Cultural Marxism... funny thing is... this happened before that in France in the French Revolution... but they got rid of religion because of the ideals America is based on, so I guess it could be scarey to compare the two. They actually created a fake, secular, state "religion."
But let's talk about the communists because I can scare you that way.
@JOHNBRANSKI100 3rd world? Ok then... nice argument by the way. You're not intelligent enough to do anything other than spout hate. You must like Savage, you two are so alike.
This was before Savage's book "The Political Zoo" where Savage made fun of O'Reilly, calling him a leprechaun. Savage made a joke of it, while O'Reilly took it personally and has waged total war on the Savage Nation.
Savage and O'Reilly seemed ok with each other here. I wonder when they started hating on each other. O'Reilly certainly wasnt calling him a "Smear Merchant" here
@AllStarKase This isn't Europe either. Europe removes all religions. There is no freedom to display your religion outside churches. You're ignorant if you think they want a theocracy.
Although I do not agree with everything Dr. Savage believes, he is head and shoulders above Bill O'Reilly. I often wonder how O'Reilly got his start there are so many that are far above him in ability and intellect. Well, good luck to both... SRA
@DrAvrington I actually like O'Reilly more an more as time goes on. The man has a better head on his shoulders than Savage, in my opinion. Take for instance Savage's comment on autism: "A fraud, a racket. ... In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out". Now take his thoughts he wrote on homosexuality: "I choose to override my desires for men when they swell in me." The main rails against homosexuality on his show but is most likely a closet case.
@galept I tend to disagree. I don't think O'Reilly is near as mentally competent or learned as Savage or say Mark Levin however his passion, like Savage and Levin's, gives him spark. Savage's comments on Autism might well too be the case as social pseudo-science, for socio-political reasons/agenda, conflicts with natural/physical science. The Homosexuality issue also falls into this area as people tend to dismiss the social/political agenda being pushed and on very debatable science. Regards.SRA
@DrAvrington Pseudo science for sure! It's unforgivable to me, his hypocritical view on those with thoughts of homosexuality when he himself has admitted such thoughts. Simply because he refuses to embrace them when others do doesn't mean can claim it as a choice without debate, and without citing any scientific studies. Honestly, I've never heard the man engage in rational discourse. I can at least give Mr. O'Reilly that credit. As I said, Mr. O'Reilly may have a lower intelligence, but he has
@DrAvrington the emotional intelligence that is more agreeable to moderate human beings, enabling his message to reach through to more people. You can see two completely different narratives presented by the men on their respective shows. One I believe manipulates people's natural reactions of fear while the other (who isn't perfect, by any means) subscribes to a more positive-minded narrative and goes off on FAR less tangents that to me alienate listeners and turn them off of your message.
@DrAvrington It takes a certain kind of person to stoop to those levels. Perhaps Dr. Michael Savage has a higher IQ than Bill O'Reilly, we will never know. But the man needs to use his intelligence more effectively. Hate and fear is not something that Mr. O'Reilly subscribes to, which is why he is head and shoulders above Dr. Savage.
@galept The reason for my position is that Dr. Savage, although there are many places I tend to disagree with him, seems to be one step outside the fold. For example, Mark Levin is very good and very worthy but unlike Savage, both O'Reilly, Hannity and Levin are all employed by Establishment owned entities therefore - possibly - narrowing the scope and schema of the product. All are "entertainment" however serious in nature they may be. But all Americans should be pissed at the sad realities.
@DrAvrington I mostly agree. However I believe he limits his own success by the words that come out of his mouth. You can see in this video Mr. O'Reilly criticizing Dr. Savage on this very point. Savage shapes debates into a very narrow (almost closed) minded approach which sets a terrible precedent in the listeners' minds. He doesn't allow for moderation and is fueling the fire that is dragging our political spectrum to new extremes, making the American people less governable and more hostile.
@galept If you research American anti-Constitutional history since the days of Woodrow Wilson, those "elitists" behind the scenes, as outlined by Barry Goldwater for example, have made America - an purpose - less governable. Savage and O'Reilly, on some subjects doesn't go far enough. Ex. Islam and the factual realities of its history and theo-political jurisprudence. Israel and the so-called "Palestinians" or a "West Bank" and all that ahistorical rubbish. About as worthy as "Global Warming".
@DrAvrington I do not believe that average American listeners really consider those deeper issues because they require "too much" research, or at least too much listening. So what vague basic political stances can Dr. Savage take to fire up a base that doesn't like going in depth? The hardest stances I've heard Dr. Savage take were on homosexuality, Islam, feminism, sex education, and immigration. His comments on Islam, specifically, were the reason he has been banned from entering the UK.
@galept As he should my friend. As he should. America, sadly, is not the same country it was 20 years ago and certainly not 60 or 100 years ago. Cicero was right. The great bastion of freedom, progress and prosperity had been intentionally rotting away from the inside out. Treason, amorality, dishonor and criminality are riddled throughout the entire political edifice which must be exposed as harshly as possible. I do hope America finds itself and soon. Bring back HUAC and get to work!! SRA
@DrAvrington Assuming that there's much more that Savage discusses, he certainly goes far enough in terms of what the American people care about paying attention to, and that's all that really matters. Pushing ahistoric rubbish is possible, and probable, but over a long period of time by a very large group of people, don't you think? Very few individuals that are not in the political office spotlight can shape a debate like he can. That's why he's powerful, and that's why I think he's dangerous.
@galept Savage, in most respects, is not shaping ahistorical schema however trying to educate his listeners toward those who are. Pushing ahistorical rubbish has become a foundational pillar within your own educational system as outlined by the Reece Committee, within your political affairs through UN, CFR/Trilateral Commission and the blatant undermining of the Constitution since Woodrow Wilson. He is powerful but no near as to Gore, Pelossi, Soros, Rockefeller, Kennedy, Clinton, Bush etc. etc.
Just because a judge wears a cross in the courtroom does not mean the government is establishing a religion. It is just what the judge believes and not the federal government. When the government restricts the practice of religion among the people then the government has joined the church of athieism.
Sweetheart, he never said the federal government should establish religion as federal law, he said JUDGES SHOULD REMAIN NEUTRAL, which is the textbook definition of a JUDGE.
@Romansteel13 Just because the judge is a christian does not mean he will rule according to Gods law. If he is a good judge he will rule according to the law. I didnt say the government was establishing a religion. Maybe you should think before you call someone an idiot.
@Romansteel13 I like how you have analyzed me psychologically without even knowing my history. I doubt you have been educated enough to receive a college degree. The fact remains that I can't prove there is a God any more than you can prove there isn't one. The difference between you and I is I am not guided by a blind belief. I would rather believe in God and be a fool when I die rather than not believe and find out I was wrong. I guess ignorance is bliss in California.
" I would rather believe in God and be a fool when I die rather than not believe and find out I was wrong."
That's called Pascal's Wager, I understand you are moronic and can't even use proper terminology, which is why I am here to educate, the uneducated. It is actually immoral, as Christopher Hitchens pointed out. "Believing something that isn't true is intellectual dishonesty" - Sir Bertrand Russell, British Polymath. (That's a big word for a multi-talented genius)
@Romansteel13 It would be moronic if I was using Pascal's Wager but I am using common sense. Besides, my statement is not made because I think there is a God, it is made because I know there is a God. I have something that can't be taught in a classroom and that's faith. Something that athiests do not have much of. That is something you have to have in order to believe in something you can't see. Just because you can't see God does not mean he doesn't exist. Can you see the nucleous of an atom?
@Romansteel13 You are correct. I don't have a PhD. But I also know that you need a a high powered microscope to see things like this. If we did not have devices to allow us to see such things would you still say they exist?
@Romansteel13 But are they teaching faith in God or faith in athieism? The last time I checked, teachers are forbidden to teach creationism because to the closed minded it contradics the theory of relativity. Schools aren't even allowed to put a nativity scene in school during Christmas. I know this will be hard for you to understand but I believe science is a tool used by God for the purpose of creating life. To me, science and God are paralelled.
@Romansteel13 Religious people are very intellegent people. They are also very wise. Wisdom will always trump an IQ score. You can keep your IQ score, I will keep my wisdom.
@Romansteel13 Religion has been around for thousands of years and continues to grow stronger as we continue to evolve. So when do you think it will fade? I think the only thing you are proving is that I need to brush up on my spelling and you seem to be the master at name calling and put downs. Also, don't you have to have intelligence to answer questions with great accuracy?
@Romansteel13 I just asked when you thought it would end. I didn't quote you. Since you believe morons only believe that religion is getting stronger, then do you you believe that 80-90% of the world population are morons too? The spanis inquisition, the crusades, the Salem witch trials, the thousands of priests that have molested alter boys, and Islamist extremists are all examples of religious crimes. But most believers follow God and not religion. There is a difference.
@Romansteel13 I am not talking about the PhD's of the world, but the 80-90% of the people that believe in God. Now I understand why you call me names and will not answer most of the questions that I have asked you. You feel that since you have a PhD you are better than the 99% of people that don't have one. You may have a higher college degree than I do, but your maturity level is that of a child. Maybe you should have taken a debate class while getting your PhD. Let me guess, you're a teacher?
@Romansteel13 Some questions I have asked and you did not answer. "When do you think religion will fade?", "Don't you have to have inteligence to answer questions with great accuracy?", and "Let me guess, you're a teacher?" I know you didn't say you are better than anyone else, that was my impression of you since you have verbally attacked me since we started this debate. In all honesty, most of the straw man has come from you. But my apology for the unintentioned imaturity.
None of those questions are relevant to my argument.
They are strictly for derailing my argument, because you cannot pierce my immaculate intellect.
Religion already has faded. Japan is 65% Atheist, are you saying the Japanese are stupid? The UK is 85% Atheist, are you saying the Brits/Scots are also stupid? Intelligence is not correlated with answering questions, that is called deductive reasoning. You are by far one of the most moronic theologians I've ever encountered.
Why would you assume I was a teacher, because i'm smarter than you, you automatically assume i'm a teacher? Nice incorrigible logic.
I'm a trained scientist, not a teacher. I couldn't stand sitting in the classrooms of UC Berkeley, UC Davis, Stanford and Yale.
I have more degrees than your family tree, which to say the least means i'm exorbitantly more trained in the sciences than you could ever possibly be.
Why is it every reputable scientist, are atheists?
@Romansteel13 The first step in losing a debate is when you start the name calling. You lost as soon as you started. You may be smarter than me but it is clear that you have no maturity. I would love to continue this discussion when you grow up. If this is how they teach you to handle debates in California I am glad I did not receive my education there. Get back to me when you can cary a conversation without verbally bashing me. God bless.
@Romansteel13 Where do you get your data that all scientist of all professions are atheist. How could you possibly know that.Is that childish theory of yours based only in the United States or worldwide.You clearly make up data to support your arguments. Last time I checked Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Max Planck, William Thomson Kelvin,Robert Boyle,Galileo Galilei ,Johannes Kepler,Nicholas Copernicus believed in god. Are these scientist famous enough for you?
" Where do you get your data that all scientist of all professions are atheist."
Apparently you are illiterate.
Emphasis on the word 'reputable.'
Actually. Einstein was a deist, this is proven in his memoirs and by his surviving posterity. Newton was a believer in Spinoza's god. Kelvin and Planck were not theists, once again, you are a guilty of the very thing you are pointing out. Galilei, Kepler, and Copernicus HAD to be THEISTS in order to receive funding. FACT.
@Romansteel13 It is true that billions of muslims pray in mosques every day. And most of them are told that there is a reward in heaven for killing jews and christians. That doesn't mean they are following God. They are comitting murder. Just like the nazi's did when they slaughtered 6 million jews. The only difference is the reasoning. One tried to create a master race and the other wants to clense the earth of all non muslims.
" It is true that billions of muslims pray in mosques every day. And most of them are told that there is a reward in heaven for killing jews and christians. That doesn't mean they are following God."
How arrogant of you.
I thought religion was supposed to teach humility?
You claim that 1 billion Muslims are wrong, and you are right.
@gasmaskinfidel Profile Channel Views:316 Total Upload Views:0 Age:22 Joined:Jan 24, 2009 Last Visit Date:1 month ago Subscribers:0 Country:United States Ah, that explains your ignorance and moronic ideology. You are 22 years old, living with your parents in some safe suburb in the US. Which is you are naive, and moronic. Once you reach a ripe old age of 50, come back to me. Kids these days.
@Romansteel13 Actually you are reading my sons profile. I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. I do know a thing or two about life. I have realized that name calling is only reserved for people that are either losing an argument or have no knowledge of what they are talking about. And you call me ignorant and moronic. That's rich.
". I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. "
Well-educated, THAT is rich. People who boast about education are usually the dumbest in society.
Uh-huh, honey.
I'm currently dating Angelina Jolie, I own 33 rolls royces. I have a Boeing 757.
I'm 6'2, %5.23 (repeating) body fat.
Moron. Keep lying to yourself, feed yourself the malarkey. Moron.
"Actually you are reading my sons profile. I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. "
Wow...
Talk about arrogance.
"Ignorance often begets confidence than does knowledge." - Immortal words spoken by Charles Darwin.
You are as about empty headed as that Romansteel13 douchebag.
@morrowindfan75 Its not arrogant when someone states facts. Even the philosophers of the past believed there is a higher power than mans existance. Neither one of us is higher up on the food chain than the other. The difference between you and I is that my mind is not closed to the possability of something greater than us. The closed minded are the ones full of arrogance. The devil's greatest achievement was convincing people that he does not exist.
@morrowindfan75 I like this discussion. I state facts and all you can do is correct my spelling and call me names. Is there anyone with the maturity level higher than that of a child? You must be a liberal.
@taxidriver987: The whole global governmental system is communist to the core. It's nothing but world communism under a variety of new names. Both parties have bought into it.
At Occidental University, Obama loved to hold forth on how the only answer was Marxist Leninism and that he would bring this about eventually. No really. zombietime com thepeoplescube com hotair com americanthinker com breitbart com biggovernment com michellemalkin com steynonline com any P.J O'Rourke lookingattheleft com PJTV com jihadwatch org climatedepot com eco imperialism org Tim Blair blog Andrew Bolt blog wattsupwiththat com dissectleft blogspot com colonelrobertneville blogspot com
It is actually the illuminati pulling the strings. The Rothchilds, Rockefellers, Kissinger, The Vatican, The UK royal family, the Bilderberg group, Counsel on Foreign Relations, TriLateral Commission etc...
There is some truth to that statement. I would exclude the British royal family in entirety though. The monetary entities and global think tanks are part of something beyond most people's admission. There are 4 dynasties that control a nation: monetary, political, religious, educational (including media). The beast system wants all of these.
When OReilly comes on, I switch to Fox BUSINESS News and watch Judge Andrew Napolitano on "Freedom Watch." I get the news of the day and learn about the Constitution! What a deal!
Michael Savage speaks the truth and all of you Left Wing Liberals can't handle the truth. Savage would chew up and spit out any of you punks with little or no effort...Stand behind Michael Savage and this country may have a chance for survival.
The conservative movement in this country is a movement of idiocy. Its so so sad because I feel that elsewhere conservatism is a legitimate financial and social philosophy purported by intelligent people. Oh well.
Bill says the secular movement wants "no moral judgements"
I say the secular movement is a moral imperative...we've made and continue to make moral judgements that "traditional values" as Bill calls them are in themselves wrong and based on BS.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."-this means that they will not side with one side of one religion over another... laws From religious doctrines should be taught not forced upon people this man would force his views on you if he could. Good Luck
If u actually watched o'reilly instead of olberman you would see that everytime someone from the right is on he debates from the left and vice versa. this is called fair and balanced. Why would you want to boycott foxnews if it wasnt for them the only news we would have would be about bush/cheney and waterboarding. and as for the ntlfr8 o'reilly isnt in same group as rush and hannity.
O'Reilly is one of the most skillful partisans I've seen. He really does have a lot of people fooled that he is objective, but he's just a partisan hack. This video proves it. I watched the Factor last night and he compared the left who had "glee" as Sanford went down in disgrace to people who stone others to death.
Yet, Bill says it's "legitimate" to overstate things as Savage does. It's OK to stone liberals to death, but not conservatives. Bill is 100% partisan hack.
Anyone can bring a person who disagrees with them on their show a few times a week. That doesn't mean anything when you're talking 5 hours a week on the air. O'Reilly is a partisan though, regardless of how much token opposition he allows.
western europeanize wtf.the problem is europe is getting stupid like usa not the other way around.people wake up these bastards want youre energy.shit on them do youre thing.want some real issues
It's too bad that O'Reilly seems threatened by Michael. It would be nice if O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush supported each other - but I think there is just to much competition.
I've trashed Savage a little, but I'm starting to like him more. I'd like to see him do more one-on-one interviews.
It's interesting to see how a lot of radio personalities are more laid back and personable when they get on television. Of course, this being from 2003 has something to do with it. Savage has grown in power of late!
Michael Savage = Idiot
pboisei 1 day ago
OMG what happened to john ritter?!?!?!
scheshire7 4 days ago
Savage for some reasons felt smarter than O Reilly then again, we all know how smart BIll is.
TheRaajpooot 1 week ago
Jesus has a strict moral code? I'm pretty sure Jesus' moral code is only strict when you're a rich, greedy, hateful person...
HornPlayer983 2 weeks ago
Cultural Marxism... funny thing is... this happened before that in France in the French Revolution... but they got rid of religion because of the ideals America is based on, so I guess it could be scarey to compare the two. They actually created a fake, secular, state "religion."
But let's talk about the communists because I can scare you that way.
HornPlayer983 2 weeks ago
If you can make Bill O'Reilly look like the good guy you are doing something wrong.
TheHuntress144 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ஜ۩۞۩ஜ๑۩۩๑Vote Ron Paul 2012 Join The Revolution๑۩۩๑ஜ۩۞۩ஜ
Severddans 1 month ago
Michael Weiner (yes, that is his real name, lol) is a self hating jew and a cunt.
JimBowie1133 1 month ago
@JimBowie1133
Ad Hominem preceeding the actual argument? NOW I've heard it all ;)
sadeyedangel 1 week ago
WE ARE THE SAME , U.S CITIZENS BORN HERE AND REMEMBER THE TIME WHEN THIS COUNTRY WAS NOT TURNED INTO A WELFARE STATE FOR ILLEGAL MEXICAN NATIONALS.
JOHNBRANSKI100 1 month ago
@JOHNBRANSKI100 Haha, why do I get the feeling a certain group - the Native Americans - is saying the exact same thing about Europeans?
Lukege15 1 month ago
From somebody outside of the US, I view America as the pinnacle of liberty and justice. Savage destroys that image, and shames the values of freedom.
woohootrainiscoming 2 months ago
@woohootrainiscoming to tell with the third world shithole you live in.
JOHNBRANSKI100 2 months ago
@JOHNBRANSKI100 3rd world? Ok then... nice argument by the way. You're not intelligent enough to do anything other than spout hate. You must like Savage, you two are so alike.
woohootrainiscoming 1 month ago
@woohootrainiscoming
Would you rather Savage praises the drug related shootings across the Rio Grande?
HeyMamboRepublicano 1 month ago
This was before Savage's book "The Political Zoo" where Savage made fun of O'Reilly, calling him a leprechaun. Savage made a joke of it, while O'Reilly took it personally and has waged total war on the Savage Nation.
fredmacification 2 months ago
Savage and O'Reilly seemed ok with each other here. I wonder when they started hating on each other. O'Reilly certainly wasnt calling him a "Smear Merchant" here
williwo 3 months ago
savage is the best
englandareus 3 months ago
RIP John Ritter!
dbrandinni 3 months ago
Savage is the best
canefan17 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Savage is much smarter than O'Reilly
donpengin 4 months ago
bed buds
toetag88 4 months ago
I'm an atheist & I think Savage is right.
KenMacMillan 4 months ago
Meh, I don't want to live in a theocracy. This isn't Iran.
AllStarKase 5 months ago
@AllStarKase This isn't Europe either. Europe removes all religions. There is no freedom to display your religion outside churches. You're ignorant if you think they want a theocracy.
gamefreak1000000 2 months ago
wow savage is a dope, its a sad day when o reilly is more reasonable
MegaLink117 5 months ago
What a douche bag O'reilly is. he attacks savage because he claims he overstates, what bs
Dman5796 6 months ago
there both idiots
AoDPhoenix 8 months ago
Although I do not agree with everything Dr. Savage believes, he is head and shoulders above Bill O'Reilly. I often wonder how O'Reilly got his start there are so many that are far above him in ability and intellect. Well, good luck to both... SRA
DrAvrington 9 months ago
@DrAvrington I actually like O'Reilly more an more as time goes on. The man has a better head on his shoulders than Savage, in my opinion. Take for instance Savage's comment on autism: "A fraud, a racket. ... In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out". Now take his thoughts he wrote on homosexuality: "I choose to override my desires for men when they swell in me." The main rails against homosexuality on his show but is most likely a closet case.
galept 8 months ago
@galept I tend to disagree. I don't think O'Reilly is near as mentally competent or learned as Savage or say Mark Levin however his passion, like Savage and Levin's, gives him spark. Savage's comments on Autism might well too be the case as social pseudo-science, for socio-political reasons/agenda, conflicts with natural/physical science. The Homosexuality issue also falls into this area as people tend to dismiss the social/political agenda being pushed and on very debatable science. Regards.SRA
DrAvrington 8 months ago
@DrAvrington Pseudo science for sure! It's unforgivable to me, his hypocritical view on those with thoughts of homosexuality when he himself has admitted such thoughts. Simply because he refuses to embrace them when others do doesn't mean can claim it as a choice without debate, and without citing any scientific studies. Honestly, I've never heard the man engage in rational discourse. I can at least give Mr. O'Reilly that credit. As I said, Mr. O'Reilly may have a lower intelligence, but he has
galept 8 months ago
@DrAvrington the emotional intelligence that is more agreeable to moderate human beings, enabling his message to reach through to more people. You can see two completely different narratives presented by the men on their respective shows. One I believe manipulates people's natural reactions of fear while the other (who isn't perfect, by any means) subscribes to a more positive-minded narrative and goes off on FAR less tangents that to me alienate listeners and turn them off of your message.
galept 8 months ago
@DrAvrington It takes a certain kind of person to stoop to those levels. Perhaps Dr. Michael Savage has a higher IQ than Bill O'Reilly, we will never know. But the man needs to use his intelligence more effectively. Hate and fear is not something that Mr. O'Reilly subscribes to, which is why he is head and shoulders above Dr. Savage.
galept 8 months ago
@galept The reason for my position is that Dr. Savage, although there are many places I tend to disagree with him, seems to be one step outside the fold. For example, Mark Levin is very good and very worthy but unlike Savage, both O'Reilly, Hannity and Levin are all employed by Establishment owned entities therefore - possibly - narrowing the scope and schema of the product. All are "entertainment" however serious in nature they may be. But all Americans should be pissed at the sad realities.
DrAvrington 8 months ago
@DrAvrington I mostly agree. However I believe he limits his own success by the words that come out of his mouth. You can see in this video Mr. O'Reilly criticizing Dr. Savage on this very point. Savage shapes debates into a very narrow (almost closed) minded approach which sets a terrible precedent in the listeners' minds. He doesn't allow for moderation and is fueling the fire that is dragging our political spectrum to new extremes, making the American people less governable and more hostile.
galept 8 months ago
@galept If you research American anti-Constitutional history since the days of Woodrow Wilson, those "elitists" behind the scenes, as outlined by Barry Goldwater for example, have made America - an purpose - less governable. Savage and O'Reilly, on some subjects doesn't go far enough. Ex. Islam and the factual realities of its history and theo-political jurisprudence. Israel and the so-called "Palestinians" or a "West Bank" and all that ahistorical rubbish. About as worthy as "Global Warming".
DrAvrington 8 months ago
@DrAvrington I do not believe that average American listeners really consider those deeper issues because they require "too much" research, or at least too much listening. So what vague basic political stances can Dr. Savage take to fire up a base that doesn't like going in depth? The hardest stances I've heard Dr. Savage take were on homosexuality, Islam, feminism, sex education, and immigration. His comments on Islam, specifically, were the reason he has been banned from entering the UK.
galept 8 months ago
@galept As he should my friend. As he should. America, sadly, is not the same country it was 20 years ago and certainly not 60 or 100 years ago. Cicero was right. The great bastion of freedom, progress and prosperity had been intentionally rotting away from the inside out. Treason, amorality, dishonor and criminality are riddled throughout the entire political edifice which must be exposed as harshly as possible. I do hope America finds itself and soon. Bring back HUAC and get to work!! SRA
DrAvrington 8 months ago
@DrAvrington Assuming that there's much more that Savage discusses, he certainly goes far enough in terms of what the American people care about paying attention to, and that's all that really matters. Pushing ahistoric rubbish is possible, and probable, but over a long period of time by a very large group of people, don't you think? Very few individuals that are not in the political office spotlight can shape a debate like he can. That's why he's powerful, and that's why I think he's dangerous.
galept 8 months ago
@galept Savage, in most respects, is not shaping ahistorical schema however trying to educate his listeners toward those who are. Pushing ahistorical rubbish has become a foundational pillar within your own educational system as outlined by the Reece Committee, within your political affairs through UN, CFR/Trilateral Commission and the blatant undermining of the Constitution since Woodrow Wilson. He is powerful but no near as to Gore, Pelossi, Soros, Rockefeller, Kennedy, Clinton, Bush etc. etc.
DrAvrington 8 months ago
dirty jew
blanenbishop 10 months ago
@TheBoneheader
Hey man what ever gets your rocks off.
EzKrispy 10 months ago
@TheBoneheader Whatever you say you socialist
EzKrispy 10 months ago
Very much dislike O'Reilly...
slumberingsam 11 months ago
I HATE BILL O'RILEY. HE IS A DICK! he makes it out to be that people shouldn't be allowed to be who they are. =/
TheMe6996 11 months ago
Savage really needs his TV show back. I love that show.
Freedan111 1 year ago 2
Just because a judge wears a cross in the courtroom does not mean the government is establishing a religion. It is just what the judge believes and not the federal government. When the government restricts the practice of religion among the people then the government has joined the church of athieism.
gasmaskinfidel 1 year ago
@gasmaskinfidel
Sweetheart, he never said the federal government should establish religion as federal law, he said JUDGES SHOULD REMAIN NEUTRAL, which is the textbook definition of a JUDGE.
UNBIASED and NEUTRAL.
Idiot.
Fyi, i'm an ATHEIST.
Romansteel13 1 year ago
@Romansteel13 Just because the judge is a christian does not mean he will rule according to Gods law. If he is a good judge he will rule according to the law. I didnt say the government was establishing a religion. Maybe you should think before you call someone an idiot.
gasmaskinfidel 8 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
"Just because the judge is a christian does not mean he will rule according to Gods law."
Gods law?
Darling.
There are no Gods, they're delusions by mentally imbalanced people like yourself.
Sorry, you can feed yourself the malarkey all you want, i'm not buying it.
And most appellate judges, trial judges are ATHEISTS.
This is a FACT, having worked as a Solano County Law clerk.
Keep feeding yourself the bullshit, honey buns!
Romansteel13 8 months ago
@Romansteel13 I like how you have analyzed me psychologically without even knowing my history. I doubt you have been educated enough to receive a college degree. The fact remains that I can't prove there is a God any more than you can prove there isn't one. The difference between you and I is I am not guided by a blind belief. I would rather believe in God and be a fool when I die rather than not believe and find out I was wrong. I guess ignorance is bliss in California.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
" I would rather believe in God and be a fool when I die rather than not believe and find out I was wrong."
That's called Pascal's Wager, I understand you are moronic and can't even use proper terminology, which is why I am here to educate, the uneducated. It is actually immoral, as Christopher Hitchens pointed out. "Believing something that isn't true is intellectual dishonesty" - Sir Bertrand Russell, British Polymath. (That's a big word for a multi-talented genius)
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 It would be moronic if I was using Pascal's Wager but I am using common sense. Besides, my statement is not made because I think there is a God, it is made because I know there is a God. I have something that can't be taught in a classroom and that's faith. Something that athiests do not have much of. That is something you have to have in order to believe in something you can't see. Just because you can't see God does not mean he doesn't exist. Can you see the nucleous of an atom?
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
"Just because you can't see God does not mean he doesn't exist. Can you see the nucleous of an atom?"
Nucleus*, I understand you don't have the intellectual horsepower to even understand basic science.
I have a PhD in Astrophysics, earned from the University of Berkeley, class of 89'.
Yes, we can see the Nucleus of any atom.
If you were capable of understanding science, you would know about Schrödinger equation and it's four factors.
Googling won't help you, kid.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 You are correct. I don't have a PhD. But I also know that you need a a high powered microscope to see things like this. If we did not have devices to allow us to see such things would you still say they exist?
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gasmaskinfidel
"If we did not have devices to allow us to see such things would you still say they exist?"
Of course.
The Germ theory was invented long before the microscope was invented.
Same with atom theory.
How do you think Spinoza, Descartes, Newton, Galileo, DaVinci and Copernicus found their theories without the help of a microscope?
How can you be this ignorant!
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
"I have something that can't be taught in a classroom and that's faith."
Actually, they are teaching it in classrooms.
Another moronic statement from this fundamentalist nut job.
"Absence of evidence, is not evidence of Absence."
- Carl Sagan.
I'll give you a week to disseminate this quote.
I understand most religious people are in the double digit IQ range.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 But are they teaching faith in God or faith in athieism? The last time I checked, teachers are forbidden to teach creationism because to the closed minded it contradics the theory of relativity. Schools aren't even allowed to put a nativity scene in school during Christmas. I know this will be hard for you to understand but I believe science is a tool used by God for the purpose of creating life. To me, science and God are paralelled.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 Religious people are very intellegent people. They are also very wise. Wisdom will always trump an IQ score. You can keep your IQ score, I will keep my wisdom.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
'Religious people are very intellegent people."
Intelligent*, not intellegent.
You really are making this way too easy.
You keep proving me left and right.
IQ score doesn't equal intelligence, mate.
A high IQ on the binet scale, just means you can answer a series of questions with great accuracy.
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
- Sir Bertrand Russell, English Polymath.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 Religion has been around for thousands of years and continues to grow stronger as we continue to evolve. So when do you think it will fade? I think the only thing you are proving is that I need to brush up on my spelling and you seem to be the master at name calling and put downs. Also, don't you have to have intelligence to answer questions with great accuracy?
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
Wrong. Religion isn't growing stronger. Only morons believe that. I never said it will fade, Bertrand Russell said it, take it up with him.
I understand that you aren't capable of understanding basic grammar.
Quotations means they aren't my words.
Religion is a falsehood.
I can name hundreds of atrocities committed in the name of Religion.
The Roman Catholic Church, BACKED Adolf Hitler. They had vigils on every birthday of Der Fuhrer.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 I just asked when you thought it would end. I didn't quote you. Since you believe morons only believe that religion is getting stronger, then do you you believe that 80-90% of the world population are morons too? The spanis inquisition, the crusades, the Salem witch trials, the thousands of priests that have molested alter boys, and Islamist extremists are all examples of religious crimes. But most believers follow God and not religion. There is a difference.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
" then do you you believe that 80-90% of the world population are morons too? "
Hey ignoramus, less than 1% of the World's population have PhD's, I belong to this spectrum.
Of course 99% of the world are morons.
Which is why education is the most important duty in life.
Religion is the bureaucracy between man and god.
" But most believers follow God and not religion. "
WRONG. 1 billion Muslims pray in Mosques every day.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 I am not talking about the PhD's of the world, but the 80-90% of the people that believe in God. Now I understand why you call me names and will not answer most of the questions that I have asked you. You feel that since you have a PhD you are better than the 99% of people that don't have one. You may have a higher college degree than I do, but your maturity level is that of a child. Maybe you should have taken a debate class while getting your PhD. Let me guess, you're a teacher?
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
I never said I was better than anybody. Putting words in my mouth, typical religious fanatic mentality.
When you can't beat them with logic, resort to infallible straw men.
It's a proven fact that people with PhDs tend to be smarter than those without.
This is an empirical proven fact.
Yawn, stop attacking my character and attack my argument.
I have answered every moronic question you have posed.
Its my turn to stop your double talk.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 Some questions I have asked and you did not answer. "When do you think religion will fade?", "Don't you have to have inteligence to answer questions with great accuracy?", and "Let me guess, you're a teacher?" I know you didn't say you are better than anyone else, that was my impression of you since you have verbally attacked me since we started this debate. In all honesty, most of the straw man has come from you. But my apology for the unintentioned imaturity.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
None of those questions are relevant to my argument.
They are strictly for derailing my argument, because you cannot pierce my immaculate intellect.
Religion already has faded. Japan is 65% Atheist, are you saying the Japanese are stupid? The UK is 85% Atheist, are you saying the Brits/Scots are also stupid? Intelligence is not correlated with answering questions, that is called deductive reasoning. You are by far one of the most moronic theologians I've ever encountered.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
Why would you assume I was a teacher, because i'm smarter than you, you automatically assume i'm a teacher? Nice incorrigible logic.
I'm a trained scientist, not a teacher. I couldn't stand sitting in the classrooms of UC Berkeley, UC Davis, Stanford and Yale.
I have more degrees than your family tree, which to say the least means i'm exorbitantly more trained in the sciences than you could ever possibly be.
Why is it every reputable scientist, are atheists?
Care to explain?
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 The first step in losing a debate is when you start the name calling. You lost as soon as you started. You may be smarter than me but it is clear that you have no maturity. I would love to continue this discussion when you grow up. If this is how they teach you to handle debates in California I am glad I did not receive my education there. Get back to me when you can cary a conversation without verbally bashing me. God bless.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
Calm down. Simmer down, religious boy.
You can't win one point with me , so you keep reverting to the name-calling card.
I'm waiting with bated breath.
Why is it every reputable scientist in every field of every discipline are atheists?
Emphasis on the word reputable.
It is true there are theologians, like yourself who proclaim to be scientists.
But at the end of the day, they are as moronic as you are.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 Where do you get your data that all scientist of all professions are atheist. How could you possibly know that.Is that childish theory of yours based only in the United States or worldwide.You clearly make up data to support your arguments. Last time I checked Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Max Planck, William Thomson Kelvin,Robert Boyle,Galileo Galilei ,Johannes Kepler,Nicholas Copernicus believed in god. Are these scientist famous enough for you?
loyolaf 4 months ago
@loyolaf
" Where do you get your data that all scientist of all professions are atheist."
Apparently you are illiterate.
Emphasis on the word 'reputable.'
Actually. Einstein was a deist, this is proven in his memoirs and by his surviving posterity. Newton was a believer in Spinoza's god. Kelvin and Planck were not theists, once again, you are a guilty of the very thing you are pointing out. Galilei, Kepler, and Copernicus HAD to be THEISTS in order to receive funding. FACT.
Romansteel13 4 months ago
@loyolaf
Semantics, he was talking about scientists that are alive. I.E. Hawking, Krauss, Smolin, and Greene.
Your argument is invalid, because we live in an age where religion is no longer necessary to live an ethical and fruitful life.
"You clearly make up data to support your arguments."
LOL, irony.
"Nicholas Copernicus believed in god."
Copernicus was burned at the stake by the Catholic church.
morrowindfan75 4 months ago
@Romansteel13 It is true that billions of muslims pray in mosques every day. And most of them are told that there is a reward in heaven for killing jews and christians. That doesn't mean they are following God. They are comitting murder. Just like the nazi's did when they slaughtered 6 million jews. The only difference is the reasoning. One tried to create a master race and the other wants to clense the earth of all non muslims.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
" It is true that billions of muslims pray in mosques every day. And most of them are told that there is a reward in heaven for killing jews and christians. That doesn't mean they are following God."
How arrogant of you.
I thought religion was supposed to teach humility?
You claim that 1 billion Muslims are wrong, and you are right.
Wow.
"That doesn't mean they are following God."
Many Muslims would disagree with you.
Muslims are more devout than Christians.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@Romansteel13 Actually you are reading my sons profile. I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. I do know a thing or two about life. I have realized that name calling is only reserved for people that are either losing an argument or have no knowledge of what they are talking about. And you call me ignorant and moronic. That's rich.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gasmaskinfidel
". I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. "
Well-educated, THAT is rich. People who boast about education are usually the dumbest in society.
Uh-huh, honey.
I'm currently dating Angelina Jolie, I own 33 rolls royces. I have a Boeing 757.
I'm 6'2, %5.23 (repeating) body fat.
Moron. Keep lying to yourself, feed yourself the malarkey. Moron.
Romansteel13 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
"Actually you are reading my sons profile. I am 43 years old, well educated, and supporting a family. I just havent signed up on youtube yet. You are not dealing with another empty headed youngster. "
Wow...
Talk about arrogance.
"Ignorance often begets confidence than does knowledge." - Immortal words spoken by Charles Darwin.
You are as about empty headed as that Romansteel13 douchebag.
You being 43 years old makes you worse than him.
morrowindfan75 7 months ago
@morrowindfan75 Its not arrogant when someone states facts. Even the philosophers of the past believed there is a higher power than mans existance. Neither one of us is higher up on the food chain than the other. The difference between you and I is that my mind is not closed to the possability of something greater than us. The closed minded are the ones full of arrogance. The devil's greatest achievement was convincing people that he does not exist.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
@gasmaskinfidel
" Its not arrogant when someone states facts. Even the philosophers of the past believed there is a higher power than mans existance. "
BAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHA.
Existence*
"The devil's greatest achievement was convincing people that he does not exist."
You've been watching too much Usual Suspects.
It's actually.
"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing the world he didn't exist."
Dance for me moron!
Dance!
morrowindfan75 7 months ago
@morrowindfan75 I like this discussion. I state facts and all you can do is correct my spelling and call me names. Is there anyone with the maturity level higher than that of a child? You must be a liberal.
gasmaskinfidel 7 months ago
Yeah, gay rights totally equates to the desire to make out in front of little children.
HappyColouredMarbles 1 year ago
Is there a better quality video of this on Youtube?
redcat608 1 year ago
ORIELLY IS A JOKE...........SAVAGE RULES
kevvcoot 1 year ago 2
Wow, this just goes to show both sides can be retarded.
kenotube 1 year ago
You are an Irish boy, O'Reilly!! You have lost your passions and have careened into schmuckhood. What the hell is the matter with you?!
irishmermaid4 1 year ago
Its so cute how O' Reilly thinks hes some kind of creditable news caster.
Savage kicks the shit out of him any day.
EzKrispy 1 year ago
Vile propagandists both.
timpipe 1 year ago
Bill O'really sucks.. Michael Savage rules..
StraightEdgeReviews 1 year ago
i wish bill o'reilly would shut the fuck up and let someone say their point
TheSamswam 1 year ago
Bill if you pointed that finger at me id rip it off and shove it up your hole... shithead
Eireboi 1 year ago
accept differences unless they harm society or laws. silly left with racism and etc :/
hexxmix 1 year ago
I shudder to think what has happened to this nation.
How did we go from Walter Cronkite to bill o'reilly?
smujismuj 1 year ago
HAHA! They are BOTH out of thier fucking minds!
splicedenergy 1 year ago
Bill O'Reilly is telling someone else that THEY overstate for attention??? What a hypocrite, not to mention a pathological liar!!!
DMenase24 1 year ago
Both guys are nuts, but O'Reilly seems to have a more realistic view on this issue than Savage, who seems to be spouting conspiracy theories.
kict951 1 year ago
@kict951 O'Reilly is way more reasonable than Savage is on a lot of issues. But thats how I see it
Steanu 1 year ago
@Steanu Agreed
kict951 1 year ago
O'Reilly's a phoney and most people know it. He's a lefty at his core.
flagwaver1969 2 years ago
@flagwaver1969 It is a left/right-paradime. It is all the same NWO-agenda...Please investigate.
Taxidriver987 2 years ago
@taxidriver987: The whole global governmental system is communist to the core. It's nothing but world communism under a variety of new names. Both parties have bought into it.
flagwaver1969 2 years ago
At Occidental University, Obama loved to hold forth on how the only answer was Marxist Leninism and that he would bring this about eventually. No really. zombietime com thepeoplescube com hotair com americanthinker com breitbart com biggovernment com michellemalkin com steynonline com any P.J O'Rourke lookingattheleft com PJTV com jihadwatch org climatedepot com eco imperialism org Tim Blair blog Andrew Bolt blog wattsupwiththat com dissectleft blogspot com colonelrobertneville blogspot com
gmakepiece 2 years ago
It is actually the illuminati pulling the strings. The Rothchilds, Rockefellers, Kissinger, The Vatican, The UK royal family, the Bilderberg group, Counsel on Foreign Relations, TriLateral Commission etc...
Taxidriver987 2 years ago
There is some truth to that statement. I would exclude the British royal family in entirety though. The monetary entities and global think tanks are part of something beyond most people's admission. There are 4 dynasties that control a nation: monetary, political, religious, educational (including media). The beast system wants all of these.
flagwaver1969 2 years ago
@Taxidriver987 "paradigm"
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
Go Micael Savage!!! God Loves You
and Peace Always Be with You my friend/ann
Kittyhawlk 2 years ago
savage pwned gay bill
ne0nsurf 2 years ago
hehe 2 of the most hated people in the country...you know after looking at michael savage bill doesnt seem so bad lol
hgates101 2 years ago
i love debates where i hate both people and i think they're embarassing i can't lose and it's just fun:D
Nilaikx 2 years ago
hes jewish u know
Russellt0228 2 years ago
Well, it's 2009 Michael Savage was right!
Why don't O"Reilly have another interview with Savage?
My money is on Savage, He'll kick the Crap out of him Verbally!
roge69charger 2 years ago 17
This has been flagged as spam show
When OReilly comes on, I switch to Fox BUSINESS News and watch Judge Andrew Napolitano on "Freedom Watch." I get the news of the day and learn about the Constitution! What a deal!
vechorik 4 months ago
Michael Savage speaks the truth and all of you Left Wing Liberals can't handle the truth. Savage would chew up and spit out any of you punks with little or no effort...Stand behind Michael Savage and this country may have a chance for survival.
Reinseug 2 years ago 9
stand behind michael savage... ha... i shit on you
chiachi77 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This guy's a fucking tool. Breeders? Gay people have children too now. Moron.
AroonR6 2 years ago
@AroonR6
how dare we give innocent children to homos?
michael savage tells the truth about kids hearing whats going on next door
since when have budhists or hindus been offended by any cross!!!
the muslims are the only ones who get offended so thats a bad example to use the 2 of the most open beautiful ideologies like hinduism and budhism
timewilltell7 2 years ago 2
The conservative movement in this country is a movement of idiocy. Its so so sad because I feel that elsewhere conservatism is a legitimate financial and social philosophy purported by intelligent people. Oh well.
AroonR6 2 years ago
I hate to say it but Bill was right....
soya5180 2 years ago
Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage together? o.o
I thought these two would fall in love with at first site and make out
stevenizback 2 years ago
Steve your a disgrace to people named steve
stevemtc1 2 years ago
Well you silly redneck, my name is actually 'Steven' so go eat a fork you disgrace.
stevenizback 2 years ago
"go eat a fork" What a dumbass you are
stevemtc1 2 years ago
Yeah go eat one. Goodbye redneck
stevenizback 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck off nigger
ne0nsurf 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ur mom's a nigger lol
stevenizback 2 years ago
michael savage sounds like a tough guy on the radio but he's a punk.
at8933 2 years ago
Michael Savage isn't just a raciest, or homophob, or sextist, he's a freakin' nationalist. Burn in Hell Savage. Bill'O...I don't care what you do.
ledawg1138 2 years ago
Comment removed
wayne2166 2 years ago
After all this-- Savage was right about everything he said.
masha732 2 years ago 2
Savage makes O'Reily look intelligent and objective.
jakefree25 2 years ago
"Did you just say sexuality is boring? You've been working too much."
Owned.
GlamMetalBrian 2 years ago 2
Michael Savage is the lowest of the low. He's absolute scum.
Gary4Gary4 2 years ago
bill oriely is so annoying
footballerncp 2 years ago
Shit should be put in the ground where it can do some good.
4Dmetricology 2 years ago
AAAAAAMAZING how much airtime this guy gets, oppose to Joan Walsh. Joan Walsh didn't nearly get the same airtime at this guy got. I'm shocked.
GlamaHouse 2 years ago
Bill says the secular movement wants "no moral judgements"
I say the secular movement is a moral imperative...we've made and continue to make moral judgements that "traditional values" as Bill calls them are in themselves wrong and based on BS.
EnhancementSmoker 2 years ago
Wow poor quality.
SlowRealization 2 years ago 3
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."-this means that they will not side with one side of one religion over another... laws From religious doctrines should be taught not forced upon people this man would force his views on you if he could. Good Luck
Rottedvideo 2 years ago 2
DR. SAVAGE IS MY HERO!
tigerwoodsondxm 2 years ago 13
@tigerwoodsondxm also savage is so fucking funny,
positivesecret 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SUPPORT SAVAGE:
SupportMichaelSavage [.] blogspot [.] com
curbyourenth1 2 years ago
Mr Savage rules!
orion90ryan 2 years ago 5
whats up with savages teeth?
bonesaw08 2 years ago
If u actually watched o'reilly instead of olberman you would see that everytime someone from the right is on he debates from the left and vice versa. this is called fair and balanced. Why would you want to boycott foxnews if it wasnt for them the only news we would have would be about bush/cheney and waterboarding. and as for the ntlfr8 o'reilly isnt in same group as rush and hannity.
PaulRyan4Pres 2 years ago 4
O'Reilly is one of the most skillful partisans I've seen. He really does have a lot of people fooled that he is objective, but he's just a partisan hack. This video proves it. I watched the Factor last night and he compared the left who had "glee" as Sanford went down in disgrace to people who stone others to death.
Yet, Bill says it's "legitimate" to overstate things as Savage does. It's OK to stone liberals to death, but not conservatives. Bill is 100% partisan hack.
tubular87 2 years ago 2
I understand he is a consevative, I was just making a response to rachelo. But he does give the viewer the chance to hear both sides of the debate.
PaulRyan4Pres 2 years ago
Anyone can bring a person who disagrees with them on their show a few times a week. That doesn't mean anything when you're talking 5 hours a week on the air. O'Reilly is a partisan though, regardless of how much token opposition he allows.
tubular87 2 years ago
O'Reilly SUX! Look who turned out to be right... Boycott Faux News
rachelabombdotcom 2 years ago
I wonder if this interview ... WAS DONE LIVE!!!
santana3212 2 years ago
This interview seems like a UFC fight..each guy sized the other up..then went after it..
And at the end of the day..history shows that Savage the conservative was right..and Bill the Republican was on TV with no radio show anymore..
tillman40 2 years ago 2
still great to this day
bs2137 2 years ago
western europeanize wtf.the problem is europe is getting stupid like usa not the other way around.people wake up these bastards want youre energy.shit on them do youre thing.want some real issues
watch?v=ftAdP61D8jI&feature=PlayList&p=D4084DF4E7DA5F58&index=0
letitgothinkpositive 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What a baffoon this man is.This nutjob actually makes o'reilly seem reasonable
scouser691 2 years ago
It's too bad that O'Reilly seems threatened by Michael. It would be nice if O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush supported each other - but I think there is just to much competition.
ntlfr8 2 years ago
It certainly would unify the right a bit, wouldn't it?
I've often wished they weren't in competition with each other as well.
But my Dad seems to think they're vying with each other because they all have big egos.
Illumirage 2 years ago
I've trashed Savage a little, but I'm starting to like him more. I'd like to see him do more one-on-one interviews.
It's interesting to see how a lot of radio personalities are more laid back and personable when they get on television. Of course, this being from 2003 has something to do with it. Savage has grown in power of late!
FigurinItOut 2 years ago 2
I like that!
FigurinItOut 2 years ago
and he calls bill the leprechaun !
richzimmer 2 years ago
That's funny!
FigurinItOut 2 years ago
If this interview took place in the summer of 09 Savage would shred him!
kickfostermac 2 years ago 2
I thought this interview was from 2005 though?
imyoursuperior2 2 years ago
nope 2003
imitator777 2 years ago
my how time flies
imyoursuperior2 2 years ago