Yesterday, Savage published a letter from the Texas Representative to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in which he urged her to urge Great Britain to remove Savage's name from the list of those banned from entering the country.

On Savage's radio program last night, Culberson said he was sure he would get some colleagues in the House to join him in that effort.

So, as is typical with a self-important blowhard like Savage, reality isn't good enough.

"Congress presses Hillary on Savage's behalf" reads the top headline on Savage's Web site today.

Congress? Really? Since when does one person out of more than 400 constitute a "Congress?"

This is along the lines of how Savage promoted the New Yorker profiled him over the summer: He claimed he was the "only media figure" in history to have been profiled by the magazine, an easily debunked lie.

It's almost pathologic how this guy needs to boost himself. What is he compensating for??

Keep the faith.

Need Help

I usually don't read communist garbage propaganda, like Huffington post, however someone has forwarded to me an article from this moron Rachel Weiner. For the record- she never called me to get my side of the story. She just published garbage about me to protect Comrade Obama. Can someone forward to them the pleadings: Motion for reconsideration and my declarations denying all the allegations.

Same thing with the Orange County Register. Please let me know, if they publish it. If they don't, then they are intentionally defaming me.

So in Dr. Orly Taitz' world, if you disagree with her, you are a communist. You are a moron. You are defaming her.

Apparently, Rep. John Culberson of Texas' 7th Congressional District has written a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, "urging" her to persuade the U.K to remove Savage from its list of banned people.

You will recall that former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith placed Savage on the list, part of which was released in May, because, she said, she was concerned that his opinions and past statements might incite Britain's Muslim population.

Savage has sued for defamation, and regularly hits his listeners up for money for the suit, even though he reportedly makes $10 million a year through his nationally syndicated radio program.

In his letter, Culberson says the reason Savage "needs" to go to Great Britain is because he must tend to the "rare plant specimens" he deposited in Kew Gardens in 1969. (You remember 1969. There was a war going on, but some able-bodied men spent their time prancing around the Fiji Islands picking plants and communing with the natives.)

"They are a world-class collection of rare medicinal plant specimens from Fiji and Tonga," Culberson said in his letter. "Dr. Savage needs to visit London for his scientific research, but he is unable to do so because of the Home Secretary's travel ban."

Culberson says in the letter that "in the weeks ahead," he will work with other members of Congress "to help protect Dr. Savage's First Amendment rights, and his ability to travel freely to Great Britain."

So that's the story now, Savage has to do scientific research?? Are you kidding me?

Why is it that in the six months since this story broke and Savage has been whining about being kept out of the UK, we have never, NEVER, heard that he needs to continue his "scientific research?" And how long has it been since he last did any scientific research, anyway?

Why have we not heard anything about research until now? Because it's bull, that's why.

I wrote to Kew Gardens several weeks ago, asking the keeper of the collections about Savage's (Michael Weiner, as he was known then) collection. I was told they couldn't find any reference to him or his collection. It was suggested that I provide them with some specimen names, as that might help in the search.

So much for the "world-class rare medicinal specimens," as Culberson's letter claims. They're so important, that Kew Gardens has relegated them to the dust bins.

But it seems even Rep. Culberson can't keep his story straight. Does Savage need to go to London to tend to his plants, or is the issue that his First Amendment rights have been compromised?

Last time I checked, Great Britain wasn't bound by the US Constitution. And just how have Savage's First Amendment rights been abridged? He still has the third-largest radio show in the US, he still writes books, he's still on the Internet, and his show can be heard via that Internet all over the world.

So tell us, Savage, what's the damage? What message are you not able to get out there?

And I have to say, for a US Congressman to complain about a foreign country exercising control over its borders -- one of the very things he compliments Savage for advancing in this country -- is the height of hypocrisy. The US also has a list of banned people. Will Culberson and whatever member of Congress joins him in this crusade also call for the trashing of that list?

He has to tend to his plant collection. Oh Myrtle.

Keep the faith.

Dave Gaubatz, the fellow who brought us the book "Muslim Mafia," is now seeking donors to fund his latest excursion. He needs $25,000, a Class A RV and two motorcycles. The idea is to go to various Sunni mosques in North Carolina and see what's going on.

You can read more about it at TalkingPointsMemo.com.

Apparently, Gaubatz' research leads him to believe there's something brewing amongst those North Carolinian Muslims, and he means to find out what it is. So he's going on a month-long journey with two interns and, it seems, the top donor to his cause.

This is a perfect opportunity for Savage, I think. Given the way he was doling out money a few months ago, he can clearly afford to pony up the $25,000 and the cost of renting a couple motorcycles and an RV for a month. A(For Pete's sake, the guy makes $10 million a year, according to published reports.)

Anyway, maybe Savage could have a portable studio built into the RV, and he could do his show on the road, give his listeners a day-by-day update of how the investigation is going.

I think I smell a ratings smash here. And think of the publicity he'd get.

So what do you say, Savage?

Friday, October 30, 2009 12:15 PM From: "David Pautsch" 

Good job, David.  Such wickedness needs to be exposed when patriots like my son have died to preserve the very liberties people like Obama and Carter are selling off wholesale.  The penalty for treason and traitors used to be the death penalty and, in England, the punishment meant being hanged, drawn and quartered. This is clearly appropriate here.

What can be done now?  I don't know.  Any ideas?

All I know is that I love the hope-giving quote you shared:  During the Revolutionary War, 70% of the people were either loyal to the British Crown or apathetic--the other 30% formed a new nation.

Since 1923

The L.W. Ramsey Advertising Agency

David Pautsch, President/CEO

I'm all for free speech. But just like you can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, you can't agitate for the hanging of our president or a federal judge. These people have abused their rights and are acting irresponsibly, at best.

It's one thing that this fellow wrote this. I know from personal experience that all comments on Taitz' Web site are approved by either her or her designee (I have commented several times, none of which have been approved). So she has as much culpability as anyone if some nutcase decides to make a statement for this "movement."

As an attorney, Taitz is an officer of the court. Certainly there are attorney ethics rules that speak to this behavior.

When will the feds take note of this and do something about it? Hopefully,before it's too late.

Keep the faith.

When I tuned in, Savage was blathering about a program on HBO called, "Curb Your Enthusiasm," starring "Seinfeld" creator Larry David. Apparently, Savage saw an episode in which religion was mocked.

He went on for a while about how David is a self-hating Jew, along the lines of Woody Allen, according to him. i guess if you are part of a religion and make fun of it, you're self-hating. Whatever.

And for the record, I think Savage has the self-hate market covered. But I digress.

What caught me about this program is that Savage called for a boycott of HBO for its airing of the program. Now, parts of his rant were blocked out by WOR in New York, but you could tell what he said by the context.

This is interesting, because Savage railed about how his free speech was being abridged back when the Council on American and Islamic Relations called for a boycott of Savage's program sponsors.

So the "Guardian of Free Speech" once again shows that he's all for freedom of expression, as long as he's the one doing the expressing.

You're a hypocrite, Savage.

Keep the faith.

And to top it off, the station substituted Michael Smerconish, who usually isn't on until after Savage, for the blowhard. The conservative commentator was on-site at Rutgers stadium in Piscataway, NJ, doing a pre-game hour.

I thought this was interesting because in the past, WOR has at least presented the first hour or so of Savage, then switched to Rutgers. But this time, the station decided to let another political commentator talk about college football instead.

Remember, WOR some time ago cut the last hour of Savage's program. The station now presents Savage from 6-8 p.m., followed by Smerconish. I guess that's because WOR grew tired of paying for an hour of canned programming.

I'm waiting for the day Savage is bumped for Lady Knights basketball. That will be a hoot.

Keep the faith.

Clinton and her Russian counterparts discussed a successor treaty to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires in December.

According to the Fox News report, the two sides "tentatively" agreed to a weapons inspection program that would allow Russian inspectors to "visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads."

This, Fox News breathlessly reports, "would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted."

Never one to let the thinnest of connections go unconnected, Savage on his radio program this evening declared that the agreement is a done deal, and that it would allow Russians into every US missile facility. he compared it to a Las Vegas blackjack dealer showing his cards to the players before they placed their bets. I'm still trying to figure that one out.

But my point is, Savage once again apparently did not read the story to which his Web site points. The agreement is tentative, the terms have not been confirmed, and there is no mention that the agreement includes every missile location in the country.

And as far as Fox News' assertion about this being the "most intrusive" weapons inspection program ever; says who? Is this Fox News' opinion, or did it come from someone who actually knows what they are talking about?

We don't know because Fox doesn't tell us (big surprise) and Savage doesn't bother to do any primary research (bigger surprise).

The world's laziest Ph.D. strikes again.

Savage's appearance was prompted by his being banned in May from entering the country. That sterling move was made by former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, prompting a massive Savage pity party and a lawsuit, (Oh, and endless and shameless begging on Savage's part for money for his "legal defense fund." This from a man who reportedly makes $10 million a year.)

But apparently, things have changed. According to the venerable World Net Daily, Savage's producer received an email this week, canceling his appearance.

The cancellation was confirmed by a columnist for the London Telegraph.

The Union cited legal and financial reasons for the move; WND took it at that and did not pursue the point. Which, of course, plays right into Savage's "world against me" mindset.

What doesn't British Prime Minister Gordon Brown want me to say? Savage mused to WND.com. Perhaps Brown is afraid that Savage will blow the lid off of why he was banned. Hmmm.

Well, probably not.

According to the Telegraph article, the main reason is that the Union could not afford the 5,000 British Pound cost for the technology. Apparently, the Union anted to do it through a low-cost Internet program called Skype, but Savage wanted high-tech equipment.

According to an email the Telegraph reporter received from the Union's president-elect:

We proposed to Dr Savage that he speak by videophone (/Skype), but his team demanded higher spec equipment than we were able to provide and were not willing to negotiate or contribute to the costs.

The £5000 plus that this event would have cost us - following their demands - was not an expense we could justify.

So i t's not so much pressure from the British government, but pressure from Savage himself that scuttled his big chance.

The Telegraph suggested that Savage be the bigger man and pay for the technology, and I agree. It's only about $8,000. C'mon Savage, you throw $50,000 around like it's Monopoly money, you can afford it.

Don't hold your breath.

Keep the faith.

No that's not enough for our favorite self-aggrandizing blowhard. He has to make it out to be more than it is.

At the bottom of Savage's Web site appears his claim that he is the "only media figure in history" to be profiled by the venerable magazine.

Really, Savage? You want to go with that?

A one-minute (literally one minute) Google search puts the lie to this claim.

There's a book available at Amazon.com called Life Stories: Profiles from the New Yorker that is, as its title implies, a collection of profiles. Included in this collection: Johnny Carson, newsman and publisher Henry Luce and Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author Edna Buchanan, media figures all.

And I found all that without even trying.

This guy's need for public acclaim borders on the psychotic. It's not good enough for Savage that a magazine with the reputation and readership of the New Yorker would even bother to include his name in an article, let alone slobber all over him with a press release-worthy profile, but then he has to make it out to be more than it is. Why would he lie about something that is so easily disproved? Because he knows the mouth-breathers who hang on his every word and take it as gospel won't check his veracity. "Savage said it, so it must be true," is their mantra.

And what happens to those of us who have the temerity to question their hero? There's never anything said about the substance of what we say (as is evidenced by the comments I've receive on other sites). No, the criticism takes the form of personal attacks, name-calling and other hallmarks of the Savage Nation indoctrination.

So it's no wonder that Savage feels safe in propping himself up with lies, when he knows the saps who listen to him and send him money for his "legal defense" (the man makes about $10 million a year, according to published reports. People, wake up!) will swallow what he gives them and then resort to schoolyard taunts against his critics.