Michael Savage: Banned by Britain to ‘Balance Least Wanted List’
By Josh Price
On the Thursday, July 23rd edition of The Savage Nation radio broadcast, conservative host Michael Savage told his listeners that they would be astounded by what he and his legal team had uncovered during the discovery phase of his lawsuit against former British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. Savage went on to say that once this information was released those in the conservative media who chose not to cover the story of Britain banning and putting him on a blacklist with Islamofascists and KKK members would have egg on their face. He wouldn’t name many names, but I will:
- RedState
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Human Events
- HotAir
- Glenn Beck
- Sean Hannity
- Rush Limbaugh
They all failed to report or opine on this story. Why? If they are such wonderful bearers of conservatism, why have they not come to the defense of the most conservative of all of them?
Perhaps these conservatives will come to Savage’s defense in light of the following report from London’s Daily Mail:
Emails written by Home Office officials privately acknowledged the ban on Mr Savage would provide ‘balance’ to a list dominated by Muslims – and linked the decision to Gordon Brown and Foreign Secretary David Miliband.
The officials admitted their action could look ‘duplicitous’ and cited his ‘homophobia’ as a reason the move would receive public support.
Now, correspondence released under Freedom of Information legislation suggests the banning of Mr Savage, whose real name is Michael Weiner, was based on a party political calculation made at the highest level of Government.
One message, sent by an unidentified Home Office official on November 27 last year, said that ‘with Weiner, I can understand that disclosure of the decision would help provide a balance of types of exclusion cases’.
The documents include a draft recommendation, marked ‘Restricted’, saying: ‘We will want to ensure that the names disclosed reflect the broad range of cases and are not all Islamic extremists.’
A further email confirmed the decision was approved at the highest level of Government, saying: ‘HO [Home Office] intend to include Weiner in their quarterly stats… Both the FS [Foreign Secretary] and PM [Prime Minister] are firmly behind listing and naming such people.’
One civil servant, again unnamed, counselled caution, saying: ‘I think we could be accused of duplicity in naming him’ – without explaining why – and even added that ‘the fact that he is homophobic does help’.
Every conservative news site should be covering this story, even if you don’t like or enjoy Michael Savage. This incident is much bigger than one person. If Savage had taken this lying down you can better believe people like Hannity and Limbaugh were next. Had this happened to Hannity or Limbaugh, however, they would have had the weight of FoxNews and other giants in the conservative media behind them. Michael Savage has had only the support of his listeners and donors to his legal fund, and a few blogs and radio hosts.
Let’s see if the “conservatives” listed above finally come to Savage’s defense. I’m sure they won’t, and that should tell you everything you need to know about their brand of conservatism.
UPDATE 1: It’s now 1 o’clock here on the east coast and still nothing on this story from the major conservative media outlets. Nothing from RedState, Michelle Malkin, or the first hour of Rush Limbaugh.
Amazing.
UPDATE 2: It’s 3:30 eastern and still nothing. Limbaugh’s show ended without a mention (shocking, I know); Drudge has removed the links to the story; RedState (again, shocking) is still silent; and we all know Hannity and his “Special Edition,” “Stop Whoever or Whatever Express” will surely mention this story.
Nope. In their eyes Sarah Palin’s farewell speech is much more important, after all, within a few months she’ll probably have a show on Fox News. (Remember, you read that here first).
But hey, at least Hannity can get wonderful guests like Al Sharpton, Charlie Rangel, Phil Donahue, Terry McCauliffe, etc. That should crystallize with you–that Sean “Great American” Hannity will allow liberal rats like those mentioned on his show to promote their garbage, yet he will not defend a fellow conservative unless his name is Limbaugh or Levin.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
Bill:
Have you actually read the article from the Daily Mail? It really doesn’t matter what list he was put on. The fact of the matter is that he is banned from the UK. Period.
Why? Because of anti-semitism and political correctness–placating the large Muslim population in Britain.
Please tell me you don’t support his being banned.
Josh, who knows? There might be some that do think he deserved it. Our ideas aren’t especially popular with the left. I don’t know what the other commenter was coming from, but you never know.
I’m kind of mystified by this as well. Hannity, Limbaugh, and many of the others run with the same crowd. Savage seems to be an outsider with that bunch. I do recall that O’Reilly had Savage on his show, but was actually rather hard on him. May be they view Savage as an outsider of sorts. Just conjecture on my part, but that’s all I have.
That’s not what the emails say. The emails refer to the so-called “name and shame” list, a subset of the “banned” list. For Savage or anyone else to make statements about why he was banned, based on these emails, is incorrect.