Skip to comments.Michael Savage: Line U.S. border with tanks
Posted on 03/19/2007 2:18:25 AM PDT by Man50D
Tanks keeping illegal immigrants from U.S. borders? Nukes dropped on terrorist sanctuaries? Iraqi insurgent strongholds barb-wired and then decimated?
That's just a glimpse into the future should ultra-opinionated radio host Michael Savage have his way and become the next leader of the free world.
The highly rated talker, whose books include "The Enemy Within" and "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions," announced last month he may leave the airwaves, join the political zoo and run for top office in the United States. Since then, over five million people affirmed they want him to seek the presidency, according to an online opinion poll conducted by Savage Productions.
In a WND interview today, the radio personality spelled out his official presidential policies on some of today's burning issues:
Regarding U.S. border control, Savage favors stationing the National Guard along America's periphery "with orders to shoot to kill."
"I'd also put tanks on the border if necessary. I'd reinforce the border after making sure we still have a border following so many years of having it melted down under George Bush," Savage said.
Savage's formula for winning the war on terror is simple: "My platform would be nuke 'em and rebuke 'em. Hit them hard. Hit them fast and get out of the Middle East. Teach them we are the most powerful nation on earth and when our interests and their interests conflict, we are going to win."
The talker maintains America can "absolutely" be victorious in Iraq.
He said as president he would "send maximum force into the Sunni triangle and after giving them 72 hours to evacuate their women and children, turn on the Sadar City area and not go door to door, but decimate the entire area after barb-wiring the place and letting the women and children out."
Following his prescribed military campaign, Savage said Iraq would be divided into four quadrants as determined by the League of Nations after World War I.
He then turned to Iran, calling it a "great nation of great people," but deeming Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "an anomaly, the Hitler of our time."
Savage advocated an international coalition unified against Ahmadinejad to ensure Iranians "have a chance to live in freedom and peace."
Savage said his presidential candidacy can do no harm, since the GOP in its current state is "incapable of winning." He knocked all the current Republican candidates as "good Republicans and bad conservatives. None of them evidence much of a conservative orientation."
While Savage is considering a run, vice-presidential candidates shouldn't be lining up just yet.
"I'm just exploring," he said in a previous online interview. "I could not continue to do my radio show. I've been told that once you've declared yourself a candidate and you're openly running, you have to give up your career in the media for obviously good reasons."
Savage, whose first books were published by WND, is now the nation's third-most popular talk-show host, reaching about 8 million fans listening on more than 370 stations weekly. His show is consistently ranked one of the nation's most influential, and is rated No. 1 in multiple major city markets, including his home base in San Francisco.
The Talk Radio Network host often sparks national news. Savage was credited with bringing the Dubai Ports World deal to national attention. The deal would have turned over U.S. port operations to the Middle Eastern company. A public outrage ensued, forcing Dubai Ports World to scuttle their plan.
Savage has written a series of best sellers. His latest, "The Political Zoo," is a satirical criticism of both Republicans and Democrats.
He'll be a real Weiner with the "glass parking lot" crowd.
Well, I'm part of that crowd. And who'd thunk it since I'm an african american female, and from Washington, DC to boot.
Right, plus the 5 million who would vote for him for president. By the way, I wouldn't necessarily vote for him, but some of the things he advocates are exactly my sentiments and have been long before he stated them.
Tanks? It would be more effective to put a 50 cal every 500 yards.
I have long felt the same way.
We're either serious, or we're not.
There is no middle ground.
A pinch of humility is a necessary ingredient for successful national leadership. This rules out Michael Savage - unfortunately (because I really like the idea of tanks, *AND* 50 cals!) :)
Ummmmm. That still leaves a bit of a gap.
Many other talk show hosts think Savage is nuts. I do not.
General "Blackjack" Pershing and his troops were sent to stop border incursions almost 100 years ago.
I can only infer that the reason our politicians have stood by and allowed this invasion is fear of losing votes from illegals. Disgusting.
Wait isnt' this the ultra liberal position on Iraq? Aren't we supposed to withdraw all troops and then when the Terrorists create multiple training camps. Iraqi govt collapses and Iran and Saudi Arabia are at open war and a mushroom cloud goes up over Tel Aviv thats when were supposed to say enough already and make the entire region a glass parking lot. I mean typically, historically speaking that is the correct Democrat response ala Harry Truman nuking not one but 2 Japanese cities to in his estimation bring about a quick end to a war that may well have lasted 10 more years or more... Tokyo was next too...
Tanks on the border and exterminate our enemies? Sounds perfect to me rather then playing politics with both.
Tanks on the border to Mexico would be better than what we have now! Not that I would ever vote for Savage, but someone needs to do something QUICK about our borders!!!
Not sure what you mean.
Tanks on the border is the latest display of symbolism over substance. The tanks are useless unless there is the political will to command the military to literally pull the trigger. Moreover, I agree that .50 cals and M-60s at closer intervals will work better and cost less.
That's unpossible--we were out of nukes after Nagasaki.
Nuking Japan twisted Truman's brain forever. During the Korean war he insisted we drop leaflets over North Korean factories 48 hours ahead of time, warning them of our impending bombing. We've been fighting wars Truman style ever since.
Weiner does say many things that I agree with, however, he usually can't talk for more than a half hour before he says something so incredibly stupid I have to turn him off. He may have a Phd., but he has the reasoning skills of a ten year-old.
Good for you!
That "crowd" that you have joined is growing by the day.
At last I can say "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" and know that I'm not alone.
Huh? What great president has lacked a monumental ego?
I've listened to his show off and on since his days as a fill-in at KGO, and I have to agree with that. I also could not bring myself to vote for a guy who lacks control over his emotions to the degree that I'd worry about him trying to launch strategic weapons out of a fit of personal rage.
I agree that we need a doer and not a talker in the White House who brooks no BS, but I see Savage as a bit of a loose cannon. I'd rather not have a President who has to be told by his subordinates, "I cannot comply, that is an unlawful order, sir".
Not to mention more economical. Can you imagine the amount of "AlGore" carbon credits that would be needed to operate that many M1's? /sarc
Michael Savage is a very strong candidate compared to the rest of the pitiful bunch of Republicans we have so far. He is also the only one who would NOT submit his questions in advance for Hillary in any debate.
I can't help thinking that a great many problems around the world would be solved if your President was not - as he is - urbane and restrained, but was in fact a disgruntled ex-dockworker with poor impulse control.
Michael Savage is angry, but so are a whole lot of contemporary Americans. Half of them want to destroy America, the other half want to destroy America's enemies. The two groups are like gas and a match. Our current crop of Republicans don't see this, and their "moderate" leftist trends are worsening the divide because they are increasingly aiding America's enemies and hastening its implosion. Without sane conservatism in our government, insanity will prevail and we could be headed for an internal struggle the likes of which hasn't been seen since Stalin or Hitler. Passions are mounting and we need a leader. Currently, we have none, and none in the making. Voids are often filled, badly.
Mine also, but I think Weiner is mentally deranged.
There currently is no real penalty for making the attempt to cross. If you get caught and sent back, you just try again. We will continue to get illegal immigration as long as the rewards (working in US for better wages than Mexico) exceed the penalties
"I've listened to his show off and on since his days as a fill-in at KGO, and I have to agree with that. I also could not bring myself to vote for a guy who lacks control over his emotions to the degree that I'd worry about him trying to launch strategic weapons out of a fit of personal rage."
I believe you've just described Hillary!
Lot's of people say that without providing proof, other than he "sounds" crazy at times.
I've heard enough of him to know.
I certainly have my disagreements with Bush, but if we're going to nominate a San Francisco talk-show host- my pick would be Lee Rogers. He's deadly right-on, without the screaming antics. I have never heard a moonbat caller call his show that didn't get shot down in flames.
Oh, joy. Another Ross Perot.
Yes, his ego is quite large, but I think he would mainly be trying to influence the type of ideas that would emerge as the electioneering goes into full force.
That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. But don't expect everyone else to agree with you.
Your name isn't Amelia Erhardt by any chance is it?
BTW, I don't think he'll be leaving the airwaves any time soon.
The pay's too good.
It's like I tell my wife. I'm always right ;-).
Sounding crazy every day he is on the air, is substantial proof that he is indeed, crazy. If he could make it three hours in one setting without sounding crazy, then, I might give him the benefit of the doubt.
There we go again with the "sounding crazy." It's his style to get hot and bothered about the subjects he talks about, but some people can't handle it. I don't worry about the ranting; it's good to burn off a little steam from time to time.
I think it means it takes a whole lot more than 5 million votes to win. It's gonna take anyone over 50 million votes to win the presidency.
He's an egotist taht sounds like Howard Dean.
Grab another cup of coffee.
Maybe, however, most times he speaks sanely even in his insanity.
Maybe it's the insane who think he's insane.
I'll never tell!
Mike talks about Iraq being divided into 3 parts.
One for the Sunnis, one for the Shiites, and one for the Kurds.
He makes ethnic cleansing look like a boy scout jamboree!