Savage’s Badge of Honor
by Ben ShapiroThe British government’s decision to ban Michael Savage from entering the UK based on his political viewpoint and opposition to the global domination of Islamic shariah law puts Savage in the same company as Winston Churchill, and Prime Minister Gordon Brown in the same company as Neville Chamberlain. Savage, the recipient of the Talkers Magazine 2007 Freedom of Speech Award (Al Franken is a former winner), is an ardent advocate for liberty and freedom and the leading opponent of global Islamofascism.
During the 1930s, Neville Chamberlain pursued a policy of appeasement that brought Europe to its knees before Adolf Hitler. Even as Hitler planned his domination of the globe, the British Broadcasting Company banned Winston Churchill, Hitler’s leading political opponent, from the radio. Even after the beginning of World War II, the BBC censored Churchill, considering him too inflammatory in his description of the Germans.
Today, as Britain gradually kowtows to Islamofascism in the form of domestic acceptance of shariah law and radical Muslim rallies, they seek to censor Michael Savage in the same way they censored Churchill. By placing Savage on the same list as representatives of Islamic terrorists and Neo-Nazis, the Brown government has attempted to draw moral equivalence between those groups that speak out against Chamberlain-esque appeasement of Islamofascism, and the appeasers and Islamofascists themselves. This moral equivalence is utterly false, and worse, it is dangerous not only to free speech values but to the continued freedom of the West against those who would seek to enslave it. Brown will be listed in the history books alongside Chamberlain as an appeaser of tyranny and Savage will be listed alongside Churchill as an advocate of liberty.
Today’s Gordon Brown-led British government is as appeasement-oriented as its 1930s predecessor:
· According to the Telegraph, just last week the leader of the radical Islamofascist group Hizb ut-Tahrir held a rally in London in which he called on his followers to support “jihad” against Israel. Four years ago, Tony Blair promised to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir from Britain.
· According to the Telegraph, last month the British government, led by Brown, was forced under pressure to deny entry to Ibrahim Moussawi. Until Conservative opposition arose, the Brown government had been prepared to admit Moussawi to speak at the University of London. Moussawai describes suicide bombers as “martyrs” and calls Jews “a lesion on the forehead of history.”
· According to the The Sunday Times (September 14, 2008), “Islamic law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases. The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.”
“Considering the historical position of past liberal British administrations, radio personality Michael Savage finds himself in the best of historical company with Winston Churchill, based on the position that the Gordon Brown government has taken towards Savage today,” said a spokesman for Talk Radio Network. “Winston Churchill claimed that in the years leading up to World War II, he was banned from the BBC for a period of up to eight years. He was put into political exile where he was labeled ‘an extremist’ at a time his voice and free speech was needed most. This attempt at marginalizing Savage and Savage’s free speech is no less egregious than what Churchill experienced in the hands of Chamberlain’s government. It simply validates how history does repeat itself when history’s lessons are not learned by leaders of the modern age.
“The American way is sustained by the lynch pin of freedom of speech. TRN’s position towards all of its hosts is that of the classical liberal who says, ‘even though I might disagree with you completely, I will fight to the last breath to defend your right to speak freely.’ Sadly, the Brown government veers away from this, abandoning Britain’s principles and departing from the position of its own people.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
93 Comments
Well, this is the only way that a dirtbag like Savage can every find himself in such distinguished company.
Heh, yeah, I'm hesitant to rush to Savage's aid and give him more prominence in the Conservative movement.
It's official the UK has been captured by Islamo Fascists. In the ongoing yet unspoken, World War III, Britain has fallen to the enemies. I would be concerned except the enemy is already amongst us and we have our own battles to attend to.
Fist time shame on you….Neville Chamberlain appeasement….Second time shame on us. The UK deserves what it is about to happen to their country because they didn't learn from their own history. They accpeted extreme Islam with open arms and defended it at every turn and now that it is about to consume them. Well….. good.
Mikie Weiner is a LOW LIFE….this moron said autistic children need to be "slapped" around by their parents…let the snivelling little fraud get a real life and produce something of value for society other than his mindless, baseless rants…Winston Churchill? Pls…..how about that leader of the Austrian fascist party…oops, he's more articulate and photogenic than weiner…actually, "savage" reminds me of "Imanutjob" from Iran, a pathetic, whiny little "man"
The problem i have on this is that they put Dr. Savage on the list because of what his audience might do. They didn't say he was going to commit violent acts, but that he might incite his audience to do so. Savage is a thought criminal to them.
Savage employs shtick, he rants and raves and says the things we might think if we didn't have an internal governor. He is not to be taken seriously. he is a certain brand of entertainment that has little mainstream appeal. But that does not mean he is a danger to Britain.
Insoc is alive and well in Air Strip One.
Savage is a way too over the top schlock jock for my taste – he's just another pseudonymous Jewish entertainer, for crying out loud (Not that there's anything wrong with that. LOL!) – but it is useful to have lightning rods like him around to point out the insanities of political correctness.
A lot of you seem to be missing that: It's an act.
Perhaps Savage should have threatened to destroy the UK. Then they would have let him in.
Good point!
The Brits don't deserve their fleeting freedom. The time will come in the not too distant future when the crescent and scimitar will fly above their capitol and sharia will be the law of the land. This time they will be alone and they will roll over without a shot being fired. Eurabia indeed.
I recently heard an interview with a British bedwetting leftist reporter that was commenting on the errors of liberal thinking towards their muslim immigrants. He and other assorted leftist eunuchs were convinced that the muslims would see the enlightened virtues of western liberalism and these narcissists actually believed that these devout religious muslims would abandon their beliefs in favor of degenerate anti-religious western liberalism. Oh how wrong these naïve leftists were. The reporter went on to express shock that first generation muslims became more devout than their parents and have utterly rejected liberal degeneracy through domestic terrorism. Their terrorist threat is home grown and the myopic ignoramuses in Britain are shocked.
I hope the muslims make the liberal British men wear burqas.
He needed to offer an anti-Israel diatribe. Then they would have welcomed him with open arms.
It's interesting to me that this attack against Savage is happening at the same time the Left wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine to hurt Talk Radio,coincidence aahhh. I Don't Think So.
They might even knight him if he did that. . .
As you are alluding to, there is a direct connection between the British labor party and our democrats. So you might be right. I wonder what we gave in return? "A diplomatic incident to be named later"?
If you are a true conservative and do not come to the aid of Savage, you might want to question your beliefs. Savage is a loud mouth, however in this country (not England) he has a right to his voice and opinion. If you don't like it turn the dial or turn it off. One day they may come for you and there will be no one left to speak for you.
Well said.
I don't agree with Savage and some things but I appreciate his courage in saying what must be said.
He still has that right to voice his opinion. Once that is taken away, I will speak against it. But that is not what happened.
I agree that the UK is becoming a bit of a joke now and seems hell-bent on its own destruction. But the USA is one of the only countries in the world to have free speech (including UK, Canada, Germany, France to name a few), so this should come as no surprise to anyone.
I just think that if I am going to speak out against the UK's self-destructive instinct, it will not be under the banner of Savage's publicity stunt. This guy does more harm to the conservative movement than good.
UPDATE: I will explicitly say, though, that I definitely disagree with the UK's move of banning him (lest it seem that I'm neutral about the issue). And if this gets people to realize the totalitarian nature of the Left, then great. I just want no part in the publicity stunt that Savage is starting to pull off.
I pray that our prudent leaders do not take this course domestically. The whining on the right will rise to a very annoying din if we err in such a way.
WTKK-FM of Boston recently pulled conservative schlock jock Jay Severin off of the radio – no government intervention required! Just good ol societal decency on the part of the station owners!
wow- Michael savage under attack and needing support from conservatives… we have never seen Dr Savage as a true conservative; he is a libertarian bomb thrower who has made a great deal of money off of his 'shtick'.
He comes across most unpleasant, and that is what irks most of the folks here one suspects. However,on this he is both correct and morally right. Odd for him? Maybe. That doesn't mean he shouldn't have support. The 1st amendment is a sticky business- if it can protect kiddie porn than it should protect him as well…
True conservative or true liberal should support freedom of speech in America. What does being an interventionalist in England have to do with being conservative in America? Is that like, a neo conservative, who supports nation building and other international adventures?
silence troll or I will tax thee
did someone blow up your bridge? Go home. . . we don't care.
yep. And to the degree that he is taken seriously by anyone… what's sad is that in a perverse way, the UK is actually legitimizing the jerk. By pulling this nanny-state like stunt, Savage actually gets more attention and looks like he's being persecuted (e.g. the point of this article).
I'd rather let guys like Savage get their airtime – that's what hot air deserves.
Does this mean we can finally ban Elton John?
yeah yeah yeah… us liberal leftists are always SO naïve to you on the right. Oh, wait tho, who was it that claimed that the Iraqis would be throwing us bouqets of flowers when we arrived in Bagdad? Talk about naïve!
oh no! A VAST LIBERAL CONSPIRACY!? Can you hear the sinister music in the background? Better go get your guns!
That's the central fallacy of Leftist thinking, that no matter how extreme the opposition is, eventually everyone will be just like them. In their view everyone is just a leftist waiting to sprout.
I really don't give a crap about Savage, but a country banning him from entering because of something he said is fascist. Europe has lost its soul; it no longer believes in anything except prolonging its own comfort.
Absolutely right. Everyone who blogs whatever their political bent is should follow this story this IS Important.
In this Humpty Dumpty World all things are possible, but I do think this attack on Savage is a trial balloon of some kind . It'll show itself soon enough.
Michael Savage, aka Dr Dissent, is okay in my book. If he's made a great deal of money, well then good for him. He can be unpleasant to my ears, and sometimes I am annoyed, but he makes more sense than not, most of the time I've listened to him. With that said, I support him in whatever he chooses to do in the face of this absurdity. Whoever called it a publicity stunt is off the mark, unless Savage somehow submitted his own name and orchestrated every following event. I seriously doubt that. I think he may have pissed someone off, who took it personally, then Soro..uh, I mean that someone, made sure Savage was on that list. Why not Rush? Too obvious, and even sillier. Savage's messages are more pointed, and probably closer to the truth.
So, who in the hell was on that jet?
At some point the lefts dishonest idealistic world view is always shattered.
It would be hilarious if it didn't come with such deadly consequences.
Know what? I feel EXACTLY the same way! They accepted them open arms, AND have always been every bit as rabidly anti-semitic (anti-Jewish at least, for the Arabs are also "semitic") as the French, Germans and Austrians- only not quite as bloodthirsty as them when it came to actually slaughtering Jews.
Anyway, they're going to reap exactly what they've sown, and while it's a crying shame for the all the good Brits (most of whom will probably emigrate), the rest of them can start getting used to obeying sharia law and clothing their women in burqas- not overnight of course, but just wait till 20 – 30 years have gone by.
IDIOTS!
Yeah, I was thinking that too. Some famous poem…"when they came for the…", etc. Savage may be a nutball, but he's our nutball. He also has a tendency to be right.
He's the crazy old crotchety uncle at the family picnic. Every family has one (at least!).
I've never listened to Savage but he must be onto something, why else would anyone try to silence someone for their views.
Important video everyone should watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
I think the UK would ban FDR and Churchill himself today. So Savage was an easy shot.
I can't stand Michael Savage, and honestly I couldn't care less about England, it just makes me rethink ever visitng the country. But, people in my age group are thrilled about this, they want it done in America, it just blows my mind, it shouldn't, but it does.
I literally feel sick at my stomach.
Societal decency? Here's liberal societal decency:
http://www.zombietime.com/up_your_alley_2008/
The liberals are definitely headed down a path of oppression, just like the liberals have done in Britain. Read the comments in the SF Chronicle. Liberal after liberal thinks banning Savage is a good idea. If it's a view that liberals don't agree with, they're happy to suppress it. It's already happening on college campuses. They are out to destroy all opposing views at any cost. Look what they are doing to Miss. CA, simply for expressing a view, a view that Obama himself has expressed. This liberal viciousness is becoming more mainstream. There is definitely a vein of totalitarianism running through a a whole lot of liberals.
When the people are so willing to accept this sort of thing, watch out.
If a country is corrupt enough to ban you because of your political beliefs, it's a clear sign that your political beliefs are on the right track.
I am no fan of Savage.The phoniest of conservatives to me.That being said the UK is a joke and it is painful to watch our democrats try to emulate them.How many libs cry about big brother and if I'm not mistaken I think Labour had the biggest hand in making the UK the king of CCTV.(I'm still trying to find vote tallies on those CCTV measures passed there).I have a conspiracy to share however,here goes…..if you were an ideological movement you would realize that in trying to bring in more converts you would fail miserably by beating them over the head with viewpoints they obviously would turn off instantly but if you hid your agenda and pretended to represent a certain "side' and then took that position to such over the top places you would increase one's membership in the "hidden" movement.I think a bunch of libs(Savage included) created this ridiculous character with all the stereotypes of conservatives,the goofy name(Savage),the crappy intro music(Motley Crue and Metallica), and all the hyperbole he spouts and this has created more libs at the cost of sprouting a couple of whacked out right winger 17 year olds that if they did not listen to Savage they would have fell prey to Stormfront instead.Ultimately for libs they have no problem with strengthening 10,000 more libs at the cost of creating 100 loose cannons.I went on there a bit and deep down I am not even sure if I believe what I wrote but there are times i stumble upon Savage on the radio and something just is not kosher.If anything maybe we could use this strategy and create such a disgusting lib(yes,i know Olbermann already exists) that would do for us what a joke like Savage does for them.
Such an important film. As a history professor of sensible (conservative) views, and someone interested in demographics, I knew most of the film's numbers. I also suspect that the fraud of climate change, global warming or whatever the latest fad is, contributes to the guilt that some Americans (students) are made to feel if they want a family. This guilt perpetrated by liberals will result in the changes this film foresees. Quite quite grim. Learn how to defend yourself now.
Savage is a blowhard. He's about the only rightwing talker i DON'T like. Gives conservatives a bad name. UK is a politically correct police state as far as I'm concerned, but please don't stick up for Savage. The guy is an embarrassment.
It's not about sticking up for Savage, it's about sticking up for free speech.
I’ve lived in the UK and the thing is most people would agree with many of Savage’s points. In any case, Gordon Brown’s Orwellian Labour Party is on the way out, from what I can see.
I've listened to Savage for years and find his absolute honesty to be refreshing. I don't see how he gives conservatives a bad name. He didn't nearly go deaf from drugs (Rush), and he's not a plagarist (Hannity). Everybody has faults, but I find him very entertaining.
Half of my family lives in England groaning under socialism and inadequate medical care. I will not be visiting them until this moronic government is voted out of office. There are not words to express the outrage I feel at this injustice toward an intelligent and informed radio host who has bravely expressed views on a range of topics. A few weeks ago this same woman banned a member of the Dutch parliament as he had read directly from the Koran which she said incited hatred. While her husband is off subscribing to porn and charging it to the British taxpayer, she is busy inventing outrageous lies and dictating who should be hushed. Is Speakers' Corner still there? Is it Great Britain or just britain?
I was on radio in Australia then the US including Chicago in the 60's long before Savage. I go on youtube daily and have alarge following……I consider myself politically incorrect and take off where people like Savage leave off. I should definately be number one that hit list…..trouble is….I am British lol.
The issue here, people, is which issue is larger? Michael Savage's right-leaning tirades? Or Britain's treatment of him and free speech? Is Michael Savage so offensive he is banned from Britain? Who's Next On First? Rush? Beck? Hannity? This is even worse than the DHS report! Whatever he is, Mr. Wiener is not a terrorist. Agreed?
"and the leading opponent of global Islamofascism."
Really? THE leading opponent of globabl Islamofascism? A mid-grade political talker? Really?
Not, say, the U.S. Army in Iraq/Afghanistan? Not the U.S. itself? Not the anti-fundamentalists actually IN Islamic countries? Not the dissidents being stoned to death in Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc? Michael Savage is ahead of ALL of them? REALLY, Ben?
For doing what? Making catchy music that gets people happy? Pretty much the opposite of Savage, who's main purpose in life is to make money off of convincing people to hate and mistrust each other.
Ban Sir John? Not in my America!
Not that anyone cares what I think, but here goes…. Never listened, but I agree with others who say he must be on to something. Just like the attacks on Rush, these things usually backfire. Savage will start getting listeners calling in from the UK. I think the UK is probably lost. Lose all faith in a higher power and you lose the guts to stand up for other important stuff… like freedom and liberty. "We hold these truths to be self evident….."
I must apologise for our pathetic excuse for a government. When they get creamed at the next election, then hopefully this disastrous experiment called “New Labour” (Or socialism in new clothes) will be consigned to the dustbin of history where it belongs.
Not having heard this gentleman on the radio I cannot really say if he is offensive or not. But unless he actually incites violence he should be allowed in to express his views, however looney they may be. It does not surprise me that he is banned though; free speech under commissar Gordon Bruin is a dying art.
I don't know what's sadder Cgntv, that you are applauding censorship or you think any of us here agree with the sentiment that Severin put forth.
The difference, CgntvDssdnt, is we admit our mistakes and you don't. Conservatives are always hand wringing about what we're doing wrong (too much so, in my opinion). Liberals don't. They'll ride the "progress" train right off the cliff and blame everyone but themselves. This is one of the reasons I have no worry about the future of conservative thought. It will eventually evolve to fit the times and still remain conservative. Liberalism will continue to repeat their same mistakes of the 30's and 60's every generation and learn nothing in their arrogance.
Look, I'm a liberal, and I detest Savage . . . but England is clearly, undeniably in the wrong here. There's also a Muslim on the "banned" list, as well as Fred Phelps and some KKK members. (The list also apparently includes two leaders of a Russian skinhead gang; there may be a legitimate reason to ban them based on criminal activity.)
I also oppose Israel's ban on Normal Finkelstein and the US ban on a handful of moderate Muslim scholars who happened to have donated to a charity with some terrorist ties (the scholar in question made the donation well before the charity joined the government's "watch" list).
Ideas can't hurt people. In this, we're in agreement.
Incidentally, for the people who state that this ban must mean Savage is on to something . . . No. The guy is an idiot who appeals to the lowest common denominator, and he's no more "on to something" than Fred Phelps is.
You know there are some times when you should just shut up and move along. This would be one of those times. The list of what you have had to defend the past 6 months is AMAZING!
This video reminds me of Mark Steyn's book. Thanks SgtTank.
If you don't think this has not already hit out airwaves, here are 2 examples – watching a commercial against a city attorney here in CA I found the opposition villifying this candidate because of whom he defended (have never heard this before); on some show about Prejean, heard the hostess say (my words) that due to how intolerant she (Prejean) was, it was OK to villify her. Both examples shocked and angered me. I remember many years ago when the Hitler Youths wanted to march in some Illinois town – it did not go down too well with me or others; and then I heard someone say that he did not want them too either, but he would defend their right to march; cause this is America! Where have the educated gone that we're so afraid of hate speech we must stop it! This country is greater than that!
Frank, I agree free speech is important. But Michael Savage cannot be compared to Fred Phelps. The comparison is ridiculous and not based on facts. What the Phelps Family does is hateful and harmful to many grieving American servicemen's familes. Not to say I agree with Savage all the time but he makes sense much of the time.
It's really heartening to me that liberals and conservatives can come together over the fact that EVERYONE thinks Savage is a lunatic. Banning him from the UK is just dumb political pandering, I'd agree, but there's a huge difference between sticking up for someone's right to say idiotic things and sticking up for the idiotic things they say. Dude is the biggest narcissist in media today; he doesn't have discussions with people, he just shouts them down, hangs up on them, cuts their audio, and if his callers do anything other than grovel and moon over him, he calls them cowards, nobodies, idiots, etc. As a liberal who consumes a LOT of right-wing media, I'd say that Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, et al, outclass Savage in about every respect imaginable. This dude is not mainstream, and he gives rational, respectable conservatives a bad name.
No doubt Savage is a certifiable loony tune and is a large part of the fringe of the right wing that has damaged the ideaology of Conservatism, but this is a simple case of not knowing your enemy. To the best of my knowledge Savage has never condoned or encouraged violence, the same can not be said for the Islamist.
This is a diversionary farce to get Michael off the real issues.
One way to silence Michael is to get him to waste his air time on this crap.
Keep on exposing the illegitimate Obama government Michael.
Keep up the good work !!
Savage is not a lunatic, he doesn't go far enough IMHO.
Homework Assignment: look up Charles Martel .
Would Charles Martel be banned because he saved Europe from Islam?
Charles Martel is #2 on my list of the all time most important people of the planet earth.
"Charles's victory has often been regarded as decisive for world history, since it preserved western Europe from Muslim conquest and Islamization." Would this be viewed as racist?
…And the same might be said of your commenting on Big Hollywood.
You notice how nobody's taken the time to reply? It's just so clear that someone as articulate as you clearly has the upper hand in any intellectual debate.
You know, if you guys want to make the right-wing look any worse in this country, keep giving attention to clowns like Savage and Ann Coulter.
Shock value conservatism does nothing but keep Buckley-style philosophy on a back burner, and makes it so that reasonable liberal-conservative debate never happens.
I love you, Michael Savage!!!
I agree with most of what Michael Savage says, and I'm with him %100 on his stance against Islam's encroachment on Western civilization.
Some idiot leftist where I work said "I wish we could ban him from this country — he's a radical."
I flew off the handle a bit — I'm not going to take any type of idiot calling someone who shares a similar belief structure as I do a "radical." I asked this moron if card checks, fairness doctrines, and a treasury secretary asking for the power to take over ANY business, are "radical"?
Of course, no answer came from the morally-bankrupt leftist. I really hate the left of this country.
Every time Ben Shapiro writes a column, he reminds us of how young and ignorant of history he really is. To compare the lunatic ramblings of Beatnik-wannabe Savage to Winston Churchill is particularly egregious.
Churchill didn't denigrate Germany because he hated foreigners or the German people, it was because he hated fascism and the evil Hitler represented. Savage just spews bile because he's putting on show and, since he has the third-highest-rated conservative talk radio show, somebody must be not be getting the joke.
Disclaimer: none of the above is to insinuate that I approve of any country banning people based on what they say…
I wouldn't describe myself as a fan of Savage, but that's not the point, is it? What England is doing is embarrassing and cowardly.
What would be going far enough? Actually inciting people to violence as the UK is erroneously alleging? Savage is almost certainly a lunatic; even if you explicitly agree with his politics, you've got to admit he's incredibly rude to pretty much everyone he speaks with, in addition to being, as I mentioned before, the biggest narcissist on the radio. He acts like no one apart from himself, liberal or conservative, is capable of understanding the issues at hand. He calls people cowards and fools and inconsequential morons if they don't agree not only with his opinions but with his every word as he speaks it. It's like nothing I've ever heard before; his fans seem to enjoy being berated and admonished by him.
That's the point. You "hate" the left. Your hatred gets none of us anywhere.
The Ku Klux Klan have a lot of hate, too and they make that clear. Are you willing to follow their lead?
I think Doc Savage can take care of himself without my defense. That's part of what I like about him. Lefties all over the world hate him as he is a threat to their PC lies. Another excellent reason why I like the Doc. Britain doesn't dererve the truth about Islamists. The island of 'diversity' is about to become a defacto Sharia State and I feel sorry for the people of Britain but certainly I have no sympathy for the leftie government. Do you lefties realize that Doc Savage has more listeners than all of the Leftie dweeb commentators including Larry King? That alone defuses your demeaning attitude check and stupidity over Doc's opinions. Apparently more people care to listen to the Doc than all of the lefties. Stick that one in your teleprompter and read slowly.
Depressing video, another reason the Founding Fathers gave us the 2nd Amendment. Thanks for posting it .I'll send it to everyone I know. Keep punching Brother.
Again I notice how tolerant of other opinions the left really is.
Miss Calif., Mike Savage, Cheney, Bush and many etcs.
Only the left opinion will be tolerated and let's admit it. There is no room for any other opinions but yours.
I also notice the kindly left tolerant seem to always start calling people names and become downright nasty.
I may be a righty but I'm happy I'm not a lefty hypocrite.
May the likes of Perez and Al Franken win the Michael Moore award for tolerance and fairness and the left will vote in overwhelming yeas.
You don't need to. There are enough in his audience he has that prominence, even if the media usually ignore him.
If you wait for the perfect person to support in the face of cowardice and tyranny, it will be too late when that instance comes along.
Wasn't Britain the primary partner in the "Coalition"? As in, supported your fantasies about WMDs and Saddam…
He's on the list because he's a radical who hates a whole lot of people. Denying that just makes you a liar.
And seriously stop conflating American liberals with the British government. This has nothing to do with liberal vs conservative culture wars here and everything to do with how you rightwing freaks are perceived by the rest of the world (who you love to hate).
LT, you listen to left wing hacks, and not to the facts. I listened to that radio show you're refering too. I've also worked with an autistic person. Schools in some areas get extra funding for students with special needs, so it's too their advantage to diagnose any possible condition. He never said all students diagnosed with autism should be slapped around. Thank goodness he thinks about his words more carefully than you do.
You know next to nothing about Mr. Weiner, he has written several books on nutrition that has helped more people than you realize. But you have the media to back you. We know how well they're doing. Are you so bitter because you're a laid off New York Times reporter?
It may be an act, but it does make you think about serious issues. And he has a gift to make you think about things without lecture you, or talking down to you. Maybe that's why he has the 3rd largest radio audience in his segment.
I would be greatly surprised if this were not a political act with its actual roots in the USA. Regardless, this story has legs that will NOT go away – very bad news for Britain.
Savage has 8-10 million listeners, many of them very loyal, and British tourism is currently suffering significantly from the recession.
This really dumb decision by Britain's Home Office will only add to its tourism woes as well as a noticeable boycott of British imports.
You get what you ask for.
Well if that's your argument then I guess they should ban you too stupid. The only difference in you and this guy savage is that he says his thoughts out loud everyday to a bunch of people BFD. As far as I know he's never said he's going to blow up a mosque, a church or a government bldg so where's the threat? You call the right wingers whack jobs but you're kind of in the same category as a box of fruit loops yourself.
The first amendment does not protect his right to a microphone blasting 50,000 watts syndicated over dozens of cities. He can express himself quite ably without it just like I can.
I don't even know what you're talking about. You have no idea what my views are because I don't have a radio show.
You guys hate EVERYONE in the entire world besides yourselves. Some of it is coming back around.
You missed my point because you are just that, stupid. The point was that YOU yourself come across as extremely hateful..A wise man told me once "beware of those pointing fingers". See if you can figure that one out on your own.
You conservatives are funny guys.
You only care about the 1st amendment until Weiner Savage is banned from England.
You only care about massive unchecked executive power until Obama is President.
You only care about illegal domestic spying until it's your cell number.
You only care about fascism until you resemble the extremists in a DHS report.
You only put Country First! until you're a powerless minority, then it's "I hope he fails".
So I say good! I hope all your paranoid conspiracies come true regarding your constitutional rights because that's the only time we can get you on board to preserve them.
I don't hate you at all. Not sure what evidence you have to back up that statement. I'd like to see it instead of arbitrary pejoratives being tossed around.
I don't agree with conservatism. Caliing me a "hater" is not going to win an argument. Mr. Savage Weiner's hatred of all kinds of groups is well documented.
Pretending that Mr. Savage Weiner's invective being broadcast nationally is just his harmless opinion and is innocuous contradicts the very point of this blog.
Not allowing him to visit your country is not "silencing" him anymore than I am silenced by not going there. Duh.
Whether or not its an act, Michael Savage is a disgusting human being who likes to goad our worst impulses and gives conservatives a bad name. However, one should not be banned from a country just because he speaks his mind no matter how hateful. As long as he's not inciting violence (like the extremists who swarmed the streets of London demanding death to Tony Blair. Are they out of the country yet?) he should be allowed to go wherever he wants. Are these people limiting someone's rights for the "greater good?" Sounds like something out of "V for Vendetta." Wasn't free speech limited in that one too? Where's your Guy Fawkes masks now?
That's what YOU don't get stupid..by not allowing him to travel there they ARE silencing him. They're afraid that he will come there and start saying whatever it is he's says. Sheesh, that's just too easy to see.
First of all he is a radical. Second of all responding to your co-worker with a litany of prepackaged, tired Talking Points is the reason you don't convince anyone of anything anymore. Sorry to tell you this but you have to begin to address the left's complaints and opinions as LEGITIMATE. That doesn't mean you have to agree, it just means that you have to act like an adult and not resort to failed techniques like gumming up conversation with regurgitated Talking Points if you want your views to get any traction.
How did I applaud censorship? I am against censorship. What I applaud is self-censorship. I stand firmly with you in opposing governmental censorship.
And boy oh boy I'm sorry to tell you, but sure do wonder how many here do think like Severin.
I have no worries about the future of conservative thought either. The question is: Will anyone who thinks conservative thoughts be elected, and to what level?
Now that liberals are once again in power, we will see if and to what degree we've learned the lessons of the past. Barack Obama was elected by the majority of the people – liberals AND moderates. He was able to win the middle-vote by making overtures to suggest that liberals have (admitted and) learned a few things, such as:
-Internationally, we can speak nicely AND still be tough.
-We can provide limited governmental help to the little guy while still maintaining a culture of responsibility and NOT entitlement
-big governmental infrastructure programs can expand the economy and create wealth (this isn't exactly a "mistake" from the past – all though not always perfect, there are plenty of good examples where the sentence is a true statement: e.g. the internet, the interstate, hoover dam… and so it will be for the improved energy grid, etc.)
Will the modern democratic party steer clear of 70s era folly? Well, it’s their opportunity to make good on or not at this point.
why should I be silenced when the point of this thread is censorship?
look- a democrat president is in power. On the national stage, and in congress, the Republicans hold the minority point of view. Which is to say: The Republicans are currently the "trolls" of American society. And with this teaparty stuff you all are brazenly and unapologetically acting like nothing else besides trolls, and you should know it.
Not that there is anything wrong with it.
- your humble breit bart troll -
The left in this country has undermined two wars and put our military in greater danger with every drop of invective that comes out of their mouths. The problem there, is that they do so with lies and deception. I don't care if anyone is against our foreign policy, but you better be educated about it. Our enemies recruit based on the lies of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Plame, Kerry, and the others.
The KKK correlation is a reach. My feelings are pointed to a destructive force eating away at the foundation of this country, not any group because of its color or race.
I don't like to hate, but I don't deny my feelings — I just will not act on them. I turn the feeling into writing my representatives and getting involved in the democratic process.
The Employee Free Choice Act, The Fairness Doctrine, and wanting to take over any business is NOT a talking point. They are each very real, and VERY radical.
I just find it interesting that a libertarian loudmouth is a radical, but these endeavors are "talking points."
Most of the left's complaints and opinions aren't LEGITIMATE. It's unreal that a treasury secretary thought congress could give him the power to take over a business. When Michelle Bachman pressed Geithner as to where is it in the Constitution that would allow congress to even do that, the idiot didn't even understand the question.
We should not be having debates as to whether the government should nationalize the health-care system, we should not have to listen to an attorney general who doesn't believe the 2nd Amendment gives the citizens the right to bear arms.
People like John McCain should represent the left. Debating Pelosi's people and their unconstitutional endeavors is counterproductive.
The left has been VERY nasty for the last 40-plus years. I am going to meet it aggressively, and with a broad base of knowledge and and a well-defined code.
Good. We don't want that scum in the UK.
To those right-wing idiots whining about free speech and branding other countries they don't agree with as socialist, let me pose a question to you – if you ran a bar, would you allow a rowdy bunch in that will start greif and piss off the locals? I don't think so. The same can be said here.
We don't answer to US law, you don't tell us what to do. Try sue us, you'd lose. I cannot stand right-wing Americans who bitch all the time if they don't get their way. Smith is protecting the country, and she has a RIGHT to ban anyone who she sees as a threat to the locals here (Savage is a bigot who will do nothing but offend people here, with his racist/homophobic/anti-austistic/chauvanist remarks). Its a privalege to visit another country, not a right. So shut up and get over yourself.
And America isn't exactly a 'free country' if you had conservative fascists like Bush slapping on things like the Patriot Act on you. Stupid hypocrites.
You must be logged in to post a comment.