About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Savage claims he has "never called for violence"

August 21, 2009 12:07 pm ET

From the August 20 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Savage on the Mumbai attacks: "Should the tribal areas in Pakistan be wiped out and the rats killed in there once and for all?"   

Savage: "I'd hang every lawyer who went down to Guantánamo"

Savage: Madeleine Albright is a "traitor" who "should be hung"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 21, 2009 12:18 pm ET)
      5  
      Well, YEAH! I mean there's nothign VIOLENT about SHOOTING PEOPLE IN THE HEAD!

      Can I go give this schumck a sample of what he thinks constitutes non-violnece now? Please?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by The_Cat (August 21, 2009 12:24 pm ET)
        2  
        And look a bit silly with a screen name like Niceguy Eddie? No, far better to deal with the willfully ignorant by the time honored tradition of pointing and laughing! :) Besides, as Mr. Savage will no doubt discover, what comes around goes around.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 21, 2009 12:40 pm ET)
          2  
          Point taken, but I'm guessing you don't know who "Niceguy Eddie" is. Hey a cop-killing jewel thief and mob-boss's son from Quentin Tarantio's Resevoir Dogs portrayed by the late Chris Penn. I like the handle specifically for it dual nature: We are both "nice guys" (although in his case, only relative to the sociopaths he works with) but we also have little patience for suffering fools. (For the record though, I don't kill or assault people, I just go online and debate politics... occasionally in an overly brusque manner.)
          Report Abuse
          • Author by epkklk851 (August 21, 2009 1:20 pm ET)
               
            Thanks for the explanation of your handle. I saw the movie a long time ago, I have forgotten a lot of the details, but it was a great film. I don't have much sufferance for fools, either.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by sdlnkicker4551 (August 21, 2009 12:25 pm ET)
         
      So why should Savage not misrepresent the truth like almost all the other right wing pundits do? It's what he does. Twist the truth about the issues, and deny that you have said it when it fits your agenda or you are confronted. This guy should wake up and smell what he is shoveling.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (August 21, 2009 12:25 pm ET)
         
      They let the guy go when he is dying of cancer after ten years in prison. It was probably cheaper to send him home than to care for him as a hospice patient. That is merciful. I will admit I am a bit ambivolent about his release, if he is guilty, then dying in prison isn't an unjust death. I am appalled that he would be greeted as a hero in Libya, however. As I watched the BBC report on his arrival last night, I asked my husband how he felt about it. And his response was this, "If he had been in prison in the U.S., we would have executed him." Now, while I personally oppose the death penalty, I recognize that he is probably right. The man would not have lived to this stage of cancer in the U.S. prison system. As to Mr. Savage, well, at least he knows that his speech is shocking and offensive. But the case could be made that the Brown government found this guy's conduct so offensive that they didn't want him in the country, either. They refused hallowed ground to even bury him in. I will also remember this particular comparison when Mr. Savage makes another of his attacks on liberals for being whiners and victims. He needs to listen to himself more often.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by puppienrainbows (August 21, 2009 12:32 pm ET)
          1
        "The man would not have lived to this stage of cancer in the U.S. prison system". It's likely his cancer would have been discovered and his prostate removed in the U.S. prison system, thereby allowing him to serve out his sentence or live the typical 28 years behind bars, on average, before being executed. The 'cost' of imprisoning a convict has no bearing on his or her term. It is part of a civilized society.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by epkklk851 (August 21, 2009 1:03 pm ET)
             
          Pup, you are right in a civilized society, the cost of imprisoning someone has no bearing on the length of their sentence, but that doesn't stop conservatives like yourself from screaming about how well prisoners are being treated and how unfair it is to have to pay for them. Perhaps I was ineloquent in my post, but I was just channeling kneejerk conservative rhetoric. But you are so wrong in the rest of your post. Sorry.

          "thereby allowing him to serve out his sentence or live the typical 28 years behind bars, on average, before being executed." I will take issue with your typical exaggeration with a quote from a Fox News story: "The average length of time for an inmate to stay on death row (search) in the United States is more than 10 years." The actual story can be found here:

          http://www.ask.com/bar?q=average+stay+on+death+row+in+u.s.&page=1&qsrc=0&ab=0&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fstory%2F0%2C2933%2C167236%2C00.html

          This link is from the Florida Department of Corrections, Florida has a long history of executions, as you may know.
          "12.31 years is the average length of stay on Death Row prior to execution. 13.94 years is the average number of years between offense and execution."

          http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fairliberal (August 21, 2009 4:11 pm ET)
               
            Florida statistics also show that the death penalty is not disproportionately applied to minorities. At least in Florida. Actually, that stastic surprised me. I have heard that all my life, I assumed it to be true.

            http://www.fadp.org/news/Death_Row_from_the_in.html
            Report Abuse
            • Author by epkklk851 (August 21, 2009 6:09 pm ET)
                 
              According to your link 229 white males have been executed since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1979. In that same time period, 125 black males have been executed. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2008, African Americans made up only 15.9% of the population of Florida, but they are 55% of those executed, that statistic clearly shows a disproportionate application to Blacks. It may not reflect the application to Hispanics, who are considered White in Florida statistics. In Florida, Latinos are 21% of the population, non-Hispanic Whites make up 60% of the population.
              Here is the Census Bureau link:

              http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12000.html
              Report Abuse
            • Author by vysotsky (August 21, 2009 7:22 pm ET)
                 
              "Florida statistics also show that the death penalty is not disproportionately applied to minorities. At least in Florida. Actually, that stastic surprised me."

              Yeah, it surprised me, too. Tell me, where in the link you provided does it say that the death penalty was not disproportionately applied to minorities?

              Report Abuse
    • Author by vysotsky (August 21, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
         
      "Now I want you to understand that to the British government under Gordon Brown, speech has become behavior. Do you understand how Orwellian this is? Speech has become behavior."


      That's not Orwellian, that's accurate. Speech is not immaterial and it is not inconsequential. Laws are "just words" but obviously they have real effects in the world. Death threats are just words, but they constitute behavior just as waving a gun at someone constitutes behavior. "Incitement" is an action. Lying in a contract is behavior, specifically fraud. Declaring war has consequences. Throwing the word "Orwellian" around like a Frisbee at a concert whenever one is confronted with the consequences of one's speech is, well, behavior worth questioning.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rkallen09 (August 21, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
      2 1
      Michael Savage in 2006...
      They say, "Oh, there's a billion of them." I said, "So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them." I mean, would you rather die -- would you rather us die than them? I mean, what is it going to take for you people to wake up? Would you rather we disappear or we die? Or would you rather they disappear and they die? Because you're going to have to make that choice sooner rather than later.
      Noooo... you've never called for violence, Mr Savage. Why, where would we have ever gotten the idea that you had?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by drake2b (August 21, 2009 12:43 pm ET)
         
      Savage won't admit it but I'm sure he welcomes the British ban. It gives him more fodder for his lunatic rants and he can scam more people for donations to his "legal defense fund".
      Report Abuse