Welcome by Scoobie Davis of Scoobie Davis Online
This site was created to assess the claims made in the Michael Savage's book, The Savage Nation: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Borders, Language, and Culture.

Note: After the main posts, there is a section of 2009 updates.

The Unholy Alliance Behind The Publication of The Savage Nation: How A Christian Publisher Made A Deal With The Devil
The Savage Nation is a scabrous book by a man who is a nutcase, a quack and a virulent hatemonger. How The Savage Nation was published is a compelling (and sad) story. WorldNetDaily Books, a subsidiary of Thomas Nelson Publishing, a Christian publishing house that publishes Bibles and various Christian books, published The Savage Nation. Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily, a web site of supposed conservative opinion, created WorldNetDaily Books. In reality, WorldNetDaily is an internet journal of misanthropy and anti-intellectualism (just the other day, WND had an interview defending creationism). Farah is a fraud and a dirty tricks operative posing as a journalist (scroll down to the post on front groups). Farah’s WND is not much better; it is revealing that many of its writers also have a problem with the truth (e.g., Ann Coulter, John Hagee, and Jerry Falwell). Didn’t the Bible say something about not bearing false witness against thy neighbor? For that matter what about the biblical prohibition against stealing? Falwell made a lot of money fleecing his flock with his phony infomercial with con artist Patrick Matrisciana, whom Farah declared under oath was “a good man, with a good heart -- who has poured his creative talents into a selfless pursuit of the truth.”

In fact, when Matrisciana, the author the of the infamous Clinton Chronicles video was sued successfully by two law enforcement officers who were libeled in one of Matrisciana’s other anti-Clinton conspiratorial videos, Farah served as an expert witness and promptly perjured himself when he wrote in his affidavit that “the producers of the video acted well within the confines of accepted journalistic standards and practices.” Here is the truth about Matrisciana and his libel case. I find it funny that Bill O’Reilly called Hillary Clinton a liar when she claimed that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy to destroy her husband with libels and dirty tricks. O’Reilly’s charge against Senator Clinton is refuted by the history of Farah, the man who gave Mr. No-Spin a fat paycheck for his WND column. Also, Fox colleague Sean Hannity has a cozy relationship with fellow Scaife operative Christopher Ruddy.

Make no mistake; Thomas Nelson has every right to collect its thirty pieces of silver for aligning itself with Farah and WND and publishing trash like The Savage Nation. However, Thomas Nelson Publishing wants to have its bread buttered on both sides; it can’t simultaneously profit from charlatans like Farah and call itself a Christian company. Therefore, I am asking people to contact Louetta Sayne of Thomas Nelson at LSayne@ThomasNelson.com 1) Ask her why her company would do business with a mercenary con artist like Farah; 2) Ask why she would publish a racist kook like Michael Savage; 3) Ask her why a company that claims to be based on biblical values would make money from these moral lepers. It’s important.

Savage Racism
I previously noted that in Michael Savage’s view, Trent Lott’s endorsement of Strom Thurmond’s 1948 overtly pro-Jim Crow Dixiecrat presidential candidacy were "innocent comments" but that the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who voiced opposition to the comments were "a lynch mob"—-even though it was Thurmond’s campaign that opposed anti-lynching laws.

Were Savage’s comments anomalous? Hardly. The full title of the book is The Savage Nation: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Borders, Language, and Culture. Protecting our borders is important—especially in the age of terrorism. However, Savage appeals to nativist thought on his radio show. The Savage Nation is no different. Savage wants to create an impression with his readers that “Private Ryan’s grandson is in the grandstands, cheering, as his land is being overrun by a flood of illiterate immigrants”(p. 125). Here are a few excerpts from the book:

When Savage was recounting an experience he had in San Francisco: “Just as we were crossing the crosswalk, a cab tried to cut us off and almost killed six of us. I naturally turned around and screamed at the driver, ‘Go back to where you came from,’ and that type of thing. He was a swarthy Middle Easterner, but I couldn’t have cared less.” (p. 13)

Savage referred to The National Council of La Raza as “a racist group.” He called The Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund “an anti-American racist group.” He called The NAACP Legal Defense Fund “an anti-white pressure group.” (p. 189)

In chapter 7, titled “Immigrants and Epidemics: TB, Anyone?” Savage makes the following comments:

“President Bush should declare: Middle Eastern immigrants can no longer leave America without a thorough examination by the FBI. You come in nice and easy, and we didn’t say a word. But you’re not getting out. That’s all. You want to leave? Go to the FBI. We’ll let you out in a few years” (p. 133).

“Maybe you think I’m paranoid when I say we must not allow immigrants to come here and impose their cultural-trappings on us, rather than respect the American culture. Fine. You’re entitled to be wrong. The next time you’re in your backyard grilling hot dogs, don’t be surprised if your Korean neighbor is actually grilling his dog. That’s the way things are done in Korea” (p. 128, italics in original).

REALITY: As a resident of the Koreatown section of Los Angeles, I can attest to the dearth of dog barbecues. If there is any consumption of dogs in K-Town, it is done covertly. The Korean-Americans in LA overwhelmingly respect the law as well as the rights and feelings of others.

Also, in his attempt to portray the left as soft on terrorism, Savage picks on the NAACP. Savage titled a sub-chapter, “IF THE NAACP HAD EXISTED IN WWII” (apparently Savage was unaware that the NAACP has been around since 1909, an error that SummaryOpinions.com also noticed).

Analysis: Savage, like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, has gotten away with saying racist statements. What a pity.

Isn’t It Ironic?

Whenever I listen to Savage’s show, it’s as if I am watching a film in which the words of the actors are incongruent with their objective circumstances because they lack information that the audience possesses—a situation called dramatic irony. I had given the previous example of when Savage referred to Trent Lott’s speech in which he longed for a Strom Thurmond presidency as being only “innocent comments” and then referred to the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who dared to criticize Lott as “a lynch mob.” It seems to be lost on Savage that the 1948 Thurmond campaign had the goal of preventing the passing of anti-lynching laws in the South.

I was fortunate enough to listen to Savage’s show yesterday (yesterday I had mentioned how I found Savage’s show too repulsive to listen to; I forced myself to listen—the sacrifices I make for my readers). After listening to his 1/6/03 show, I reached a conclusion: Savage is a complete whackjob. Let me give one example: when Savage was discussing the most recent homicide bombings in Israel with a caller named Kurt and after explaining why “homicide bomber” is a more apt term that “suicide bomber,” he went on a progressively incoherent rant:

You know what’s disturbing, Kurt? It’s that the radical left-wing media—which is all of them—actually have the audacity to give the names of the human scum who blow themselves up. They’re not human. They’re lower than human clones...I’ll tell you the names of the humans. Here are the names of the humans who were blown up by the human scum yesterday...

Savage then read the list of the victims in the bombing. After Savage read the list, he screamed the following diatribe:

I may as well be reading you a death list from Hitler’s death camps. Have a nice day, moron. You’re the ones who did it. You liberals are the descendants of Adolf Hitler, only you don’t know it. You’re the most dangerous people on planet Earth. I am your enemy. I am your worst nightmare. I will expose you. I know who you are and I know you’re suicidal and I’m going to expose you until this government acts finally to stop you. I am not kidding you. I’m telling it as it is.

Don’t ask me what he’s talking about—I’m just the transcriber. More ironic were the comments right after this rant full of non-sequiturs: Savage went to another caller:

SAVAGE: San Francisco. Alex, you’re on the Savage Nation.

CALLER ALEX: I think the reason why you do so well on radio—as well as most conservatives—because you exude and encourage the traditional American values and that’s one of the reasons why you won me over...

Michael Savage on Front Groups

Front n. a person or organization serving as a cover for subversive or illegal activities.

In Michael Savage’s book The Savage Nation, he makes some odd charges against various groups. For instance, Savage uses the term “radical front group” to describe The League of Women Voters and The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (p. 187). When such a serious accusation is made against an organization, the burden rests with the accuser to let us know who or what is behind the alleged front. Savage leaves this out altogether—apparently Savage knows that his audience is comprised of people who aren’t concerned with such matters.

For the benefit of those not familiar with the concept of front groups and how they operate, let me give a textbook example of a front group that is close to Savage: The Western Journalism Center (WJC). WJC is headed by Joseph Farah who also runs WorldNetDaily (which published The Savage Nation). In its heyday in the 1990’s, WJC was a Scaife-subsidized front group disguised as a journalistic organization. It engaged in a series of dirty tricks; the best known of WJC’s dirty tricks was its full-page newspaper ads that supported “reporter” Christopher Ruddy’s error-laden conspiracy theories regarding the “mysterious death” of Vince Foster, a favorite paranoid delusion that has obsessed Scaife (60 Minutes investigated Ruddy’s “reporting” on Foster’s death and exposed Ruddy as a fraud; even Ann Coulter referred to Ruddy’s book on the matter as a “conservative hoax book”). Trudy Lieberman wrote a great article about the incestuous echo chamber that Scaife and Farah created in order to give legs to Ruddy’s smears. Lieberman quotes Farah: “We can reach key legislators, key journalists, key radio talk show hosts...It's an easy, inexpensive way to make sure Chris Ruddy's work just doesn't appear in Pittsburgh and just die."

WJC also used similar tactics in an attempt to give credence to the discredited stories of the Arkansas troopers who had been Bill Clinton’s bodyguards. Here was what happened: The troopers were paid by Scaife to tell lies to a “reporter” (David Brock) from a Scaife-funded journal (The American Spectator); in order to give credibility to this dirty tricks operation, a Scaife-funded front group (the Western Journalism Center) disguised as a journalistic organization give a “journalism award” to Brock for his “reporting.” In addition, Scaife-beneficiary Ruddy sold tapes of one of the trooper’s allegations. Ironically, after Brock came clean and repudiated the Troopergate dirty tricks operation (years after the troopers admitted they were lying for pay), Farah’s reaction was to treat the discredited allegations by the troopers as established fact and accused Brock of mendacity. It is not only Farah who is citing the troopers years after their stories were shown to be false. Recently, in an attempt to provide cover for Trent Lott, Sean Hannity repeated charges by one of the discredited troopers that Bill Clinton used the “N” word. This answers Savage’s question about why left-wing audiences don’t support talk radio. Answer: we don’t like being lied to.

Scary

Here is Savage’s satirical(?) take on Al Gore’s supposed agenda:

Okay, we all know it’s not about Al Goreleone [sic], head of the Goreleone Crime Syndicate. Gore, we must remember, is "his own man." No, our concern is about his agenda. In fact, I recently imagined a highly classified document from Al’s personal journal which spelled out what America might anticipate with Al Gore in the White House.

GORE’S CONTRACT AGAINST AMERICA

1. Homosexuals in the military and homosexual marriage.
2. Affirmative action, or The Fairness for Dummies Act
3. Reparations for non-slaves by non-slaveholders
4. Hate-crime laws aimed at straight, white males
5. Racial profiling laws, aimed at straight, white police
6. A United Nations tax or a world tax
7. Free prescription drugs not only for the elderly but also for AIDS patients
8. Delegitimizing the Boy Scouts, or The Fairness to Predators Act
9. Outlawing homeschooling, or The Freedom from Learning Act
10. Arrest [sic], ban, or rewrite the authentic Bible as a hate book
11. Mandatory application of Ritalin to any child with spunk, or The Security for Children Act
12. Complete elimination of borders with Mexico, or, The Fairness to Latinos Act
13. Partial-birth abortion or infanticide and the sale of baby body parts, or The Senior Citizen Life Extension Act
14. Increased license for Hollywood’s violence and pornography, or The Freedom of Arts Act
15. Socialized medicine and a national health plan, or The Freedom from Bad Behavior Act
16. The No Limits on Lawsuits Act
17. Mandatory suicide for sick seniors, or The Saving Social Security Act
18. The Fairness in Talk Radio Act, i.e., the end of talk radio
19. The end of the Electoral College and the congressional redistricting of America to ensure that never again will the Demoncats [sic] be threatened, or The One Dunce, One Vote Act
20. The complete seizing of all guns, or The Freedom from the Second Amendment Act
21. The abolition of our existing Constitution or The Freedom From Freedom Act

If this were intended to humorous, there’s one problem: there are no punch lines. In order to be good satire, something has to remotely reflect the target of ridicule. Except for perhaps affirmative action and gays in the military, there’s nothing in this agenda that Gore even remotely supports. It’s just invective word salad. I suspect item two was included just as an excuse for Savage to make a racist insult. Some of the alleged parts of Gore’s agenda don’t make any sense such as item 19; elimination of the Electoral College and congressional redistricting would do nothing to ensure that Democrats will never have their power threatened. Some agenda items contradict others—e.g., Savage seems to think that Gore is in favor of sacrificing babies to extend the lives of the sick elderly (item 13) but also that Gore is in favor getting rid of these same elderly sick people (item 17) AND giving them free prescription drugs (item 7). Which is it?

I realize this guy isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I expect some internal consistency. Where were the book editors? Oops. I just realized that the publisher is WorldNetDaily.

Michael Savage’s Quackery and Frivolous Lawsuits

In the book Savage Nation, one of Michael Savage’s many whipping boys are trial lawyers (scroll up to my previous post and look at item 16 of what Savage in his fantasy world believes is Al Gore’s agenda). Savage also bashes trial lawyers on his radio show for being excessively litigious. It seems that Savage doesn’t practice what he preaches because he was part of one of the most frivolous lawsuits in California history. I posted an article on it on HorowitzWatch because Savage used one of David Horowitz’s front groups to waste taxpayer dollars on his silly lawsuit (it was against the University Of California at Berkeley). Also, when I was doing research, I discovered that Savage wrote some quack medicine books under his birth name Michael A. Weiner. This is surreal.

UPDATES: Here's a post I wrote on Savage and racism. Also, I wrote about the feud between Savage and an equally nutty radio competitor, Mark Levin. Also, I have a post about Savage's pattern of frivolous lawsuits (against the University of California, against DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, and his threatened suit against British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith for putting him on a list of people banned from the United Kingdom.

Addendum: Rush Limbaugh Links
1) Media Matters for America monitors Limbaugh and has an updated page on Limbaugh.
2. I have several informative posts on my main web site that give a lot of information about Limbaugh: 1) A compendium of hateful statements by Limbaugh; 2)I have posts on Limbaugh's virulent racism, here and here; 3) My article on Limbaugh's drug problem.
3. Limbaugh denigration of veteran's military service: 1) Around the same time that the 2000 Bush campaign was orchestrating the whisper campaign that John McCain's POW experience made him mentally unbalanced, Limbaugh has a parody of The Caine Mutiny casting John McCain was the paranoid Captain Queeg; 2) Limbaugh's denigration of Iraq veteran Paul Hackett, who was running for Congress as a Democrat: Limbaugh called Hackett a "staff puke" who "to pad [his] resume." Here's Hackett's apt response to Limbaugh; 3) Limbaugh denigrated John Kerry's military service even before the Swiftboaters were formed. Of course, during the 2004 campaign, Limbaugh supported the smears of the Swift Boat liars; he even interviewed John O'Neill and said that he was doing "God's work"; 4) Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" smear against members of the US military.
4. Limbaugh's paranoid Clinton-bashing almost leads to a fatality.
5. Journalist David Neiwert's series on Limbaugh, "Rush, Newspeak and Fascism" Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, and Part VI.
5. I have the transcript of the infamous on-air conversation Limbaugh had with "Greg from Orlando" in which Greg confronts Limbaugh about his reasons for not fighting in Vietnam (here is Snopes.com on the matter; also, Joe Conason has an article on the flap).
6. In addition to the previously listed posts on Limbaugh's racism, there are other sites that have chronicled Limbaugh's hatred against minorities: 1) Media Matters on Limbaugh's racism against Barack Obama; 2) Jeff Cohen and Steve Rendall on Limbaugh's racism. Here's an informative article on limbaugh's "Barack the Magic Negro" flap. Ironically, despite Limbaugh's racist rantings, he has accused Democrats of being racist for criticizing Al Sharpton and then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Here's another Limbaugh false charge of racism. 1/2008 UPDATE: Limbaugh compared Bill Clinton to segregationist "Bull" Connor.
7. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) did an analysis of Limbaugh's claims on his radio show in the 1990's that infuriated him.
8. During the Clinton presidency, Limbaugh, along with Roger Ailes, was one of the top Vince Foster conspiracy theorists. Even though numerous investigations has shown that Foster committed suicide and not murdered, Limbaugh has not apologized and continues to suggest that anyone who crosses the Clintons will face a similar fate (click here and here).
9. Limbaugh caught truncating a quote by Bill Clinton to give it the exact opposite meaning--Keith Olbermann reports. This is hardly surprising.

Other Useful Links:
1. Here's an on-air conversation of me and Sean Hannity over the issue of Republican sexual hypocrisy and GOP election fraud. This post also has a large list of Sean Hannity links. I have another conversation with Hannity in which I confront him about Pat Robertson's religious bigotry and Jerry Falwell's victimization of his flock and his political dirty tricks. The sidebar on my main blog has a list of talk radio phone call transcripts with such luminaries as Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, and Matt Drudge.
2. Brave New Films on Michael Savage's hate speech.
3. I have a blog that addresses cult leader Sun Myung Moon's pernicious influence on American politics (including a post on a Moon operative working for Mitt Romney's campaign).

Bonus: Links to informative sites about Sean Hannity:
1) Media Matters for America monitors Hannity: Click here for the latest on Hannity; here are additional Media Matters resources on Hannity.
2) Here is an article by Ben Fritz on Hannity's intellectual dishonesty in his book Let Freedom Ring.
3) The Center for American Progress has two informative articles about Hannity's dishonesty: click here and here.
4) Wikipedia has information about Hannity's mendacity--e.g., Hannity tried to portray an anti-troop protest by fundamentalist hatemonger Fred Phelps as being the work of the left (quick note: Fox News' Oliver North took the same tack).
5) I have several blog posts documenting Hannity's mendacity: (1) Hannity plays dumb when it suits his purposes; (2) Echoing the Moonie-owned Washington Times, Hannity intentionally truncated a John Kerry quote; (3) Hannity uses deceit to try to link Kerry with Jane Fonda--also here; (4) If you watch or listen to Hannity regularly, undoubtedly you've heard Hannity speak about how important it was for Americans to come together after 9/11. Don't believe him for a minute. Even as as the twin towers were still smoldering, Hannity was part of a Moonie Times smear campaign to distort a speech by former president Clinton to give people the false impression that Clinton was blaming America for the attacks. Read about it here and here; (5) Hannity is one of the usual suspects who used Sudanese propaganda to smear Bill Clinton; (6) Here's a blog post on the problems with the Hannity & Colmes show; (7) My article on Hannity's hypocrisy regarding Ann Coulter's denigrating comments about the 9/11 widows.
6) An article from The Nation about Hannity's relationship with white supremacist Hal Turner (Hannity was one of Trent Lott's biggest apologists after Lott defended Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat presidential run).
7) ThinkProgress article in response to General Motors' (GM) decision to hire Sean Hannity to be spokesperson for GMÂ?s "You're A Great American" Car Give-Away.
8) Article on Hannity's friend Hal Turner by Dave Neiwert. Here's another article about the Hannity/Turner connection by Max Blumenthal.
9) Every since I whipped Hannity's ass on this program and on another occasion, Hannity has made sure that competent opponents don't show him up. Here's some revealing empirical evidence that Hannity is a total wuss [NOTE: if this link does not work at first, refresh it or click here for a truncated version--also I reprint it in the addendum of this post--scroll down to the end]. Hannity has also chickened out of debates with Ed Schultz and Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson.
10) Hannity's vicious attacks on crime victim Abner Louima (also here).
11) Notice how Hannity criticizes people opposed to Bush's ineptitude in Iraq with the canard that they are undermining "the troops in harm's way and undermine their commander in chief while they're at war"? Here are some quotes by Hannity at a time in which we had a president who knew how to use the military.
12) Hannity, of course, defended Ann Coulter's Moussaoui-like attacks on women who lost their husbands on 9/11.
13) Al Franken has an entire chapter on Hannity and Alan Colmes in his book Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.
14) Campus Progress has an informative article about Hannity.
15) Watch this video of Howard Dean slamming Hannity and Fox News on live TV. Dean mentions Robert Greenwald's excellent documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism:
15) Media Matters on Hannity's conspiracy-mongering regarding the death of Vince Foster on his Sunday television show on Fox "Hannity's America":(here, here, and here). this isn't surprising considering that Hannity's boss Roger Ailes has engaged in Foster conspiracy-mongering. Also, more Media Matters on Hannity's intellectual dishonesty--here, here, and here.

Addendum: Talk Show Radio Accessibility--Follow-Up Survey Results
Research 2000 thought it would be an interesting endeavor to find out how six nationally syndicated talk radio programs handle incoming calls among individuals who wish to engage in the live talk show over the air. The our original April ‘06 ‘Talk Show Radio Accessibility Survey Results‘ were interesting enough to report in the hopes that “ALL” talk radio hosts and formats in the future will make it less restrictive and more accessible for potential call in guests regardless of whether or not they have a differing point of view.
Findings:

* Ed Shultz “as the easiest to get on the air with regardless of the caller’s “view point for the simple reason that the show is the only format of the six that does not ask the caller what they want to discuss.”
* Sean Hannity comes in last place with “none” of the callers “with a different view point” getting on the air.
* The “one caller of five dissenting view points” allowed on Limbaugh’s show “went through three screeners before getting on the air.“
* Ingraham, Miller and Rhodes showed “no significant differences” in terms of getting on the air “if one had a dissenting view point.
* In all cases, callers with dissenting views were able to get on the air with the host.

Methodology:

While the following survey results do not possess the standard 95 percent confidence level or 5% margin for error which is standard within the scientific polling community, Research 2000’s follow yielded almost identical results.

In August and September, we examined the same six nationally syndicated talk shows we did back in April which are heard in the Washington DC ADI five days weekly between August 21 through September 19, 2006. Three liberal: Stephanie Miller, Randi Rhodes and Ed Shultz. Three conservative: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh. Back in April, each program was called ten times (5 with a point of view compatible with the host and most of the callers and 5 that were not). In the August-September follow up survey, we called each show 15 times with a point of view which was not compatible with the host and most of the callers. We decided not to do any calls with compatible view points because the April survey showed that those callers with compatible views with the host and most of the callers were able to get through and on the air between 15-30 minutes with each of the hosts.

The rank order below is based on how accessible it was for one to get through to the host with both a liberal and conservative point of view.

Once again, there was no significant differences between the Laura Ingraham, Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes shows in terms of getting on the air if one had a dissenting view point. In all cases, callers with dissenting views were able to get on the air with the host. The wait on hold was longest for the Laura Ingraham show and that averaged 40 minutes to one hour and fifteen minutes. For Miller it was 35 minutes to one hour and for Rhodes it was 30 minutes to 40 minutes.The difference between number 2 and 4 are slight and the rank order is based purely on the amount of time one was on hold. Both Ingraham’s and Miller’s wait on hold increased slightly from April, while Rhodes had a slight decrease.

Only two callers of fifteen dissenting view points was successful in getting on the Rush Limbaugh show. Both callers went through three screeners on the show before getting on the air with the host. However, the other thirteen callers with dissenting view points were told politely that the host would not be taking calls on either the subject matter or a dissenting point of view.