Article: Toward a More Savage Nation

by Selwyn Duke Selwynduke.com
February 23, 2007


The Shill Media are offering up the usual pabulum about presidential contenders, disgorging reportage about the vapid and venal that's more soap opera than scoop. With mock surprise they speak of the presidential aspirations of Rudy, Lady Macbeth and Brokeback Obama, as they treat platitudes and political sloganeering as if they were less empty than the minds that regurgitate them. But amidst the din of this much-ado — about-nothing quest for copy, the media have missed — perhaps quite conveniently — the only truly scintillating story of the 2008 election. Radio talk show host Michael Savage is mulling a run for the White House.

I'm sure many would say I was wasting words on wishes, as Savage is the darkest of horses. But there's a very good reason to welcome his entrance into the race, and I'll discuss this in a moment. First, though, let's take a peek into the life of the effervescent commentator.

Although Michael Savage has achieved fame through his exploits on radio and his four best-selling political books, this presidential dark horse is no one-trick pony, as he has lived a storied life and worn many hats. The son of an immigrant, he was raised in Queens, NY, in a home of most modest means. Savage attended public school and, applying himself to academics, vigorously pursued higher education, eventually earning a Ph.D. in Epidemiology and Nutrition Sciences from UC Berkeley.

Dr. Savage went on to become an innovator in the field of nutrition, authoring seventeen books on the subject, became a director of nutrition for a major corporation and spent years as a botanical Indiana Jones, exploring the south pacific in a search for plants with medicinal qualities.

It was only later in life that Savage plunged into talk radio, an effort that gave birth to his show, The Savage Nation, which boasts more than eight million listeners weekly. And on that show one gets a glimpse of what Michael Savage would bring to the presidential race.

The Savage Nation is a land where political correctness finds no safe harbor. Savage unabashedly waxes patriotic, as he fights the culture war with a battle cry of "Borders, language and culture." He rightly sounds the alarm about radical Islam, the invasion by illegal aliens, the ACLU, feminism and the homosexual mafia, enduring the slings and arrows of those who would tarnish the tellers of truth. He rails against the moral decay represented by pop tarts, Howard Stern, gangsta rappers and the prevalence of pornography.

Yet, despite Savage's impressive credentials as a traditionalist, he is no blind flag-waver or party loyalist. An independent thinker, he casts the discerning eye within as well as without, exposing America's true characteristic faults, as opposed to the imaginary ones of leftist conjurers. And his ire is no respecter of party lines, as he has often roasted George W. Bush on the same spit that has impaled the president's most ardent foes.

Lastly, although Savage is certainly versed in the hyperbole and acid-tongued rhetoric that are staples of talk radio, any honest listener is quickly struck by how his presentation is more sophistication than savagery. He not only nimbly segues from the emotional to the dialectical, from the earthly to the ethereal, and from satire to sober analysis, but is also equal parts philosopher, preacher and poet. He is unafraid to invoke biblical passages when providing insight on today's woes and demonstrates a grasp of history impressive enough to convince one that he has not forgotten the mistakes of the past. Simply put, he talks about everything the major presidential contenders should but never will.

And this brings me to why I would encourage Savage to don yet one more hat and then throw it into the ring. All the current high profile presidential contenders are pretenders, people who, for lack of either wisdom or will, will never broach the real issues or speak hard truths. They'll never talk honestly about immigration, Islam, the destruction of our culture and sovereignty or anything else that really matters, and, damnably, the Shill Media won't ask them the tough questions.

Michael Savage would, in the least, stand a chance of taking these soporific candidates and a slumbering people out of their comfort zone and bringing real issues and outside-the-box thinking to the forefront. Barring this, the politicians will just go through the motions and keep people in the Matrix, a controlled faux reality in which lies can masquerade as truth and liars can carry the day. The end result would be another general election with a socialist on the left and a garden-variety statist on the right, another choice between the lesser of two evils.

So it's not really about whether Michael Savage can win but, rather, the opportunity to force politicking sentient programs in a virus-ridden system to deal with relevant data. It's a task that may be impossible, as even Neo might be trumped by the neo-cons. But maybe, just perhaps, Dr. Savage can help administer that red pill.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selwyn Duke is a columnist, public speaker, and Internet entrepreneur whose work has been published widely online and in print. His articles appear at RenewAmerica, American Thinker, The Conservative Voice, and Blogcritics, as well as many other sites. He has been featured in The American Conservative (Pat Buchanan's magazine), on the Rush Limbaugh Show, and has a regular column in Christian Music Perspective.

Article: Information Warfare, CNN & Hillary

Information Warfare, CNN & Hillary
The Fifth Column Lance Fairchok, Featured Writer December 5, 2007

“It is a free press...There are laws to protect the freedom of the press's speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press.” – Mark Twain

One of the fundamental objectives of information warfare is to gain dominance of the information environment, to shape it in such a way that you control the messages your target audience sees. It also means pushing messages that undercut an opponent’s advantage wherever and whenever possible. Getting the message out is often the most difficult task. Using the press and the media, both print and broadcast are the most efficient and effective. Our military stresses that the truth is the best message. In Iraq, this means showing the Iraqis that Al Qaeda is their enemy; that democracy will bring prosperity and security, and of course pointing out the true nature of Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism. In domestic American politics, it is not that simple.

The latest GOP debates, hosted by CNN, revealed an insidious brand of political information warfare, one where the press and a political party conspire to deceive the American people. CNN denies wrongdoing of course, excusing a blatant setup as an oversight. Do not believe it. At every step, at every level, there was collusion and coordination with Democrat Party strategists to diminish the impact of the Republican candidates, to paint Republicans as fringe and to obscure their message. The Democrats will react with outrage and indignation at this accusation. The louder and more strident the denial, the more likely it will silence the accuser, and the more obvious it becomes that the denial is just another tactic.

CNN portrayed Democrat party operatives as undecided voters, average Americans with honest questions. They were in fact Democrat activists, advocates and sympathizers; their questions designed to reinforce negative stereotypes about conservatives: “Do you take the Bible literally?” “Should women who have abortions be jailed?” “Why aren’t gays in the military?” “Why do Black people dislike Republicans?” “Do you support water-boarding?”

The questions were not about issues that concern most Americans; they are not the issues that are at stake in this election. They are the sidelines, the liberal and far left focus of MoveOn.org and Code Pink, chosen precisely because they blocked valid inquiry from concerned citizens and prevented any conservative issue from snowballing, especially an issue the polls tell Democrats they cannot control. It was a Democrat information warfare triumph, made possible by its allies in CNN and the naiveté of the Republican Party.

The manipulation we witnessed during the Republican debates should convince every American that the peoples’ business is not what motivates the Democrats, nor is it service to the nation or an honest battle of ideas. The citizen’s participation in the political process is inconvenient and unpredictable. The citizen is at best a tool, an electoral simpleton to be used by elites smarter than they are, to elect “progressive” leaders more capable than the electorates’ choices would be. The voice of the citizen has been replaced by ideologues and activists with pre-scripted monologues, our perceptions are something to cleverly manipulate, our national debates merely an opportunity for deceit.

The information war we see today began long ago, at a time when we were complacent, confident our institutions and ideals would endure, respected and obeyed. Those days are gone. Indeed, all this would be clear if the left would receive honest scrutiny, if the media spotlight focused on them with half the intensity it does on conservatives. Let me list a few issues we know far too little about, issues the press will not pursue, issues the Democrats actively suppress, issues that should have enormous impact, or would be if the public were informed.

▪ Campaign finance corruption and money laundering conducted by Democrat fundraisers Norman Hsu, Sant Chatwal, Rehman Jinnah, Vinod Gupta, Samuel Rivera, Charlie Trie, Jimmy Chung and Aaron Tonken. These gentlemen facilitated the contribution of many millions of dollars to democrat campaigns and Hillary Clinton, several are the subject of ongoing investigations, some have been indicted, some have been convicted of campaign finance fraud, yet there is little curiosity in the press, no expose, no special reports.

▪ In New York, Chinese cooks, dishwashers, waiters and street merchants donated $1,000 and $2,000 each to the Clinton campaign, hundreds of thousands of dollars from workers who live in tenements and labor for low wages. Some have said they were instructed to contribute and would be paid back. Most cannot be located. Where are the intrepid investigators of the fourth estate?

▪ The Clinton propaganda machines MoveOn.org and Media Matters are funded in large part by infamous America hater George Soros. MoveOn.org is a political action committee that funnels propaganda and disinformation supporting Democrat causes. Claiming to be “A non-profit progressive research and information center,” Media Matters is the media spin machine for the information war. They spend millions supporting the Clinton campaign while claiming to be a non-profit media organization. These sites are full of misrepresentations, smears and slander. Why haven’t the press investigated the connections to the Clinton campaign, their funding and their relationship with George Soros?

▪ Code Pink appears at every high profile Senate hearing, disrupting the proceedings. Claiming to be “citizens that want to be heard,” they conduct political intimidation. How do they so consistently gain access? Why are they permitted to shout down and insult those giving testimony? After they have finished their theatrics, a command from an equally theatrical Democrat has them removed. The manipulation is so blatant it is astounding. In fact, Code Pink’s antics are encouraged by the Democrat leadership, sometimes even choreographed by them to embarrass and demean the administration while maintaining the appearance of propriety. It is another tactic in the information war. The ever-curious press gives this national embarrassment a pass.

▪ The Clintons regularly intimidate newspaper editors, TV commentators and publishers when unfavorable information might be forthcoming. Bill Clinton pressured ABC to alter its 6 hour docudrama "The Path To 9/11" and Hillary mounted a successful campaign to discredit and suppress Edward Klein's biography "The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It and How Far She'll Go to Become President." Television appearances by the author received intense Clinton pressure resulting in cancellations on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews" and CNN's “Paula Zahn Show.” Shows that were interested such as ABC's "Good Morning America," NBC's "Today" show, and CNN's "Aaron Brown" quietly withdrew. For the Clintons to have such power over the media is frightening. Where is the defense of freedom of speech?

▪ The Clinton campaign has been caught feeding softball questions to audiences for town hall meetings and campaign events. Staffers even have books with questions for specific demographics such as student, housewife, male or female, etc. Staffers then stand by the primed questioner so Hillary knows whom to call on. To appear sincere, engaged, and concerned she has to stage the public interaction. That speaks volumes as to what kind of President she would be. I would think this kind of obvious manipulation would warrant an editorial or two or a few press conference questions.

The possibility that a scheme like the one CNN orchestrated could be perpetrated by Republicans against Democrats is laughable for two reasons. The first is that it is glaringly dishonest and thus repugnant to most Republicans, and the second is that the press would crucify them, something about which the Democrats, for obvious reasons, seem unconcerned.

Let me be clear, we are not talking about simple political advertising; we are not talking about a politician pandering for votes. We are talking about the active organized manipulation of public perceptions, the cynical twisting of the truth and the creation of falsehoods. We are talking about focused misrepresentation, timed sensationalism, purposeful dishonesty and the worst kind of gutter political tactics. CNN has shown us that truth has become a malleable political commodity, irrelevant in the national debate. It is not the battle of ideas, the weighing of one position against the other; it is stagecraft and propaganda.

For Democrats, achieving power justifies every dishonest tactic, tactics which the press ignores or actively supports. Democratic Party politics means taking every opportunity to manipulate the public with planted questions, softball interviews, contrived issues, and fabrications. It means smearing our military heroes with false accusations in a time of war. It means enabling Code Pink activists to disrupt Senate hearings. It means limiting their top candidate’s availability to the press because hard questions answered poorly don’t poll well. It means counting on media sound bites, editorial smears, the omission of context and the public’s short memories. How can the average citizen now measure the worth of a candidate or party? If the press actively works to deceive us, how can we debate the great issues that confront our nation? The answer is that we cannot, and the Democrats want it that way.
Lance Fairchok is a Featured Writer for The New Media Journal. He is a retired Air Force Intelligence professional with many years of service in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. His travels left him fascinated by the wide differences in human cultural perceptions and how ideas spread in diverse populations. He writes and does research on a variety of subjects to include totalitarian ideologies, radical Islam and press accuracy. He currently teaches and writes on the Emerald Coast of Florida.