Our Rights are at Stake

Our Rights at Stake in Michael Savage Case
By Cliff Kincaid
December 14, 2007

Michael Savage, who is being accused of "hate speech" by a Muslim group whose own holy book The Koran is full of hate against Christians, Jews and other unbelievers.

Radio personality Michael Savage wrote a book on why liberalism is a mental disorder. That helps explain why he is under attack by radical Muslims, who are fellow travelers with the liberals in trying to dismantle American defenses against terrorists and criminals.

Two recent developments, the banning of capital punishment by politicians in New Jersey and the House vote to ban the waterboarding, or simulated drowning of terrorists, provide more evidence of Savage’s thesis. Why is it that liberals are so determined to keep convicted killers alive at public expense? Why are they so determined to spare terrorists from a few seconds of discomfort? It is because they have a mental disorder. For them, it is fashionable to be indifferent to the suffering of the real people who should count—American citizens.

In this battle, however, good sometimes wins over evil. That occurred when “a measure to expand hate-crime protections,” as the liberal Washington Post put it, was dropped from a Pentagon spending bill by House and Senate negotiators. The measure had been introduced in the Senate by the notorious Ted Kennedy, who goes down in history as the only senator in U.S. history to let a young girl die in the bottom of his submerged car. That was a fate much worse than waterboarding. Kennedy, of course, is also opposed to waterboarding. Terrorists, he believes, should enjoy more rights than Mary Jo Kopechne, who died in that car struggling to breathe as the water enveloped her.

Kennedy is a concrete example of liberalism as a mental disorder. In his warped world view, real people and real victims such as Mary Jo Kopechne have no rights, but it is wrong to “hate” people and such “hate” should be rooted out and punished by federal authorities. This is their agenda—making us think like them, or at least getting us to quit thinking and quit acting on behalf of what is truly important in this country, such as the survival of our nation and our families.

Credit goes to the White House and Congressional Republicans for forcing the dropping of the “hate crimes” provision. The White House had threatened to veto the measure. It would elevate homosexuals, the supposed victims of “hate crimes,” to protected status under law, and would leave other classes of people (such as the elderly, the military, police officers, and victims of prior crimes) without similar special status.

Now who are these “homosexuals?” Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth held a December 5 National Press Club news conference to unveil a video of what took place at the Folsom Street Fair in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s congressional district. The video showed naked homosexuals masturbating and having sex in public as children walked down the streets near them. Some were dressed up as animals being led around by leashes. Others were dressed in leather and being whipped. Homosexual pornography was sold openly. See it for yourself here.

Was LaBarbera guilty of a “hate crime” for bringing this perverted behavior to the public’s attention and demanding that Pelosi condemn it? That is what the homosexuals would like you to believe. That is apparently why all of the television media, with the exception of Sean Hannity of Fox News Channel, ignored LaBarbera’s news conference. Who wants to suffer the wrath of the militant homosexuals by focusing attention on what they actually do?

In another indication of a mental disorder, we are being told that waterboarding, which involves pouring water over a terrorist’s face, is torture and should never be used. This mentality is what drove Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives to actually pass a bill banning the practice. During a time of war, can you believe that the House would actually vote to tell terrorists in advance how we will interrogate them? Can you believe that the House would vote to ban a practice that has saved American lives and disrupted terrorist plots against America? The House does this because it has lost sight of who really died on 9/11 and because it puts the “rights” of terrorists above the right to live of ordinary Americans. For all intents and purposes, the House is acting like a terrorist front group.

Similarly, New Jersey politicians have voted to ban capital punishment. Like the measure to ban waterboarding, this can only result in more lives lost. That means that a murder in New Jersey, no matter how vicious, can never be punished by the death penalty. The practical result will be that crimes will go unsolved because police and prosecutors will not be able to threaten to use capital punishment to get information out of criminals. It means criminals will know that no matter who they kill or how many, they will be kept alive at taxpayer expense. Banning the death penalty constitutes open season on law-abiding citizens.

Which brings up the case of Michael Savage, who is being accused of “hate speech” by a Muslim group whose own holy book The Koran is full of hate against Christians, Jews and other unbelievers. Muslims are killing or threatening to kill people around the world over Teddy Bears and cartoons but companies advertising on his Savage Nation radio show are being pressured to stop sponsoring his program because he dares to exercise his First Amendment right of free speech and to criticize Islam.

There is some dispute over which companies have withdrawn advertising from his show. The names of those companies are less important than the campaign itself which is now underway. The purpose of the “Hate Hurts America” group that is now leading the charge against him is to intimidate companies into never advertising on his show. The names of those companies we may never know. This is the insidious danger of this campaign. It will force him off the air eventually—unless we speak up now.

(The) new book, The Death of Talk Radio?, makes the critical point that what we are seeing in the Savage case will become official federal policy if the liberals manage to capture the White House in 2008 and take control of the Federal Communications Commission.

Those determined to kill us are on the offensive, and they have powerful friends in important positions of influence in the media and politics today. It is literally a battle to the death. Our constitutional rights and our lives are at stake. (emphasis added)

The original article can be read at the excellent Accuracy In Media website:
http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5982_0_3_0_C/

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

Posted December 14, 2007 03:17 PM
Read more on Articles - Cliff Kincaid ~ Constitution and Government