Savage: "We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. ... [T]hey never assimilate. And then their children become gang-bangers"
Michael Savage asserted on June 23: "We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. You're telling me they're going to assimilate? They will never assimilate. They come here and they bring their destitute ways to this country, and they never assimilate." He continued: "And then their children become gang-bangers. It is a disaster." Savage added that earlier immigrants to the U.S. "had used toilet paper and toothbrushes and they knew how to survive in this country. They took a job or they worked. They didn't come and sit and have 16 children and eat beetle nuts."
On the June 23 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, while discussing first lady Laura Bush's World Refugee Day speech, Michael Savage asserted: "We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. You're telling me they're going to assimilate? They will never assimilate. They come here and they bring their destitute ways to this country, and they never assimilate." He continued: "And then their children become gang-bangers. It is a disaster. Did you hear what I just said? A disaster." He added: "And Laura Bush is talking about political refugees as though it's 1955." Savage then aired a clip of Laura Bush stating, "Many American families came to this country to escape repressive regimes," which Savage interrupted to say: "Let's stop right there. Yes, Laura that is true, but they had used toilet paper and toothbrushes and they knew how to survive in this country. They took a job or they worked. They didn't come and sit and have 16 children and eat beetle nuts. They're living in a crazed world. We're living in an insanity."
As Media Matters for America has noted, when five San Francisco students held a hunger strike in July 2007 in support of the DREAM Act -- a bill that would have provided a pathway to citizenship and other benefits for certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before the age of 16 -- Savage said: "I would say, let them fast until they starve to death, then that solves the problem. Because then we won't have a problem about giving them green cards because they're illegal aliens; they don't belong here to begin with." In April 2006, Savage stated, "If you take to the streets with the vermin who are trying to dictate to us how we should run America, even though they're not even entitled to vote or be here, you're going to be thrown out of office. The people will throw you out of office. There are not enough of them to re-elect you. You will be out of a job. You will not have a living. You will be hunting for a job. Maybe, you'll be picking the vegetables." After Media Matters highlighted his comments, Savage denied that he had referred to illegal immigrants as "vermin," but rather "the leadership behind them," whom Savage described as "the communist Marxist bloc of International ANSWER [Act Now to Stop War and End Racism]."
Talk Radio Network, which syndicates Savage's show, claims that Savage is heard on more than 350 radio stations. The Savage Nation reaches at least 8.25 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 June 23 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Now, but Bush put the stake into the heart of the conservative movement by posing as a conservative. He was the enemy within. There's no question in my mind he destroyed the entire conservative movement. Take a look at what his wife, Laura, now is promoting -- and I told you that the last six months would make the first seven and a half years look like child's play of what those two are going to do to this country. Just this weekend, Laura Bush boasted about the number of refugees we've taken into America, as though she has unlimited check-writing qualities, that she could just write a check, her and him, for any amount of refugees, that there's no one in America who cares about what they're doing. Listen to clip three now. Three.
LAURA BUSH [audio clip]: The United States contributes more assistance to refugee populations than any other government. This year we'll spend nearly $1.2 billion to facilidate -- facilitate refugee resettlement and to provide food, shelter and supplies to those who fled their homes in search of safety. I'm pleased to announce that this morning, President Bush approved a $32.8 million emergency funding to support unexpected and urgent needs, including food, and for refugees and conflict victims in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere.
SAVAGE: Isn't that nice that the two Bushes live in the 1950s in their own mind? Here's Laura and whatever his first name is -- George -- walking around, holding hands as though it's 1955 and Dwight D. Eisenhower is sending care packages to the poor of Africa and Asia. What she doesn't understand is that there are more poor in America now than there were when they took office, and that there are people lining up for aid in the areas stricken by the floods, and that we have seen a rise in future prices for corn of 100 percent. And I say that's nothing compared to what's coming next year, that if the government does not step in and stop rampant, out-of-control speculation on basic staples, you're not going to be able to afford a loaf of bread, you're going to need a wheelbarrow to buy a loaf of bread as they did in Weimar Germany, and that's because of the catastrophic policies of this insane administration that we have right now. Where did they have the audacity to take in refugees and to say that they wrote a check over the weekend for $38 million in emergency funding to support urgent emergency need -- what do you mean emergency refugee needs for refugees? We have refugees in Iowa, for god's sakes.
And moreover, let me tell you something. I am an immigrant son, but when my grandfather came here, he could read and write. And he had a business that he opened with his money -- the first monies he got, he opened his own business. He knew how to use toilet paper; he had used a toothbrush. We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. You're telling me they're going to assimilate? They will never assimilate. They come here and they bring their destitute ways to this country, and they never assimilate. And then their children become gang-bangers. It is a disaster. Did you hear what I just said? A disaster. And Laura Bush is talking about political refugees as though it's 1955. It's pretty amazing to me that she is as out of touch as her husband is. But she said there's more work to be done. Listen to clip four.
LAURA BUSH [audio clip]: Many American families came to this country to escape repressive regimes -
SAVAGE: Let's stop right there. Yes, Laura that is true, but they had used toilet paper and toothbrushes and they knew how to survive in this country. They took a job or they worked. They didn't come and sit and have 16 children and eat beetle nuts. They're living in a crazed world. We're living in an insanity.











Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular



"Refugees" from where? Seeeking or taking "refuge" from what, and why?
It's hard to argue with lunatics, when they neglect to include any particulars in their argument...
"Refugees" from where and from what, and why are they seeking "refuge"?
Sometimes I guess, guys such as this Syphilis victim savage, they get tired of focusing their hatred on anything particular and specific, and just figure it to be easier and less time-consuming, to just hate everyone for everything, I guess.
SAVAGE: Now, but Bush put the stake into the heart of the conservative movement by posing as a conservative... There's no question in my mind he destroyed the entire conservative movement.
I wasn't sure what the misinformation was until I saw this.I realize Weiner is trying to prop up the GOP by giving Chimpy credit for doing something positive, but I don't think even the 24%ers actually believe this.
GW Bush accomplishing something important and good for the country... come on, say something halfway plausible.
Dubya couldn't even f*** up on purpose. He'd f*** that up, too... ;>)
I snorted coffee out my nose when I read that. It burned, but I'm still laughing.
Bush exemplifies EVERYTHING about conservatives: failure, death, hate, destruction, hypocrisy, misery, murder, deception, anti-Americanism, racist, fascist, and embarrassment to real Americans. Bush is a conservatives and conservatives are just like Bush. Deal with it. He's YOUR legacy, conservatives.
Conservatives are not big on responsibility. They sure can talk about it, though.
"Deal with it. He's YOUR legacy, conservatives."
We deal with it on a daily basis, just like you do. You pay high gas prices, so do we. You send you kids to fight terrorism, so do we. At least we got 2 supreme court judges who aren't hypocritical liberals. THAT'S why I voted for him. That, and to reduce the opportunity of abortion-on-demand. Which I got, also. So, in actuallity, I'm 2 for 2 in the reasons I voted for Bush. I got all the bad things you listed with Clinton, and will probably get with the next president. Do you honestly think the person that is elected this time will be different than the person elected the last time?? If so, you are a fool.
Mr. Gore would not have invaded Iraq. period. Your ignorant vote for Bush led to the deaths of thousands of people. So now you're paying high gas prices. This is the extent of your understanding of what you have enabled.
"Your ignorant vote for Bush led to the deaths of thousands of people. So now you're paying high gas prices."
Demonstrate this. Our high gas prices can be attributed to MANY MANY other factors besides just this. Idustrialization of more countries, such as China. Lack of refineries being built in America. Our Congress refusing to open up proven oil reserves and oil shale reserves on American soil. Lack of rewards and incentives to speed the process of developing hybrids and other alternative energy technology. Lack of developement in clean, safe nuclear power.
On the side, I just want to point out how ironic it is that at first, liberals screamed about how Bush/Cheney went into Iraq for oil (which I wish they did, it would have increased our supply/lowered prices)...and now those same people are screaming that our presence over there is hurting the oil situation and raising prices. My question to you, because I am interested in what the other side thinks about this: Would you be in favor of us importing Iraqi oil for free in order to pay off the war debt (and as a thank you from the Iraqis for liberating them)?
If you wish to know my thinking on this, read Baghdad Ground Zero by Naomi Klein.
"There was no threat to us from Iraq, but somehow we have the right to invade and seize the oil?"
Name one democrat who did NOT make a speach about the dangers of Saddam/WMD's from '98-2000. Why did Clinton bomb Iraq in '93? Wasn't it because he "threatened" the life of Bush Sr.? How about; why did Clinton bomb Iraq in '93 + '98, and why did Clinton pass The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998? When you say Iraq posed NO threat, all I can say is... those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/062793.htm
http://www.themilitant.com/1996/6032/6032_2.html
But the action that was taken influences the scope of the behavior that follows. So if Clinton recognized Saddam had to be contained, and then took steps to do that, then it could clearly be a different situation years later. If Saddam developed the capabilities for being dangerous again, that could be dealt with. That's why we had inspectors in Iraq, they were trying to make that determination. But for some reason, the war started before they could finish their job.
Imagine if you owned a business that had tons of complaints about health and safety violations years ago, but the state made you fix things up. If they just shut you down regardless of what the current situation was, that would seem just a tad bit improper.
"Your two judges are compromised. they, along with Scalia and Thomas, are ideologues. In a democracy, this is not how the judiciary is supposed to work."
How would you describe Ginsburg and Breyer? You think they promote the democratic thought process you seem to require of all the other judges?? Let me guess, your idea of a democracy would be to have 9 'ginsburg' type judges. Your idea of a democracy is to have all YOU want while leaving others destitute. Thanks, but no thanks on your idea of what this country should look like.
GW Bush accomplishing something important and good for the country... come on, say something halfway plausible.
Pretzelboy lost his last chance for doing something good for the USA when he did not resign on September 12, 2001 for cowardice the day before.
I love that argument. Even though I've never seen anyone back it up with what Bush actually could have done from that classroom of children. Was he supposed to get up, leave, and go after the bad guys as soon as he found out? (Even though the bad guys had just all died in the crashes?) Was he supposed to immediately make a public statement, which would have scared the kids in the room?
Looking back, while he has abused the military, and made countless mistakes and blunders (which I do not excuse him from)...one fact remains: We have killed thousands of jihadis, captured them, gained intelligence, and have crippled AQ. Saddam is dead, his sons are dead, top AQ and Taliban members are dead or captured. We have gained a middle east ally in Iraq, and the Iraqi army is finally standing on its own legs and wiping the desert clean with terrorists. Say what you will about Bush, I hate him, but under his administration we have dealt serious blows to the jihadi movement worldwide. I can only hope we deliver a crippling blow to that insane, nuke-happy, genocidal midget maniac over in Iran before Bush leaves office.
Firstly, Mr. Bush could have excused himself gently in the classroom, and managed a brief statement and alerted his staff, gotten on the phone with his sec. of state, etc. He froze.
Regarding Ahmindejad, you obviously haven't studied much about how things work in Iran and what you would unleash in a country where most of the population is young...and inclined to want to emulate the west.
"Regarding Ahmindejad, you obviously haven't studied much about how things work in Iran and what you would unleash in a country where most of the population is young...and inclined to want to emulate the west."
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. We need to destroy/kill/remove ahmadickwad and his radical mullahs from power, so the Iranian people can have their voices heard and remain at peace with the West. I think we can both agree that the radical views of Iranian leadership are not in line with the more moderate, pro-west views of the citizens.
"Even though I've never seen anyone back it up with what Bush actually could have done from that classroom of children. Was he supposed to get up, leave, and go after the bad guys as soon as he found out? (Even though the bad guys had just all died in the crashes?) Was he supposed to immediately make a public statement, which would have scared the kids in the room?"
Are you serious? Nobody even knew who the "bad guys" were at that point. Any thinking human being would have quietly excused himself from the classroom and done something to lead his staff into action. Bush was told that the first plane crashed into the tower when he was on his way to the classroom. After being told that a second plane had struck, he sat there immobilized for 7 minutes until someone on his staff came in and told him to get up. During those 7 minutes people in New York were dying by the hundreds, and Bush's staff and the military he commands were scrambling to do something about it. ...And he just sat there reading The Pet Goat.
SAVAGE: We're living in an insanity.
I think it's beyond assumption that he's using the royal "we" here. Because, to be honest, the required harvest amount of beetle nuts necessary to sustain a human would be unattainable in a normal 8-hr day. Depending on the size of the beetle, of course.
hiya neon. Out there in the desert no doubt you gather lots of crunchy snacks like the foreigners do. Like scorpions, crickets, trap-door spiders, tarantulas, side winders, sand vipers, maybe shrimp hatching from a dry lake bed. Weiner should try some before he knocks such appetizers.
I'm going to try to start a trend. Every time I have a bowel movement from now on, I'm going to call it "havin' a Savage."
"Excuse me, where's the restroom? I need to have a Savage."
Toothpaste and toilet paper?... Toothpaste and toilet paper?... These are the 2 basic requirements for immigration? First off, for a DR - this guy has a pretty low regard or appreciation of the abilities for development of the human brain. I'm sure there are plenty of immigrant children who can't use a toothbrush that are better adjusted in aspects of human development, and interacting as social beings, than 25% of all the preschoolers in America!
You know, other than this stupid part (I guess he just can't help himself) - I was getting a strange feeling in my stomach as I started thinking how much I agreed with what else he says here. I need a shower.
"than 25% of all the preschoolers in America! "
You mean the children of Illegal Immigrants?
Hey, I want to share here a little story about "immigrant children".
This past fall, I was talking to a man who is an educational consultant: he travels the country going from school district to school district (by invitation only), to show them how to implement a special reading program into their curriculum, specifically for Elementary Schools... he had a lot of interesting things to say about NCLB (like that it causes School Administrators to want poor performing students to drop out, or otherwise go elsewhere, because they are dragging down the all-important test scores that are hinged to school funding: True! It's what's behind the recent and remarkable rise in High School dropout rates! And this man I was talking to should know, because before he went into private consulting, he was the Principal at two different schools in my town)... anyway, about "immigrant children": the educational consultant I talked to, he was at an Elementary School in the Bronx, NYC... he was there for his reading program, and to teach it to their teachers... he was talking to the Principal at that Bronx Elementary School, and that Principal was telling him about the extraordinary number of "immigrant children" there are enrolled at his school (something more than half, way more, like three-quarters maybe: I don't recall that detail)... and my friend the educational consultant, he responded to the fact of such a high number of "immigrant children" at that Bronx Elementary Scholl, by saying that it must make things hard and harder, to have so many ragged and dumb and poor students (those are my facetious words, not his: he merely thought it must make education harder with so many "immigrant children")... it must make it harder, having so many "immigrant children" at that Bronx Elementary School... and the Principal said immediately "No! Oh no, don't misunderstand me: they're actually the most attentive, and attending, and obedient and orderly and hard working students in the School... they come every day, they pay attention, and do all their assignments and home-work, on time and correctly and completely"... and when my friend the educational consultant asked about that counter-intuitive fact, the Principal of the Bronx Elementary School told him (and this true what I'm telling you here), told him it was because "they haven't been 'Americanized' yet: the 'immigrant children' don't 'hang out' like American kids do... they don't spend mind-numbing hours playing video games and watching television, like American kids do... they don't talk back, or are disobedient, or refuse to attend and participate, or are lazy and trouble-making, like American kids are"
This is all true what I have told you here... it's what the Principal of an Elementary School in the Bronx NYC had to say about "immigrant children": and he should know, for obvious reasons... and that strory was brought to my mind by the slanders about "immigrant children", and I thought I would take the several minutes to type it out to you.
What nationality where these immigrant children. I know for a fact, the Asians and East Indian children take education very very seriously. However, take the chlidren of Illegal Immigrants, (Always mixed in with the phrase, "IMMIGRANTS") are by in large a diffrerent story. L.A, San Jose, Antioch, perfect example of Illegal Immigrant children or children of Illegal Immigrants not passing basic math and english in High School.
Clams, please I mean no disrespect to any gender or race.. You have valid points, are mine not valid? As far as how I know if they are illegal or not? I live in California, where no doubt there are several million Illegal Aliens. When ALL the car washes, Fast Food joints, Restaurants, Construction jobs ect are labored primarily by Latino folk, how could you deny that at least one in the bunch, is NOT here legally. A little common sense goes a long way.
The Illegal Alien gangs here in America are starting to take some serious territory.
The food service industry has gone to pot around here. I guess I should not go out and eat then, right?
Really? Every kitchen around here where I live is nothing but Immigrants (legal, and probably some illegal) and they are excellent cooks. Of course, you do realize that every major chain restaurant has a specific menu that was focus group tested and is made in a specific way every single time. I'm just curious though, what exactly has gone wrong with the food industry where you live that you think it's gone downhill? Quality of food? Service?
Ignorance is bliss my friend.
Ignorance is bliss my friend.
I take it that means you're happy as a clam.....
interesting...I live in NC, in the Research Triangle Park area, and we don't have many servers who are Hispanic, so I can't really speak from that angle, but I can tell you that if they're working in, say, a fast food restaurant or sandwich shop, then it doesn't really matter what their nationality or immigrant status is, they're pretty dim bulbs to begin with. However, I've actually found that immigrants work much faster and harder in the fast food business than native people. Our local Bojangles (local fried chicken chain) is almost exclusively Hispanic immigrants and my order has never been wrong nor has it taken a long time.
I worked in a higher end restaurant for nearly two years, and 90% of the cooks that came through there were Hispanic. Most were legal, but a few weren't. However, they took their jobs seriously, and worked their tails off for the little they were paid. Got to be really good friends with them and go back and see them every once in a while.
As far as the language barrier, that can be frustrating, but it's a common problem that everyone has, and even in the same language that they speak. My girlfriend is from Eastern NC and I'm from Western NC, and half the time I can't understand a thing her family says.
So I guess where you live has a lot to do with it.
I performed at a Hindu Wedding last Saturday night. I play in a Rock Band. Sounds funny, Rock at a Hindu Wedding? Well, the bride was Caucasion, the groom Indian. It was a very fair and balanced wedding. To the point. We had to load in through the kitchen at the Marriot in San Francisco. I understand what you mean about Immigrants working hard in the Upper Class Service Industry. I heard all kinds of accents. I saw people working their tales off. I was very impressed.
As a kid I use to work at Togos. I could make any large sandwich in under 50 seconds. I was day/night manager and received two Super Service Awards for getting a perfect score when shopped. I jsut do not see the same level of service in many lower to mid tear Restaurants these days. Really, what it boils down to is corporate greed.
F**k that that bull-chit elitist stereotype. That attitude makes me sick, it's that very attitude that enables people to rationalize the plight of fellow citizens working for slave f**king wages. It allows people to feel like they're so much better than and more deserving than folks who just aren't getting ahead because of a devalued labor market. That elitist bull-chit attitude is the attitude seperates us from our commonality, it negates our ability to see each other as equals.
I was a dim bulb when I worked at Togos for $3.45hr. 10 years alter I decided to join the Workforce and took out a student loan and earned a AA in Multimedia. I am no longer a dim bulb.
One question, how is working at Burger King for minimal wage a slave wage?
You used to post as iron maiden and before that it was something else related to your car. Before that it was...I don't remember. You've been the same annoying nativist the whole time.
Anyway.
All I'm saying is that it's a damned elitist attitude that equates paygrade with worth as a human being. I believe that the guy on the top floor is no better than the guy on the shop floor.
I believe in a living wage.
I believe we all have a right to dignity in return for our labor.
Screw that royalist attitude that places one human above another.
We are all made of dust.
You have a valid point. I find myself surrounded by 100's if not 1000's of white European-Americans and common sense would dictate that some of them are illegal.
Wow, one could infer from your statement that you feel "refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper", that Savage is automatically referring to those people of color.
The point, IMO, is that Micahel Savage is a lunatic who sounds serious when he says there are immigrants who don't know how to use a toothbrush or toilet paper.
It's easier to demonize people when you depict them as subhuman. That's my point.
Of course he uses over the top rhetoric, he always does.
I think you meant to say that "he uses over the bottom rhetoric." No?
The point is that Tommy's point is the point.
As for paying for poverty, Tommy-The-Point should simply share his thrice-daily 20-piece Chicken McNuggent habit w/ some of our newest community members in need. It's a start.
share his thrice-daily 20-piece Chicken McNuggent habit w/ some of our newest community members in need. It's a start
You can voluntarily give any amount of money you like to any immigrant you like. I wonder how much have you given? You can also voluntarily have your employer take out more taxes, refuse a refund, send back your stimulus payment as a way of sharing with our new illegal community members. Why is it the American taxpayers job to "share" with people who are coming here illegally? Like it or not the influx of thes people is having some detrimental effects on our society. We should in no way reward bad behavior.
So how about having Bush face the consequences of not enforcing the law? Something like... dereliction of duty, perhaps?
Why does he get to skate on this?
Excusing bad behavior because of circumstances is not a defense.
You're not the judge.
Or on naval boats? Last I heard, we were holding over 25,000 on those floating prisons where more than the abuses at Gitmo were observed. The military confirmed it, but the Pentagon denied it.
link
Like it or not the influx of thes people is having some detrimental effects on our society...
Examples?
"Importing poverty?"
That's an interesting way to put it. I thought America was great because anyone could come here with a dream and better their conditions without limits. You know, that whole American dream thing?
It's funny: when conservatives want to bash liberals for focusing on and wanting to ameliorate domestic problems of poverty and wealth disparity, they accuse liberals of being doom and gloomers who want to socialize our country. They crow about how America is the greatest country in the world and anyone can do anything. They cite stories of immigrants who came here without a dollar to their name and pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. They say that the effects of slavery have all but vanished and the primary reason that African Americans are disproportionately poorer and less educated than whites is that they suffer from an internalized soft-bigotry of low expectations and a culture of dependence upon the state.
But when the topic turns to refugees and immigrants, suddenly the tune changes. Then it suddenly becomes a question of who will pay for importing poverty. Isn't every person who comes to the United States, no matter how poor, a potential rags-to-riches story by virtue of the fact that America's culture, government, and laws are inherently wealth-promoting? And why should we worry about paying for poor people at all when the perennial conservative complaint is that there are too many state social services and programs in place already? If one is committed to the proposition that we should reduce state services for existing domestic poor, then what difference does it make if more poor are arriving? If we can motivate our own poor to go get work by cutting their social services, than certainly the same will be true for refugees and immigrants, right?
I guess I wasn't paying attention when Lady Liberty's message went from:
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, your homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
...to:
"If you seek refuge, look elsewhere: we refuse to import your poverty."
Bulls-eye, Vy. And on a related note, employee beatings will continue until morale improves.
Well, except for the part where I spelled "then" as "than". Clearly too many immigrants have been polluting my English literacy.
Who do you think he's talking about? "Here's Laura and whatever his first name is -- George -- walking around, holding hands as though it's 1955 and Dwight D. Eisenhower is sending care packages to the poor of Africa and Asia."
Are you going to try that trick where you call me a racist for noticing that most people from Africa and Asian aren't white?
"conflict victims in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere"
You left out this, why?
"conflict victims in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere"
...who don't know how to use a toothbrush or toilet paper. That, IMO, narrows it down a little to primitive people whose bare-chested women wear grass skirts. Don't see too many blonde-haired, blue-eyed folks like that.
Except by Savages previous, overtly racist comments.
The man is a certified, frothing-at-the-mouth bigot. Anything he says is suspect.
that Savage happens to think are good hardworking people. So, no, it's obviously not just about poverty.
So it is your position that Savage would welcome immigrants who can't use toothbrushes, toilet paper, have 16 kids and don't work - AS LONG AS THEY ARE WHITE?
Is that what you are saying? Because if not, you just invalidated your entire argument here. Thanks for playing.
Then you figure out how your entire argument just went up in flames.
Thanks again for trying to play....
"My point was that you have incessantly tried to turn this argument around without defending your point of view with anything other than crap like" everyone can see" or "it's obvious" and yet when Tommy challenges you to back up your baseless assertions you don't but rather attack his logic."
Classic. Just priceless.
Me:"People who have nothing to offer but flaming should not be allowed to post here, just like people who have nothing intelligent or honest to say shouldn't be allowed on the public airwaves. It has nothing to do with political viewpoints, despite all the baseless assertions being made to the contrary here."
Tommy:"Oh please, don't be naive. It has EVERYTHING to do with political viewpoints. And the simple fact that some here want those they don't like silenced, in whatever roundabout way they can get their partisan little hands on. Between trying to shutdown Fox News, to calling for networks to up their standards, it's all the same glossed over, dressed up call for government involvement...It most certainly is."
So tell me, how is "don't be naive" significantly different from "it's obvious"? When you and Tommy are challenged to back up your baseless assertions, you don't have any problem with such "crap". Hilarious. And it's not like Tommy is even attacking my logic, which would be a valid tactic, he's just repeating the same baseless assertions.
I notice that later on in this thread that you say that Clams can't assign motives to Savage. But talking about how liberals want political censorship and government intervention is certainly assigning motives to our complaints regarding Morris yesterday. And when an attempt to dispel those baseless assertions is dismissed as just "naive", you had absolutely no problem with that behavior at all.
And to touch on what I said to Jeter on this thread, it's hard to call what Clams is saying "baseless" when Savage has such a history of inflammatory comments. Even Tommy has said that people's history is important in evaluating what they say, so that most certainly puts Savage's comments here in a more suspicious light. On the other hand, I didn't see any citations of history for any liberals to bolster the case that we want political censorship or government intervention regarding who is allowed to appear on the air.
That's your full rebuttal? No effort to point out how I'm mistaken, in any way whatsoever?
Too damn funny.
Are you trying to give me a ruptured spleen from laughing at you? My God. You guys can judge Clams all day long, but when you're under the microscope I should get over myself. The hypocrisy just keeps on coming.
If I'm "twisting" anything, or how I'm "full of sh!t", demonstrate it. I know you're just spouting defensive crap, but I want to give you every chance to make your case anyway.
Otherwise, go practice your inferiority complex routine in front of the mirror with a box of tissues, because I'm not interested. If you don't want to look stupid, try developing a set of principles and sticking with it. Make some effort to be fair and unbiased, even if it's regarding people you don't personally like.
You got busted for being a damned hypocrite, and you can't return serve because I don't spout off knee-jerk opinions based on ideological alliances or enemies. I've defended you, Tommy, Jeter, Bruce, Steve, anyone when I feel they should be defended. I'm not perfect, I'm not omnipotent, but I make every effort to be fair, honest, and in accord with a self-consistent set of principles.
If you're not capable of the same, you'll just have to deal with the resulting embarrassment and quit whining about it.
"and concentrate on the issue, which is importing poverty."
"Importing poverty" is a staple and foundation of this country's existence. We SURE wouldn't be what we are today if only the rich had settled this country.
Uh, because Laura Bush said it and I was quoting Savage. What's your point? You're already starting to flail here. But do let's take a look at your quote: So Savage plays a clip of Laura specifying Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and the Western Hemisphere (which obviously refers to everything south of the U.S.). Savage then goes off on a xenophobic rant about people who've never used a toothbrush and eat beetle nuts. Savage then plays a clip of Laura talking about past generations of families who've come to the U.S. from war-torn continents (i.e. Europe), and Savage says that those refugees knew how to use a toothbrush and knew how to work.
So again, O Great Defender of All Conservative Bigotry, who do you think Savage was talking about?
Boy, you have absolutely no self-awareness, do you? I'm giving you a small taste of your own medicine. Or don't you recall that you spent the entire day yesterday petulantly demanding that everyone answer your question about enforcing media fairness?
You can't wave your magic "opinion" wand over this one. Race is obviously the driving force behind Savage's xenophobia, or he wouldn't have contrasted European immigrants with immigrants of color by praising the hard-working, civilized nature of Europeans, while mocking the African, Asian, Middle-Eastern and Latin American immigrants as ignorant primitives.
Race is the driving force behind everything for a two bit race hustler, unless you can demonstrate that Savage is saying he hates only "colored" people who can't use toothbrushes, as opposed to anyone else, then all you have are your baseless assumptions, sorry.
As for the thread yesterday, I didn't ask you to back up your opinions, I asked you for a workable solution to who is or who isn't "allowed" on networks for political analysis, you refused to do it, your opinion was irrelevant to me, as it normally is.
You've resorted to ad hominem attacks really early today. Sorry, but calling me names doesn't change the fact that Savage is using stereotypes to broadbrush immigrants of color, while at the same time he nostalgically praises white immigrants of past generations.
Maybe we should go back to that Laura Bush quote that you posted, because I'd still love to know what your point was. How does that quote in any way support your argument that Savage is talking just about poverty and not about race?
You will race where there is no evidence of it, you can keep saying it all day long but you have no proof except that Savage is nostalgic for past immigrants as opposed to todays. That is not racially motivated as you insist, unless you can prove it beyond your assumptions, which you can't, he is talking about a mindset, an entitlement mentality that he feels is different from immigrants past vs today.
Sorry, I know it's easier to cry racism for then you don't have to discuss the real issue.
"[H]e is talking about a mindset, an entitlement mentality that he feels is different from immigrants past vs today."
Prove it. You're assumption is completely unsubstantiated. Savage very specifically singled out non-white countries to characterize as ignorant primitives. Where exactly do you get that he's talking about a mindset of entitlement? Where exactly does he say that?
And I can't help notice that you keep ignoring my question about why you posted the Laura Bush quote. So again, what was your point in posting that quote?
"And moreover, let me tell you something. I am an immigrant son, but when my grandfather came here, he could read and write. And he had a business that he opened with his money -- the first monies he got, he opened his own business. He knew how to use toilet paper; he had used a toothbrush. We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. You're telling me they're going to assimilate? They will never assimilate. They come here and they bring their destitute ways to this country, and they never assimilate"
What do you think he's talking about, bringing their destitute ways to this country and don't assimilate? Funny, you introduce race into this with no evidence whatsoever, but dismiss this. Are you on meds today?
So you're just going to avoid all questions by asking me the same questions? I already told you who he's talking about. He's talking about non-white immigrants. And he's contrasting them with his European immigrant grandfather. I'm not sure if you noticed, but Savage is white. The question was who do you think he's talking about when he specifies African and Asian immigrants and refers to them as beetle nut-chewing idiots with gang-banger children who can't figure out toothbrushes and toilet paper?
And, oh, by the by, what was you point with the Laura Bush quote?
Savage is responding to Laura Bush and she is speaking of immigrants from all over the world, do you honestly think Savage is fine with those from our hemisphere as long as they happen to be white, it's just the non-white immigrants that he is speaking of in his racist rant?
That's ridiculous.
Savage was quoted as saying, that Muslims, at least, “need deportation”; and adherents of Islam would do well to “take your religion and shove it up your behind” because “I’m sick of you.”
You are the one who is making the assumption about advocating censorship, so it is incumbent upon you to prove it, not the other way around. You can't, you failed, admit that and move on.
There, fixed another one. But no, when you make assumptions then you can just assert them over and over and over no matter how obvious your failure to prove them. I don't recall you admitting that failure on yesterday's thread and moving on.
Also, isn't Clams' opinion about what Savage is saying...an opinion? When you have an opinion then there is no evaluation allowed of it, it's just your opinion. It doesn't have to have a basis to it, you don't have to justify it. It's always "we disagree, get over it". But here you have no problem criticizing Clams' conclusions as "race-baiting" and "baseless", which means his opinion must have a basis and must be justified.
Clams,
Unless you can prove that Savage wouldn't be wailing about poor White refuges coming to this country then what the hell is your point?
God, only you could make me come to Savage's defense.
The guy is griping about folks arriving here from poverty & not assimilating. I fail to see why you are making this a racist issue.
I read the transcript.
Most of the immigrants from past generations happen to be White, but he was not making this a White-Colored comparison...you are.
He is simply stating that immigrants/refugees today are coming from areas of poverty & not assimilating like those from past generations...that is a FACT.
YOU are the one who always turns everything into a racial argument.
"He is simply stating that immigrants/refugees today are coming from areas of poverty & not assimilating like those from past generations...that is a FACT."
I missed this before.
"...this whole lies and distortion stuff, apparently you think it's so easy to arbitrate that, forgive me if I don't see you or the seafood entree as qualified since you both have soooooooo much trouble distinguishing between fact and opinion."
But when Jeter explicitly asserts that his interpretation...his opinion...as FACT, not only do you not comment on his qualification, it deserves praise.
So either it's fine for Jeter to conflate fact and opinion, or you can't tell the difference yourself. This clubhouse mentality you guys have going is like a hypocrisy mill, it just keeps on churning out.
So he's talking about immigrants who just happen to be of color, and he just happens to use references to chewing beetle nuts and he just happens to use stereotypes about lazy do-nothings who have 16 kids who grow up to be gang bangers. But it has nothing to do with race, right?
Clams,
This may come to a huge shock to you but WHITE folks can be lazy-do-nothings & pop out numerous kids & collect welfare. And they aren't even refugees...they are born & bred citizens!
If some of these improvised countries have beetlenuts [whatever those are?] so what? How you make the leap from refuges that won't assimilate to something racist tells me YOU always see everything in terms of Black vs. White.
Personally I wouldn't want anyone coming here from anywhere if they won't assimilate into our culture.
Well at least you didn't deny it, thank you for that pinlight of honesty regarding your own henious actions of race baiting.
And I call them as I see them, O'Reilly comes to mind where I definitely thought his harlem restaurant slur was racially motivated, and you agreed with me from what I recall.
I don't know what you're point is, but I've had about 5 or 6 posts deleted over the years, and you've had dozens. In fact, I can think of a single thread where you had more than a dozen posts deleted because of racist content. And I didn't flag any of them. It all happened before I even joined the discussion. This Ann Coulter/slavery apology thread had close to 400 posts that were whittled down to 133. All but one of your posts was deleted. As you can read from my comments at the end of that thread, it was the most racist thread I'd ever seen on this site, and you were at the forefront of at all.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702090010?offset=0&show=1#comments
I guess you were hoping I wouldn't remember?
Thank you for reminding me of that thread....and your defense is your post at the end? OMG, that is funny, considering whatever was yanked was not of my doing, but the insults and slime thrown at me, so all accompanying posts prior were deleted, but of course you left that out. Wow, what you will sink to when you are getting tossed around in a thread and your motivations are brought to light. Do you have no shame?
You really shot yourself in the foot with this little gem you linked to, how incredibly rich. You are a peach, thanks!
...racist rants from you, Evillib and the Colonel...
For the record, Clams, that was Col. Roy Campbell, a completely different Colonel. I was still Huntingtonbeachlefty back then.
Tommy,
What I'm finding [and it really came to light during the Dem primary] is that Libs are the ones so hung up on race that they end up coming off looking like racists.
Clams is a great example.
"This may come to a huge shock to you but WHITE folks can be lazy-do-nothings & pop out numerous kids & collect welfare. And they aren't even refugees...they are born & bred citizens!"
Yes, and Savage isn't talking about them, is he? So you have no point.
"If some of these improvised countries have beetlenuts [whatever those are?] so what?"
I'll excuse your ignorance since you fess up to it. If you lived anywhere with a large South East Asian immigrant population you would see people chewing beetle nuts. The point is that Savage targets a very specific ethnic group with this insult.
"Personally I wouldn't want anyone coming here from anywhere if they won't assimilate into our culture."
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
But you better start acting like an American once your inside the golden door!
Clams,
You are the one throwing out the idea that only Blacks fit a certain stereotype. That makes YOU a racist buddy.
And yeah, you come here, you assimilate. Learn the language, get a job...is that too much to expect?
Jeter, it's been gone over any number of times here that a person's record makes a difference in how you interpret their comments. Even Tommy has said this.
Considering Savage's record, are we really supposed to accept that the racially-charged phrases he is using aren't actually meant to refer to anyone in specific races? As if it's "OK so Savage is a lunatic who makes wildly offensive comments on a regular basis...but when he's talking about beetlenuts and gang-bangers then we have to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's talking about white people". Doesn't that seem just a bit too charitable, in your opinion?
The only way you can prove your racist garbage is if you can prove Savage welcomes one race of immigrants over another, regardless of their behavioral traits. Can you?
"So it is your position that Savage would welcome immigrants who can't use toothbrushes, toilet paper, have 16 kids and don't work - AS LONG AS THEY ARE WHITE?"....tommy.
"No, that's not what I'm saying at all"....Clams Casino.
And now this; "Everyone can read what he said, and he very clearly differentiates between white immigrants and non-white immigrants".....Clams Casino.
Oops........
One minute he says Savage doesn't differentiate between the two with regard to whom he welcomes and who he doesn't,
Ah, but he never said that, Tommy.You get really angry when other people don't fall for your Hannity-type questions, don't you?
Concrete thinking may not be what you think it is. You may be hearing "solid" or "strong", or "difficult to destroy".It's more like this.
HaHa. You two lecturing me on thinking skills. When you're nothing but emotional arguments and not really telling people what you believe, so parsing and dancing around words become commonplace.......one of you posts substance free nonsense and cute little youtube links, and the other cries racism at every turn to compensate for weak arguments.
Who's falling faster gents?
What a pair.......
It would be cute if it weren't a cause for concern. Tommy's brighter than your average dittohead, but he does have one of those conservative traits; the idea that locking yourself into a flawed argument and clinging to it desperately is a sign of strength.
The projection is there too. I think he realizes he's aligned himself with a completely emotion-based ideology, and so he's constantly putting that onto liberals.
or this?
Wow, you're just plain crazy. What do you mean, "oops"? You're obviously trying to point out some contradiction where there is none. Care to explain? I'll assume that you're not capable of clarifying your nonsense, so let's just go back to the original question, shall we? When Savage talks about Africans, Asians, Middle Easterners and Latin Americans, do you think he's talking about white people? When he talks about his grandfather and other European immigrants, do you think he's talking about people of color? Unless you're going to be completely disingenuous we'll have to assume that the answer to both questions is, no. So, when he says that European immigrants are hard working and civilized, he is therefore talking about white people. And when he paints non-European immigrants as ignorant, beetle-nut chewers, with 16 gang-banger kids, and no working knowledge of phones, toilet paper or toothbrushes, he's talking about people of color. It's pretty simple.
Of course he isn't talking about white immigrants. The point is that you have in now way supported your argument that he assigns the traits mentioned to these people because of their color. It could just as easily be his opinion that they have these traits because of their thiird world environment. Just because YOU say so doesn't make it so sir. Everything is not about race. Paranoia will destroy ya'
Let's try this again.
Of course he isn't talking about white immigrants. The point is that you have in now way supported your argument that he assigns the traits mentioned to these people because of their color. It could just as easily be his opinion that they have these traits because of their thiird world environment. Just because YOU say so doesn't make it so sir. Everything is not about race. Paranoia will destroy ya'
Let's try this again.
Of course he isn't talking about white immigrants. The point is that you have in now way supported your argument that he assigns the traits mentioned to these people because of their color. It could just as easily be his opinion that they have these traits because of their thiird world environment. Just because YOU say so doesn't make it so sir. Everything is not about race. Paranoia will destroy ya'
"Those people he is referring to may certianly be of color. but you have no way of proving that he is calling them ignorant because of their color."
Geez, at least one of you has the balls to admit that Savage isn't talking about white immigrants. I'm not going to argue the cause and effect of Savage's bigotry, but if you admit that he is referring to non-white immigrants, then you must see that his broad stereotypes of them are racially offensive.
Now, anyone who has ever listened to or read transcripts of Mr. Savage now that he is a bigot and that he is in fact referring to third world or non-white immigrants. Who else could he possibly be describing? Tommy, your a smart guy and I think it's safe to assume that you know this, is in fact, true.
But you like to play the devil's advocate. You love to argue a point if you can find anything that will bolster you position. And never give an inch on that position no matter how much evidence to the contrary. At least if your debating with a "liberal", aka anyone who disagrees with "conservatives" and are therefore trying to censor them. Very lawyer-like of you I guess.
In this instance you have chosen as your point of contention that Clams cannot "prove" Mr. Savage was comparing white immigrants with non-white immigrants. And you are indeed correct if the proof you seek is a quote from Savage that this is the comparison he is making. But I would argue that the standard of evidence is pretty low considering the accused.
You overlook Savage's history of hateful, bigoted and ignorant rantings just to say,
"Well, you can't prove that's what he meant.". Why on earth would you in anyway defend this horrible person and what he says? I know you gotta be right all the time but, damn.
You need to learn when to just leave it alone, it's not worth it really, do you think?
"Now I will ask you to prove that Savage is saying that these people he mentions have the traits he assigns them because of their color."
Oh come on. "16 kids", "beetlenuts" "Gang bangers" are all backdoor stealth terms to describe people of color. Don't you know anything about codes?
Argument copyrighted by Tommy's Arguments-o'-Convenience. All rights reserved.
"A comparibly viable alternative would be that immmigrants from European nations were more advanced industrially, technology, and education wise as opposed to inhabitants from third world countries."
If that's "comparibly viable", then why is it that Clams has to prove his contention but you don't have to prove yours? That would presume that your view is more reasonable by default, for some reason.
Why do we get these immigrants if they're so well off regarding industry, technology and education? I thought most were poor people looking to find a better life here. So all the poor white people who came from less-developed parts of eastern Europe and Russia fifty years ago knew how to start their own businesses, but today all the people who come from Asia and Africa are lazy and stupid.
I just don't see what major difference there is in the general atmospheres of the places these people are coming from that makes for such a tremendous disparity in their abilities and attitudes.
"You freakin moron! I am not defending Savages' overall opinion on these people. I am pointing out that his argument is that there is a distinct difference in people from Eastern Europe and people from the third world countries he talks about. He is saying that the latter can't assimilate because of thier ignorance of industrialized culture not because they have dark skin. Goddamn your hopeless."
Tut, tut! Whatever happened to your condemnation of childish name-calling?
Again, if your theory is comparably viable to Clams', why don't you have to prove it? I'm genuinely curious.
What a bizarre and irrational reaction. I didn't say you were defending his overall opinion, I'm explaining why I don't find that theory completely convincing. What is the "industrialized culture" in the less-developed parts of eastern Europe and Russia? I don't see the great difference between their respective environments, not great enough to create the disparity in attitude that he's talking about at least. And if it's not environmental, what's the cause of it? Additionally, you leave out the possibility that Savage believes the ignorance you're talking about is directly related to their skin color. That would still be racist, and within the boundaries of your own theory.
All right, so the only way you will be convinced is if Savage actually comes right out and says that he is a racist.
Are all conservatives that dense mentally when it comes to understand what people mean without them having to state the obvious or is it just you?
"he has been asked numerous times to give some concrete evidence that Savage believes that because of these peoples skin color they can't use a toothbrush."
So I could use any demeaning stereotype against a person of color that I like, but it isn't racist or bigoted because nobody can provide concrete evidence that I used that stereotype because of the person's skin color? For instance, if I call a Taiwanese immigrant an ignorant beetle-nut chewer, it isn't racist, because the slur might have nothing to do with the fact that he's Taiwanese?
Yes, if Savage was talking about people who happened to be black, and made comments about watermelon, fried chicken and playing basketball, we'd just have to give him the benefit of the doubt because white people also eat watermelon and fried chicken and play basketball. So what if he's talking about big lips, Mick Jagger has big lips too.
If we could only find some sort of concrete evidence that proves what he's saying beyond any measure of doubt whatsoever, then we could criticize him for such behavior.
You keep isolating "toothbrush" as the only word that's important here. It comes off as a little odd, since there are other things to consider. Your theory is possible, it just doesn't seem to jibe for reasons I've already stated.
Nothing has to be "proven", anyway. It's a reasonable interpretation based on what Savage said and on his history, therefore it's not "baseless" or "mind-reading" as you claimed.
"The fact is that you don't and you know it yet you cling to the idea that Savage's past statements prove your argument."
Just scanning through and I realized I forgot to comment on the above earlier.
That is dishonest on your part. I didn't even imply that his past "proves" anything, I said it makes it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, I said it puts what he's saying in a more suspicious light. That is far from saying that it's proof of an argument, and it's a concept that's not really controversial. If you're looking at a comment that seems racist, it makes a difference whether the person making it has a history of racist comments or no such history. You don't evaluate those two situations the same way.
I've found it amusing that those trying to explain Savage's remarks have ignored this very basic principle, especially since Tommy has argued it in the past himself. Apparently it's a "common-sense" argument none of you can address.
And thanks in advance for your efforts to avoid "twisting" my words in the future. I do appreciate it.
Where is Savage's evidence that these immigrants can't or won't use toilet paper and toothbrushes? I've asked that earlier but got no response.
So what is it? Does Savage actually know this for a fact or is he using his ridiculous assertion as some sort of moronic 'comedy device'... an attempt to be 'funny'?
"I fail to see how Savage is saying that just because a person is white they know how to use a toothbrush."
Wow, you've really twisted this debate into some crazy knots of illogic.
"If it's about poverty then why does he say that past generations of immigrants knew how to work and operate a toothbrush and toilet paper?"
I was just responding to what you wrote above. It is your indication that because Savage mentions a toothbrush he is therefore talking about race. Hw you come to that conclusion I have no idea, but of course in your world of logic anyone who doesn't think like you is a racist.
Your logical fallacies are piling up too high to even bother with.
Do tell or give an example please. Untile then We'll be waiting on you to give any kind of proof that Savage assigns the traits he mentions to those people BECAUSE of their skin color.
Savage will never do that DIRECTLY because he would get thrown off the air for it. He is walking on what is commonly known as a 'thin line'. So he spouts his racist tripe INDIRECTLY and in a ROUNDABOUT way using 'clever' linguistic tools - yeah, 'clever' to the simpleminded. Those of us with a higher level of intelligence can see exactly what Savage is doing here.
You cons really need to quit being so goddamned literal. That's a huge flaw your side has.
Zachary Aronow is an intern at Media Matters for America.
I feel for Zachary that apparently his assignment is to listen and analyze Michael Savage the most hateful person on radio today. Good job Zachary. You have a job that I would not want. Savage hurts my ears.
-- and they never assimilate -- savage
Non-assimilation? That's not always so bad. Obama is all over this one with a two-pronged solution.
Obama is in favor of offering citizenship to those non-assimilating illegal aliens...as well as giving them driver's licenses.
-- The problem we have here is not driver's licenses. Undocumented workers do not come here to drive. They're here to work. -- Obama
Brilliant...the faster they come here in greater numbers...these illegal aliens will restore our standing in the world community as a benevolent nation...and help us break the iron grip of dependency on foreign oil.
Would you rather NOT have them have a driver's license and drive anyway? Meaning, they won't need to have insurance, and then what happens if they get into an accident? I'd much rather they have a driver's license, and everything that needs to go along with it, than NOT have them have an official driver's license.
Citizenship might be offered, after they jump through a bunch of hoops, pay a fine (illegal immigration is a civil offense, by the way, sort of like speeding - same category), and then they can become citizens eventually, and do the things that guys like you complain that they don't do, such as pay into SS, have insurance, and become even more useful members of the community.
You guys always make it sound like if you come here illegally, man, you've got it made easy. When that is far from what the case actually is.
-- if you come here illegally -- magnolialover
That's it...you got it...the rest of the issues you complained about is just a smoke screen.
If you're here illegally...you should go home...it's pretty elementary.
Not in any particular order:
Secure the borders.
Prosecute employers who hire illegal aliens.
Overhaul the immigration system to streamline the process of immigrating legally...and yes I support a guest worker program.
Deport all illegal aliens when they are found. Don't even start with the BS that it's impossible to deport 15-20 million aliens. They didn't get her overnight and we can't deport them overnight...but we can sure as hell get started.
We do not seem to have a huge influx of Immigrants coming from Europe. Do Russians chew beetle nutts?
Let me ask you this. What Nations are most of the Immigrants, Illegal or not coming from?
It's definitely racist and any arguments to the contrary are, at best, intellectually dishonest, and they reveal more about those who post them than anything else. I rarely even bother to read the posts about SavageWeiner because there are sure to be apologists out there and they are sure to be disingenuous.
Savage: "We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. ..."
That's a pretty accurate description of Savage's listners, except some of them know how to use a telephone. :-)
M.A. Weiner rants about refugees and claims a lack of assimilation and economic strain and he DARES to allude to Weimar-era Germany while disparaging masses who seek to escape horrific oppression and bloodshed in hopes of survival.
Weiner's fascistic rhetoric, coupled with every other vile statement that's crossed his lips regarding immigration or religion, proves his latent self-loathing.
Was Weiner too Jewish a last name? Do you derive sick pleasure from labeling other Jews as Nazi sympathizers?
And he's still not the most repulsive scum on the airwaves
Boy, you sure are a tollerent bunch. Maybe, just maybe he wanted to listen to another point of view. You and your, smoker pals, seem to spinless to accept another point of view.
I listen to savage, I just choose to cast all the negative chit aside. So, I guess that ends our conversation?
CHRISTOPHERPKING, I think you meant "spineless", didn't you? I thought so.
Also "too". as in "also". There are just so many points of view out there, gee whiz, what's a fellow to do, Chris? Sometimes a person just has to make a choice, ya know?