R
radiohawkins
Guest
Anyone think he will get suspended?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What did he do?
He basically stated that Autism is being over diagnosed and that lots of children just need stronger parenting. I am not a fan of "The Savage Nation" but I defend his right to his opinions. Some stations might back out but I doubt there will be a suspension.
I don't know about the Autism child, but there are plenty of kids out there who need their parents to be parents and not their "friends", so he's right on 100%. Yes, I'm not a fan of The Savage Nation, ether, because he always seems so angry, and I believe there is a better way to get your point across than be angry every night, BUT I'd defend his right to do his show his way and to voice his opinions as he sees fit as long as he doesn't use "vulger" language ("F" word, the Lord's name in vain, any derogitory word about any ethnic group, etc) to express his opinions. From the times I've listened to his show, that is NOT his style so it isn't an issue.
If he'd just calm down I'd be a loyal listener, but can't stand the ranting and raving with all the anger and angst he dishes up constantly. Educate me, inform me, but don't yell at me. There's emnough stress and rudeness in the world that most of us have to put up with without his adding to it. The unfortunate thing is, he has good stuff to say if he'd calm down and not put people, at least me, on edge. His show airs at night and then I want to wind down, not get riled up, so I guess I'll never be one of his loyal listeners. I know he's got like the #3 or 4 show nationally, so obviously I'm in the minority here.
If he'd just calm down I'd be a loyal listener, but can't stand the ranting and raving with all the anger and angst he dishes up constantly. Educate me, inform me, but don't yell at me. There's emnough stress and rudeness in the world that most of us have to put up with without his adding to it. The unfortunate thing is, he has good stuff to say if he'd calm down and not put people, at least me, on edge. His show airs at night and then I want to wind down, not get riled up, so I guess I'll never be one of his loyal listeners. I know he's got like the #3 or 4 show nationally, so obviously I'm in the minority here.
B
Biz Listener
Guest
MikefromDelaware said:BUT I'd defend his right to do his show his way and to voice his opinions as he sees fit as long as he doesn't use "vulger" language ("F" word, the Lord's name in vain, any derogitory word about any ethnic group, etc) to express his opinions. From the times I've listened to his show, that is NOT his style so it isn't an issue.
I'd defend his right to voice his opinions without any disclaimers. I'd defend anyone's right to voice their opinions, even people I disagree with or find obnoxious. Of course, I won't listen to anyone who is obnoxious (or smarmy, or condescending, or half a dozen other descriptions) myself, but that's why I equipped my radio with both a station tuning mechanism that enables me to change stations, and an on-off switch.
You should consider getting those accessories for your own radio.
My guess is that Savage will eventually go the way of Stern and Imus one of these days. Maybe not in the near future, but it will probably happen. I mean he's was fired from MSNBC after his anti-gay remarks already, and for quiet some time now there has been disdain for him within some conservative circles, with Bernard Goldberg placing Savage on his "100 people screwing up America" list.
I like having Savage there as an outlet for non political angst. At least he's not a shill for any particular political party.
It seems that he at least is a voice against forces/institutions that bother common individuals and usually doesn't label them democrat or republican.
I'd never be able to listen to him too often through. The tone of his rants is off-putting.
It seems that he at least is a voice against forces/institutions that bother common individuals and usually doesn't label them democrat or republican.
I'd never be able to listen to him too often through. The tone of his rants is off-putting.
Of course, I won't listen to anyone who is obnoxious (or smarmy, or condescending, or half a dozen other descriptions) myself, but that's why I equipped my radio with both a station tuning mechanism that enables me to change stations, and an on-off switch.
You should consider getting those accessories for your own radio.
Obviously, you don't get it. I do have an on/off switch and I do use the dial to change stations when I'm dissatisfied with the programing on a given station. However, I do not agree with anyone's right to go on the public airwaves and use vulgar language like the "F" word, or derogitory words used to belittle people of a given race or gender, or the use of the Lord's name in vain. There is no reason that such language should be allowed on the air waves. It never was prior to recent years. That sort of language only cheapens the product and serves no purpose other than to say we are an ignorant nation. To Michael Savage's credit, as I do not listen to his program for the reasons I stated in my previous post, I defend his right to rant as he does and give him much credit for the quality of the language he uses in those rants. I just choose NOT to listen to those rants as that seems to be all he does. A rant, sometimes is justified, as I'm sure you'll consider this post to be a rant, but if ALL my posts were like this then you'd be justified in saying that why can't that guy ever post without a rant. That's exactly my point with Savage. He's got a lot of great things to say, but why be angry all the time???
It's obvious that this forum is full of lefty communist Savage haters because I see a thread bashing him EVERY week at least, why don't you people give it a rest?
I agree with brian65, that Savage offers an interesting point of view and he's not a pawn of the Republican party like Hannity or Limbaugh. But as brian65 also said, Savage's tone of his rants is off-putting. In other words for those who'd rather call people communists rather than have an intelligent discussion, even though I may agree with some of what Savage says, he's difficult to listen to, especially at night (his show airs on WILM from 7pm to 10pm), because all he does is rant and rave. Who wants to be all worked up each night. If he'd calm himself down, my guess is he'd attract people to his show that he now has no chance of getting to listen for more than a few moments.
How many people like going to a church where the preacher yells at them for an hour? Same thing. There are plenty of other Bible believeing God fearing Christian churches where the preacher makes his point and convicts you of your sin and that you can receive the saving grace of Jesus Christ without yelling and screaming at you. Same thing with talk radio. So I choose to use the station selector and tune else where rather than listen to Savage's rant, and that DOES NOT make me or anyone else with similar views a communist.
You should consider getting those accessories for your own radio.
Obviously, you don't get it. I do have an on/off switch and I do use the dial to change stations when I'm dissatisfied with the programing on a given station. However, I do not agree with anyone's right to go on the public airwaves and use vulgar language like the "F" word, or derogitory words used to belittle people of a given race or gender, or the use of the Lord's name in vain. There is no reason that such language should be allowed on the air waves. It never was prior to recent years. That sort of language only cheapens the product and serves no purpose other than to say we are an ignorant nation. To Michael Savage's credit, as I do not listen to his program for the reasons I stated in my previous post, I defend his right to rant as he does and give him much credit for the quality of the language he uses in those rants. I just choose NOT to listen to those rants as that seems to be all he does. A rant, sometimes is justified, as I'm sure you'll consider this post to be a rant, but if ALL my posts were like this then you'd be justified in saying that why can't that guy ever post without a rant. That's exactly my point with Savage. He's got a lot of great things to say, but why be angry all the time???
It's obvious that this forum is full of lefty communist Savage haters because I see a thread bashing him EVERY week at least, why don't you people give it a rest?
I agree with brian65, that Savage offers an interesting point of view and he's not a pawn of the Republican party like Hannity or Limbaugh. But as brian65 also said, Savage's tone of his rants is off-putting. In other words for those who'd rather call people communists rather than have an intelligent discussion, even though I may agree with some of what Savage says, he's difficult to listen to, especially at night (his show airs on WILM from 7pm to 10pm), because all he does is rant and rave. Who wants to be all worked up each night. If he'd calm himself down, my guess is he'd attract people to his show that he now has no chance of getting to listen for more than a few moments.
How many people like going to a church where the preacher yells at them for an hour? Same thing. There are plenty of other Bible believeing God fearing Christian churches where the preacher makes his point and convicts you of your sin and that you can receive the saving grace of Jesus Christ without yelling and screaming at you. Same thing with talk radio. So I choose to use the station selector and tune else where rather than listen to Savage's rant, and that DOES NOT make me or anyone else with similar views a communist.
B
Biz Listener
Guest
MikefromDelaware said:Obviously, you don't get it. I do have an on/off switch and I do use the dial to change stations when I'm dissatisfied with the programing on a given station. However, I do not agree with anyone's right to go on the public airwaves and use vulgar language like the "F" word, or derogitory words used to belittle people of a given race or gender, or the use of the Lord's name in vain. There is no reason that such language should be allowed on the air waves. It never was prior to recent years. That sort of language only cheapens the product and serves no purpose other than to say we are an ignorant nation. To Michael Savage's credit, as I do not listen to his program for the reasons I stated in my previous post, I defend his right to rant as he does and give him much credit for the quality of the language he uses in those rants. I just choose NOT to listen to those rants as that seems to be all he does. A rant, sometimes is justified, as I'm sure you'll consider this post to be a rant, but if ALL my posts were like this then you'd be justified in saying that why can't that guy ever post without a rant. That's exactly my point with Savage. He's got a lot of great things to say, but why be angry all the time???
I do not know why Savage is angry. I do not much care why Savage is angry. If he chooses to be angry, that's his business. But as for what should be "allowed" on the airwaves, I don't know anyone who has the moral right or authority to make that call. I do, however, know far too many people who feel they are the ones anointed to protect the public.
As for taking the Lord's name in vain, why don't you get in an equally intense lather over all those commercials on the radio encouraging people to covet their neighbors' things? If you're going to insist that any of the Ten Commandments be enforced by the government, then you should be consistent and insist that they ALL be equally enforced. Which means, of course, shutting down all transmitters on the Sabbath.
MikefromDelaware said:How many people like going to a church where the preacher yells at them for an hour? Same thing. There are plenty of other Bible believeing God fearing Christian churches where the preacher makes his point and convicts you of your sin and that you can receive the saving grace of Jesus Christ without yelling and screaming at you. Same thing with talk radio. So I choose to use the station selector and tune else where rather than listen to Savage's rant, and that DOES NOT make me or anyone else with similar views a communist.
I'm not going to go there. Your idea of "Christian" theology and mine are so far apart that there's no way we'll ever come anywhere close to agreement. Suffice it to say that I don't know anyone with the authority to dictate what political or social opinions should be permitted on the airwaves, nor the tone of how those opinions should be expressed. And I pray to God that no one gets the authority to dictate what theology is permitted on the air, either.
We either have freedom, or we don't. Having someone dictate a little bit about what can or cannot be transmitted over the airwaves is like being a little bit pregnant. Given the choice between freedom of expression on the radio and government censorship, I'll take freedom. Even if that means I have to exercise my own control over my own radio.
With the advent of radio in the 1920's, that bandwith of electronic frequency (that originates within the United States) has been regulated and controled by the US government. It's only since the late 1960's that the standard for what could or couldn't be said on the air has changed where the standard keeps getting lower and lower. We all know the George Carlin routine of the 7 words you couldn't say on radio or TV. Well back then you couldn't say those words on the air, because the government said you couldn't.
So IF, I understand, your point of view correctly, you believe that freedom means you get to do or say anything you want, because you're an American. Well, you may want to drive down the left side of the road at any speed you choose, but if you do, you'll soon be in a head on collision or get stopped and issued a ticket, because the law says that we drive on the right side of the road. Did the government take your freedom away? No, there are standards, rules or laws that need to be in place to keep order in a society or you'd end up with everyone doing what they want and to heck with everyone else, that's anarchy.
You also do not have a right or the freedom to yell "FIRE" in a theatre. You don't have the right to carry a gun anywhere you want as in the Wild West days. The government does have the right and authority to have some standards of what can be said in a public forum like radio or TV. Would you want your grandmother, mother, sister, or daughter exposed to some of the vulgar or violent language that has become so popular today? You may not have been offended by the Janet Jackson breast bearing event at the Super Bowl, but would you want your mother or daughter to have been exposed to say Justin Timberlakes pants opening up and his maleness sticking out for all to see? Without some sort of standards these sorts of things could and would be seen as some folks don't think it's a problem or offensive. It's one thing to have an "R" rated show late at night when kids are not watching and telling the listener or viewer that the content may be offensive for some. That at least gives the listener warning that if they have a stricter standard than a "R" rated show, then you better tune to another station during this upcoming program. The issue with the Janet Jackson Super Bowl show was that it was billed as a "G" rated family event. So families were watching. You shouldn't have to worrry what your kids are going to see or hear during a family type show or a "G" rated show.
As I said earlier, I don't think using the Lord's name in vain is appropriate, but I also don't think that the media should use Allah's name or Confusous, or the God of Abraham's nane in vain either. Not because I'm a follower of Allah's, Confusous, or a Jew, but because that is showing a lack of respect for the people of that faith. So it's not just the Christian faith I wish to show respect for, but all faiths, even though I am a Christian. I also don't believe that hate language against anyone's race or ethnic background, or sexual lifestyle should be used on the air. Respect for one on the air should mean respect for all on the air. That's the standard we used to have in this country, and I believe we should keep that standard. You apparently have a different opinion, which you are entitled to have, but I strongly disagree with your point of view, which is my right.
As this is a radio chat and not a religious chat, I'm not going to get into a theological discussion with you, as I don't know what your beliefs are, and you shouldn't assume you know what mine are, based on a sentence or two or comment in on this board. The only point I was trying to make was that as Savage yells a lot and is offensive, many a preacher does the same thing with the same result.
So IF, I understand, your point of view correctly, you believe that freedom means you get to do or say anything you want, because you're an American. Well, you may want to drive down the left side of the road at any speed you choose, but if you do, you'll soon be in a head on collision or get stopped and issued a ticket, because the law says that we drive on the right side of the road. Did the government take your freedom away? No, there are standards, rules or laws that need to be in place to keep order in a society or you'd end up with everyone doing what they want and to heck with everyone else, that's anarchy.
You also do not have a right or the freedom to yell "FIRE" in a theatre. You don't have the right to carry a gun anywhere you want as in the Wild West days. The government does have the right and authority to have some standards of what can be said in a public forum like radio or TV. Would you want your grandmother, mother, sister, or daughter exposed to some of the vulgar or violent language that has become so popular today? You may not have been offended by the Janet Jackson breast bearing event at the Super Bowl, but would you want your mother or daughter to have been exposed to say Justin Timberlakes pants opening up and his maleness sticking out for all to see? Without some sort of standards these sorts of things could and would be seen as some folks don't think it's a problem or offensive. It's one thing to have an "R" rated show late at night when kids are not watching and telling the listener or viewer that the content may be offensive for some. That at least gives the listener warning that if they have a stricter standard than a "R" rated show, then you better tune to another station during this upcoming program. The issue with the Janet Jackson Super Bowl show was that it was billed as a "G" rated family event. So families were watching. You shouldn't have to worrry what your kids are going to see or hear during a family type show or a "G" rated show.
As I said earlier, I don't think using the Lord's name in vain is appropriate, but I also don't think that the media should use Allah's name or Confusous, or the God of Abraham's nane in vain either. Not because I'm a follower of Allah's, Confusous, or a Jew, but because that is showing a lack of respect for the people of that faith. So it's not just the Christian faith I wish to show respect for, but all faiths, even though I am a Christian. I also don't believe that hate language against anyone's race or ethnic background, or sexual lifestyle should be used on the air. Respect for one on the air should mean respect for all on the air. That's the standard we used to have in this country, and I believe we should keep that standard. You apparently have a different opinion, which you are entitled to have, but I strongly disagree with your point of view, which is my right.
As this is a radio chat and not a religious chat, I'm not going to get into a theological discussion with you, as I don't know what your beliefs are, and you shouldn't assume you know what mine are, based on a sentence or two or comment in on this board. The only point I was trying to make was that as Savage yells a lot and is offensive, many a preacher does the same thing with the same result.
B
Biz Listener
Guest
MikefromDelaware said:With the advent of radio in the 1920's, that bandwith of electronic frequency (that originates within the United States) has been regulated and controled by the US government. It's only since the late 1960's that the standard for what could or couldn't be said on the air has changed where the standard keeps getting lower and lower. We all know the George Carlin routine of the 7 words you couldn't say on radio or TV. Well back then you couldn't say those words on the air, because the government said you couldn't.
Which demonstrates that back in the Roaring 20's, which were 80 years ago, when AM radio was the only mass communication medium that existed, before there was television, cable television, the internet, direct broadcast satellite radio, satellite television, and who knows what else in the way of new mass media that will be developed, the government did what the people in government thought was needed at the time. And, as the saying goes, that was then and this is now.
Back in the 1800's, you couldn't say "leg" in mixed company or women would get the vapors. You had to say "limb". Back in the 1950's, you couldn't show a bedroom of a married couple on television that had a double bed. Forget whether there were people in the bed, you couldn't show an empty double bed in a married couple's bedroom on TV. In the 1930's and 40's, hardened criminals called each other "dirty rats" in movies, because everything was bowdlerized.
None of those examples prove that censorship was right, and none of those things made the media or society any better. If the airwaves truly "belong to the people", then the people should be the ones who decide what gets broadcast by using their on/off switches and station tuners. The people aren't at the mercy of the broadcasters regarding what is transmitted, the broadcasters are at the mercy of the listeners who decide what to tune in to. The American public gets the radio content that they want, it's just that some bluenoses think they know better than the mass audience what's "good for them".
I, too, believe in free speech. However, sometimes people will go too far. I haven't heard words from any family who may have a child afflicted with autism supporting Mr. Savage. I have a grandchild who will be 11 years old in October. He's autistic and hasn't been able to speak a word since birth! Mr. Savage's words are very hurtful. Persons who have an autistic child in their lives can better identify with the pain Savage has caused. I'd give anything to hear my little guy speak a word. His condition isn't as bad as a lot of kids I've seen during these past 10 years... and, I'm extremely grateful. People like Mr. Savage should try to be more sensitive about others. He can maintain his opinions about others, but should try to use a bit of tact about his statements and feelings. A lot of you have taken his statements lightly. I assure you, you wouldn't be as kind if you had an autistic child within your family.
Then, there's the matter concerning racist remarks made by Mr. Savage. In essence, he stated that Blacks coached their kids to fake having asthma to obtain better benefits from social services. He's exactly the type of guy we don't need on the airwaves. When you have someone broadcasting his or her racist opinions, it merely help to breed more racists. Many times, it's very easy for listeners to believe the words of a popular radio host. I support his right to have his own opinion; however, some opinions should be kept to one's self. Providing the TRUTH to people is one thing; just spitting out your poison is ANOTHER.
Then, there's the matter concerning racist remarks made by Mr. Savage. In essence, he stated that Blacks coached their kids to fake having asthma to obtain better benefits from social services. He's exactly the type of guy we don't need on the airwaves. When you have someone broadcasting his or her racist opinions, it merely help to breed more racists. Many times, it's very easy for listeners to believe the words of a popular radio host. I support his right to have his own opinion; however, some opinions should be kept to one's self. Providing the TRUTH to people is one thing; just spitting out your poison is ANOTHER.
An on/off switch is NOT the answer. Saying that a person has a choice not to listen does not solve the problem. If that were true, we would never have problems. Ranting, raving, and breeding hatred create problems even if a person turns off the station. You still have those persons remaining listeners who absorb what's being said. If those persons accept Savage's rantings as truths, then we're creating additional problems.
Why do you see people getting into trouble day in and day out due to their mouths?! For those of you who feel an on/off switch is the solution to matters such as this, YOU JUST DON'T GET THE POINT!!!!
Why do you see people getting into trouble day in and day out due to their mouths?! For those of you who feel an on/off switch is the solution to matters such as this, YOU JUST DON'T GET THE POINT!!!!
BillFromBaltimore makes some good points. Hate filled talk be it racist, religous, political, etc is offensive no matter who is saying it, be it Rev Wright (Obama's former pastor) or Michael Savage. Saying the sort of things about Autistic children certainly doesn't help those families who have first hand experience with such a child. Think how better our world would be, if all people, not just those on the air, but them included, thought about how their words affected people. If we would make an effort to be more considerate of the other person in both our words and our deeds. Words are very powerful, they can up lift or they can destroy. A wise man once said, that you become what you absorb by reading, listening, and watching. If you fill yourself with trashy items, you become trashy in thought and attitude, just as a person who eats a lot of greasy food becomes a greasy person.
It seems to my ear and eye that our nation is abandoning the former standard and settling for the lesser lack of a standard that allows the lowest common denominator (what used to be called "gutter language") to run rampant and pollute the airwaves. Yes indeed there is an ON/OFF switch and a station or channel selector. I do use them. So I've protected my families ears and eyes, but as anyone over 40 can see, unfortuately way too many other families were not protected and are becoming what they see and hear.
This of course isn't new. Read the book a Pillar of Iron by Taylor Caldwell (which is a fictional book based on research she did of Ancient Rome, Julius Ceasar, Cicero, etc) and many others like this for some additonal persective on how cultures can degenerate and what ultimately happens.
It seems to my ear and eye that our nation is abandoning the former standard and settling for the lesser lack of a standard that allows the lowest common denominator (what used to be called "gutter language") to run rampant and pollute the airwaves. Yes indeed there is an ON/OFF switch and a station or channel selector. I do use them. So I've protected my families ears and eyes, but as anyone over 40 can see, unfortuately way too many other families were not protected and are becoming what they see and hear.
This of course isn't new. Read the book a Pillar of Iron by Taylor Caldwell (which is a fictional book based on research she did of Ancient Rome, Julius Ceasar, Cicero, etc) and many others like this for some additonal persective on how cultures can degenerate and what ultimately happens.
I really wonder if Savage confused ADD with Autism. ADD has been a quick diagnosis for many years but Autism is a bit more serious and not the result of bad parenting.
But as usual, a pundit makes an ass out of him/herself and refuse to admit error. But this is a post 9/11 world and as you know Savage along with others like him love America more than you do. If you disagree then that means you hate America and want our soldiers to cut and run as you greet people with your damn terrorist fist bump.
But as usual, a pundit makes an ass out of him/herself and refuse to admit error. But this is a post 9/11 world and as you know Savage along with others like him love America more than you do. If you disagree then that means you hate America and want our soldiers to cut and run as you greet people with your damn terrorist fist bump.
B
Biz Listener
Guest
Bill and Mike,
You're taking this way beyond mere radio. If you want to institute a new regime of thought police to make sure no one ever gets exposed to thoughts or ideas you don't like, go for it. That's a risky business and something I want no part of.
You're taking this way beyond mere radio. If you want to institute a new regime of thought police to make sure no one ever gets exposed to thoughts or ideas you don't like, go for it. That's a risky business and something I want no part of.
BillFromBaltimore said:An on/off switch is NOT the answer. Saying that a person has a choice not to listen does not solve the problem. If that were true, we would never have problems. Ranting, raving, and breeding hatred create problems even if a person turns off the station. You still have those persons remaining listeners who absorb what's being said. If those persons accept Savage's rantings as truths, then we're creating additional problems.
Why do you see people getting into trouble day in and day out due to their mouths?! For those of you who feel an on/off switch is the solution to matters such as this, YOU JUST DON'T GET THE POINT!!!!
An on/off switch and the tuning dial are the answer, further than that is the right to contact advertisers and stations to make your feelings heard. Finally it is within the rights of any station owner to carry, or not whatever they wish, however the bottom line can often push their decisions. What we do not want is a situation that approaches censorship. We have decided about indecent content, however the free expression of ideas is what makes this country and our form of government possible. Once we impede free expression we risk having a dictatorship and the tyranny that ensues.
Now I as a matter of personal taste I find Mr. Weiner's rantings and angry tirades unappealing. I was however at one point kind of forced to hear him as I worked for a man who liked him and kept the radio in the office and his car tuned to Savage. I can say that often he makes valid points and that it is his way of presenting them that offends my sensibilities. On the other hand I often disagree with talk radio hosts but I don't choose my programs by whether or not I concur, in fact in my quest for knowledge and understanding I prefer to hear from people who have opposing ideas.
In this case Savage has made some valid arguments regarding the tendency of medical and psychological practitioners to over prescribe medications and treat misbehavior as an illness rather than a disciplinary problem. Some of this is at the behest of pharmaceutical companies who want to increase their sales. Some of this is because we now live in a society where we want a magic pill or potion to solve our problems and cure us of all ills. The problem I see here is that this is an issue of too much sensitivity to be fodder for someone like Michael Savage. The way he talks, yelling and making every attack or criticism of him an attack on all of conservative talk radio makes him and his views, even when valid, unappealing to most. While he may give the opponents of conservatism ammunition he is in no way representative of all of conservative talk.
By the way I have taken the time to listen to all of Savages on air comments and have read his web site commentary. I have also listen to many commentaries by others ranging from Ed Schultz to Neal Boortz so I am not uniformed on this matter as I fear many others are. Most people have reacted to hearsay or excerpts, not hearing all of the surrounding remarks he made himself.
If Savage is talking about ADD, I'd have to agree that the medical community is using Rydalin, etc as a silver bullet to make boys be docile and act like girls. Granted there are some kids who actually have a real problem with focusing abilities and might need some assistance, but from what I've observed, as the schools have eliminated recess for elementary kids, these youngsters need a chance to run off that energy they generate so they say "little Johnny needs Rydalin". Of course, back in my day, the public and private school teacher and principal could also administer disciple, via your rear end, to an overly disruptive child without the ACLU or the parents wanting to sue the teacher, principal or the school district.
One of the problems in our nation today is that many parents want to be friends with their kids rather than parents. These "sperm donars and egg donars" who birth offspring need to step up to the plate and become actual parents. A good parent teaches their child the difference between right and wrong, being consider of others, etc. Even non-religious parents in the 1950's taught their kids this stuff, so it has nothing to do with being religious. I had friends of non-religious parents and the kids were just as well behaved as the Christian and Jewish kids, because even the non-religious parents knew the difference between right and wrong behavior. There simply are common sense values that do seem to mirror the 10 Commandments and which most of our American law was anchored that gave American society that guidance to keep it from going crazy as our American society now seems to be headed. That's not creating a "thought police" as you claim. Many non-religous "secular" studies agree that children DO need guidance from their parents.
If that was what Savage was trying to say, but got confused and said Autism rather than ADD I could agree with you, but Autism is NOT ADD and those kids do need special help.
Maybe Savage should pre-read his monologue BEFORE he reads it on air to be sure his writer got his facts straight.
One of the problems in our nation today is that many parents want to be friends with their kids rather than parents. These "sperm donars and egg donars" who birth offspring need to step up to the plate and become actual parents. A good parent teaches their child the difference between right and wrong, being consider of others, etc. Even non-religious parents in the 1950's taught their kids this stuff, so it has nothing to do with being religious. I had friends of non-religious parents and the kids were just as well behaved as the Christian and Jewish kids, because even the non-religious parents knew the difference between right and wrong behavior. There simply are common sense values that do seem to mirror the 10 Commandments and which most of our American law was anchored that gave American society that guidance to keep it from going crazy as our American society now seems to be headed. That's not creating a "thought police" as you claim. Many non-religous "secular" studies agree that children DO need guidance from their parents.
If that was what Savage was trying to say, but got confused and said Autism rather than ADD I could agree with you, but Autism is NOT ADD and those kids do need special help.
Maybe Savage should pre-read his monologue BEFORE he reads it on air to be sure his writer got his facts straight.
B
board_manager
Guest
Some posts have been relocated to Take It Outside
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,105246.msg829894.html#msg829894
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,105246.msg829894.html#msg829894
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.