Let The Angry Men Speak
There was a time when I listened to political talk radio every weekday. I was a political junkie. After a while I stopped listening. I grew tired of the angry tone, the negativism, and the demonization of every person the pundit disagreed with. I realized the sky was not falling, and no longer cared to listen to the fools claiming it was.
I've never been a Ditto-head, as Rush Limbaugh's minions call themselves, and even found it ironic they used a name synonymous with copying. Ditto-heads don't think for themselves, they merely copy what Rush says. I may be 50/50 on his positions, I just can't deal with the partisan hypocrisy. He's not credible. Rush is angry, but he's not the most negative.
I read today that talk show host and author Michael Savage is banned from the U.K. because of his vocal extremist political views. Very interesting! They're banning a man for his speech. I have his book Savage Nation on my bookshelf at home. I read it. I have listened to Michael Savage many times. I think he's nutty, and far too angry-at-the-world for my taste. What really turned me off was his gay-bashing. Savage lives in San Francisco and is vicious in his anti-gay views.
A messenger can kill a message if they deliver it with an angry tone. You don't hear what these men say because you're so turned off by the tone. Michael Savage is guilty-as-charged.
In reading his book, and listening to him on the air, I would find areas of agreement but then think, "If this guy wasn't such as asshole about this, people might take him seriously."
With all that said, I have a problem with any citizen being denied entry into a free nation over his political views. Savage is not alone on Britain's published banned list.
White supremacist Stephen Donald Black, anti-gay preacher Fred Phelps, Hamas parliament member Yunis Al-Astal, and Egyptian cleric Safwat el-Higazi are also banned from entering the UK.
I say let the angry men speak.
The more they talk the more insight we have into the bigoted groups they lead. They reveal themselves and their followers. I think it's better to know who they are than to have them hiding in the shadows. Free speech is for everyone, even those we find abhorrent.
I'm not going to defend Michael Savage, but as far as I know, he hasn't called for the death of gays, or infidels. He calls the Koran a 'book of hate' but does not say we should kill Muslims. How many religious extremists have called for the death of people they don't agree with, us infidels, or the cartoonist portraying Muhammad?
Once they start denying angry men entry, what's to stop a government from expelling citizens of their country who preach hate? That is the slippery slope this ban sets us on, a course best avoided.
We should do what western democracies have always done. We should allow all men and women, left, right, angry or aggrieved.......to express themselves and move freely between free nations. Freedom of speech is more important than the message.
As long as the angry man is not calling for the death of others, as some whack-jobs do, let them speak. At least then we know what they're thinking, we can tune them out, or call out their ignorance, and law enforcement can keep an eye on them.
I've never been a Ditto-head, as Rush Limbaugh's minions call themselves, and even found it ironic they used a name synonymous with copying. Ditto-heads don't think for themselves, they merely copy what Rush says. I may be 50/50 on his positions, I just can't deal with the partisan hypocrisy. He's not credible. Rush is angry, but he's not the most negative.
I read today that talk show host and author Michael Savage is banned from the U.K. because of his vocal extremist political views. Very interesting! They're banning a man for his speech. I have his book Savage Nation on my bookshelf at home. I read it. I have listened to Michael Savage many times. I think he's nutty, and far too angry-at-the-world for my taste. What really turned me off was his gay-bashing. Savage lives in San Francisco and is vicious in his anti-gay views.
A messenger can kill a message if they deliver it with an angry tone. You don't hear what these men say because you're so turned off by the tone. Michael Savage is guilty-as-charged.
In reading his book, and listening to him on the air, I would find areas of agreement but then think, "If this guy wasn't such as asshole about this, people might take him seriously."
With all that said, I have a problem with any citizen being denied entry into a free nation over his political views. Savage is not alone on Britain's published banned list.
White supremacist Stephen Donald Black, anti-gay preacher Fred Phelps, Hamas parliament member Yunis Al-Astal, and Egyptian cleric Safwat el-Higazi are also banned from entering the UK.
I say let the angry men speak.
The more they talk the more insight we have into the bigoted groups they lead. They reveal themselves and their followers. I think it's better to know who they are than to have them hiding in the shadows. Free speech is for everyone, even those we find abhorrent.
I'm not going to defend Michael Savage, but as far as I know, he hasn't called for the death of gays, or infidels. He calls the Koran a 'book of hate' but does not say we should kill Muslims. How many religious extremists have called for the death of people they don't agree with, us infidels, or the cartoonist portraying Muhammad?
Once they start denying angry men entry, what's to stop a government from expelling citizens of their country who preach hate? That is the slippery slope this ban sets us on, a course best avoided.
We should do what western democracies have always done. We should allow all men and women, left, right, angry or aggrieved.......to express themselves and move freely between free nations. Freedom of speech is more important than the message.
As long as the angry man is not calling for the death of others, as some whack-jobs do, let them speak. At least then we know what they're thinking, we can tune them out, or call out their ignorance, and law enforcement can keep an eye on them.