Michael Savage takes on AIPAC and others

[Brian4Liberty]

Regular Savage listeners know that Savage has become anti-war since Obama got into the Whitehouse (he was very anti-war during the Clinton/Serbia years too). This week was interesting. Savage got worked up about Obama firing McCrystal, and blamed AIPAC. He also goes after Andrea (Andy) Mitchell, Alan Greenspan, Chris Matthews, Lyndsey Graham, John McCain...

Here's some segments from this week:

At 1:20, Savage talks about AIPAC:
YouTube - Savage June 24, 2/2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeR1vP6KteA)

Military Industrial Complex/Anti-war:
YouTube - Michael Savage-Why Are We in Afghanistan, Axelrod, Obama! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFxampnf8K4)

At 3:30 - Alan Greenspan, Andrea Mitchell
YouTube - Michael Savage-June 23, 2010 pt.4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc0iZ7Bja4U)

Also around 3:30, more Andy Mitchell and husband:
YouTube - Michael Savage EXPLODES: Obama Administration, McCrystal Resigning, Media!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gpgy9IA4mKE)

[lester1/2jr]

lol he's blaming the jews. now I've heard everything!

[catdd]

You can't blame AIPAC without blaming the US government at the same time. Whatever power they have over policy is given to them by us.
Just shut them off and the hell with the consequences.

[Brian4Liberty]

lol he's blaming the jews. now I've heard everything!

That's collectivist! :p

Seriously, it's a powerful lobby group with a limited number of members. Not everyone of Jewish extraction is a member, or in agreement with everything that particular lobby group advocates. Heck, not everyone who is a member of AIPAC is Jewish!

[WaltM]

he's a classic opportunist, only conservative and anti-war when a Democrat is President, he kisses evangelical ass when he can, then he bashes Jews when he feels its safe

[Brian4Liberty]

he's a classic opportunist, only conservative and anti-war when a Democrat is President, he kisses evangelical ass when he can, then he bashes Jews when he feels its safe

AIPAC <> "Jews"

He's been going after his "red-diaper-doper babies" right from the beginning. Was that "bashing Jews"?

[libertygrl]

lol he's blaming the jews. now I've heard everything!

Let's not get crazy about this. It's the Israeli Lobby - NOT Jewish people in general.

There's an excellent book about it:

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt

One reviewer on Amazon wrote:

This book is stunning. The two authors are prominent political scientists with impeccable credentials, hailing from Harvard and the University of Chicago. They have boldly gone where many of their academic colleagues would fear to tread. Although their conclusions about Israel and its negative influence on American foreign policy will awaken much anxiety, resentment and fury in certain quarters, Walt and Mearsheimer don't seem to care. Why not? They are scientists. They appeal to logic, facts and common sense; and let the conclusions fall where they may.

The writing is calm, dispassionate, thorough. The basic argument is that the extraordinarily high degree of economic, military and diplomatic support given to Israel by the United States cannot be explained or justified by the notion that Israel functions as a strategic asset to the U.S., or that Israel as the "only democracy" amidst a sea of authoritarian neighbors is deserving of special favor for its "shared interests and values". In fact, the authors claim, Israel is more a liability than an asset. During the Cold War, the strategic-value argument had perhaps some plausibility -- but no longer. What has replaced the Soviet menace, as the enemy which the U.S. supposedly needs Israel's help to combat, is Islamic terrorism.

http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277582934&sr=1-1

[heavenlyboy34]

Let's not get crazy about this. It's the Israeli Lobby - NOT Jewish people in general.

There's an excellent book about it:

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt

One reviewer on Amazon wrote:

This book is stunning. The two authors are prominent political scientists with impeccable credentials, hailing from Harvard and the University of Chicago. They have boldly gone where many of their academic colleagues would fear to tread. Although their conclusions about Israel and its negative influence on American foreign policy will awaken much anxiety, resentment and fury in certain quarters, Walt and Mearsheimer don't seem to care. Why not? They are scientists. They appeal to logic, facts and common sense; and let the conclusions fall where they may.

The writing is calm, dispassionate, thorough. The basic argument is that the extraordinarily high degree of economic, military and diplomatic support given to Israel by the United States cannot be explained or justified by the notion that Israel functions as a strategic asset to the U.S., or that Israel as the "only democracy" amidst a sea of authoritarian neighbors is deserving of special favor for its "shared interests and values". In fact, the authors claim, Israel is more a liability than an asset. During the Cold War, the strategic-value argument had perhaps some plausibility -- but no longer. What has replaced the Soviet menace, as the enemy which the U.S. supposedly needs Israel's help to combat, is Islamic terrorism.

http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277582934&sr=1-1

Interesting. Are the authors considered "credible"? The author of "Controversy of Zion" covered similar topics, but has been smeared as an "anti-semite". :p

[Mach]

I stopped listening to him years ago, his is nothing but a political opportunist.

Michael Savage (Michael Alan Weiner)

:D Hey! Michael A. Weiner!

And good try with the Jewish crap, but, he is Jewish..... Michael A. Weiner.

[Brian4Liberty]

I stopped listening to him years ago, his is nothing but a political opportunist.


Aren't they all? Political Entertainers...

[Mach]

Aren't they all? Political Entertainers...

Yup. I guess that's why I don't really listen to any of the others either. That whole Political Entertainers with an agenda thing.

It's very disgusting that that's what the American people have settled with on a daily basis, nothing but a great big commercial to run our country. Look at all of the people that literally base their political and social decisions on an Entertainer$ point of view.

Of course there are exceptions, at least Napolitano sticks to the actual "original paperwork" and doesn't veer off into supporting whoever pays him the most money.

I don't do much TV or Radio Talk anymore, when your brain stops getting washed by them every day you start to clean things up yourself and look around.

[AmericaFyeah92]

Here's to crossing my fingers hoping for an "isolationist" right to emerge under Obama

[lester1/2jr]

that' ll be the first thing that goes whn they get in power

[james1906]

Notice how Harvey Fierstein and Michael Savage have never been in the same place at the same time?

[libertybrewcity]

i don't usually listen to savage. is he a good guy? he claims he "invented the word independent" in the first clip

[james1906]

i don't usually listen to savage. is he a good guy? he claims he "invented the word independent" in the first clip

He just rants about how Italian food isn't as good as it used to be.

[jmdrake]

Michael Savage is a loose cannon. But I give him credit for being the first neocon to come out against the war in Afghanistan. (He'll claim he's against the neocons, but he parrots a lot of their talking points.) The other day I heard him come out against the Bilderbergers and the CFR.

He got one of this facts wrong here though. It was Petraus that brought up the fact that the Israeli - Palestinian conflict stirs anti American sentiment.

[JCF]

i don't usually listen to savage. is he a good guy? he claims he "invented the word independent" in the first clip


He's somewhat of a nationalist that advocates either leaving afghan or bombing the hell out of them instead of "sending our men over there to die". He appeals greatly to white nationalists, I've seen plenty on certain other forums get all giddy over him until they find out that he's a Jew :rolleyes:

Some points :

1. He has had Peter Schiff on his show.

2. Doesn't like Ron Paul because of his Foreign Policy.

3. Actually attacks republicans instead of saying he was against them while they were spending "like drunken liberals".

4. Calls Michele Bachman a real consitutionalist.

5. Attacks Limbaugh, hannity, levin, beck and pretty much everyone other than himself. Calls them water carriers for the Republican party, corporate broadcasters.

YouTube - Michael Savage Attacks Rush Limbaugh and the other Pseudo-Redneck, Fake Conservatives (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hqkJgQteL4)

6. Goes on about how Obama is destroying America and that that we won't last another year.

7. Hates pot, wants to build more prisons, wants to "gas" all those on death row, send all people with a welfare check into worker camps.

I don't know if he serves anyone, I think he's just in it for himself.

---


My honest opinion? Not worth listening to unless you have a soft spot for stories about "the gold ol' days", he doesn't do politics as much as everyone else.

[Brian4Liberty]

i don't usually listen to savage. is he a good guy? he claims he "invented the word independent" in the first clip

He's entertainment. Take him with a grain of salt. Do you like listening to people rant?