Talk:Michael Savage/Archive 2

message: I am deleting the link to "Michael Savage / Savage Nation Discussion Forums" Because it links to a page that has been taken down. Prnd3825 04:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleting Link

message: In the article, the following quote appears:
"Intelligent people, wealthy people...are very depressed by the weakness that America is showing to these psychotics in the Muslim world. They say, 'Oh, there’s a billion of them (Muslims) [and 10 percent or so are radical (Muslims).]' I said, 'So, kill 100 million of them (radicalist Muslims); then there'd be 900 million [peaceful Muslims left. -- he says 'of them']' I mean...would you rather us die than them?...Would you rather we disappear or we die? Or would you rather they disappear and they die? Because you’re going to have to make that choice sooner rather than later."
In the referenced source, the parts I have placed in brackets do not appear. The current misquotation obscures the extreme nature of his quote which makes no distinction between radical muslims or otherwise. I suggest editing it accordingly.
Ohhhhh, you can guarantee that I will put this in the article. (EnglishEfternamn 20:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hitler claimed that killing the Jews was absolutely neccessary to protect Germany.  And, yes, justifiable genocide would still be genocide.  Beyond that, he is not saying "if it's neccessary", he is saying it *will* be neccessary at some time.  That's extreme.  But, please, explain the context that makes it not extreme.  ThatGuamGuy 18:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrect quotation 

message: Why does this article state that Savage is syndicated by Clear Channel? He's syndicated by Talk Radio Network (TRN). He even mentioned this Wikipedia error on his show last month. His flagship station is a Clear Channel station, but that's not the same thing.Politician818 01:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Savage's syndicate

message: One central theme for The Savage Nation seems to be how "the hollywood vermin" as Savage puts it are undermining values in a society where coarseness is becoming more and more acceptable. It would seem strange then, that Savage would choose Douglas Urbanski to fill in for him, Urbanski is the 1998 BAFTA Awards winner for Best British Film Nil by Mouth, a movie credited with containing the word "F@ck" a record 470 times and the word "C@nt" 96 times. A record that stood until 2005. Anyone see the irony here?
The one thing common to all of the shows that Douglas Urbanski has guest hosted are they are syndicated by Talk Radio Network.  Your question assumes that Savage chooses his guest hosts.  The purpose of the talk page is to discuss the content of the article, not the subject of the article.StreamingRadioGuide 00:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stand in hosts for ''The Savage Nation'' & Pornography Industry connections 

message: Michael savage has recently started to use the term "Krystal Methodist" or "Crystal Methodist" as a slang for....I don't know quite what.
On further research of the Savage family business Rockstar Energy Drink and their links to the pornography industry in which they collaborated with Penthouse Magazine and Porn star Jamie Lynn for a 2006 SuperBowl party it appears that Jamie Lynn has starred in pornography flicks suchas "First Offence 14", "Pussy Foot'n 13" and "Krystal Method". Has Savage ever explained the origins of the term?
Dean1970 November 15th, 2006.
:::I would think that a Crystal Methodist is a person who is addicted to crystal methadone.Lestrade 01:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would guess its just a derogatory word to describe certain types of Christians by comparing them to crystal methamphetamine addicts; I've never even heard of "crystal methadone" Mbc362 21:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krystal Methodist 

message: Why has the category 'Anti-Arab' (if it even exists) not been added to this article?
Anyone who is even slightly Anti-Semitic has had labels added to them moments after they made the comment, shouldn't the same be done with those who are Anti-Arab or Anti-Islam? Kytok 03:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I abhor the concept of having any such subjective, judgemental, and bias-fraught terms as "categories", I would oppose even having an "anti-Arab" category, much less using one on this or any other article.  This isn't some sort of mud-slinging contest.  This is a project to build an encyclopedia.  We should focus on facts, not recriminations.  Kasreyn 06:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really think Savage is "anti" any specific group. In fact, he sometimes refers to some homosexual friends and even extols the virtues of some of the Muslims he knows. What he constantly criticizes are Group Identity Politics and Group Think. GuyInCT 03:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Arab 

message: On June 5, 2006 the IRS stripped the society of its tax-free status.
I checked the source but it was unavailable. Furthermore, blogs are not allowed to be used as reliable sources in wikipedia, correct me if I am wrong. So please provide something that backs up what you wrote or remove it. Thanks.
vincent_shooter 10:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing source 

message: On Dec. 12, 2006, the Michael Savage JPEG image was vandalized. Lestrade 13:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what happened to the original image? Was it deleted? — Loadmaster 21:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: JPEG Vandal

message: Michael Savage is by no means "public and vocal" about his own Jewish heritage, at least not on the show. If anything, he almost always refers to himself as "White", implying he is a Gentile as well. In fact, it seems to me he is continually chasing a sort of WASP, identity. He wants to be seen as one of those conservative American WASPs who support the Jewish perspective on the Middle East situation. Like John Hagee, perhaps. (EnglishEfternamn 23:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Savage & Judaism

message: This is a pretty good, fairly objective article.  It is neither biased or false.  I think the writer should be commended.
No, it is not fair; it is slanted and presented from the point of view of those that are offended by him. 70.107.104.75 01:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any specific recommendations for how to change it? JoshuaZ 01:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am currently conducting a neutrality edit of the page.  Please see my edit log on neutrality of the article further down this discussion page.  Thanks - Eisenmond 17:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good fair Article

message: Wasn't there some talk a few days ago about Savage considering a possible 2008 Presidential run?
WAVY 10 01:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there was... Monday morning he announced that he was strongly considering a run for the Republican nomination.  If you check the United States presidential election, 2008 page under Republican candidates, there is a link to this report.  And if you check his website you will see that he is strongly considering it.  Enjoy.  - Eisenmond 02:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a section on his involvement in the campaign, including his platform and criticism of other candidates.  If he files for exploratory or with the FEC this section can be expanded in a seperate campign page, discussing in more detail.  I think it is fair to include his intentions and more about his views on his place in the party.  Thanks - Eisenmond 21:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presidential campaign? 

message: It would be better to print the text of the letter and let readers decide for themselves. Steve Dufour 18:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I had added a picture of the letter to the article but it was removed by other editors. Gamaliel 19:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Gay" letter

message: Savage's stated views on religion seem pretty unlikely, judging by some of the other comments he's made. Is it possible to get a source (and a date) on those? Rumour is that Weiner used to be a hippy and a pal of Alan Ginsberg - could his universalist leanings date back to those days? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.111.220.7 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was also struck by how "liberal" his views were on this subject. :-)   I do know a little about Judaism and the Universalism expressed by Savage was well within the mainstream of Jewish thought on the subject, despite the original wording of the passage which seemed to imply a contradiction between the two. Steve Dufour 17:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Views on Religion? 

message: Will anyone object if I remove the tag? JoshuaZ 18:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I object at this time.  I am still only 75% finished with my neutrality edits.  If you could give me until the weekend to get proper feedback and continue the "citation needed" checks, we can agree that the tag can be removed.  Thanks.  I have been working hard on this one this week!  - Eisenmond 19:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality tag? 

message: This section needs citations. 76.21.45.13 09:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am concerned that Wikipedians cherry-picking quotes to insert into this article is inherently POV and likely OR.  We've gone through a similar discussion in Coulter's article and came to that conclusion.  --ElKevbo 18:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Savage's comments on homosexuality

message: How does a Salon article prove that Savage's Ph.D. is in nutritional ethnomedicine? Savage says that his Ph.D. is in nutrition and epidemiology science. I would think that Savage knows better about his degree than Salon. 76.21.45.13 09:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nutritional ethnomedicine?

message: It is getting very non neutral. Statements such as these:
"On October 9, 2006, Savage labeled Madeleine Albright a “traitor” because the Clinton administration was in office when North Korea bought two nuclear reactors from a Western company in 2000. Savage said former Secretary Albright should be “tried for treason and when she’s found guilty she should be hung” Savage has previously called Albright a "hag" and "a monster in a dress"."
are biased in the fact that they say he has criticized all these people, but don't clarify why. Especially this one, it stacks everything up against him but doesn't present his side, just saying that he called Alnright a traitor and said she should be hung. We should put in why he criticized her, other than a basically sarcastic remark ("because the Clinton administration was in office when North Korea bought two nuclear reactors from a Western company in 2000.") The Person Who Is Strange 03:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: Did Michael really write The Taster's Guide to Beer ()? How do you know? 
It doesn't really fit in with his other areas of writing interest.  Thanks. --johno95 15:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, he wrote it... you can click on the ISBN link, and then see different links, for instance here:  on Amazon. He uses his birth name. Danski14 16:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait. There are other Michael Weiners in the world. One is an actor. I am not saying he DIDN'T write it. But where's the proof that he did? (Like a mention in a reputable article.) It doesn't do any good to say he's using his birth name. It could be another Michael A. Weiner using HIS birth name. If  anyone has a copy of the book, maybe it contains a short bio or photo. --johno95 01:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, that occurred to me of course, but other book sources said Micheal A. Weiner, and the comments on Amazon.com alluded that it was him, so I thought it was fairly safe. If you think it's not true, then feel free to remove it (don't want any lawsuits or anything, hehe). He doesn't have a published list on his website, but for what its worth you can see his works listed here on "NNdB"  Sometimes I wonder if they just copy from wikipedia articles when they are creating pages on that site...   Danski14 05:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, thanks. I found the book, and on the first page, it lists the usual homeopathy books, etc. "also by this author." But thanks to everyone here. Now I know that Michael is/was a beer fan. Interesting. -- johno95 13:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Help with Book

message: Don't list Savage under "anti-Catholic" just because he disagrees with the Catholic Church on one issue. Savage actually has a point; why should a church be able to break the law? Savage also agrees with the Catholic Church on many issues and even defended Pope Pius XII, so please knock it off. It is simply your opinion that Savage is anti-Catholic. This is an encyclopedia; let the people decide whether he is anti-Catholic. Now, if Savage said, "I hate Catholics," that would be different. If Savage is anti-Catholic, then liberal politicians who are pro choice should all be listed as "anti-Catholic." 76.21.45.13 12:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop Savaging Savage.

message: I have removed several difficult statements from the article pending proper sourcing.  I am not sure that I got ALL the unsourced material from the article, but we really should remove ALL unsourced material on the article.  Watch out as well for anyone POV pushing by inserting false or overstated claims about Mr. Savage's certainly controversial positions.  NPOV applies to everyone and WP:BLP is an important policy in cases like this.  I nearly stubbed the whole article for a careful resourcing of everything, but the article is mostly pretty well sourced already, and so I think it just needs a cleanup... and possibly semi-protection. --Jimbo Wales 08:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some removals of content

message: The two masters degrees, mentioned in the intro paragraph, and then in paragraph four, should match EXACTLY. Could someone (if you know the correct degrees) please fix this? I am not sure that you have to mention the precise degrees in the intro, but some people like to do this. Then we get into trouble. (ie. Anthropology and Medical Anthropology are similar, but why should they differ?)  -- johno95 13:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Two Degrees

message: Does it matter that Savage's legal name is still "Weiner"? (On the flap of every one of his Savage books, it reads "copyright 20XX Michael A. Weiner.") If it is important, where would this mention go? I bring this up because this wiki piece makes it seem like his name was (in the past) was Weiner, but now it's Savage. To us, he is Savage. It's ok to call him Savage, because without that name, he probably wouldn't be listed in wiki. But maybe you could mention his legal name is still Weiner. What do you think? -- johno95 13:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal name still Weiner

message: This is in the second paragraph of the radio section:
::"In the 1990s, Michael Savage began his radio career on KGO (a San Francisco news/talk radio station) as a fill-in host for the liberal Ray Taliaferro. Less than a year later he was given a weekday show on KGO's sister station KSFO."
Less than a year later from what date? The 1990s? 
Maybe someone knows. Thanks. -- johno95 13:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification of Savage's Start

message: I heard Savage say on his show that he's not running. Should this article still list him as a possible candidate? 76.21.45.13 05:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Savage still mulling?

message: Savage is both an independent and a conservative, although he will register as a Republican if he indeed runs for president. 76.21.45.13 16:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: An Independent and a Conservative

message: To what does "literary scene" specifically refer?  What does it mean?  It is strangely vague and conspicuously cliche.  It does not say anything really, does it?  Could someone add to this to qualify the meaning.  What is a literary scene?  (Gamliel, I am not trying to pick a fight with you...) 70.107.104.75 22:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Local authors and their events. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 22:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What additional specificity can we find for the usage of "literary scene"?  What type of authors?  What type of writing?  What type of world view did they have as writers? This is too vague.   There must be more than one such "literary scene."  What distinguishes the literary scene from which he estranged himself from other literary scenes?  'Literary scene' alone without qualification is weasily. 70.107.104.75 22:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent questions.  Where do you suggest we find the answers? Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 22:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another good question, yours.  I don't know.  So, since it cannot be answered, the inclusion of this strange usage reflects a poor standard in the article's redaction. 70.107.104.75 23:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't agree that it's strange at all, it's a pretty common usage and it seems perfectly on point.  Just because we don't know the precise nature and composition of the SF literary scene at the time of Savage's involvement does not mean that it was not a literary scene nor does it mean that we can not describe it as such. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since you are content with it, pleae qualify it.  If it is common usage, explain it.  If it is perfectly on point, tell us the point please.  Do you imply that San Francisco had only one "literary scene?"  There was no other such scene that could qualify as a scene too?  Since there was only one scene, it does not need further explanation?  All other similar such scenes were inferior?  It is not described at all, therefore you cannot say it can be described as such.  A literary scene is a means to an ends, and not an ends; the ends is the literature it promotes.  What were/are the ends of this scene?  67.87.92.56 04:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "From there, he started making trips into San Francisco to hang around the North Beach literary scene."  Perhaps you can find the answers to your questions in the article this quote is taken from. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 16:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  The Salon article!  LOL.  Just because it is referenced, does not make it legitimate or encyclopedic for that matter.  Nothing is communicated. Your defense of the wording is not persuasive.  70.107.104.75 18:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: While you raise some interesting questions, I simply don't agree that you have made a compelling case to remove the material at issue. Gamaliel (Orwellian Cyber hell master) 23:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Literary Scene

message: I listen to his show, probably on average about once per week.  Yet, I've never once heard him proclaim himself a Republican.  He sais repeatedly, and to this day (April of '07), that he is a "registered Independent".  He is also a staunch critic of the Republican Party, not only for the party being too liberal, but even in some instances the party being too conservative on fiscal issues.  One show, in about '05 I'm guessing, he's going at it with a Republican caller over the minimum wage.  Savage was unmistakably the 'liberal' in that particular debate.  
Savage is what he sais, a conservative independent.  So, would the people who keep calling him a Republican reconsider their entries?  Sounds to me like some Republican contributors here are trying to dishonestly forge Savage into their ranks by misrepresenting his American political party affiliation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.164.87.163 (talk) 04:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gamliel is the most active overseer of this article.  There are numerous debates in this talk page about how Savage identifies himself which have yeilded nothing.  It is pretty much established that what the subject says about himself is not relevant to the agenda of the numerous overseers.  As you can see, the article only slimes him.  This statements is going to self destruct. 70.107.104.75 20:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republican???  Says who??? 

message: A bill To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prevent excessive concentration of ownership of the nation’s media outlets, to restore fairness in broadcasting, and to foster and promote localism, diversity, and competition in the media.  Text of the bill in .pdf format
Media Ownership Reform Act of 2005
On 2 May 2007, Micheal Savage used his airwaves to instill in his audience a fear that the liberal congress was out to get him and other "conservative" talkshow hosts.  He went so far as to say he expects to be subpeaned to testify before congress in defense of his own political views, of which are already guaranteed under the first amendment.
Actual headlines from his web site:
"Dems Declare Savage 'Threat to National Security', Want Him Removed From Radio; Using Same Rhetoric as Hitler's National Socialists; see sponsors of Nazi Bill Moving Through Congress( H.R. 3302)"
However, upon reading this bill it has absolutely nothing to do with any on-air personalities, however it does target large communication conglomerates from maintaining ownership of large shares of any given radion market.  This includes television and newsprint as well as AM/FM radio frequencies.
Headlines on the Savage web site all linked to PFD formatted files that were provided by "Insight Magazine" as well as a commentary by the editors of " insightmag.com".  The credentials of this magazine are questionable, but it might be suggested that Insight Magazine, being an ultra-conservative publication might have ties with "The Radio Network", a large communications and entertainment company that might be affected by the outcome of passing and signing into law of H. R. 3302. I myself do not believe that anyone at insightmag.com has ever read the actual text of H.R. 3302 in the last 2 years of its process from committee to full vote on the floor. Not that Micheal Savage would be hurt or silenced in the legal definitions of this law.  Oddly enough, the bill is some 2 years old and seeks to reverse a number of decisions made by the FCC for allowing large markets of radio/TV markets from being owned by 1 person, in order to dictate what is local programming.  For example,  as Hurricane Katrina was approaching the Mississippip Coast, the affected radio stations were run by a service in the midwest and they refused to allow local authorities to use their airwaves to provide local information regarding Hurricane Katrina.  This information would include emergency shelters, evacuation routes, and local conditions, of which a broadcastor in Ohio would know very little about while conditions of the Gulf Coast were under siege by a large-scale hurricane.
Instead, Savage wished his audience to believe and fall for the concept that he created by instilling the bieleif that a liberal congress was out to squash his ability and free speech rights as protected by the first amendment.
In truth, the corporate syndicate that broadcasts the "Savage Nation" to over 300 markets, was most likely very concerned that the ratifying of H. R. 3302 would drastically affect their ability to control and manipulate the airwaves.  Talk Radio Network knew that the entertaining skills of Savage would instill some of his listeners to contact legislative members to not support the passing of H.R. 3302.
In conclussion, it seems even the great independent Micheal Savage is manipulated like a puppet by corporate ownership and syndication powers.  A shame on all for allowing this to happen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.147.36.108 (talk) 03:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Savage and H. R. 3302 

message: I wish people would stop calling this guy Savage.  His name is Weiner.  And since in German, when the "e" precedes the "i", it's pronounced not like an Oscar Mayer "Weener," but rather like "whiner," which is pretty much what he is, in addition to just being a very strange person. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.3.140.30 (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also the point that many of his listeners do not know his real name. I didn't, until I read about it on Wikipedia after hearing him on the radio for a few years. How many people know Madonna's real name? — Loadmaster 22:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia has an established naming convention that deals with this at WP:NCP. — Loadmaster 20:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many listeners know this guy's real name? 

message: The link to "Savage Letter" goes nowhere. Where is the article? 69.181.156.67 18:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to "Savage Letter"

message: Savage has stated that he used to host a radio show that dealt with nutrition on Saturday nights in the New York City area. Maybe someone should insert that into the article, with cited sources. This goes way back to when he still went by his real name. 69.181.156.67 01:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Savage hosted a radio show on nutrition?

message: The article states:
He chose his "nom de voix" in "the Tonga Islands in the 1960s. I stumbled upon the name of a [19th-century] shipwreck who was locally infamous -Charles Savage. His exploits were legendary," he said. "So the name was bouncing around in my head."
However, there is no citation.  This appears to be a quote, so the information must have come from somewhere.  I believe the source of this statement must be listed.  I have never heard this anywhere else. Ursasapien 08:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How This Person Chose the Name "Michael Savage"

message: "Red Diaper Doper Baby"
"That's all"
"It's the lawyers stupid"
"KNEW San Fransicko"
"KNEW San Franfreako"
"One man's opinion"
--BrianB4837 22:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Section on "Savagisms"? 

message: I read the Salon article, but the statement "In the early 1970s, Savage had more liberal political views" seems to be an interpretation, rather than a strict reporting of the article.  I would suggest the word "political" be removed.  The article and those quoted in the article say little regarding his political view.  Rather, they paint a picture of a man who was more liberated, more tolerant of homosexuality, and more involved with people we consider "American liberals" now. Ursasapien 06:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Synthesis?

message: Yesterday, Savage rescinded his support for Romney after learning that Romney referred to gay adoption as being "American." If someone can find a source for that, please put it into the article. 69.181.156.67 22:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rescinding his support of Romney