What is Digg?341 Comments
- quakerorts, on 01/24/2008, -26/+60This man is JUST PLAIN NUTS! He should date Coulter... as long as they don't breed.
- EvanFromHeaven, on 01/24/2008, -6/+24Nobody's curtailing the Savage's freedom of speech. We just want his advertisers to know what they're paying for, and they are wisely refusing to pay him for his crap anymore. He can go out on the street and scream himself silly -he'll just have to deal with the hate he's causing, instead of hiding behind a corporate microphone.
- pianomahnn, on 01/24/2008, -23/+40Yes, being a hate filled Christian is apparently all the rage these days.
- takamalak, on 01/24/2008, -5/+19His lazy what?
- drunkwally, on 01/24/2008, -6/+20He still has his free speech, he can go down any street corner and yell his head off. Maybe he could start his own nutjob newsletter. There is no such thing as a constitutionally guaranteed radio show spot.
If he gets on the radio and says a lot of stuff that upsets a lot of people, it shouldn't be a surprise they don't want him on the radio anymore. His not being gaged or told he can't say stuff, people don't want to hear that ***** and are telling their sponsors what they think. - strawberry, on 01/24/2008, -12/+25He looks like that Fry guy from Aqua Teen Hunger Force
- sixthchild, on 01/24/2008, -0/+13Actually, he's Jewish.
- mrsdz50, on 01/24/2008, -29/+42This guy's venon is truely repulsive - glad to hear thinking people are not willing to support him.
- inactive, on 01/24/2008, -0/+13He has the right to free speech yes. And those who oppose him have the right to free speech in the form of complaints to his sponsors.
Nobody is trying to pass a law to prevent him from voicing his opinions, if they were, that would be anti-free speech. - Malevolant, on 01/24/2008, -19/+32I really get sick of people throwing around the term "hate speech" when it is none of the above. What Savage is doing is no different than when all of you call out extreme Muslims, no different at all. For all of you to be so hypocritical isn't a surprise but you shouldn't be so disingenuous in your responses. Digg, and the internet as a whole, is supposed to be about freedom and free speech. The reality is Digg is very much anti-free speech unless you are part of the Digg flock, ideology speaking. Calling on advertisers, picketing, boycotting, etc. are all ways in which individuals with alternative viewpoints/ideologies try to silence free speech. If you don;t like something fine, don't listen to it. If enough people don't like something then they will not listen to it and then said product dies. Going around trying to overstate, misrepresent, and use hyperbole, to silence someone you don't agree with and to not let people make their own decisions, as to what is acceptable and what isn't, isn't your job.
100% of people will never agree on anything, but at least leave it to the individual to make up their own mind about things. I realize the majority of digg users like to fall under one umbrella in terms of ideology and also try to force their views on others, but that doesn't work. Silencing opposing views just make you look like narrow-minded, anti-free speech people. More often than not, when a person puts their foot in the mouth, the population reacts in the correct manner. See Michael Richards, etc. for example.
As for Savage- he uses hyperbole as it was intended to be used to illustrate his points. If you have ever listened to him with an open mind you would know he's not racist, xenophobic, etc. He is sick of America being demonized and his is sick of the free ride given to extreme views of Muslims. His view is that America is allowing itself to be bullied by extremists, religiously speaking. I know most digg users are anti-extremist, especially religions, so what the hypocrisy? I realize it's because you see him as a conservative and it's an easy mark, but he's a Bush hater too. he agrees with all of you on that. I listen to him occasionally and I do not agree with half of what he says, but he is right about America selling itself out. He wants to preserve our way of life, not give it away to extremists. The group suing him is just trying to silence his voice of dissent and you people are falling for their b.s. hook, line, and sinker. Wake up and realize that free speech is just that and, in this instance, it's not about hate, it's about being brutally honest of what is happening to our country and he's on your side. He is standing up so you can remain free and keep your way of life. I realize he can be a polarizing figure, but there is some truth in what he says.
You don't have to like or agree with Savage, but if you believe in free speech, it shouldn;t be on a per case basis. It should be across the board without reservation. - kalrhael, on 01/24/2008, -19/+32Why can't people just learn to turn the radio dial if they don't like what's being broadcasted? I don't care of this guy is head of the KKK, learn to change the god damned radio station if you don't like what's on.
- gregfadein, on 01/24/2008, -3/+15I don't think you understand free speech.
The Constitution doesn't guarantee that you have a right to be paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for anything that drools out of your mouth. It just says that the government itself won't impede it. - fantasticFlan, on 01/24/2008, -3/+14Really? Savage is the guy MSNBC fired for telling a caller to get AIDS and die. There's vitriol on the left, but I've never heard anything near this guy.
- Albear89, on 01/24/2008, -17/+28Say what you will. It's still an interesting show. don;t get me wrong, I'm not a right wing hate monger,but it's a good laugh on the way home from work. I think the fight he is taking up with CAIR should also be mentioned. CAIR = terrorist sponsorship.
- Wiggles2, on 01/24/2008, -6/+17nooo-
Are you a parrot that sits in a cage next to a T.V. with Bill O'Relly on 24 hours/day?
It's not completely inadmissible to have some reasoned critique of liberalism, but at least try to sound like you have some ideas of your own. If I wanted to listen to Bill O'Reilly's talking points verbatim, I'd just go and watch his show. - bullcutter, on 01/24/2008, -3/+14He's only influential to people that listen to him. Nobody else gives a rats ass what he thinks.
- kolinkoolface2, on 01/24/2008, -14/+25did anyone see in the article how it said more to go, meaning more radio hosts like him. That is really ironic coming from a group of people constantly pleading for free speech. Last time i checked the 1st amendment clearly states freedom of speech. Anyone that can deem what "Hate Speech" is then saying what speech is in general which then comes to a point where someone is determining what you can and cannot say which is a violation of the first amendment. ***** off, we will say what we want. You don't like it, then do not listen. This is america and we can say what we wish.
Ron Paul '08 - nblsavage, on 01/24/2008, -1/+11What did you say when the Dixie Chicks were slammed by the conservatives? Did you stand up for them?
- nblsavage, on 01/24/2008, -4/+14Free speech isn't free - isn't what you dorks said about the Dixie Chicks?
- espo111, on 01/24/2008, -3/+13oh the same liberal media that won't let Kucinich on TV but will let Giuliani which has lower ratings and no hope of winning?
the "liberal media" myth belongs with santa clause and the easter bunny.... - tman84, on 01/24/2008, -5/+15I'm with you, I listen to him once in a while and think he's much different from Hannity or Rush. He doesn't always talk politics, doesn't agree with the Bush regime. He's very interesting. I don't agree with him n probably 60% of what he says, but its great radio and I can appreciate that.
- sekhui, on 01/24/2008, -0/+10no.
- reuscel, on 01/24/2008, -14/+23Would it be naive of me to think that these kinds of hate-spreading douchebags are finally falling out of favor in our country? Might we see a return to mature and civil political discourse? Probably not, but I sure felt optimistic there for a second.
- sirillium, on 01/24/2008, -22/+30Mr. Savage just tells it like it is. The U.S.A. has lost its way. We are letting the enemy take over under the guise of fairness. What happened to the goal of this country? Why is Mr. Savage not allowed to speak up against an enemy whose goal is removing free speech? He speaks out against corruption, and calls people out for being against freedom...any freedom. He has comments to be made regarding this president, just as much as he does against Islamic oppression.
Don't be a hypocrite and wish him canceled because you don't like what he has to say. Protect free speech, and protect this country. - wizerwon, on 01/24/2008, -1/+9I've listened to Michael Weiner many times, redmonkey, and I find it noteworthy that you, like all reactionary right-wingers, make such widesweeping statements. I also find it strange that Dr Weiner loves to scream about gays, lesbians, Moslems, etc and he lives in San Francisco, a multi-cultural city. If he finds it so objectionable, maybe he should just leave, you know, turn it off.
- OMGIAMTHEMAN, on 01/24/2008, -1/+9what's the real reason? your post doesn't help inform me (not sarcastic)
- OUberLord, on 01/24/2008, -4/+11Ignorance is a cancer too, but you won't see me calling for your removal from the gene pool either.
- inactive, on 01/24/2008, -1/+8Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
- dhughes, on 01/24/2008, -13/+20 Weiner-Savage? lmao with a handle like that no wonder he's cranky.
- Seafea, on 01/24/2008, -2/+9Shouldn't be too tough. It tastes like *****.
- COINTELPROAgent, on 01/24/2008, -5/+12Speaking as a conservative, Savage's constant BS about Bush world conspiracies turned me off a long time ago. A lot of people here on digg might be surprised how much their views are similar to Savage.
- chaosium, on 01/24/2008, -6/+13How is Franken hateful, or in any way comparable to Savage?
I'm not that fond of Garofalo or Rhodes, nor do I listen to their shows so I can't comment on their content. - bullcutter, on 01/24/2008, -1/+7I agree with you actually, but losing advertisers isn't the same thing as somebody "trying to shut him up". The point of the article is, he is slowly shutting himself up.
- isunktheship, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6Frylock, another similarity is that they both have potatoes for brains.
- ianam, on 01/24/2008, -1/+7Well you must cover your ears, since they don't "talk hate" at all, nothing like Savage. Only a hateful Savage supporter would liken the political criticism heard on Air America to Savage's spew.
- 1337Einstein, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6So not wanting to pay someone for being an enormous *****=violation of free speech? Apparently we're all victims of constant rights violations.
- Wiggles2, on 01/24/2008, -1/+6Me: "It's not completely inadmissible to have some reasoned critique of liberalism"
You: "if you think there is ANYTHING "reasoned" about liberalism, then you're naive"
man just kill yourself - vroom101, on 01/24/2008, -2/+7New York Times article...
Boycotted Radio Host Remains Unbowed
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/arts/17sava.html ... - MrNexus, on 01/24/2008, -1/+6Hate knows hate.
- nblsavage, on 01/24/2008, -3/+8Did I say I felt the need to inject my beliefs? I was merely asking a question. Nice projection there.
- chaosium, on 01/24/2008, -2/+7"Would it be naive of me to think that these kinds of hate-spreading douchebags are finally falling out of favor in our country?"
Yes.
"Might we see a return to mature and civil political discourse?"
Never :( - Burrito, on 01/24/2008, -2/+7On December 12, in response to Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize win, Michael Savage said, "90 percent of the people on the Nobel Committee are into child pornography and molestation".[50]
On October 9, 2006, Savage called former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright a "traitor" because the Clinton administration was in office when North Korea bought two nuclear reactors from a Western company in 2000.[41]
In March 2006, Savage drew the ire of the Catholic community when he accused the Catholic Church of breaking federal law by giving assistance to illegal immigrants (in response to statements by Roger Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles calling it "pastoral support").[38] William A. Donohue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, was scheduled to be on the show that day but was refused after he became upset upon hearing Savage's language. Later he responded by saying "what is not fine is Savage's diatribe about the 'greedy pigs' in the Catholic Church and how 'the institution is rotten from the top to the bottom.' He owes all Catholics an apology."[39] On March 28, 2006, Savage encouraged his listeners to burn Mexican flags to counter a pro-immigration group that had burned American flags.[40]
In February 2007, Creative Artists Agency signed Savage to represent him in all media.[42] Within days, however, it was reported that CAA had dropped him in response to remarks that he made regarding another CAA client, Melissa Etheridge.[43]
On his July 5, 2007 radio broadcast, commenting on students' fasting in protest of the lack of immigration reform, Savage said, "I would say, let them fast until they starve to death; then that solves the problem." The San Francisco Board of Supervisors had previously introduced a resolution that commended the student protest. Over a month after the broadcast, the Board of Supervisors introduced a resolution that "condemns the defamatory language used by radio personality Michael Savage against the immigrant community", claiming that Savage "urged the death of those students." The resolution contains a whereas clause noting a community-organized vigil to take place outside the offices of the KNEW radio station on August 15, calling for the "termination" of the The Savage Nation radio program.[44] Savage responded on his radio show and website:
Illiberalism is not only a mental disorder; it is fascist at its core. This schmuck says my comments are "symbolic of hatred and racism." And they want the City to sue me for "symbolism." There is no basis in American Law for such a suit but the larger point is the astonishing hate speech this putz is engaging in. To stop OPINION by threatening legal action is akin to using the power of the State to control thought and speech. This is something out of Kafka and the ex-Soviet Union. Moreover, this illegitimi is working on behalf of a foreign government AGAINST an American Citizen. Does this constitute harassment against me? My attorney will soon answer this question as I ponder suing the City of San Francisco.[45]
Voted on on August 14, 2007, the resolution was one vote short of being passed unanimously by the Board. The city attorney stated that although the resolution did condemn Savage, it did not violate any of his constitutional rights.
In early November 2007, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has called on radio listeners to contact companies that advertise on Savage's program to express their concerns about what they deemed as anti-Muslim bigotry. On his show and website, Savage has countered that CAIR is linked to terrorist organizations. On November 8, 2007 Citrix Systems, Inc. was the first company to pull its advertisements from his show based on the recent comments.[46] On November 15 Office Max followed suit.[47] TrustedID also dropped their sponsorship of The Savage Nation, but according to their CEO this was due to lack of sales and not anything Savage had said.[48] Savage sued the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for its use, on its website, of excerpts from his show. The suit charged CAIR with copyright infringement and alleged that CAIR's "repackaging" of Savage's comments was "deliberately designed to obscure the specific message conveyed by Michael Savage". The excerpts included Savage's characterization of the Qur'an as "a throwback document" and a "book of hate". CAIR called the suit "bizarre, sloppy and baseless".[49] On December 17, the New York Times published an article discussing Michael Savage's struggle with CAIR.[48] In the article, Savage was quoted as saying, “If they are trying to hang me by my own petard, they have no right to use my petard. It’s my petard, not theirs.” - norman619, on 01/24/2008, -2/+7@William:
Ah yes Israel hates Arabs and Muslims. Let's ignore the fact that Arab Muslims have been living in Israel in along side the Jewish people in peace for a very long time. Your words smell a bit like blind ignorant antisemitism to me. - caleb4mj, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5"are we really better off with him off the air?"
Irrelevant. The ONLY reason he's on the air is for business and profit. When your audience and advertisers decide to stop supporting your message, you lose. No freedom of speech will save you from these cold hard facts.
You're free to say whatever you want, just don't expect to get paid for it. - jlungu, on 01/24/2008, -5/+10Exactly ... if you see a problem, ignore it. Then it will just go away.
- sixthchild, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5Do you honestly think slavery would still be legal? This is a stupid conversation to be having here, but you may want to look into the fact that we are one of the only, if not the only, Western countries who had to end slavery through war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compensated_emancipat ... - Timetheos, on 01/25/2008, -0/+4Prove it.
- AdamGeld, on 01/25/2008, -0/+4They can't decide if their advertisements are making them money if they get zero feedback. We are giving them feedback. That is how freedom works.
- gregfadein, on 01/24/2008, -4/+8Neither Michael Weiner nor Ron Paul are Libertarians.
Ron Paul is a paleo-conservative and Michael Weiner is just a *****. - insertcleverid, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4Isn't it conservatives who justify the controversial subject matter of these right-wing idiots by saying that they succeed in the marketplace of ideas? That indeed things are more valued, correct, and positive the more they generate money? Maybe the reality is that while controversy sells, bigotry offends.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 336 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is