Scheuer On Savage

[ButchHowdy]

Interesting interview.

Scheuer said Al Qaeda would love a McCain presidency. His explanation was kind of weird, that they know he has no money left to fight.

Perhaps he was throwing RP a bone?!?

If anyone else listened, please comment . . .

[nick4rp]

Interesting interview.

Scheuer said Al Qaeda would love a McCain presidency. His explanation was kind of weird, that they know he has no money left to fight.

Perhaps he was throwing RP a bone?!?

If anyone else listened, please comment . . .

I heard the whole thing. I believe Scheuer's other book was on Ron Paul's "booklist to Rudy Guiliani", so Scheuer is right on.

The gist is that Al Qaeda would love a McCain win, just because he is seen by their world as another Bush and that reference to no money left, is that Bin Laden is doing to us, that Reagan did to the Soviets...bankrupt us to death.

They want a hawk that will "fight 100 years" till we bankrupt ourselves to our own demise.

The Dems are more apt to pull out sooner, so they wouldn't want that to happen.

Now, my confusion is this, and maybe someone else knows the mystery.

I was once a neocon-warhawk, post 9/11. I was introduced to Ron Paul and eventually, recovered from my neoconism. Slowly, the golfer (rush), the leprechaun (O'reilly), and wallbanger (Hannity), I got tired of listening to. Savage, was more "independent" than the rest, but I think, his Jewish heritage has kept him hawkish about the war. I really thought he'd join the RP revolution, but my theory is, at the time, he was pondering running for the Presidency. I think he was toying with the idea and I think, that really, its more a question of ego than values, on why he doesn't like RP. RP "stole his thunder", IMO, and that is why he's been not throwing his support. That is the only thing I can think of, unless he's also got Clearchannel gagging him like the rest of talk radio.

I dunno, because I've been keeping an eye on pro-Ron Paul folks like Peter Schiff and this Scheuer guy. Watch this Glenn Beck interview of Peter Schiff (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es2SZ1Z2lW8" target="_blank), and notice the answer Glenn Beck makes after Schiff gives a tirade on why Ron Paul is the "only guy" who's got it right. Beck just gives a stare and "uh-huh".

Shocking. Schiff just basically dropped a "nuke" and all you can say is "uh-huh"?

Its the same response I hear on other neocon radio hosts. To me, its like Ron Paul is Kryptonite to these guys, yet, when the stock market goes down, who do they run to for an interview? Ron Paul. Amazing.

Back to Savage, I don't get it. Scheuer basically said everything along the Ron Paul platform on how we should deal with non-interventionism and yet, Savage says "I basically agree with you" yet he rips Ron Paul.

What is it? Is there some concerted conspiracy to just ignore Ron Paul? To me, it sure seems that way with the way people respond, yet others are not ignored. I don't get it. Anyone got a good explaination?

Especially Savage, he's kind of the last really honest guys that is "independent" of these Bushbots, but this is his black mark...ignoring Ron Paul I mean. Other than that, he's been right on with stuff like Bear Stearns and Spitzer theories.

Anyone got any say on this? :confused:

[nate895]

All I have to say is that I use to listen to him until I was enlightened by the Ron Paul Revolution.

[SWATH]

He's a gatekeeper. He acknowledges the NWO and calls the owner of News Corp. Rupert "Moloch" Murdoch, but then in a perverse twist says that Islamo-Fascists are behind the NWO and that Bush is our way to fight back the global NWO takeover of Islamo-fascists trying to impose Sharia Law on us as the globalists demand.

In my opinion he is red herring bait. Albeit more sophisticated than you average shit eating grinner Sean Hannity.
http://www.hannity.com/images/g-header.jpg

[nate895]

He's a gatekeeper. He acknowledges the NWO and calls the owner of News Corp. Rupert "Moloch" Murdoch, but then in a perverse twist says that Islamo-Fascists are behind the NWO and that Bush is our way to fight back the global NWO takeover of Islamo-fascists trying to impose Sharia Law on us as the globalists demand.

In my opinion he is red herring bait. Albeit more sophisticated than you average shit eating grinner Sean Hannity.
http://www.hannity.com/images/g-header.jpg

He does say that Bush is a part of it. He thinks that we don't fight them enough, and that we should be at war with all of Islam, basically.

[New York For Paul]

He's a gatekeeper. He acknowledges the NWO and calls the owner of News Corp. Rupert "Moloch" Murdoch, but then in a perverse twist says that Islamo-Fascists are behind the NWO and that Bush is our way to fight back the global NWO takeover of Islamo-fascists trying to impose Sharia Law on us as the globalists demand.

In my opinion he is red herring bait. Albeit more sophisticated than you average shit eating grinner Sean Hannity.
http://www.hannity.com/images/g-header.jpg

Globalism/global elites really can't coexist with Islamic fundamentalism.

Doesn't Sharia law call for a different set of banks with very little interest charged?


Here is the deal with Savage. He probably disagrees with Ron Paul on the drug issue. Savage talks about the danger of drugs all the time. He would view Ron Paul as threatening the country with a change certain drug laws. However, Savage doesn't want to see non violent people sitting in prison for long periods of time either for violating drug laws.

While Savage may agree with Scheuer about the war in Iraq, Savage wants to vigorously defend against Islamic terrorism. The debate is over how best to contain Islamic terrorists. Savage may be unconfortable with some of Paul's views about non intervention everywhere in the world.

[Nirvikalpa]

Savage. Hah.

I used to listen to that man daily, because my father loved the guy and we both generally thought he was a Conservative. That was until he said McCain was, and a I quote, "82% conservative."

Then I realized he was smoking something. As I said in my blog:

"And Michael Savage… whoa. He says McCain is 82% conservative. Where did he pull that number from (don’t answer - I don’t want to know)? Obviously he has failed to read these few things about his friend, John McCain: McCain praises illegal immigration rallies, McCain would vote against Bush tax cuts AGAIN if given a chance, his flip-flopping views on the Second Amendment, and, of course, flip-flopping on abortion. Although, like McCain, Savage is up to his head in money, so what does he care if his candidate doesn’t support the tax cuts? He takes a vacation day almost once every week (his job is strenuous, I’m sure - I mean being a radio talk show host and all *scoffs*). But one of the main points I’m making is this; Dr. Savage was a man I highly respected, I still do. But he flip-flops as well. The same time McCain was praising the immigration rallies, Dr. Savage was calling all illegals out, because some were expected to rally outside of HIS station. Dr. Savage was pissed off, and upset. Does anybody but me remember that?"

[apropos]

Savage says "I basically agree with you" yet he rips Ron Paul.

Savage has been ripping Paul? I haven't listened to his show in a few months, but I remember that Savage was not even mentioning the name on the air. Heh, once I heard him talk about the strengths of Duncan Hunter's campaign, and as time went by with no mention of Paul whatsoever, it was as if he was purposefully not mentioning RP. If he was aware of Hunter, he would have to be aware of Paul. Sometimes I wonder if Savage is a "safety valve" myself. If you pay attention to what he says from month to month, it really becomes hard to take him seriously.

[New York For Paul]

Savage did lead the fight against amnesty. Savage's motto is "Borders, Language and Culture." He wants to preserve it and is a nationalist.

However, that doesn't mean that Savage will agree with Ron Paul on every thing. They happen to agree on over fifty per cent of the issues.

Savage is against stupidly fought wars. So he is highly critical of Iraq and sometimes advocates withdrawal out of frustration with the whole situation. He hates Haliburton.

However, he is not afraid to use force around the world.

Savage probably thinks at this point, we were better off leaving Sadam in there to fight against Iran and stay out of the area. Let those two counties go at it and spend more time worrying about the United States and securing the border, defending the culture and defending English language.

He probably believes that the President should use the presidency as a bully pulpit especially promoting moral values which would help preserve the culture. Savage would disagree with Ron Paul's approach to being a hands off type of president in terms of using it to promote a more moral culture.

[Flirple]

Anyone have a link to the Savage interview?

[wgadget]

I heard the whole thing. I believe Scheuer's other book was on Ron Paul's "booklist to Rudy Guiliani", so Scheuer is right on.

The gist is that Al Qaeda would love a McCain win, just because he is seen by their world as another Bush and that reference to no money left, is that Bin Laden is doing to us, that Reagan did to the Soviets...bankrupt us to death.

They want a hawk that will "fight 100 years" till we bankrupt ourselves to our own demise.

The Dems are more apt to pull out sooner, so they wouldn't want that to happen.

Now, my confusion is this, and maybe someone else knows the mystery.

I was once a neocon-warhawk, post 9/11. I was introduced to Ron Paul and eventually, recovered from my neoconism. Slowly, the golfer (rush), the leprechaun (O'reilly), and wallbanger (Hannity), I got tired of listening to. Savage, was more "independent" than the rest, but I think, his Jewish heritage has kept him hawkish about the war. I really thought he'd join the RP revolution, but my theory is, at the time, he was pondering running for the Presidency. I think he was toying with the idea and I think, that really, its more a question of ego than values, on why he doesn't like RP. RP "stole his thunder", IMO, and that is why he's been not throwing his support. That is the only thing I can think of, unless he's also got Clearchannel gagging him like the rest of talk radio.

I dunno, because I've been keeping an eye on pro-Ron Paul folks like Peter Schiff and this Scheuer guy. Watch this Glenn Beck interview of Peter Schiff (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es2SZ1Z2lW8" target="_blank), and notice the answer Glenn Beck makes after Schiff gives a tirade on why Ron Paul is the "only guy" who's got it right. Beck just gives a stare and "uh-huh".

Shocking. Schiff just basically dropped a "nuke" and all you can say is "uh-huh"?

Its the same response I hear on other neocon radio hosts. To me, its like Ron Paul is Kryptonite to these guys, yet, when the stock market goes down, who do they run to for an interview? Ron Paul. Amazing.

Back to Savage, I don't get it. Scheuer basically said everything along the Ron Paul platform on how we should deal with non-interventionism and yet, Savage says "I basically agree with you" yet he rips Ron Paul.

What is it? Is there some concerted conspiracy to just ignore Ron Paul? To me, it sure seems that way with the way people respond, yet others are not ignored. I don't get it. Anyone got a good explaination?

Especially Savage, he's kind of the last really honest guys that is "independent" of these Bushbots, but this is his black mark...ignoring Ron Paul I mean. Other than that, he's been right on with stuff like Bear Stearns and Spitzer theories.

Anyone got any say on this? :confused:

Yep, I wonder the same thing. It's mind-bogglingly obvious that Ron Paul is anathema. The reason? I have no idea....

Any investigative journalists that would like to take this one up?

[SilentBull]

In my opinion Savage is controlled by the CFR. He's one of their agents whose job is to appear to be against them. It's one of the strategies that they use.

To spot these kind of people you just have to watch what they do when a real solution to the problems they complain about, actually appears; like RON PAUL!

When these people ignored or attached Ron Paul, it became obvious that they were never serious about fixing the problems they complain about. That's the key. that's how you spot them. I used to respect Savage. He's a fake!

[nate895]

Savage. Hah.

I used to listen to that man daily, because my father loved the guy and we both generally thought he was a Conservative. That was until he said McCain was, and a I quote, "82% conservative."

Then I realized he was smoking something. As I said in my blog:

"And Michael Savage… whoa. He says McCain is 82% conservative. Where did he pull that number from (don’t answer - I don’t want to know)? Obviously he has failed to read these few things about his friend, John McCain: McCain praises illegal immigration rallies, McCain would vote against Bush tax cuts AGAIN if given a chance, his flip-flopping views on the Second Amendment, and, of course, flip-flopping on abortion. Although, like McCain, Savage is up to his head in money, so what does he care if his candidate doesn’t support the tax cuts? He takes a vacation day almost once every week (his job is strenuous, I’m sure - I mean being a radio talk show host and all *scoffs*). But one of the main points I’m making is this; Dr. Savage was a man I highly respected, I still do. But he flip-flops as well. The same time McCain was praising the immigration rallies, Dr. Savage was calling all illegals out, because some were expected to rally outside of HIS station. Dr. Savage was pissed off, and upset. Does anybody but me remember that?"

The American Conservative Union gave him that rating. Of course, according to them Ron Paul also has an 82% rating (lifetime, 76% up to 2007).

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Interesting interview.

Scheuer said Al Qaeda would love a McCain presidency. His explanation was kind of weird, that they know he has no money left to fight.

Perhaps he was throwing RP a bone?!?

If anyone else listened, please comment . . .

Sheuer looks like he's always constipated lol. How's his book?

[RSLudlum]

Anyone have a link to the Savage interview?

ditto

[nbruno322]

yes a link would be very good

[RSLudlum]

Found the interview here:

March 25th
Talk Radio Network (http://www.talkradionetwork.com/premiumstream;jsessionid=C5358C6B923407E07C8FA0E92 CF52C10?dispid=304&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanN wP3BpZD0zMDYwJnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoY XJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzA0JnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT05MA==)

[angelatc]

Savage. Hah.

I used to listen to that man daily, because my father loved the guy and we both generally thought he was a Conservative. That was until he said McCain was, and a I quote, "82% conservative."

Then I realized he was smoking something. As I said in my blog:

"And Michael Savage… whoa. He says McCain is 82% conservative. Where did he pull that number from (don’t answer - I don’t want to know)? Obviously he has failed to read these few things about his friend, John McCain: McCain praises illegal immigration rallies, McCain would vote against Bush tax cuts AGAIN if given a chance, his flip-flopping views on the Second Amendment, and, of course, flip-flopping on abortion. Although, like McCain, Savage is up to his head in money, so what does he care if his candidate doesn’t support the tax cuts? He takes a vacation day almost once every week (his job is strenuous, I’m sure - I mean being a radio talk show host and all *scoffs*). But one of the main points I’m making is this; Dr. Savage was a man I highly respected, I still do. But he flip-flops as well. The same time McCain was praising the immigration rallies, Dr. Savage was calling all illegals out, because some were expected to rally outside of HIS station. Dr. Savage was pissed off, and upset. Does anybody but me remember that?"

I suspect that number comes from his over-all voting record. Which means that if he voted for the war he voted conservative. Which means the number is wrong. It should be 82% Republican.

[michaelwise]

In my opinion Savage is controlled by the CFR. He's one of their agents whose job is to appear to be against them. It's one of the strategies that they use.

To spot these kind of people you just have to watch what they do when a real solution to the problems they complain about, actually appears; like RON PAUL!

When these people ignored or attached Ron Paul, it became obvious that they were never serious about fixing the problems they complain about. That's the key. that's how you spot them. I used to respect Savage. He's a fake!Yeah. It's the same when a solution to Hillary comes along they introduce Rush's Operation kayos, as opposed to Hannity's Stop Hillary Express. First they want to get rid of Hillary, then when the Obama solution looks like he will take her out, Operation Kayos is supposed to keep her in. You see, it's that four years of Clinton talk radio content that they will lose out on if Hillary loses. The Obama programming content really is not all that interesting. I can just see talk radio ratings drop like a rock if Hillary loses.

[RSLudlum]

Damn good and fair interview, Scheuer even goes so far as stating that he fears another terrorist attack is eminent and our own gov't will turn on us instead of going after the attackers bc. we, the American citizens are more vulnerable and ignorantly myopic concerning history in general.

He also stated that bin Laden said American Gov't and Media will impode upon itself, ultimately destroying civil liberties in the US and bringing her to her knees.

Just goes to show: Never underestimate your enemy, even if the enemy is yourself.



edit: Anybody know how large of an audience Savage has?

[ButchHowdy]

Damn good and fair interview, Scheuer even goes so far as stating that he fears another terrorist attack is eminent and our own gov't will turn on us instead of going after the attackers bc. we, the American citizens are more vulnerable and ignorantly myopic concerning history in general.

He also stated that bin Laden said American Gov't and Media will impode upon itself, ultimately destroying civil liberties in the US and bringing her to her knees.

Just goes to show: Never underestimate your enemy, even if the enemy is yourself.



edit: Anybody know how large of an audience Savage has?

Savage himself thinks he has 10 million listeners.

[Broadlighter]

What is it? Is there some concerted conspiracy to just ignore Ron Paul? To me, it sure seems that way with the way people respond, yet others are not ignored. I don't get it. Anyone got a good explaination?

Especially Savage, he's kind of the last really honest guys that is "independent" of these Bushbots, but this is his black mark...ignoring Ron Paul I mean. Other than that, he's been right on with stuff like Bear Stearns and Spitzer theories.

Anyone got any say on this?

If you've been listening to Michael Savage for any length of time, as I have, you'd know that Savage will find a way to disparage anyone who he actually agrees with.

He does this with callers. Sometimes he treats callers who disagree with him with more respect. In fact, if a liberal calls in and gets all hysterical, Savage will play very calm and rational with him. Other times, Savage goes ballistic on callers who echo his sentiments. The guy is a real piece of work. Sometimes I wonder if he's really a liberal who's putting on an act. He may have stayed up one too many nights in the 80's watching Wally George on cable.

Savage only cares about his audience. He could give a hoot about any real presidential candidate. Yeah, borders, language and culture - Right!

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Savage himself thinks he has 10 million listeners.

At least 20 million. Maybe even 50. Billion. 50 billion.

[spiteface]

I wasn't aware that some people still don't realize Savage's show is an act.

[Flirple]

Found the interview here:

March 25th
Talk Radio Network (http://www.talkradionetwork.com/premiumstream;jsessionid=C5358C6B923407E07C8FA0E92 CF52C10?dispid=304&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanN wP3BpZD0zMDYwJnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoY XJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzA0JnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT05MA==)

Thanks!

[BigTimeMoe]

I listened to the interview on the way home. I guess Scheur was expecting to have his head taken off because he was VERY polite with all the "sir's" and "Mr. Savage's" he was using. Savage seemed to pretty much agree with almost everything this guy was saying, which thouroughly P***ED me off! This guy's radio show has got to be fake or something! There he was agreeing with the major points of RP's take on the issues yet just a few months ago could barely utter Dr. Paul's name without going into a tirade against him! I was expecting Savage to let this guy make a point and then chew him up about it - that never happened. What gives with Savage? I didn't get to listen to the entire interview though - did they stay civil with each other?

[Just Come Home]

I wish there was a site called "michaelscheueraudio.com" like with www.ronpaulaudio.com

[ButchHowdy]

I listened to the interview on the way home. I guess Scheur was expecting to have his head taken off because he was VERY polite with all the "sir's" and "Mr. Savage's" he was using. Savage seemed to pretty much agree with almost everything this guy was saying, which thouroughly P***ED me off! This guy's radio show has got to be fake or something! There he was agreeing with the major points of RP's take on the issues yet just a few months ago could barely utter Dr. Paul's name without going into a tirade against him! I was expecting Savage to let this guy make a point and then chew him up about it - that never happened. What gives with Savage? I didn't get to listen to the entire interview though - did they stay civil with each other?

Scheuer mentioned the dilemma caused by the Christian Zionist camp, which Savage said he is part.

As one poster said, Savage is faithful to his Jewish roots. This is fine if one can distinguish Jewishness from Zionism.

It was civil throughout but I believe Savage had great respect for a fellow author and a man of Scheuer's resume.

[Broadlighter]

I listened to the interview on the way home. I guess Scheur was expecting to have his head taken off because he was VERY polite with all the "sir's" and "Mr. Savage's" he was using. Savage seemed to pretty much agree with almost everything this guy was saying, which thouroughly P***ED me off! This guy's radio show has got to be fake or something! There he was agreeing with the major points of RP's take on the issues yet just a few months ago could barely utter Dr. Paul's name without going into a tirade against him! I was expecting Savage to let this guy make a point and then chew him up about it - that never happened. What gives with Savage? I didn't get to listen to the entire interview though - did they stay civil with each other?


Read my post above and replace Ron Paul with Michael Scheur. Michael Savage always treats his on-air guests cordially and respectfully. He doesn't get into the face of someone he's sitting with in studio. However, when the guest is not their, he'll go on his tirade and rants about the guest's positions. He'll do the same for callers who support the guest's positions.