Nope. I'm just talking about plain old in-your-face "I hate you and I hope you go to hell" prejudice. If it weren't for that one little line in that old book we all love to quote, then there would be absolutely no excuse left on the planet to openly and proudly "hate" this minority group and not be labeled a "hate group" or "hate speech".
Simple. No gray area here. This is not politics. It's hate.
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Yeah, I watched that episode. That man is so extreme it's sick. I agree with him on very few points about patriotism and such, but he went WAY too far when that guy called in. I too am surprised he lasted that long. I watched a number of his episodes and the way he treated his callers was so harsh, I'm am really surprised he lasted more than 1 episode. Oh well, good riddance. We don't need trash like that on cable news channels.
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Fellowship
God dammit I can't resist. Let's say someone knows nothing about Jesus. Now, I'm pretty sure that it mentioned somewhere that those who did not have access to the teachings aren't condemned to hell. However, being the "good christian" that you are, you tell this person about all the joys of Jesus! Now, this person looks at you funny and says "nah, I'll pass." Of course, now confronted with the knowledge, if you turn out to be right, you have condemned him to a hell sentence. Couldn't leave him alone in his heaven-bound blissful ignorance, could ya? Could ya?
God dammit I can't resist. Let's say someone knows nothing about Jesus. Now, I'm pretty sure that it mentioned somewhere that those who did not have access to the teachings aren't condemned to hell. However, being the "good christian" that you are, you tell this person about all the joys of Jesus! Now, this person looks at you funny and says "nah, I'll pass." Of course, now confronted with the knowledge, if you turn out to be right, you have condemned him to a hell sentence. Couldn't leave him alone in his heaven-bound blissful ignorance, could ya? Could ya?
BR I think what is going on here is that you want to discuss this with me but if I were to open a thread over it that thread would get locked. Still with me here? So since that is the case every other thead seems to be derailed when you see me reply to an issue at hand in given post. You then go on to derail the thread back to this same old issue. I can only imagine that the people who open threads that deal with any topic such as "Why Bunnies are soft" or such as the topic of this thread are rather a bit tired of seeing this kind of derailing.
I am not blaming you for your curiosity of my beliefs I am only suggesting that if this is so important to you let's have a chat over it and leave the threads here in tact to the original subjects the respective thread openers started the threads with.
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Fellowship
I couldn't agree with you more. It's refreshing to hear this from a devout Christian who understands the true and honest meaning of "the gospel".
Mike Savage should have studied Limbaugh more closely. Rush never uses this kind of crass personal insult, but voices similar viewpoints in a far more subtle and intelligent fashion, to present hatred and bigotry in a superficially acceptable format. One thing about Savage however: he had the courage to wear his paranoid bigotry on his chest, honest and upfront. However I don't know if that is better than closeting such sentiments towards "those who aren't one of us", as do a very considerably large section of the public.
Good riddance to this man's foul verbal slurry. One down, many more to go.
Apparently, no one here can answer that, at least without speculating on what goes on in other twisted people's heads, and how many such twisted brains there are. Very depressing stuff to put yourself in that frame of mind.
I will ask my mother if she listens to his show on the radio, that is generally my benchmark for what Joe America the Conservative thinks/does; my family.
Apparently, no one here can answer that, at least without speculating on what goes on in other twisted people's heads, and how many such twisted brains there are. Very depressing stuff to put yourself in that frame of mind.
Maybe the Rev. Pat Robertson could shed some "light" (!) on this. He is America's most visible "Christian", he speaks on behalf of a very large segment of the US population, religious conservatives, and he has a similar abhorrence of gays to that of Mike Savage, (although thinly disguised in the form of "hate the sin, love the sinner").
Perhaps Mike Savage is a closet gay, but can't come to terms with himself. There are lots of self-hating gays out there. Correct me I I'm mistaken...but I heard that Mike Savage used to go skinny-dipping with Allen Ginsberg (sp?) when they were younger men. They don't come "gayer" than Ginsberg!
Never heard of this guy, but suddenly I want more. What's wrong with sodomite? Or wishing someone gets AIDS and dies? Mebbe a lot, but is it worse than wishing someone gets any other fowl disease and dies? And since sodomy is more likely to lead to AIDS, does it automatically have to be interpretted as anti-gay?
hahaha
Actually, this is interesting stuff, because it blurs the lines of news and comedy. Yes, comedy, an injurious sort of comedy, but not a brand without either audience or its own sort of merit. And people who call in DESERVE to be attacked and berated in whatever way possible. When you attack, I think that all those charter freedoms (or whatever you call them in the states) are open to attack. Why should gayness be exempt from verbal attack, or sodomy for that matter? He's got a schtick, and it's abuse, callers should know that, so should the audience. But, you can't really put that on MSNBC, people get confused easily. I'm confused too, what is he? An asshole, a news man, commentator, comedian??? iDunno. So he gets canned for being offensive. OK. But "offensive" is big business, and it has a sort of honest about it if we just frame it on the right stage.
See as a politician, these views are entirely wise and reasonable:
"The brash, tough-talking Savage is one of radio's hottest jocks. His Paul Revere Society advocates closing borders, deporting illegal immigrants, mandating health tests for immigrants and eliminating entitlement programs."
But the presentation and attack are lacking.
But as a comedian, the attacks are gold. I mean really, if I'm rude, a pig, uncouth, and I know something about what you are, and that happens to be gay, why would I hold back on the gay side of you. It seems only fair to attack that too, or has PC made sodomy sacred but other foms fair game?
I'll agree that he's not what you want on a news outlet, or even in good taste, and I wouldn't have hired him.
But, I have to wonder if we're thinking "decency" or just a narrow band of "correctness"
To my mind, the things that describe a person make for great insults, and sometime that includes their orientation, whatever that may be, as it can include their race, creed, politics, size, language, whatever...
So then, what is MSNBC's motive behind giving him a shot in the first place? Is it just bad programming, or is a sort of public sacrifice that they're looking to make (or expecting to make) in order to legitmize a more polite presentation of the same ideas once they have justly extricated the offender (and proved their moral standards and sensitivity to the satisfaction of certain groups)
This may be a marketing ploy. If he hung in, he'd get listeners and that's a win, if he got nailed, they prove a point to a demographic, and that's a win too.
hmmm...
And wasn't Ginsberg just the greatest fag? He would have liked the weight of loaded terms and slurs rather than the clinical (and sterile) terms we put on sex, but of course he operated with a poets sensitivity and never looked to attack or abuse in his poems, so you can put the terms to different use.
I still think radio hosts owe it to the wackos who call in to verbally bugger them senseless, it's great fun when Stern, or Limbaugh, or Schlessinger get to into it.
Never heard of this guy, but suddenly I want more. What's wrong with sodomite? Or wishing someone gets AIDS and dies? Mebbe a lot, but is it worse than wishing someone gets any other fowl disease and dies? And since sodomy is more likely to lead to AIDS, does it automatically have to be interpretted as anti-gay?
Insult comedy is a big part of right-wing political talk shows. But MSNBC and other radio and TVs don't want to believe that...they want it to seem like a forum for intelligent political discussion. It's funny, there's a lot of crossover between politics and comedy, and the response that it provokes.
Political comedy self righteous indignation boredom
laughter
Comedy laughter boos & boredom
forgive the formatting on my crappy chart, but I was just thinking about how well social criticism and comedy go together. These guys are basically toadying insult comedians.
Never heard of this guy, but suddenly I want more. What's wrong with sodomite? Or wishing someone gets AIDS and dies? Mebbe a lot, but is it worse than wishing someone gets any other fowl disease and dies? And since sodomy is more likely to lead to AIDS, does it automatically have to be interpretted as anti-gay?
hahaha
Actually, this is interesting stuff, because it blurs the lines of news and comedy. Yes, comedy, an injurious sort of comedy, but not a brand without either audience or its own sort of merit. And people who call in DESERVE to be attacked and berated in whatever way possible. When you attack, I think that all those charter freedoms (or whatever you call them in the states) are open to attack. Why should gayness be exempt from verbal attack, or sodomy for that matter? He's got a schtick, and it's abuse, callers should know that, so should the audience. But, you can't really put that on MSNBC, people get confused easily. I'm confused too, what is he? An asshole, a news man, commentator, comedian??? iDunno. So he gets canned for being offensive. OK. But "offensive" is big business, and it has a sort of honest about it if we just frame it on the right stage.
See as a politician, these views are entirely wise and reasonable:
"The brash, tough-talking Savage is one of radio's hottest jocks. His Paul Revere Society advocates closing borders, deporting illegal immigrants, mandating health tests for immigrants and eliminating entitlement programs."
But the presentation and attack are lacking.
But as a comedian, the attacks are gold. I mean really, if I'm rude, a pig, uncouth, and I know something about what you are, and that happens to be gay, why would I hold back on the gay side of you. It seems only fair to attack that too, or has PC made sodomy sacred but other foms fair game?
I'll agree that he's not what you want on a news outlet, or even in good taste, and I wouldn't have hired him.
But, I have to wonder if we're thinking "decency" or just a narrow band of "correctness"
To my mind, the things that describe a person make for great insults, and sometime that includes their orientation, whatever that may be, as it can include their race, creed, politics, size, language, whatever...
So then, what is MSNBC's motive behind giving him a shot in the first place? Is it just bad programming, or is a sort of public sacrifice that they're looking to make (or expecting to make) in order to legitmize a more polite presentation of the same ideas once they have justly extricated the offender (and proved their moral standards and sensitivity to the satisfaction of certain groups)
This may be a marketing ploy. If he hung in, he'd get listeners and that's a win, if he got nailed, they prove a point to a demographic, and that's a win too.
hmmm...
And wasn't Ginsberg just the greatest fag? He would have liked the weight of loaded terms and slurs rather than the clinical (and sterile) terms we put on sex, but of course he operated with a poets sensitivity and never looked to attack or abuse in his poems, so you can put the terms to different use.
I still think radio hosts owe it to the wackos who call in to verbally bugger them senseless, it's great fun when Stern, or Limbaugh, or Schlessinger get to into it.
Quite frankly if I have to tolerate the word "n!gger" being used on the air, regerdless of the race of the person who says it, then this fool aught to be still employed.
Comments
Originally posted by Northgate
Nope. I'm just talking about plain old in-your-face "I hate you and I hope you go to hell" prejudice. If it weren't for that one little line in that old book we all love to quote, then there would be absolutely no excuse left on the planet to openly and proudly "hate" this minority group and not be labeled a "hate group" or "hate speech".
Simple. No gray area here. This is not politics. It's hate.
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Fellowship
God dammit I can't resist. Let's say someone knows nothing about Jesus. Now, I'm pretty sure that it mentioned somewhere that those who did not have access to the teachings aren't condemned to hell. However, being the "good christian" that you are, you tell this person about all the joys of Jesus! Now, this person looks at you funny and says "nah, I'll pass." Of course, now confronted with the knowledge, if you turn out to be right, you have condemned him to a hell sentence. Couldn't leave him alone in his heaven-bound blissful ignorance, could ya? Could ya?
Originally posted by BR
God dammit I can't resist. Let's say someone knows nothing about Jesus. Now, I'm pretty sure that it mentioned somewhere that those who did not have access to the teachings aren't condemned to hell. However, being the "good christian" that you are, you tell this person about all the joys of Jesus! Now, this person looks at you funny and says "nah, I'll pass." Of course, now confronted with the knowledge, if you turn out to be right, you have condemned him to a hell sentence. Couldn't leave him alone in his heaven-bound blissful ignorance, could ya? Could ya?
BR I think what is going on here is that you want to discuss this with me but if I were to open a thread over it that thread would get locked. Still with me here? So since that is the case every other thead seems to be derailed when you see me reply to an issue at hand in given post. You then go on to derail the thread back to this same old issue. I can only imagine that the people who open threads that deal with any topic such as "Why Bunnies are soft" or such as the topic of this thread are rather a bit tired of seeing this kind of derailing.
I am not blaming you for your curiosity of my beliefs I am only suggesting that if this is so important to you let's have a chat over it and leave the threads here in tact to the original subjects the respective thread openers started the threads with.
You can reach me at [email protected]
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
BR I think what is going on here is that you want to discuss this with me but if I were to open a thread over it that thread would get locked.
Perhaps I shall open a thread in the next few days. It has been a while since I have done so.
Originally posted by BR
Wow. Scary that people like this exist.
BR stated above in regard to Video on demand link of Savage.
I could not agree more.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I agree that it is hate! You are spot on with that. What I will say is that people who call themselves Christians who go around hating Gays are not living as Christ commanded them to. I am sickened by all the fakes who call themselves Christians who are actually more hateful in a lot of cases than others in society.
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
I suggest people should live not to condemn others but to love them.
Fellowship
I couldn't agree with you more. It's refreshing to hear this from a devout Christian who understands the true and honest meaning of "the gospel".
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Remember when Jesus mentioned "He who is without sin" ?
Well, here I am...
Good riddance to this man's foul verbal slurry. One down, many more to go.
Firing him was right-on.
And what I find worthy of discussion... how the hell is this guy so popular? [/B]
Are you really sure you want to discuss this?
I will ask my mother if she listens to his show on the radio, that is generally my benchmark for what Joe America the Conservative thinks/does; my family.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Apparently, no one here can answer that, at least without speculating on what goes on in other twisted people's heads, and how many such twisted brains there are. Very depressing stuff to put yourself in that frame of mind.
Maybe the Rev. Pat Robertson could shed some "light" (!) on this. He is America's most visible "Christian", he speaks on behalf of a very large segment of the US population, religious conservatives, and he has a similar abhorrence of gays to that of Mike Savage, (although thinly disguised in the form of "hate the sin, love the sinner").
Perhaps Mike Savage is a closet gay, but can't come to terms with himself. There are lots of self-hating gays out there. Correct me I I'm mistaken...but I heard that Mike Savage used to go skinny-dipping with Allen Ginsberg (sp?) when they were younger men. They don't come "gayer" than Ginsberg!
I have a feeling that this is going to lose Savage a lot of listeners.
hahaha
Actually, this is interesting stuff, because it blurs the lines of news and comedy. Yes, comedy, an injurious sort of comedy, but not a brand without either audience or its own sort of merit. And people who call in DESERVE to be attacked and berated in whatever way possible. When you attack, I think that all those charter freedoms (or whatever you call them in the states) are open to attack. Why should gayness be exempt from verbal attack, or sodomy for that matter? He's got a schtick, and it's abuse, callers should know that, so should the audience. But, you can't really put that on MSNBC, people get confused easily. I'm confused too, what is he? An asshole, a news man, commentator, comedian??? iDunno. So he gets canned for being offensive. OK. But "offensive" is big business, and it has a sort of honest about it if we just frame it on the right stage.
See as a politician, these views are entirely wise and reasonable:
"The brash, tough-talking Savage is one of radio's hottest jocks. His Paul Revere Society advocates closing borders, deporting illegal immigrants, mandating health tests for immigrants and eliminating entitlement programs."
But the presentation and attack are lacking.
But as a comedian, the attacks are gold. I mean really, if I'm rude, a pig, uncouth, and I know something about what you are, and that happens to be gay, why would I hold back on the gay side of you. It seems only fair to attack that too, or has PC made sodomy sacred but other foms fair game?
I'll agree that he's not what you want on a news outlet, or even in good taste, and I wouldn't have hired him.
But, I have to wonder if we're thinking "decency" or just a narrow band of "correctness"
To my mind, the things that describe a person make for great insults, and sometime that includes their orientation, whatever that may be, as it can include their race, creed, politics, size, language, whatever...
So then, what is MSNBC's motive behind giving him a shot in the first place? Is it just bad programming, or is a sort of public sacrifice that they're looking to make (or expecting to make) in order to legitmize a more polite presentation of the same ideas once they have justly extricated the offender (and proved their moral standards and sensitivity to the satisfaction of certain groups)
This may be a marketing ploy. If he hung in, he'd get listeners and that's a win, if he got nailed, they prove a point to a demographic, and that's a win too.
hmmm...
And wasn't Ginsberg just the greatest fag? He would have liked the weight of loaded terms and slurs rather than the clinical (and sterile) terms we put on sex, but of course he operated with a poets sensitivity and never looked to attack or abuse in his poems, so you can put the terms to different use.
I still think radio hosts owe it to the wackos who call in to verbally bugger them senseless, it's great fun when Stern, or Limbaugh, or Schlessinger get to into it.
Originally posted by Matsu
Never heard of this guy, but suddenly I want more. What's wrong with sodomite? Or wishing someone gets AIDS and dies? Mebbe a lot, but is it worse than wishing someone gets any other fowl disease and dies? And since sodomy is more likely to lead to AIDS, does it automatically have to be interpretted as anti-gay?
Insult comedy is a big part of right-wing political talk shows. But MSNBC and other radio and TVs don't want to believe that...they want it to seem like a forum for intelligent political discussion. It's funny, there's a lot of crossover between politics and comedy, and the response that it provokes.
TYPE POSITIVE REACTION NEG REACTION
Politics self-righteous inspiration self-righteous indignation
Talk show self-righteous indignation anger
Political comedy self righteous indignation boredom
laughter
Comedy laughter boos & boredom
forgive the formatting on my crappy chart, but I was just thinking about how well social criticism and comedy go together. These guys are basically toadying insult comedians.
Originally posted by Matsu
Never heard of this guy, but suddenly I want more. What's wrong with sodomite? Or wishing someone gets AIDS and dies? Mebbe a lot, but is it worse than wishing someone gets any other fowl disease and dies? And since sodomy is more likely to lead to AIDS, does it automatically have to be interpretted as anti-gay?
hahaha
Actually, this is interesting stuff, because it blurs the lines of news and comedy. Yes, comedy, an injurious sort of comedy, but not a brand without either audience or its own sort of merit. And people who call in DESERVE to be attacked and berated in whatever way possible. When you attack, I think that all those charter freedoms (or whatever you call them in the states) are open to attack. Why should gayness be exempt from verbal attack, or sodomy for that matter? He's got a schtick, and it's abuse, callers should know that, so should the audience. But, you can't really put that on MSNBC, people get confused easily. I'm confused too, what is he? An asshole, a news man, commentator, comedian??? iDunno. So he gets canned for being offensive. OK. But "offensive" is big business, and it has a sort of honest about it if we just frame it on the right stage.
See as a politician, these views are entirely wise and reasonable:
"The brash, tough-talking Savage is one of radio's hottest jocks. His Paul Revere Society advocates closing borders, deporting illegal immigrants, mandating health tests for immigrants and eliminating entitlement programs."
But the presentation and attack are lacking.
But as a comedian, the attacks are gold. I mean really, if I'm rude, a pig, uncouth, and I know something about what you are, and that happens to be gay, why would I hold back on the gay side of you. It seems only fair to attack that too, or has PC made sodomy sacred but other foms fair game?
I'll agree that he's not what you want on a news outlet, or even in good taste, and I wouldn't have hired him.
But, I have to wonder if we're thinking "decency" or just a narrow band of "correctness"
To my mind, the things that describe a person make for great insults, and sometime that includes their orientation, whatever that may be, as it can include their race, creed, politics, size, language, whatever...
So then, what is MSNBC's motive behind giving him a shot in the first place? Is it just bad programming, or is a sort of public sacrifice that they're looking to make (or expecting to make) in order to legitmize a more polite presentation of the same ideas once they have justly extricated the offender (and proved their moral standards and sensitivity to the satisfaction of certain groups)
This may be a marketing ploy. If he hung in, he'd get listeners and that's a win, if he got nailed, they prove a point to a demographic, and that's a win too.
hmmm...
And wasn't Ginsberg just the greatest fag? He would have liked the weight of loaded terms and slurs rather than the clinical (and sterile) terms we put on sex, but of course he operated with a poets sensitivity and never looked to attack or abuse in his poems, so you can put the terms to different use.
I still think radio hosts owe it to the wackos who call in to verbally bugger them senseless, it's great fun when Stern, or Limbaugh, or Schlessinger get to into it.
Quite frankly if I have to tolerate the word "n!gger" being used on the air, regerdless of the race of the person who says it, then this fool aught to be still employed.
Originally posted by Northgate
... If it weren't for that one little line in that old book we all love to quote...
What line is that?
Originally posted by Matsu
So then, what is MSNBC's motive behind giving him a shot in the first place?
Generate buzz. Pick off some of the demographic that has made FoxNews such a hit. I can't imagine Fox ever being tempted to hire Savage, though.