mine can still be taken that way as well.
what are the rules? where are they written?
They're right there hwen you register, you can find them in "about us" or "Home", I think.
You obviously skipped by them, to bring us your urgent messages from 1955 without delay.
Just because people where made aware of communism in the 50's does not change the fact that communism is dysfunctional, easy to hilack, and quite contrary to human nature.
I'm glad you are bring these issues back to light. Frankly, I am still pissed off by the Spanish Inquisition.
"Just because people where made aware of communism in the 50's does not change the fact that communism is dysfunctional, easy to hilack, and quite contrary to human nature.- finarfin / Friday November 16, 2007 12:30:28 AM EST"
People have been aware of communism a lot longer than that. For the record, as a very left-of-center liberal, I largely agree with your criticism of communism. Maybe you don't know us "commie bastards" as well as you think you do (not surprising if you're a Savage fan).
By people i did not mean the politically aware, i meant the common man. When i use "liberalism" and "communism" in the same sentance i usually mean the radical wingnut liberals, i would say about a third of liberals are communists (aware of it or not). And yes, i do admire Savage, I know how Media Matters can predistort one's opinion, I used to think that that Limbaugh was some evil cigar toter, until i read one of his books and found a agree with him on many things and that he is quite moderate.
We keep hearing the Wingnuts bloviate and wring their hands about Hillary's alleged "connection" to MMFA. Will they be equally hysterical about Giuliani's apparent midwifery of FOX "News"? Somehow, I doubt it.
Well obviously not, but maybe WE should be. ;)
Are you referring to the Giuliani who, when Time-Warner Cable declined to broadcast Fox News on its cable system here in New York City, offered to put it on a taxpayer funded, city owned channel?
Of course the courts had a problem with that and Mayor 9/11 found himself on the wrong side of the law.
What other words are in Savage's dictionary besides "fascist" and "dyke." What other things can he say besides, "gays are bad" and "Muslims are bad"?
And Michael Weiner is one of the only Jewish Nazis known to exist.
Quick! Get that man a Funk & Wagnall's...
Mikey Weiner thinks MMFA is a "fascist" group?
Really?
For someone with an advanced degree, you'd think he'd have a least one dictionary on his bookshelves.
Or, at least Google the word.
To be fair, his doctorate is in nutrition. We shouldn't expect a glorified vitamin peddler to have basic knowledge concerning societal economic or governmental systems.
I don't think "fair" is in his lexicon either.
Wow, that "Savage," such thoughtful analysis. Throwing around such big words and yet, why is it that I cannot take anything he says seriously?
It is so obvious, those that do not know anything about savage. your own predetirmined (by your commie parents) opinions have ossifyed enough so that you are no longer open to any ideas that do not comply.
I am not open to any 'ideas' that emanate from the mouths of the rabidly insane. People like Sewer should take their medication first and then get on the air but he's so far gone that even that wouldn't work for me.
'Scuse me while I hoist my hammer and sickle flag and put on my Lenin pins...
Actually, i was speaking to Slothrop, I can not imagine someone who is a rabbit lover would be a communist, subterranean commies have never before been documented (at least not in their natural habitat). but i do think if savage did take some sort of depressant he would be a whole lot less interesting.
HE MENTIONS MEDIA MATTERS AND MEDIA MATTERS MENTIONS HIM AND RATINGS GO UP .LETS FACE IT YOU NEED SOMEONE TO BOUNCE YOUR BELIEFS OFF OF LIKE ROSIE AND TRUMP, UMMMM LETS SEE ROSIE AND LIZ HASSLEBACK AHHH ROSIE AND BILL O REILLY YOU GET THE PICTURE CONTROVERSY DEFINITLY SELLS/ JOE CAPRIO CITYLIFE PRODUCTIONS
Well you go round indiscriminetly calling everyone a bunch of commies. Expect folks might be a little short with you.
Of the schools of communist thought. I perfer Groucho Marxist.
THIS IS THE THIRD MOST LISTENED TO RADIO TALK SHOW?!?!
Oh man...we are in for some dark times in AMerica.
Try to read the article you are posting about before you say something, LFS. (by the way, Laissez faire is much preferable to the alternative).
Regulated capitalism is a good system. There never has been nor will there ever be "free markets" because of human nature, as you already described re communism.
With no rules, the greedy ambitious s.o.b.s will always seize control and try to squeeze out everyone else. Eventually you wind up with a totalitarian state. That's what checks and balances are for.
the meaning of Laissez faire is in no way absolute, There can not possibly be a market entirely devoid of some sort of control.
First no it isnt. Second there are MANY alternatives to Laisse Faire I dont think the term means what you THINK it means
And for those of you who might doubt it, there appears a concerted effort to re-educate the American neanderthal class as to the definition of "fascist". Of course the real fascists are people like Savage who would gladly see the corporations simply appropriate all of the loose cash in the country while running the progressives into gas chambers.
But these re-education campaigns appear to be gaining traction. The left-wing progressives are being associated with the Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini set increasingly. Remarkable considering that the ones committing mass murder and stealing working peoples' money are the far right mostly GOP.
Mikey, What happened to VERMIN? I want to be called VERMIN..I miss being VERMIN.
Vermin Commie Bastard. But a Prince, nonetheless.
Thank You Kind Lefty. My day is now filled with sunshine. For this, I bestow the title of SIR upon you. No thanks required, it is what any Verminese Commie would do.
Michael Savage's latest whacko blatherfest reminds me of the scene in Five Easy Pieces where the Jack Nicholson character and his dumb blonde girlfriend pick up a couple of lesbians on the way to visit Jack's dying father. One of the lesbians kvetches on and on and on about a plethora of plaints until, finally, aware she boring the others, she stops midsentence, saying, "I don't want to talk about it anymore." Vis-a-vis Savage's repeated and increasingly homophobic tirades against gays, one might suggest he go to college and take a course in what used to be called "abnormal psychology." He should pay particular attention to the chapter on Freud, and especially the theory of "projection." In effect, it posits that the more a person obsesses on homosexuality, the more likely it is that he, himself, is gay. They don't call him a silly Savage for nothing, you know.
You seem to be another victim of coming to MMFA to hear what Savage is talking about. I guess MMFA didnt feel it necessary to post the discussion Savage had with a gay man on the show earlier this week. In this discussion, he clearly laid out (as he frequently does) his thoughts on gays...which consisted of, as long as two adults are in a gay relationship, and keep it a personal matter, he has nothing against that, nor does he hate any person just because they are gay. The problem Savage has with the gay community is when it tries to influence children by placing propaganda in schools...like movies or educational material that clearly "normalizes" the gay lifestlye.
You may say that is good, and it makes kids well rounded...if so, I ask you this: Since everyone pretty much believes that gay people are born that way, why must kids be taught about something that they may naturally feel when they grow up?
Your response, John, is illogical. First of all, there is no "Gay Mafia" (I know, you didn't say it, but Savage does - quite often). Gay folks don't try to indoctrinate children in schools. The point of educating kids about the differences in individuals is so that they don't grow up not understanding others, and understanding how others live, how others love and how others are treated and affected by society.
Your premise is flawed. It reminds me of the right-wing BS question "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"
I take great insult in people like you who say it is gay folks pushing their lifestyles on others. As a gay man, I don't push my lifestyle on others any more than straight people push their lifestyles on others. So what if I kiss my partner good-bye for the day as we leave the BART station? Asking us to stay in the closet, as Savage does, only relegates hard-working, tax paying decent folks like myself to second-class citizenry. It's the very definition of inequality and bigotry. It's just plain wrong. And for you to come up with this lame, fallacy of logic, seemingly defending this creep just takes the freakin' cake.
I'm not condemning you as an individual, and neither is Savage. It is extreme members of the gay communinty who we condemn. My question stands, because it went unanswered:
Why show movies or present literature in elementary schools that "normalize" the gay lifestyle? If a child was born gay, he/she will eventually grow into it naturally, he/she doesn't need indoctrination in school. If a child is born straight, why must they be presented with this gay lifestyle, if it will never apply to them?
I answered your question in my post above.
"The point of educating kids about the differences in individuals is so that they don't grow up not understanding others, and understanding how others live, how others love and how others are treated and affected by society."
Your reading comprehension skills need some work.
No, you need the comprehension skills. In my first post, where I posed the question, I predicted you exact answer when I said: "You may say that is good, and it makes kids well rounded..."
Then I went on to explain how being gay or straight happens naturally, therefore children do not need education about the acceptability of it.
By accepting this kind of indoctrination in schools, you are effectively promoting thought control (the idea that every child should be taught that the gay community should be celebrated and never condemned), which seems to work against the American dream of rugged individualism.
Look...being kind, cordial, and decent to gay people is certainly expected, and I think it is obvious that the vast majority of kids act that way without having to be taught it. But please let them form their own decisions about whether they see the homosexual lifestyle as being right or wrong, moral or immoral. Having someone as influential as a teacher preach that everyone needs to accept the gay lifestyle is brainwashing, and it goes against the religious beliefs of the majority of people.
"...groups like Media Matters, which is a fascist front group..."
He keeps using that word. I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
CAIR is the extremist branch of muslim activism in America. Example: Trying to intimidate Savage's advertisers in the name of "freedom of religion"? It doesn't even make sense.
MMFA is an extremist branch of the progressive movement. Example: the obvious overall ideology and agenda of this website.
Hillary has publically admitted to helping set up MMFA. No example needed, its publically accessible and a fact. And I'm not complaining about it, she can do whatever she wants, I just dont understand why MMFA denies it when the truth is out there in broad daylight.
Michael Savage is pointing out the obvious in this thread, theres nothing controversial here. MMFA is going to rip a guy because they don't like his use of the word "fascist?" Please, grow up.
Actually YOU should grow a brain. Do you really think it makes sense to tell us we ought to just TAKE being called Fascist? Perhaps you could just rent a couple of brain cells and find out what it would be like to have them. Hillary helped raise money for CAP and it started many progressive organizations of which MMFA is one. So what? That doesnt mean she has anything directly to do with MMFA. The Weinerdog is a deranged lunatic without a shred of decency. Anyone who takes him seriously needs to increase their medication. ANY American is free to tell advertisers what they think about the shows they are supporting. That isnt Fascism it is the opposite of Fascism it is direct democracy. Try to keep up.
So, when the leaders of CAIR publically express that they are not opposed to the idea of Sharia law in the United States, is that the American way, in your mind?
So, when the leaders of CAIR publically express that they are not opposed to the idea of Sharia law in the United States, is that the American way, in your mind? /John and some numbers
------------------------------------------------
Just because a group might publically express that they aren't opposed to the idea of Sharia law in the U.S. doesn't mean it will happen. Get a grip. Do you know what would have to happen in order for Sharia law to become law in the U.S.? Rub your two brain cells together and see if you can come up with a coherent response. I'll give you a hint: the Constitution and the Bill of Rights would have to be non-existent. If you need examples, just look at what GWB has done to the Constitution - that's a start.
Actually, I don't know how GWB has correupted the constitution, what freedoms or rights have you lost?
But I guess if you consider the big city liberal morons who have taken away my second amendment right to own a handgun, yes, my constitutional rights have been grossly violated, but not by GWB.
MAN, you really are stupid. You HAVE no second amendment right to own a gun outside its stated militia purpose MORON. Lets see. Bush says he can wiretap anyone he wants without a warrant, there goes my sixth amendment, he also says he can lock up anyone he wants call them an enemy combatant whether or not they are a citizen and NEVER bring them to trial, it was three years before he charged Padilla, there goes my sixth amendment right to a SPEEDY trial. THAT is 20% of my bill of rights you idiot.
Miller
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/
''[i]n the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well- regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.''7
(1980) (dictum: Miller holds that the ''Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia''').
Gun-grabbing nonsense. Hold on to your gun rights, whatever the cost.
Hey moron that would be gun grabbing nonsense BY THE SUPREME COURT. Rent a couple of braincells. The point isnt what you LIKE it is what the law IS.
So you WANT the SCOTUS to take away your gun rights?????? If so, then you're crazy: totally insane. Do you think the citizens of Burma would be so easy to control if they had guns?
gather up some facts before you spread your ignorance.
'A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.'
militia
|məˈli sh ə| |məˌlɪʃə| |mɪˌlɪʃə|nouna military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.• a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities, typically in opposition to a regular army.• all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.
people
|ˈpēpəl| plural noun 1 human beings in general or considered collectively : the earthquake killed 30,000 people. • ( the people) the citizens of a country, esp. when considered in relation to those who govern them : his economic reforms no longer have the support of the people. • ( the people) those without special rank or position in society; the populace : he is very much a man of the people.
arms
|ärmz| |ɑrmz| |ɑːmz|plural noun1 weapons and ammunition; armaments : they were subjugated by force of arms | [as adj. ] arms exports.
"MAN, you really are stupid." --According to your fellow posters, that kind of language is eliminationist rhetoric, aka "hate speech"...just wanted to let you know what others might be thinking about you right now.
"You HAVE no second amendment right to own a gun outside its stated militia purpose MORON." --Right, according to liberal misinterpretations and obstructions of the Constitution. You obviously perscribe to the "militia purpose" interpretation, which is peculiar because the Constitution has already provided for the existence and arming of a militia in Article 1, section 8....why would the Constitution repeat itself on the same issue? Here is the 2nd Amendment: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." If the framers had intended the 2nd amendment to apply to the right of a state to maintain a militia, they would have used the word 'state' instead of 'people.' If you take note, the rest of the bill of rights is very precise in using the word "people" when referring to individuals, and 'state' when referring to the states.
If you still do not agree, the 9th amendment comes around to slap the anti-gun crowd in the face. The 9th Amendment states, "The enumeration of the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny of disparage others retained by the people." Therefore, the constitutional right of gun ownership stands, even without the 2nd amendment.
Finally, I will quote George Mason, father of the Bill of Rights: "What is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." You just can't argue with the man that created the Bill of Rights.
And, I'm assuming you know that Hilter made the German people register their firearms in the early days...just the first step to total control. I'm not calling you or liberals or anyone Hitler here, I'm jsut pointing out what he did, and why regulations like forced registration are dangerous to the people.
So, Solon, even under your belief in the so-called "stated militia purpose," we the people cannot be denied the right to own a handgun, or any gun. You see, as you and I sit here on our computers we are part of the militia. We (or at least me) are armed citizens, which is what a milita is, armed citizens....you dont have to be dressed in a uniform doing a workout with your fellow citizens to be in the militia.
"Lets see. Bush says he can wiretap anyone he wants without a warrant, there goes my sixth amendment" -- Well, as long as you arent talking to terrorists overseas, you haven't lost anything, because they aren't wiretapping you or your friends. But I guess any educated liberal might want to have the multicultural experience of speaking with terrorist on the phone, right?
"he also says he can lock up anyone he wants call them an enemy combatant whether or not they are a citizen and NEVER bring them to trial, it was three years before he charged Padilla, there goes my sixth amendment right to a SPEEDY trial." --No, there goes Padilla's 6th amendment...the sixth amendment that didnt apply to him because he is not a US citizen guaranteed protection under the constitution. Poor little Padilla, if only the big bad government wouldn't have held him prisoner until the conviction, he could have continued his illegal invasion of your country while planning to kill innocents through jihad and fund and support terrorism. I'm sure his lack of speedy trail is really going to open the door to screwing the average American such as yourself out of a speedy trial. I think not, join the real world...you have lost no personal right to a speedy trial.
"THAT is 20% of my bill of rights you idiot." --More eliminationist rhetoric. It just isn't necessary in political debate. I have not called you any names or made derogatory comments in this thread, so you can't say I started it and you're just returning the favor.
"No, there goes Padilla's 6th amendment...the sixth amendment that didnt apply to him because he is not a US citizen guaranteed protection under the constitution."
Actually, Jose Padilla is a US citizen. He was born in Brooklyn, New York. I wouldn't call him a saint, but the government's case against Padilla leaves much to be desired. He could be as bad as they say, but isn't it also possible that the government could have detained him on trumped up charges? At any rate, guilty or not, he is an American citizen and should be afforded the right to a fair and speedy trial.
My mistake, I only took into account the label that was given to him as an "illegal enemy combatant."
"He could be as bad as they say, but isn't it also possible that the government could have detained him on trumped up charges?" --Trumped up? Maybe, but given his history of serial criminality, it is a stretch to give this guy any credit for being a victim. He is clearly an America-hater, something I think we can all agree is disgusting.
I dont care WHO he is. He is a citizen and must be afforded his sixth amendment rights. See that is the THING about rights either everyone has them or no one does. A right isnt a privelege. I cant say it better than it was said in A Man for ALL Seasons
MOORE'S DAUGHTER: Father, that man's bad.MOORE: There's no law against that.ROBERT: There is. God's law.MOORE: Than God can arrest him.MOORE'S WIFE: While you talk he's gone.Moore: And go he should if he were the Devil himself until he brokethe law.Robert: So, now you would give the Devil benefit of law?Moore: Yes, what would you do, cut a great road through the law to getafter the Devil?Robert: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that.Moore: Oh, and when the last law was down and the Devil turned roundon you where would you hide, Robert, the laws all being flat? Thiscountry is planted thick with laws from coast to coast. Man's laws,not God's. And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it,do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that wouldblow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law for my own safetysake.
Well you are stupid and when you post about liberal morons you dont get the benifit of civility. Padilla WAS a citizen, your ignorance notwithstanding. I dont really care what YOU or the rightwingers you quote SAY. IT IS THE VIEW OF THE SUPREME COURT. That means it IS the law. If you say you are part of a militia by dint of being a citizen fine. Make that argument I only pointed out that according to the LAW only weapons that can show a militia purpose are protected by the Second Amendment WHICH IS WHAT YOU REFERENCED. Actually I agree with the right on gun ownership though I dont own a gun myself. Just educating you which you CLEARLY need. I suggest you TRY having some dim conception what you are talking about before you further embarass yourself.
"Well you are stupid and when you post about liberal morons you dont get the benifit of civility." --So you are suggesting that neither of us should make any attempt to raise the level of discusison? I'm making a choice here, and it is that I will never call you a name in this board again. If you continue to do it to me, thats fine, but people will just see you for who you are.
"Padilla WAS a citizen, your ignorance notwithstanding." --Yes, thank you for bluntly pointing that out AFTER I had already acknowledged my mistake. It really helped to drive it home a second time.
"I dont really care what YOU or the rightwingers you quote SAY." So, George Mason, father of the Bill of Rights was a right winger? Good, at least you know that it was conservative white males who created the genius documents that have been widely mis-interpreted over the years.
"IT IS THE VIEW OF THE SUPREME COURT. That means it IS the law." --Thank you, but I never refuted the fact that it is the current law. I pointed out just how far we have strayed from the framer's original intent for the right to keep and bear arms, mainly due to the liberal anti-gun crowd.
"Actually I agree with the right on gun ownership though I dont own a gun myself." Good, this is a first for us.
A point I don't think you touched on, that really bothers me about the gun-grabbers in this country, is the ninth amendment. It clearly states that the bill of rights does not include or limit all the rights of the individual. Therefore, even without the second amendment (which would rule out any interpretation of how the term "militia" should be applied), we have the God-given right to firearm ownership. I think the 9th amendment makes this issue pretty cut and dry, what are your thoughts?
Sure, I am always willing to be reasonable when another poster is. Start calling us liberals morons and the gloves come off but each post is a new one. If you are refraining from such attacks you can count on me to do the same.
I answered your post when I read it before I read any other posts. I didnt know someone else had already called you on it. If you look you will see it is under YOUR post. As for our dispute about the second amendment. We are apparantly on the same page. I was ONLY addressing your contention that your first amendment rights were being taken away. Not according to the law. Whatever George Mason thought the SC thinks differently and frankly so do I. Freedoms of speech press petition assembly have NO qualifiers. The Second amendment DOES. I dont think it reasonable to pretend that qualifier has no meaning. I am not advocating taking peoples guns away and I dont really think more than a very few liberals are. It is a red herring. As for your ninth amendment argument, again I am not making an argument you cant have a gun, is that it says basically that just because SOME rights are enumerated that doesnt mean there are other rights. Well the second amendment right IS enumerated and qualified, so I dont see that as a strong argument. Saying that buy all the guns you want as far as I am concerned. I support, like virtually every liberal I know personally, some common sense restrictions. I dont see a problem with waiting periods or backround checks. About 87 people a day are killed with guns. It is disengenuous to pretend we dont pay a high price for this freedom, what we can do to emeliorate that price to whatever extent we can without abrogating the right is the goal here. Owning guns is seen as a freedom issue. As long as Americans see it that way I support the right to own guns. Doesnt mean you need an AK 47 or a rocket launcher or that certain cities cant make it onerous to carry a gun, but I dont want to see them taken away.
Actually YES. Sharia law isnt the American way but advocating whatever it is you think is best IS the American way. If you dont approve of others advocating in public, that which you disagree with then you dont support free speech at all. Even Hitler and Stalin supported speech they agreed with.
How our public airwaves are used is another matter. THAT is a resource management issue and IS a public and democratic decision. If you said you didnt think CAIR should have a radio program to push their agenda, I would say that is your right. I noticed by the way you changed the subject which WASNT CAIR and Sharia law but Cair telling the Weinerdogs advertisers what they think about him. Not even a good try really. Pretty weak.
CAIR is an islamic hate group. Need Proof? [link to www.anti-cair-net.org]
When this group goes and harrasses advertisers, persuading them that Savage is a bigger threat than a group that supports terrorists, that is a major problem.
At least all but one of Savage's advertisers have actually increased their advertising with him rather than capitulate to the Islamic Supremicists.
As long as they arent breaking the law, I dont care WHO they are, they still have free speech rights and can advocate anything they want. I dont accept any Weinerdog worshippers word that they are a hate group. Nor will an ANTIwebsite tell me anything I want to know about the group. I also dont care how his advertisers react. That is up to them. You really dont get this free speech thing do you?
I do get the free speech thing, but my real point here is that there are good, America-loving muslim groups that we should be supporting, such as these great people who love freedom and peace: [link to www.reformislam.org]
And then their are more extreme muslim groups that work to undermine the freedoms of America through backdoor strongarming, such as CAIR. Not to mention that many of their supervisors and members have been linked to terrorist organizations, even liberal democrats acknowledge this.
Just one more side note....if CAIR is really interested in free speech and getting their so-called message of "peace and tolerance" out...why doesn't Nihad Awad call up Michael Savage, and address the Savage Nation on the airwaves to explain CAIR's viewpoint? Why must they use back-door intimidation of advertisers....something all the public probably will not notice?
Arguing CAIR is bad is irrelevant. I dont CARE if they are bad. They still have first amendment rights which we protect for our OWN sake. It is NOT any violation of the first amendment to tell advertisers they think the insane Weinerdog should not be broadcasting. That is THEIR decision. If they are that bad then no one will listen even you said his advertisers arent listening. THAT is who democracy works that is how it SHOULD work.
MMFA posts articles about hillary often, do you not think that MMFA owes some sort debt to hillary? Well Brock might think so, therefore there is a good chance that when MMFA speaks about its founders, it might just might be biased.
"SAVAGE: Well, Media Matters was created by Hillary Clinton, and they're after Michael Savage. They're after Bill O'Reilly."
Po', po' Mikey Weiner. Evvabody's out to get him. That's why they're recording him.
These cognition-challenged right-wing ginks still don't get it. Audio, video, print -- doesn't matter. People are taking down what they say -- and offering it to the world at large. Watch'em try to weasel out of taking responsibility. Spin don't win anymore. Results talk, bullslop walks.
The miserable failure of the right wing -- and its foul, bigoted propagandists -- is on display, and no amount of methane can blur it anymore. So sorry, Weiner Nation. Boo-hoo.
Why do you people care what Michael Savage says? The guy is a nut.
Why do you people care what HOTWINGS says? The guy/girl is a nut.
This may be the first time I have ever agreed with him but the Weinerdog is obviously insane. Its just as obvious as the fact YOU are a moron.
It's time for you to get an updated thesaurus and look up another word for "moron": you must be wearing those letters out on your keyboard.
mo·ron
noun- 1.a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
2.All posters on Media Matters with the exception of one. newly initiated; Les Is More
Compare: feeble-mindedfamous uses(misuses);"...you ARE a moron." -Solon"...moronic posts..." -Solon"...moron..." -Solon"...what a moron." -Solon"...were a moron."-Solon[Origin: Gk mōrón, sōlón neut. of mōrós foolish, dull]