Michael Savage to run for Gov of CA!

Avatar for goofyfoot
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Michael Savage to run for Gov of CA!
18
Fri, 07-25-2003 - 10:41am
LOL! He is one funny guy... You go dude!!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33750

Michael Savage, the controversial, nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and best-selling author, is considering a run for California governor in the fall recall election of incumbent Gray Davis. Gov. Michael Savage?

Savage made the announcement on his radio program last night and is soliciting comments on the idea from his fans on his website.

His "Savage Nation" program is heard on more than 300 affiliates from coast to coast, but the talker is based in San Francisco.

State officials set an Oct. 7 date for the election to recall Davis, giving him less than three months to fight for his political life.

FULL STORY AT LINK.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Fri, 07-25-2003 - 12:27pm
>"Hospitalization of the mentally-ill homeless. Again, Savage claims this would save $3 billion to $5 billion dollars in welfare payments."<

That's interesting. Undoing the work of your idol, Gov. Reagan.

Would these been state run hospitals?

Don't people need a fixed address to receive welfare? If so they're not homeless.

Another point most mentally ill, if they can't hold job, can receive Social Security.

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for goofyfoot
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 07-25-2003 - 3:43pm
Actually, I doubt I could vote for a guy like Michael. He's more of an entertainer- funny as hell. Reminds me of when Howard Stern ran for Mayor of NY; strictly shock value. At this point ANYONE is better than Davis (at least the PEOPLE of CA seem to think so at this point).

I'm glad I moved out of that state after 15 years. It's a perfect example of what happens when socialist liberalism gets out of control!

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-2003
Mon, 07-28-2003 - 3:56pm
Hence the reason why I never plan to take one step into CA.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Wed, 07-30-2003 - 6:59pm
Micheal Savage is repugnant. Anyone who says gays " should get AIDS and die" is evil. I don't care what your beliefs wanting people to suffer, spread disease and die is just wrong. Of course these are the people who think AIDS is a gay issue, when in fact the highest new infection rates are in heterosexual women. And no it's not funny, either. I mean I don't like conservatives but I don't advocate we take all the guns they want to keep line them up in the street and shoot them.
Avatar for goofyfoot
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-31-2003 - 9:43am
You are wrong.

<>

If you listened to Savage post-facto, you will know someone called in and started harrassing HIM and was cut off the air; Savage responded DIRECTLY to this a$$hole thinking his mike was off. Bad mistake on Savage's part, but he did apologize and I don't believe it was meant for anyone BUT the jerk on the other line.

<>

Bullsh*t. Over 50% of all HIV transmissions are through GAY SEX. Cases are already going up again in the gay communities BECAUSE gay men are getting complacent with the newer drugs available. HIV drug users only account for 1-2%. So, do the math.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Thu, 07-31-2003 - 10:09am
Umm, you're wrong. Wrong. Yes, cases are going up in the gay community but they don't account for 50% of all transmissions. Men who have sex with men ( that includes those that have wives or girlfriends and occasionallyu switch hit, a much larger number than most people realize BTW)account for 42% at this date. The other 48% are hetreosexual or IDU's. Furthermore, new HIv cases are resurging across all segments of American society. If you note the highest increases in transmission are amongst heterosexual women. They are gaining on men( whho still comprise 70% of HIV cases) And I stand by my claim that the largest increases of transmission are amongst heterosexual women. The largest jumps are coming in married women who have cheating and some times bisexual husbands. If you don't believe me check with the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/news/At-a-Glance.pdf

But this is besides the point, because I don't think that because someone is gay means they should get AIDS. And that type of mentality and refusal to address the issue is what lead to the AIDS epidemic in the first place. Where infection rates are booming globally in places like Africa, China, India, and Russia. Even your Republican buddies Bill Frist and GW agree. But there are always people who are willing to see it as somebody else's problem.

Furthermore, I don't care if he said what he said off the mike or not, I've been pissed at lots of people in my life but I've never wished them death. Yeah, it was a mistake for Savage showing his true character and all. It's immoral, and shows exactly what kind of person Micheal Savage is, not someone who should be running a state.
Avatar for goofyfoot
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-31-2003 - 10:48am
"Bisexual husbands" = GAY SEX. Nuff said. (nt)
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-03-2003
Fri, 08-01-2003 - 10:02am
You know I don't usually do this...You can't beat me on the numbers so you make a stupid comment. OK, I'll try to go slow and break this down so you can understand. Gay, Bisexual, any man sleeping with a man for whatever reason constitutes 42 % of HIV transmissions. The other 48% are through heterosexual sex or IDU's. Also let it be stated for the record that virtually no transmissions of HIV are known through lesbian sex (also known as Gay sex). So virtually all the women in the world with HIV ,several million, got the virus through heterosexual sex, and many of the children with HIV got the virus through the mother.

Ah, nevermind, it's obvious you are a homophobic idiot like Savage. Why don't you become his running mate? I'm sure you'll do very well in San Francisco.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-2003
Sat, 08-02-2003 - 12:59am
REPLY TO POST 5:

The AIDS epidemic: It would not surprise me if infected heterosexual women are on the rise... if I remember right... it is easier for a woman to get HIV than a man in heterosexual intercourse. A male has this little tiny hole that HIV can crawl into... but when a man ejaculates... HIV is just pumped into the woman. Intercourse causes tiny cuts in the woman's vagina... HIV enters... bingo... woman is infected. However, when she goes to sleep with another man, unless the man has a cut on his penis, that HIV has to go into his urethra through a tiny hole. Does an increase in HIV in one portion of the population mean they are more promsicuous than the next? No. It depends on a number of factors including open sores and the amount of contact one has with the other's bodily fluids.


Your quote:

"I mean I don't like conservatives but I don't advocate we take all the guns they want to keep line them up in the street and shoot them."

I don't think this has to do with the gay men and AIDS conversation. I fail to see your reasoning here. Actually, this opens up another can of worms... which I was going to talk about... but I won't. We can leave the gun debate and your trashing of the second ammendmant for another time.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Sat, 08-02-2003 - 11:37am
Yeah, a bigot like Savage really has a chance. Two thumbs up for anyone stupid enough to waste time and money on this piece of garbage.

Pages