MSNBC fires Savage after anti-gay remarks

Associated Press ^ | Jul. 7, 2003 01:00 PM

[sakic]

NEW YORK - MSNBC on Monday fired Michael Savage for anti-gay comments.

The popular radio talk show host who did a weekend TV show for the cable channel referred to an unidentified caller to his show Saturday as a "sodomite" and said he should "get AIDS and die."

[Joe Hadenuf]

We have no choice.

[Radioactive]

You did not hear what was said to Mr Savage off the air. If you did, Then you would know why he said what he said.

[Libertina]

Where exactly did I say that More Snotty Nonsense By Chicks had no right to fire him?

[The Westerner]

Tell me your sarcasm meter was on.

[Cultural Jihad]

Again, you and Al Gore seem to be on the same wavelength here. Those poor Dixie Chicks having their 1st Amendment right to your wallet taken away!

[Cultural Jihad]

We have no choice.

"We are helpless, hapless, and hopeless! Alas is us, adrift upon a sea of oppression!"

[Libertina]

IMHO you did not take time to read what I posted. But I stand by my point; that our free speech is being eroded - and fast. The station had the right to take him off the air. That does not make the first point moot.

[First Amendment]

This is what we have to work with, so lets get the job done, and reach out to these folks, bring them over to our side. Face it, we really have no choice here.

You are baiting people to see how they respond, correct???? If you really ascribe to this viewpoint, you are a Vichy "conservative". You are kidding, right????

If you really think that way, you ought to just join "them".

[Cultural Jihad]

The station had the right to take him off the air. That does not make the first point moot.

Sure it does.

[Libertina]

You don't seem to be able to reason well or respond to discussion points. You seem hung up on Dixie Chicks and Al. I'd say look for them on one of the old FR threads. You're bound to find one.

[Revel]

Well I can see another reason why you might hate Savage. You have no reason to hate homosexuality since you do not believe in God. Since it is a spitual code that homosexuality is about the most vile behavior leading to a nations downfall(And not even just in Christianity) then you would not find any reason to hate it. And hence your idea of conservatism would be minus such spiritual code. Yet in fact spitual values were a originaly a huge part of conservatism. You say you think this does conservatism a great dis-service, but honestly it does athieism a great dis-service.
The only comment that Savage made that might have been a little over the top was "...Get Aids and die". Of course that could be taken many different ways. It is a clasic argument used between people who really don't want the other person to die. Sometimes it is merely a last effort warning to point out to someone the final consequences of there actions. Of course in this modern PC world not many would even mention the possiblity. But I have known people like that in my life. So it is possible.

[Cultural Jihad]

You are the one advancing the wacko theories of Al Gore.

[Joe Hadenuf]

You are baiting people to see how they respond, correct???? If you really ascribe to this viewpoint, you are a Vichy "conservative". You are kidding, right????

Huh, no I'm not kidding. Look, homosexuals are our own citizens, our sons and daughters, the are teachers and men of the cloth, and they are all paying taxes. Look they are not going away, like illegal aliens, they are here to stay and more are coming. So why not reach out to them, teach them to be real conservative Republicans regardless of their life styles or legal status.

What is the alternative?

[First Amendment]

I agree with you. Just because MSNBC or whatever the heck the network's initials are has the right to fire or hire anyone they want is immaterial. The point is that the Gaystapo and other liberal/leftist/secular-humanist/feminzazi/libertine/speech-code/thought-police wield tremendous power, being heavily represented in the media and other influential institutions. So even though they, constitutionally, have the right to hire and fire, silence or promote speech, they consistently silence by one means or another speech or points of view they don't like. And more and more they will use the courts to do it. They drove Dr.Laura off TV, now Savage, and it's interesting that Rush never mentions homosexuals, except rarely in a joking tone, and he uses the word "gay" - have they gotten to him? I can hardly listen to him any more. Has he talked about the SCOTUS sodomy decision at all?

So now those of us with a different viewpoint from the Gaystapo and above leftists have to tiptoe around, whisper, talk like little ladies, because otherwise we might get fired, shunned, re-educated, or our kids taken away. We mustn't use rough speech or hurt anyone's tender little feelings. Doesn't matter that the homo-nazis are killing each other, seducing young boys and condemning them to a short life of misery. That's fine, that's diversity, that's a rainbow gay life. But to criticize them for their choices and actions, that's too much.
The slippery slope is turning into a screaming nosedive.

[justshe]

I read exactly what you posted:

---

"If you are right that his career is over, and no sponsor would touch him, then you should be extremely worried - for free speech is over. And that means yours too..."

---

"...many saying that Michael's free speech was mean, harsh, hateful (GASP)"

---

"I just don't recall where that is written in our constitution, that free speech doesn't apply when a crank or protected group doesn't feel "comfortable"."

---

"Myself, I believe it's pretty hateful to put down Christianity, Boy Scouts, property rights, or scream racism towards anyone who doesn't advocate illegal aliens... but apparently that kind of "free speech" is OK. "

---

I honestly wonder if you can't see that you are arguing for a "right" that doesn't exist in the private sector. The government was not involved in ANY of the issues you bring up.

[First Amendment]

Look they are not going away, like illegal aliens, they are here to stay and more are coming. So why not reach out to them, teach them to be real conservative Republicans regardless of their life styles or legal status. What is the alternative?

Your statement makes about as much sense as seeing a wildfire coming, and instead of trying to put it out to save lives and property, welcoming it with open arms, maybe offering it some fuel.

More are coming? They hope so, that's why they want to (and are) influencing kids in schools, pushing their agenda in the media and entertainment.

As far as teaching them, they should be taught the consequences of their actions, that what they are doing is harmful to themselves and others, and that they can change. They should be taught the truth.

[Final Authority]

When I first tuned him in, and I am right of Reagan, he offended me. But I listened because he has some entertaining attributes but then with time I saw his genius and his intellect. He does get short with callers but at times he lets them hang themselves as well. I do think he is too short but his program is not a debating society, such a program only with goods debates would not get ratings like Savage does.

[freebilly]

What is it people don't get about free speech?

MSNBC doesn't have to grant Savage free speech. What is it you don't get about that?

[Monti Cello]

Nothing personal, CJ, but I'm just jumping in here at (roughly) post 813 of this Savage thread, and laughing at how the posts degrade like the conversation in a late night drunken party, everyone babbling incoherently over personal issues.

MSNBC was no place for Savage in the first place. I have enjoyed his flamethrowing in the Bay Area for the past 5 years, but I always though he was too potent for a national audience.

I think his hubris devoured him. He would have been better served and probably more respected ranting at will on KSFO and WND. Now he's not even on in his home town any more.

[Gunder]

I agree. I won't miss this jerk in the least.