It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Michael Savage Is Being Attacked!!!

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Michael Savage can say whatever he wants, and frequently does.

Unfortunately for him, he's doing it on airwaves that belong to the public, and as such is bound to all sorts of regulations, laws, etc put in place by said public.

Might I suggest Conservatives dig deep into their pockets, past the tin of Skoal, and donate some change so Weiner can purchase himself a satellite station or the like, thus freeing him from all the restrictions he faces by using the public AM / FM band?




posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Walking Fox
Michael Savage can say whatever he wants, and frequently does.

Unfortunately for him, he's doing it on airwaves that belong to the public, and as such is bound to all sorts of regulations, laws, etc put in place by said public.

Might I suggest Conservatives dig deep into their pockets, past the tin of Skoal, and donate some change so Weiner can purchase himself a satellite station or the like, thus freeing him from all the restrictions he faces by using the public AM / FM band?


Which law has he violated?

This is not a single line post.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Michael Savage/weiner is a mean and illogical man. That said, he should be allowed to speak his mind. However, he (and every other talkshow host) should also be forced to back up his positions if he is to be allowed to utilize the public airwaves!
Seperate yet related topic...I noticed many barbs pointed at liberals along with praise for conservatives...what are you talking about? This is coming down to the elites and the rest of us. We must unite around the truth forget focusing on the false differences and focus on the truth. Read the constitution www.archives.gov...
teach other the truth!



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ron in LA
Michael Savage/weiner is a mean and illogical man. That said, he should be allowed to speak his mind. However, he (and every other talkshow host) should also be forced to back up his positions if he is to be allowed to utilize the public airwaves!


How is he illogical?

Wouldn't it be a better idea to require politicians back up their positions first?

[edit on 25-8-2007 by slackerwire]


apc

posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   
If that is how the radio entertainment industry should work Coast to Coast is in for some trouble.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Walking Fox is correct.
Public airwaves are subject to community imposed standards that differ by region. What is said on NY radio, might not wash in the bible belt.
The people of San Fransico have every right to go after Savage, and have him taken off the air in the San Fransico market.
The public owns the airwaves (supposedly). The same would not apply to the internet/cable or XM/Sirius radio.

[edit on 25-8-2007 by Leroy]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


Knowing what I do of the man, I would imagine he has violated numerous drug and statutory rape laws.

Oh, did you mean broadcasting laws?


I wouldn't know. But as Leroy above mentioned, laws and regulations for use of public airwaves vary from region to region, in addition to what the FCC has in place - and if the FCC has laws against Janet's Nipple popping out, I would imagine there are some things on the books about Racist screeds and calls for mass annihilation of a population in the name of Jesus...



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Walking Fox
[
Knowing what I do of the man, I would imagine he has violated numerous drug and statutory rape laws.
Source?




I wouldn't know. But as Leroy above mentioned, laws and regulations for use of public airwaves vary from region to region, in addition to what the FCC has in place - and if the FCC has laws against Janet's Nipple popping out, I would imagine there are some things on the books about Racist screeds and calls for mass annihilation of a population in the name of Jesus...


He stated that was his OPINION. You would first have to prove his contentions are in fact untrue.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Walking Fox
Knowing what I do of the man, I would imagine he has violated numerous drug and statutory rape laws.


Here it goes. Someone disagrees with you so cast every aspersion at them that you can think of: "Michael Savage drinks the blood of infants!! I know he rapes nuns too!!", and so on. This kind of ad hominem attack just shows that you have no basis for your point. Therefore, you make derogatory, unfounded remarks to try and damage the credibility of your opponent. Very third-grade debate tactics.


Originally posted by The Walking Fox
I wouldn't know...Racist screeds and calls for mass annihilation of a population in the name of Jesus...[/url]


Savage didn't say that. WHen did he say that? (read above again).
What he said was: "I would say, let them fast until they starve to death," quipped Savage, "then that solves the problem." That's the statement at issue here. Don't try to ascribe statements or accusations that aren't attributable to make your point.



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by The Walking Fox
 



That was truely an unwarrented statement. Not to mention tasteless. I'd be careful about casting aspersions like that were I you. Then again, this is a somewhat anonymous medium, so your classless attacks are fairly safe.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Let me get this straight ...

Michael Savage can spew hate speech and be protected by the First Amendment, but people who think he's a bigot aren't?

Hmmmm .... what is wrong with this picture?

If he can spout his dreck on national radio, then I think others have the right to speak out against him. Ain't America great? Let's keep it that way and appreciate the fact that everyone is entitled to speak out against whatever they want to here.


Took the words out of my mouth while reading the thread. Thank you saved me some time.
Ok. Here I go:

Linking Muslim jihad militants or terrorists like many like to call and illegal immigrants is ludicrous. Immigrants aren't against US, they want to stay. To improve their lives, provide an education for their kids who would be a "nobody" staying at their country of origin. Unfortunally "illegal immigrants" are usually referred to the Hispanic community, because in contrast is a lot cheaper for an uneducated Mexican to come into the US illegally than a European to do the same legally (having in mind that they have to pay for a passport, visa, permit, flight, family expenses etc).

If crossing into this country illegally to provide a better life for my family with out hurting or affecting anybody fiscally makes me a “criminal” then lock me up and chop my legs and hands. My conscience will be clean. Why hate or detest “illegal immigrants”? I know some of them commit crime but don’t the legal one do as well. Or even US citizens do. Ok, ok... Yeah they don’t have any rights. Correct? Well, give them rights, ID them, and let them be an American, that’s all they want to be. They don’t want to hurt you or your country. This anti-Immigrant propaganda is nothing but HATE & FEAR.

HATE of an ethnic group which population is growing. FEAR of loosing the majority. (Illegal immigrants)

HATE: Their way of thinking, life. FEAR: The notion of another attack fed by media. (Muslim militants)

IllglImmgnt.


Linking Mus



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conosimiento.



Linking Muslim jihad militants or terrorists like many like to call and illegal immigrants is ludicrous. Immigrants aren't against US, they want to stay.


Really? Then why do they refuse to assimilate?



To improve their lives, provide an education for their kids who would be a "nobody" staying at their country of origin.


How are illegals providing an education for their kids when the bill is paid for by the American taxpayer?


Unfortunally "illegal immigrants" are usually referred to the Hispanic community, because in contrast is a lot cheaper for an uneducated Mexican to come into the US illegally than a European to do the same legally (having in mind that they have to pay for a passport, visa, permit, flight, family expenses etc).


The overwhelming majority of illegals are in fact hispanic, thats why hispanics come to mind when someone mentions illegal aliens.

Not sure if you know this, but if a european had a visa to come here, they aren't illegal.



I know some of them commit crime but don’t the legal one do as well.


If we already have alot of criminals here, why would we want to import more?


Well, give them rights, ID them, and let them be an American, that’s all they want to be.


Rewarding criminal behavior brings more of it. if all they want to be is American, then why don't they learn the language? If they want to be American, why not follow our laws?



They don’t want to hurt you or your country. This anti-Immigrant propaganda is nothing but HATE & FEAR.
WOW, do you get your news from indymedia sites?

The bottom line is illegals hurt the U.S. on a number of fronts including health, financial, and cultural. They are the chief problem facing this nation and must be stopped by any and all means necessary.



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by slackerwire

Originally posted by Conosimiento.



Linking Muslim jihad militants or terrorists like many like to call and illegal immigrants is ludicrous. Immigrants aren't against US, they want to stay.

Really? Then why do they refuse to assimilate?


Not even going to wate my time on this one.


To improve their lives, provide an education for their kids who would be a "nobody" staying at their country of origin.

How are illegals providing an education for their kids when the bill is paid for by the American taxpayer?

Are you saying that Immigrants do not pay taxes? Come on, that is a lame excuse you probably swallow from your daily FOX news don't cha?

While some argue that illegal immigrants do not pay their fair share of taxes compared to the value of government services they receive, this is partially a normative question that needs to be accompanied by more empirical evidence to support or refute. But to answer the question, "Do illegal immigrants pay any taxes?" the answer is clearly yes.

Corporate income taxes could also be paid in part by illegal immigrants. The burden of any corporate tax will fall on a combination of three parties: workers, consumers, and/or shareholders. While illegal immigrants tend to not be active investors, they are often workers and consumers, so they do bear a fraction of that burden.

And to conclude many undocumented immigrants pay payroll taxes (i.e. FICA and Medicare) using either an invalid Social Security number or a Tax Identification Number, and empirical evidence tends to show that a large fraction of the economic incidence of these taxes falls on workers.

Unfortunally "illegal immigrants" are usually referred to the Hispanic community, because in contrast is a lot cheaper for an uneducated Mexican to come into the US illegally than a European to do the same legally (having in mind that they have to pay for a passport, visa, permit, flight, family expenses etc).



Not sure if you know this, but if a european had a visa to come here, they aren't illegal.



please read my post one more time.


Well, give them rights, ID them, and let them be an American, that’s all they want to be.


Rewarding criminal behavior brings more of it. if all they want to be is American, then why don't they learn the language? If they want to be American, why not follow our laws?



Like I said, we get the uneducated and unskilled Mexican that can't even speak their own language correctly to migrate to the US. Lets give you an example you'll understand: Lets say an induvidual of the poor rural American side migrates to...mmm lets say... "Mexico". And lets say there are plennty of American sites that he can go to where his culture is very rich in Mexico. He goes to a restaruant, people speak english, he goes to buy a car where people speak english, he goes home and there is english TV, he goes to work and people also speak english... Why would he try to learn Spanish if... 1st his education isn't the best, 2nd everyone speaks english to meet his needs, 3rd he is proud of his culture. Get it? But whats the good news... his kids would become Mexican and Speak spanish...

About the laws... These people only know that if tehy cross that border thare is a better life. Wouldn't you do it?

They don’t want to hurt you or your country. This anti-Immigrant propaganda is nothing but HATE & FEAR.

WOW, do you get your news from indymedia sites?



Yes.


The bottom line is illegals hurt the U.S. on a number of fronts including health, financial, and cultural. They are the chief problem facing this nation and must be stopped by any and all means necessary.



Is it FEAR to lose your culture? Better start learning spanish. lol



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Using quotes isn't rocket surgery, neither is previewing a post.

In response to your comments about the taxes illegals pay, you may want to read this article.


Both studies found that immigrants used government services at a greater rate than native-born residents did. The New Jersey study found, for instance, that the typical immigrant family received about $4,044 annually in government services, about 11 percent higher than the average native-born family. At the same time, immigrant households paid about 8 percent less in taxes. The net result was that “the average native household generated an annual fiscal surplus of $232” to government, while “the typical foreign household was a net burden of $1,484.” The gap was even wider in California, where immigrant households produced a net deficit of $3,463 each, because so much of that state’s recent immigration had been in the form of low-wage, low-skill workers.



[edit on 31-8-2007 by slackerwire]



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leroy
Walking Fox is correct.
Public airwaves are subject to community imposed standards that differ by region. What is said on NY radio, might not wash in the bible belt.
The people of San Fransico have every right to go after Savage, and have him taken off the air in the San Fransico market.
[edit on 25-8-2007 by Leroy]


This is a good idea. Community standards should rule. Forget the Constitution and it's "rules". That thar Consteetutshun just gets in the way o' folks o' doin wats right.
Selma, Alabama should be allowed to go back to it's "community standards" and keep them thar' Negroes out tha' publick skools. The fine folks in Texas should be lowwed' ta' tar n' fether them thar supporters o' Injuns. YEEEE-HA! Let the local mob rule!. It's the way things work round heer.



posted on Sep, 1 2007 @ 08:10 AM
link   
First off, thank you slackerwire for talking to comi..er... conosimeto... but i think you missed a little bit..


Originally posted by Conosimiento.
Linking Muslim jihad militants or terrorists like many like to call and illegal immigrants is ludicrous. Immigrants aren't against US, they want to stay.

Well, what is ludicrous there is you think that there is no chance that there would be and muslem/islamic people... and considering as of now i have heard on 3 diffrent radio staions, from diffrent callers/reports, and seen internet reports of, as well as reports of islamic postings on the net how to get into the country through the southern boarder, 'acting' as a mexican if authorities get involed, are now entering through the southern boarder, and have probaly been doing so. So... its prety crazy to rule out links... if you didn't know... now you do... if you don't belive, look for it yourdelf.

Unfortunally "illegal immigrants" are usually referred to the Hispanic community, be cause in contrast is a lot cheaper for an uneducated Mexican to come into the US illegally than a European to do the same legally (having in mind that they have to pay for a passport, visa, permit, flight, family expenses etc).

Now wait right there, what is all that, 'Unfortunally "illegal immigrants" are usually referred to the Hispanic community' lol, illigal imigrant are probaly 80-90 % mexican, and you know why... because we have a 2000km boarder with an impovrished 3rd world country with more then 10% of its population in the US now... if we had a 2000km boarder with (inserst anu 3rd world country), we would have a problem with (3rd world)ans... We have a 100 km body of water and we still get illigals washing up on the shores of florida... so its nothing against the people of mexico, its against the ones that break the rules becasue is easy, and ill get to that.




If crossing into this country illegally to provide a better life for my family with out hurting or affecting anybody fiscally makes me a “criminal” then lock me up and chop my legs and hands. My conscience will be clean.
Well...

Why hate or detest “illegal immigrants”?
Hate is such a harsh word, what is crazy is to think that our nation would allow any number of unknow number of indviduals to cross the boarders, and frankly, i think we should be able to know, who, when, and where every Tom, Jose and Achmed are coming in.

I know some of them commit crime but don’t the legal one do as well. Or even US citizens do.

We have enough wasted tax money supporting criminals in jail, we don't need other nations criminals in our jail... where the quailty of life, in some cases, excedes what they could have on the outside in thier own nation.


This anti-Immigrant propaganda is nothing but HATE & FEAR.

HATE of an ethnic group which population is growing. FEAR of loosing the majority. (Illegal immigrants)

HATE: Their way of thinking, life. FEAR: The notion of another attack fed by media. (Muslim militants)


Your last words may say it the best, you are obesseded with hate and fear.

IN this country there are section that are being taken over/transformed into something that is not America, there have always been section of America that were violent, crime always persisted, but the culutre of the third wolrd had never been in moderm America. I have lived and been in numourous thrid world countries, and have been to about a dozen differnt states, and even in the last year to now, there are epedentionaly increasing the intergaration of that of which they have fled from.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, the people that condem Savage, well, in words that are best left to your own minds to see....

www.savage-productions.com...

I would take it as a Honour if they didn't like me
, but that link alone may be worth about 15 diffrent threads...



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:53 AM
link   
Passenger, since I work in radio, I was just clarifying that public airwaves ARE subject to local FCC regulations, unlike cable. This applied to the ongoing thread, and exposed the misleading comparison. Perhaps this is why you are upset?
I didn't write the FCC rules, but even if you think they are unconstitutional, what are YOU going to do about it? Somehow I doubt you are the sort of kind, brave, and deep soul who would sacrifice any of your time to make the world a better place. You ride and you ride.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leroy
Passenger, since I work in radio, I was just clarifying that public airwaves ARE subject to local FCC regulations, unlike cable. This applied to the ongoing thread, and exposed the misleading comparison. Perhaps this is why you are upset?

Why is it misleading? Perhaps I didn't read the Constitution right, but I thought it applied to all citizens. I don't see the difference in protecting the rights of minorities to use public schools or minorities to use the public airwaves. Either the Constitution applies in San Francisco or it doesn't. If it doesn't why should it apply anywhere else that it conflicts with "local standards".

Originally posted by Leroy
I didn't write the FCC rules, but even if you think they are unconstitutional, what are YOU going to do about it? Somehow I doubt you are the sort of kind, brave, and deep soul who would sacrifice any of your time to make the world a better place. You ride and you ride.

This is completely unjustified and without basis. You know absolutely nothing about me other than what I have posted. If you wish to attack me on any and all of the points I present here - feel free to do so. Please try to refrain from personal attacks without any valid reason for doing so. Remember, it works both ways: I or any other member could question your moral character without any knowledge of your true self.
Perhaps my post was a bit confusing? Maybe you got the wrong message?
What I was trying to convey is that we, as Americans, need to stand up for the rights of our fellow citizens, whether we agree with them or not.
Just because that principle was abused before doesn't mean we should tolerate it now.
If we start allowing local tastes and standards to override the Constitution we'll end up being nothing but a collective mob of clans and city-states. That would bring about the end of the U.S. as we know it.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join