Posted on 12/07/2004 12:51:20 PM PST by rdmartinjd
An Open Letter to Michael Savage from the editor of Thank You, President Bush:
Dear Dr. Savage,
While you have always placed your conservative principles over partisan politics -- a trait which all conservatives should emulate -- it is increasingly clear that you have lost your way. Ever since the election you have done nothing but criticize the president. Whether it's his choice of cabinet nominees, his second term domestic priorities, or his escalation of the offensive operation in Iraq, you have incessantly attacked the man and often for no good reason. It seems as if you have begun to prioritize your increasingly shrill anti-partisan outlook over your erstwhile conservative ideals.
Moreover, you've taken to disparaging all others who disagree with you. In addition to your token swipes at fellow radio personalities Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, last week you lambasted unnamed "bloggers" who allegedly had the audacity to criticize you from their website blogs but lacked the courage to come on your show to debate you.
While this bravado about cowardly bloggers may be no more than bluster, if it's a sparring partner that you really want, I am more than willing to accept your challenge.
Whether it's the appointment of the superbly qualified Condi Rice as secretary of state or the nature of the president's powerfully free market, forward-thinking economic policies, I'm happy to make the case that President Bush is being true to his word and preparing for a very conservative second term. Bush -- like every man who has held the office before him -- is not perfect, but he is a president of whom conservatives can and ought be proud.
You should have already received a written notice of this offer from my publicist. I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Rod D. Martin
Rod D. Martin, a former policy director to Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, is the founder and chairman of Vanguard PAC, a member of the Board of Governors of the Council for National Policy (CNP), and Vice President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA). He has appeared as a guest on Fox News and countless other television and talk radio programs; and he is the editor and co-author of Thank You, President Bush: Reflections on the War on Terror, Defense of the Family, and Revival of the Economy.
I AM a Jew, you idiot. I am relieved that some of you conservatives- more and more it seems with every passing day- see through this "Savage" charlatan. It is sad that there are still too many conservatives who will cannot see Weiner for who he really is- an opportunist. As I have said, it matters not that he is a Jew. What matters is that he baits Jews with ethnic derision in order to scapegoat them while at the same time pretending he is a Christian. It is rank hypocrisy. There are conservative Jewish talk show hosts, e.g., Levin, Prager, Medved, etc., who do not hide their ethnicity and more to point, they do not engage in anti-semitic rhetoric.
I am not going to argue with you EM2VN. You are dead wrong on this one.
You haven't been listening to his show if you haven't heard him make tactless comments about other minorities. He's very into self depracation.
Am I to assume that you are tiffed because Savage appears to you to be a Jew who has embraced Christianity. Or is it because Savage challenges liberal Jews to defend their positions. I don't understand your position, and I don't accept your claim to being Jewish.
I have heard him mention on more than one occasion that he was Jewish (I am not sure he ever said whether he was still practicing) [by the way, he talks much less about his personal life now that his show is national. I don't remember him mentioning his wife since then. He had her on twice before the show was national and used to have a picture of her on the web site.]
I have listened to Savage DAILY for over 2 years, and not once has he admitted that he is Jewish. Neither of you has attempted to explain why a man who is NOT concealing his religion would not correct O'Reilly's mistaken belief that he is Christian. And neither of you has explained why Savage would not defend charges of anti-semitism by informing Alan Colmes on national TV that he is Jewish rather than "being qualified for Aushwitz." These two documented examples prove that Weiner will not say "the "J-word" for fear that he would lose some of his Christian audience who have been led to believe that he is one of them.
It does not matter whether he practices Judaism. If Weiner is going to single out liberals on account of their Jewishness, then he should openly admit his own ethnicity. He refers to CNN's Wolf Blitzer as "Wolf Blitzberg" and NPR's Terry Gross as "Terry Grossberg" in order to underscore to his listeners that these two liberal broadcasters are Jews as if that mattered. Savage must conceal his own Jewishness in order to sell his Jew-baiting rhetoric. It's as simple as that.
I am "tiffed" because Savage baits Jews with ethnic and racist derision. I realize that he does so about Moslems as well. Let them defend themselves. I am simply pointing out what bothers me and why Weiner is dismissed by reputable conservative media as a bigot and buffoon. Weiner can rant and rave about liberalism all he wants. I resent that he puts a Jewish face on liberalism by calling liberals "Brooklynites" and "corned-beef eaters."
Why are so dense?
Some kid calls and starts ranting that Kerik was never fit to be head of HS because he's "basically a high school dropout" and a "3rd grade detective."
Savage responds that the "high school dropout thing bothered me, too, as highly educated man who worked very hard for all I have..." blah de blah de blah. Then someone must have kicked him because backpedalled like a dog on ice.
I'm livid. I'm a high school dropout, in a college educated world (Read some of my posts - the serious ones - and tell me if you would ever have guessed). You have no clue how tired I am of being thought unworthy of this, that, or the other thing. I don't think you can really know hard work until you've had to make your way without a formal education in today's world.
F***K you, Michael Savage. And incidentally, I was accepted to MIT, were you?
I think you'll find out, if you haven't already, that very few truly educated and intelligent people feel the need to draw attention to it at every opportunity.
Savage, on the other hand, needs to make his claim three to four times per hour.
As someone else said, Savage is educated far beyond his intelligence.
Weiner is a fraud. His Ph.D was one of his own making. Apparently, it was the first of its kind in some cockamamie "nutritional botany." Having spoken to someone who read the handwritten thesis, it is very soft, that is, not based on hard science. Weiner claims that he is an "epidemiologist," but his doctorate was not in that field. Remember, Weiner was a "herbalist" selling snake oil cure-alls after his Berkeley degree- talk about a hippy dippy touchy feely university. His Master degrees were earned at the University of Hawaii- hardly an Ivy League school.
No doubt, Weiner is an overacheiver, but his achievements are a lot less impressive than he would have his listeners believe.
Not only the first, but as far as I know, it was the only one in the "field". And he did it in through the Anthropology department.
I'd sure like to get a copy of the dissertation. I would think he'd make it available on his web site, since he brags about it so much.
Weiner will not post it on his website because it would expose the fact that he interviewed witchdoctors and reported their "brews."
Weiner also makes a lot of the fact that he lost his bid to be the Dean of Journalism at Berkeley on account of affirmative action. Needless to say, nothing could be further from the truth. He was never considered a serious candidate because he had no qualifications in the field. He claimed his talk radio experience qualified him. He lost out to a white man who had many journalistic accomplishments. He sued the Regents of the University of California but soon dropped the suit because it was utterly frivolous.
If his listeners only knew the real truth about this conman, they would be aghast.
Explain exactly which point you disagree with Savage on. Nobody does this because they cannot win. You only hate the man because he is passionate or angry? Since when was that wrong? I'll answer. Since the liberalism that infected the nation around 1970 has raised a bunch of girly men. Find a point and state it or else be silent.
Just wondering - what prompted you to resurrect this long-dead thread?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.