Topic: Michael Savage

[Ruteger]

I love to listen to this guy tell his stories. He is my favorite radio-host. I could listen for hours about his restaraunt experiences, or child-hood memories. I just finished his audiobook "Trickle Up Poverty", which was a good read/listen. He can be surly, but that's expected...he is almost 70...

[lasertron]

"HOLLYWOOD IS RUN BY THE AIDS MAFIA." I'll always have a place in my heart for Savage.

[onan]

"HOLLYWOOD IS RUN BY THE AIDS MAFIA." I'll always have a place in my heart for Savage.

 
Michael Savage:

My ancestors fled here because they wanted to become American. They wanted to imitate and ape the White man, while retaining some of their background. They didn't want to impose their background upon the society, like so many immigrants do today, thinking that they have a right to impose their fetid societies upon us, the very stinkpots that they ran from. The very cesspools that they ran from, they think are suddenly noble because they ran away from it? They glorify the hellhole they ran from? Let 'em go back there!

not wanting to impose their background... I wonder what the American Indian thinks about that.
 
Savage (what a dork name) is another bloviated talking wannabe with aspirations to be some kind of guru. There will always be hate mongers and savage is as addicted to it as a junkie to heroin.
 
I just love his bravado. He's a bully with the mantle of courage. He is the worst of what mankind could be. Not as powerful as some of the other worsts but if he had the opportunity he would be.

[The General]

Savage (what a dork name) is another bloviated talking wannabe with aspirations to be some kind of guru. There will always be hate mongers and savage is as addicted to it as a junkie to heroin.
 
I just love his bravado. He's a bully with the mantle of courage. He is the worst of what mankind could be. Not as powerful as some of the other worsts but if he had the opportunity he would be.

I disagree but respect your views.  I am curious, though, is there anybody on the opposite end of the political spectrum that you would say the same things about? Bloviated ideologues?  Maybe give a few examples?

[aldousburbank]

I disagree but respect your views.  I am curious, though, is there anybody on the opposite end of the political spectrum that you would say the same things about? Bloviated ideologues?  Maybe give a few examples?

I love this kind of exchange, particularly in talk radio.  The thing is, I tend to disagree with everybody because I'm so special. (This is true in my life in general, not just as to talk radio hosts)  I'm hoping a convincing argument can be made when I disagree, and in fact, I find agreeable talk radio boring.  But it's all in the delivery, this why I enjoy listening to Savage bloviate, and I tend to like the guy because I like a lot of people who are full of crap, the odds being what they are.  But for sure, bloviation is not owned by any single political spectrum.

However, as a stand-up-psychoanalyst, I will render the following diagnosis- As is often the case, the guy is fascinated by what he condemns.  I mean he was a social worker when he was poor and wanted to help, until he realized that he wasn't.  He was into the North Beach beat scene and all until he realized they weren't as flowing and hip as advertised and were infested with creeps.  He did ethnobotanical plant gathering and authorship along with the alternative health stuff and is an admitted hypochondriac.  He claims sexual libertarianism as was never specifically anti-gay but there again, he disdains SF but loves it and lives there.  And the most obvious dichotomy, to me, is that since this guy's a former ethnobotanist, is the dude's hard on for weed smokers and the blathering about each puff being a potential psycho maker (loosely based on the demographic propensity for latent Schizo+weed activation syndrome) while admitting that he used to smoke weed during his beat foray and all.  Ok- this is the same guy who has been bitching all week about the overblown radioactivity fears (I basically happen to agree)- but uncle Mike's clearly all over the board based on his own past bummers, is all I'm saying.  This is quite natural for anyone really, it's just that most of us aren't radio hosts.

He's entertaining is the only real deal.  I don't listen for advice or to agree with his politics for triangulation of my reality.  It's fucking funny is all.

[M. Knight]

He's entertaining is the only real deal.  I don't listen for advice or to agree with his politics for triangulation of my reality.  It's fucking funny is all.

That's it.

[The General]

...However, as a stand-up-psychoanalyst, I will render the following diagnosis- As is often the case, the guy is fascinated by what he condemns.  I mean he was a social worker when he was poor and wanted to help, until he realized that he wasn't.  He was into the North Beach beat scene and all until he realized they weren't as flowing and hip as advertised and were infested with creeps.  He did ethnobotanical plant gathering and authorship along with the alternative health stuff and is an admitted hypochondriac.  He claims sexual libertarianism as was never specifically anti-gay but there again, he disdains SF but loves it and lives there.  And the most obvious dichotomy, to me, is that since this guy's a former ethnobotanist, is the dude's hard on for weed smokers and the blathering about each puff being a potential psycho maker (loosely based on the demographic propensity for latent Schizo+weed activation syndrome) while admitting that he used to smoke weed during his beat foray and all.  Ok- this is the same guy who has been bitching all week about the overblown radioactivity fears (I basically happen to agree)- but uncle Mike's clearly all over the board based on his own past bummers, is all I'm saying.  This is quite natural for anyone really, it's just that most of us aren't radio hosts.

Maybe that's why I love his show so much.  I'm just like him.  First time I heard him, I couldn't believe it, it was like an older version of me with a New York accent was doing a radio show.  I guess we're all walking contradictions.  At least the most transparent of us show the world.  It's the 'straight and narrow' crowd that scares me.  Can't trust somebody that doesn't have some visible flaws.

[onan]

I disagree but respect your views.  I am curious, though, is there anybody on the opposite end of the political spectrum that you would say the same things about? Bloviated ideologues?  Maybe give a few examples?

No I cannot think of one that would say something like:
 

"In 99% of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they're silent?"
 
Don't you understand what's a stake? ...Don't you understand the sick perverts [homosexuals] are killing all of us?
 
"90 percent of the people on the Nobel Committee are into child pornography and molestation, according to the latest scientific studies."
 
The U.S. Senate is "more vicious and more histrionic than ever, specifically because women have been injected into" it.

Are there those on the other side of the aisle that aggravate me at times? yes all of them. They too can misinform either by intention or by lack of the knowledge on an issue...
 
Bill Maher has liberal leanings although he has some libertarian aspects too but he always pisses me off when he starts talking about the overuse of vaccinations.
 
But no, none come to the level of savage weiner.

[The General]

Interesting.  How about Howard Dean?  Al Sharpton? 

[onan]

I find agreeable talk radio boring...  It's fucking funny is all.

Maybe that is it. I do not like being bored either and usually when I am becoming bored it is because I have to spend too much energy understanding the person talking.
 
But would you not agree that some level of responsibility needs to be leveled?
 
I mean Gordon Liddy was offering advice on where to target FBI agents if they approached your home.
 
It is the pandering that promotes hatred. Giving credence to intolerance of what are harmless issues.
 
And like it or not Savage promotes hatred and he vilifies certain groups and areas. I think it is somewhat problematic that anyone can find that to be entertainment.

[onan]

Interesting.  How about Howard Dean?  Al Sharpton?

They may... I dunno I have never listened to them. I thought Dean was a pretty smart guy before his run for office about a decade ago. But I have not heard him speak since then.
 
I didn't even know Sharpton had a radio show... lemme set the record straight... he's a douche. But have never heard him on the radio.

[aldousburbank]

And like it or not Savage promotes hatred and he vilifies certain groups and areas. I think it is somewhat problematic that anyone can find that to be entertainment.

I dunno, I grew up deep in the brown power/civil rights movement, picket lines, marches, singing we shall overcome; the whole tamale.  In spite of, or because of this, I absolutely cannot stand the Revs Sharptons and Jackson, because they're exactly as Onan describes.  Savage is just full of shit a lot of the time.  Thease guys are professional hate peddlers IMHO.  They're also boring and however disagreeable, Savage is hardly boring.  Hard to take- regularly.

[The General]

It is the pandering that promotes hatred. Giving credence to intolerance of what are harmless issues.
And like it or not Savage promotes hatred and he vilifies certain groups and areas. I think it is somewhat problematic that anyone can find that to be entertainment.

I don't think he promotes hatred.  I would agree that he exaggerates and goes over the top for effect and entertainment.  But wanting the borders closed is not anti-hispanic.  Wanting to keep marraige as man/woman is not anti-gay.  Wanting to promote English-only as our national language is not anti-immigant.  Bemoaning the overdiagnosis of childhood mental disorders is not out of ignorance about autism.  (he actually wrote a book about that way before his radio career.)  I understand if you disagree with those positions, but there are legitimate ideological reasonings there, not just blind hatred


When a conservative disagrees with a liberal, it is based on ideology and/or values differences.
When a liberal disagrees with a conservative, it's because the conservative is racist, sexist, homophobic.
And I'm sick of that.

[onan]

I don't think he promotes hatred.  I would agree that he exaggerates and goes over the top for effect and entertainment.  But wanting the borders closed is not anti-hispanic.  Wanting to keep marriage as man/woman is not anti-gay.  Wanting to promote English-only as our national language is not anti-immigant.  Bemoaning the overdiagnosis of childhood mental disorders is not out of ignorance about autism.  (he actually wrote a book about that way before his radio career.)  I understand if you disagree with those positions, but there are legitimate ideological reasonings there, not just blind hatred


When a conservative disagrees with a liberal, it is based on ideology and/or values differences.
When a liberal disagrees with a conservative, it's because the conservative is racist, sexist, homophobic.
And I'm sick of that.

I am sorry for the position you have, thinking that liberals view conservatives as racist, sexist and homophobic. But I understand your concern because the liberal side has similar angst with general accusations of being financially irresponsible, idealistic/unrealistic, and yadda yadda yadda.
 
And I do not even really want to go down that road because we both can present many pieces of evidence to support our claims. But let us at least agree that the name calling is not helpful on either side. I too am sick of divisiveness, god knows the talking heads love to have us fighting each other.
 
And to your other points I would agree with each of them but the issues are not so black and white as to make your statements completely legitimate.
 
To savage having written a book about autism I do not find any reference to it but then again less than a minute looking... so who knows. But if he did write on autism then his statement is even more reprehensible. To be fair any system can be exploited and often they are but it is a strawman argument. I worked with autistic patients for quite some time in my career. I worked closely with several agencies that formed support systems to take care of patients at all points on that spectrum. Of all the cases I was part of I never... NEVER saw any one trying to scam the system. Unlike other mental health issues where I have seen some questionable diagnoses. But I am sure there are some out there... still what savage wrote is wildly inaccurate and does nothing but foment distrust of people that truly are not able (as a whole) to help themselves.
 
As to your other points, they are much too complicated to address in a post in a thread. But to quickly address them: Marriage between a man and a woman is not in any way affected by two people of the same sex being married. Really not an issue except for pandering. Open borders I agree is not a good idea and our system really needs to reward those that come here legally and apply for citizenship. That being said had I been born in Columbia I would crawl through my mother's ass to get to this safe haven in the U.S. And to your point on one language... when this country was in its early years there was a debate about what language would be of the land... German lost by a few votes. But I will say in general I see nothing wrong with all Americans (US citizens) knowing more than one language. Almost all the people I know that are multilingual are by far more able to understand complex issues.
 
But I completely agree I am quite sick of it too. Funny how we have similar feelings yet see things so differently. What I find so pleasing is that we can discuss this and understand that we are both reasonable and thoughtful enough to realize values are only valuable when they allow for other positions to be expressed. Weiner doesn't do that.

[The General]

Well, thanks for a thoughtful response. 
I bet we could have a beer and really have a good discussion about issues.  And I love that, you know, I think that's why I'm so addicted to talk radio.  There are legitimate positions all over the political spectrum and it gets hashed out in discussion and debate.  Savage has more of a diatribe show than a forum for debate, but I listen to other shows for that.  But I find that I agree with Savage a lot.  He's my guy, and I do really enjoy his show.  He's an asshole for sure, but some of my favorite people are assholes.

To savage having written a book about autism I do not find any reference to it but then again less than a minute looking... so who knows. But if he did write on autism then his statement is even more reprehensible.
 

It wasn't about autism only, it was called "Healing Children Naturally" and the gist of it is that childhood disorders and medication are wildly overdiagnosed, and much of it is due to improper nutrition, overuse of sugar, refined white flour, etc.  Interesting book.  Savage's nutrition books of the 70's 80's and 90's are really interesting stuff, he was really a pioneer in that field.  Some of those books are still in print.

[Eddie Coyle]

Savage's running commentary during "Comrade Barry's" speech tonight was hysterical, it was Savage in rare form, dismissing almost every bromide that came from the President's mouth.

[The General]

Savage's running commentary during "Comrade Barry's" speech tonight was hysterical, it was Savage in rare form, dismissing almost every bromide that came from the President's mouth.

Yeah.  He was pissed.  Classic Savage.

[The General]

Savage has been so good lately.  He had Ron Paul on 2 weeks ago, and Herman Cain was on at the end of last week.  He also had some bad dental work done which really has him extremely pissed off.  It's great radio.

[M Knight]

Savage has been so good lately.  He had Ron Paul on 2 weeks ago, and Herman Cain was on at the end of last week.  He also had some bad dental work done which really has him extremely pissed off.  It's great radio.

too bad there aren't any free podcasts (that I know of).

[The General]

too bad there aren't any free podcasts (that I know of).

I know.  But you can stream it at all different times of the day on tunein.com
http://tunein.com/search/?query=michael+savage

[MV]

I like listening to savage, and I frequently agree with him. However, I sometimes wonder if he really believes what he's saying.

Sent from my Droid X.

[M Knight]

I like listening to savage, and I frequently agree with him. However, I sometimes wonder if he really believes what he's saying.

Sent from my Droid X.

When people drink a glass of milk, they want it to taste like milk, not orange juice.  Savage knows that consistency is more important than incongruity as applied to broadcasting. 

He has a formula that made him a multimillionaire, regardless of his underlying principles.  I believe that the most successful talk show hosts are more or less 50% authentic and 50% pure "act".

[Frys Girl]

I remember when the whole AIDS thing went down on his CNN show (it was really in bad taste. but I get that he was just angry and it all happened badly). The gays were going on about how to hurt Savage: "Don't buy Rockstar Energy drink!" Lol. I laugh whenever I see that stuff. I don't drink soda nor do I trust Red Bull type drinks.


However, I like Savage the same way I like Rush. They make you think and they offer something different, but they are not conservative. They are neo-conservative and Savage is more conservative than Rush.
Rush is human, so he is prone to mistakes. He shouldn't have jumped on the neo-con bandwagon. It killed America this last decade, but he rode the Bush wave as many of us did, trusting that it was better than ambulance/bimbo chasers like Edwards and know nothings like Kerry. I really hope Ron Paul wins. I'm disappointed Rush doesn't take Ron Paul seriously, and same with Savage, although I might be wrong about Savage's view on RP. Let me know if I am wrong. I think one reason Rush avoids Ron Paul is that accepting Paul would be like indicting himself for his wimpy acceptance of Bush/Cheney neo-conservatism.

[GSD]

The General has it right on Savage. I've been reading his posts and he gets it.

People spend too much time dissecting Savage's political leanings, moral beliefs, and his radio "Schtick". If you really listen to what he has to say, it's hard to dispute and hard to refute his commentary. I love it when people think they're more intelligent than they really are and try and go toe to toe with him. He ends up shredding them apart without muting them, he gives them enough rope and they end up hanging themselves. He's VERY intelligent (IQ 160, not Internet derived either) and very well read, when you extrapolate his messages from his radio "Schtick", in the end, he's compelling and you ignore him at your peril.

Does he love to hear himself speak? YES.
Does he love to flex his intellectual muscle? YES.
Is he self-aware of his "Schtick"? YOU BET.
Does he borrow "Schtick" from the Pornographer (Howard Stern)? YES

Savage use to be a liberal in the 60s, he was deep in the thick of the beatnik scene. He knew Ginsberg and it was his time spent in that scene that would eventually culminate his disgust for liberalism. The reason Savage is so qualified to speak on various matters of the left is that he intimately understands the mindset from being a liberal. He has come to believe that the modern day liberal is mentally ill (I believe many of them are as well) and regularly makes sarcastic comments to this point. For instance, I once heard him say (paraphrasing), "So you and your partner should go have sex in the middle of the street for all to watch". He believes that even a 60s liberal would be a republican by today's standards (as he has said in the case of JFK's democratic stance, "he'd be a conservative by today's standards").

I think many people have him all wrong, especially CASUAL listeners. Like it or not, Savage has a mind like a steel-trap, regardless of his personal beliefs, IMHO, his views are the most intelligent, well stated, and on the mark in America today.

Yes, I'm a diehard MS fan, and I say that proudly.

PS,

Yes he can be annoying and babble on aimlessly when trying to fill air time, but people listen because they know deep down they are going to hear something thought provoking.

[analog kid]

People listen because they're addicted to outrage porn.

[Frys Girl]

One thing I love about Michael Savage is how much he adores and loves his dog. That's a real man!

[Flaxen Hegemony]

I've always enjoyed Savage more when he went off-topic than when he was discussing politics.  Restaurants, boat trips with Teddy, etc.  Being half-Italian, I always thought of him as a cross between a crazy Italian uncle who would tell the most mundane stories as if they were riveting drama, and a jaded old professor who kicks his feet up on his desk and gives a speech about San Francisco to some poor undergrad who only wanted to know what they scored on the last test. 

I'm sure many will rejoice when he finally goes off the air (and to be fair, he has crossed some lines and been way off base a few times), but talk radio will have lost a really unique approach to entertaining an audience.

[The General]

People listen because they're addicted to outrage porn.

If that were true, Mark Levin would have much higher ratings.

[The General]

One thing I love about Michael Savage is how much he adores and loves his dog. That's a real man!

I get bored with his dog talk.  Really, it's about the only thing he does that starts to bug me. 

[GSD]

I think he knows that most people have dogs or at least like dogs. Talking about dogs is a nice way to lighten things up after he's went on and on about something passionately. He'll do this with music, restaurants, movies, books, etc. He also uses these seemingly banal conversation pieces to segway into his scheduled topics for the day.

Believe me on this, when Savage passes away, people are going to miss him. He's really the last connection we have to days past, of simpler times, of respect for thy neighbor, of decency, and good old American ingenuity and spirit.  He believes in America, for what she's always stood for, in language, borders, and culture. America is losing its borders, has lost its language, and is close to losing its culture.