Posted on 06/12/2007 12:42:17 PM PDT by TBP
Michael Savage, the #3 most listened to talk-show host in America, was honored by Talkers Magazine, the "Bible" of talk radio, with this year's Freedom of peech Award.
Recently, Talkers held a bash at which they presented the award. C-SPAN, which claims to be nonpartisan and nonideological, was there and carried most of the speeches. But for some reason, it blacklisted Savage's speech accepting the award.
Why would a nonideological network do this? More liberal media bias, obviously. C-SPAN has now willingly made itself part of the liberal effort to suppress freedom of speech in this country.
I thought Glenn Beck was the 3rd most listened to talk-show host in America?
This is where this thread is from pacelvi
rockabyebaby the information came from this web site when Savage had 8 million was in Dec 05 and the list came from 05
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1537871/posts
for later consumption
This is where this thread is from pacelvi
rockabyebaby the information came from this web site when Savage had 8 million was in Dec 05 and the list came from 05
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1537871/posts
“C-SPAN has become a media outlet for the nut jobs. If you listen to the callers, they call in with their conspiracy theories and Bush hatred...”
That is why I promptley change the channel as soon as they start in with the calls, if I don’t, my TV may have a short life, due to an object being thrown through it.
That’s all very interesting, however, all I did was cut and paste the info from someone else,,,,,perhaps you should go after him.............AND the fact remains that SAVAGE is number 3,,,,,what are you disputing?
Funny, the first time I heard about his sizable donation to Brown was from Savage's own mouth on his radio program. So Bush and his total inability to explain Iraq (or just about anything else) to the American people, his arrogant pushing of the Dubai ports deal (and his general disinterest in even explaining his position, despite the public outcry), the corruption of the GOP class of 1994, L'Affair de Foley...all of these were figments of my imagination
There have been numerous times in this country's history when governmental dealings have not been completely or adequately explained, and there could be extremely good reasons for the lack of explaination. Oh, and Bush is not responsible for the corruption of the 1994 class of GOP (what ever you are speaking too since you don't provide anything other than the Foley incident - which in retrospect was much ado about little). You want to demonize the President without any evidence of his being a demon. Just that you and Savage didn't like certain things that happened, or that they weren't explained to your satisfaction. Fair or unfair critizism isn't what I've been speaking to. Savage's incredible ability to change his mind about specific issues from one show to the next is. His mindless (and manic) rantings and ravings may impress you, but it takes more than that to sell me. When I first began to tune into his broadcast he seemed to be on point with most all his points. Unfortunately, he goes off the deep end much too often for me to be able to take him seriously. Again, feel free to sing Savage's praises all you want. I'm not that naive.
And your too much of a follower. Have a nice day.
very well but if he had 8 Mil in 05 he hasn’t grown sense and I did not see a link from TBP or you yet!
At least I tried!
>Was there a guest in the studio when the Carter thing >happened?
As I recall Jimmy Carter was the guest.
“Savage” has two gears — whiny and psychotic. He kvetches for a while, then the vein pops out on his forehead and he screams for a while, lather, rinse, repeat.
I completely lost my tolerance for Mr. Weiner about the dozenth time I heard him spend a whole segment on his “I’m the only one who will tell you this. I’m the only person covering this. Why don’t you see this on CNN? Why is the media covering this up?”
The topic that day was the murder of Daniel Pearl. The nightly news on every network led with it, all the major sites had it as the top story, and the cable news networks took it wall-to-wall, no other stories, no commercials. CNN had Connie Chung — it stands out in my mind because she was such an awful choice for the story — commenting on the terrorist video, which she had watched.
I don’t know of any US network that carried the video, but it was findable online, and I watched it. Let’s just say it more than satisfied my curiosity. When Nick Berg was killed, I didn’t feel the need to see it, and I doubt I’ll ever seek out such a video again.
I had been following the story all day by the time “Savage” told me no one was covering it. The only sane explanation for why “Savage” didn’t see it on TV is that he doesn’t own one or didn’t turn it on. That’s one of the many loathsome things about Michael Savage — his “me me me” field that it impenetrable to other media who are covering the same stories, with more wit and less bile.
Yes, he has big ratings. So, at various times in history, did Morton Downey, Jr., Howard Stern and Jerry Springer. That doesn’t mean their programs are worth the time, and if I’d been a C-SPAN producer, I would have made the same call.
Does anyone know whose speeches C-SPAN did show? All I’ve been able to find is a link on Savage’s own (craptacular) Web site where you can buy a copy of the “banned” speech on DVD for $20 plus shipping. But act fast! The price goes up Friday.
I’d guess about 98 out 100 times C-Span will develop its morning question for callers from the New York Times or some other left wing rag. Try to count how many times C-Span has taken a topic from Rush or or any conservative source for its call-in topic.
C-Span is heavy-duty left wing.
My favorite, of course, is when the libs call in on the Republican line and say: “I voted for Bush, but...” Then they run through every Marxist talking point known to man. And the moderator will rarely hang up on the left wing caller.
The moderators do indeed take sides - on the left. Constantly.
You will never hear topics on Reid’s land swindles, Feinstein’s contract steering or Hillary’s trouble with illegal campaign money. Never.
That’s because C-Span will rarely ever develop a topic taken from any right wing source. The call-in segments are always heavily tilted left.
The ocassional conservative guest is about the only time you’ll hear anything conservative on C-Span.
No, middie, you are the "clueless one". And, Rush also did precisely the same show a month ago.
Thanks for saying it for me.
Give it up..........
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.