Monday, July 25, 2005

Interesting column

This was an interesting column that I read in today's Fishwrapper.
The Savage Nation vs. the Bushbots
Al Franken and the other liberals are probably still wondering why they had such little luck in their efforts to start a talk-radio network to bash George Bush from the left. They didn't consider the obvious explanation. George Bush has his left flank nicely covered. It's on the right that he's weak.

"Bush is melting down our borders and making us into a polyglot nation in which no one speaks the language," says Savage.

"I can't stand listening to people who want me to be a lapdog for Bush," he told me. "We're supposed to be watchdogs, not lapdogs."

I agree with what some of this column says. I listen to Rush in the morning for two hours but I don't particularly like him to be honest. I don't think that his show has much substance. When he was busted for being a drug addict and the liberals went beserk to find some quotes where he had discussed narcotics they could only find a reference when he talked about Kurt Cobain. All those years on the radio and he never talked about drugs? Isn't that an issue inmportant to Americans, conseravtive Americans? He has some interesting sound bites and analysis but he is certainly no debater. I'm not saying that I disagree with what he does say I'm just saying that he doesn't say much.

I listen to Hannity for an hour a day and while he has great guests he does not always press the issue with them if they are Republican big-wigs. He may ask a good question but then accepts a canned answer.

Savage, while over-the-top sometimes has the very basic premise of "language, borders, culture." I like to hear his critizism of Bush when Bush deserves it. It does us no good to elect a Republican and have him not act like one.

If I got to meet the president, which I would consider a great honor, and got to ask him one question on national tv, it would be "why are you allowing/encouraging illegal aliens, who are criminals, to invade our county, destroy our culture, sap our public resources, and victimize our communities?"

I know Savage would ask the same question, Rush would toss him a puff piece.

The talk show host who has the best of all worlds is definitely Lars Larson. During interviews with any and all public officials no matter how big or small he will bring up illegal aliens and then follow through when they give a canned answer. He actually covers issues that affect us here, today, and now rather than argue in the abstract. And he will always break the issue down with flawless logic and examples that any idiot, except liberal idiots, can understand. If you don't understand it's because you don't want to.

http://michaelsavage.com
http://larslarson.com

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Please, Michael Savage has a hundred times the brain power of Lars Larson. Lars is good for local stuff but embarrasses Oregon (sometimes)on his nightly show when he bloviates without having prior knowledge on the issue. He can't debate either because he just hits the button when it gets too hot. His prerogative though, its his show.

Sailor Republica said...

Savage and Lars compliment each other very well.

Now if we could only get Savage to broadcast from Portland again...and get his supporters out to block protesters on Bancroft...it'd be great.

Daniel said...

I would like to see a Talk Fest with Lars, Savage, and Randy Leonard. Ooooh, how I would like to see that.

jwalker said...

I think the difference between lars/savage and Rush is that Rush is a proponent for the Republican party first and foremost. Savage is a proponent for ideology first and foremost. It is just what you are looking for in my opinion.

Sometimes I listen to Rush just to get down the party line, which sometimes is useful. It is better to have watered down Republicans than any democrat if we have to make a choice, which is not much of a choice.

When I want truth, I go to lars or savage. Apples and oranges in my opinion.