So an online reader comment at the American Spectator website is supposed to hold the same weight as a legitimate article or staff writer opinion piece? This anti-Savage campaign going on the last week or so is straight out of the Soviet Union commie playbook. The regular disruptors on the daily Savage thread have admitted that it isn't Brown they really care about, but the possibility that Savage with his millions of listeners may adversly affect the election. When the party is everything and dissenting views must be crushed at all costs, you'd might as well swill beer to an oom-pah-pah band and adopt the swastika as your emblem.
So basically if you don't like Michael Savage you are a communist and a nazi?
The online comment is based on the linked thread to a National Review writer David Klinghoffer. He is a noted author as you may know, as well as a NR staffer.
I am a "regular distruptor" of the Weiner thread. My goal is to see that 100% of the Freepers recognize what a negative force he is for Conservatism. My second goal is to defend our Command in Chief when under attack, and to defend Conservative icons in America whom Weiner attacks constantly.
Weiner fans who claim to be Conservative need some major inner reflections.
Weiner is a reactionary, or he is a poser fooling a few million trained seals.
Well, I'd like to take exception to your characterization of the Savage critics. I can only speak for myself. I have a problem with him contributing a significant amount of money to a liberal candidate for AG, who is a dedicated gun-grabber. "F" rating from the NRA. Not even a gentleman's "D". That's my problem.
I couldn't care less about whether Savage has a schtick or not.
Post #22 one of the best posts I have ever read on FR.
I'm pretty sure that was a staff written opinion piece. Hunter Baker is an AS contributor.