San Francisco fails in attack on Michael Savage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmfBWb... A single vote by a San Francisco Board of Supervisors member whose grandfather emigrated from China seven decades ago has halted in its tracks a proposal to condemn as "hate speech" radio personality Michael Savage's criticism of illegal aliens in the United States. The vote tonight was 9-1, with 3rd generation San Franciscan Ed Jew turning in the veto vote, after getting up and affirming Savage's First Amendment right to express his opinion. Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval had introduced a resolution condemning the radio talker, and after the vote called for the tally to be rescinded and the proposal sent to committee, which essentially is a polite way of letting the issue die. "For the record, I do not agree with comments allegedly made by Mr. Savage, but the First Amendment gives him the right to make those comments," Jew said. Savage noted another protest is scheduled tomorrow by the illegals. "I would hope that my own government would be interested enough to go out to the station tomorrow, logically assuming that most of them are here illegally - after all this was illegal aliens protesting today, stirred up and fomented in a mob action by a supervisor who supports Hugo Chavez, an enemy of America," he said. "You don't have to be a Sherlock to put two and two together. They're enemies of the state, they're enemies of the people and they're enemies of me. But they're here illegally ... they're criminals," he said. Sandoval had pushed hard for a unanimous endorsement of his resolution, required for it to be approved by the San Francisco board. He said condemnation of immigrants "leads to the beating of Muslim-Americans and many other Americans." "This attempt to vilify Latino-Americans will not be tolerated," he said. "We are saying first that we are recognizing this speech is hateful and we are condemning it." "Don't fool yourselves. This kind of speech just incites behavior that is nothing short of hysteria," he said. "It's the kind of hysterical behavior we saw in Nazi Germany 60 years ago." Earlier, one of the nation's top civil rights attorneys has offered his assistance to Savage in suing Sandoval. Daniel A. Horowitz of Oakland, Calif., wrote to Savage after Sandoval introduced his resolution. "You have a strong federal civil rights action that you can file against Supervisor Sandoval and the city of San Francisco," he advised. "You have a constitutional right to state your political opinions and no city official has the right to lie about what you said or to call for a mob to come to your door to threaten you and to try to have you fired." Horowitz said the Civil Rights Act of 1871, designed to tame the terror of the Ku Klux Klan, can be used as the basis for a federal civil rights action against the official and the city. "You are protected by this civil rights act because you are the victim of the same type of mob terror that (the) Klan used to inflict," wrote Horowitz. "This terror is being organized against you simply because people do not like what you say. Translated into legal language, you are being attacked by a type of terrorist because you have exercised your First Amendment rights." Horowitz wrote: "The Klansman in your case is wearing a suit and not a white robe. He is doing his dirty work under the hood of his elected position instead of under the coward's hood of the Klan." The call for action against Savage came at the same time city supervisors were considering using taxpayer dollars to pay for immigrants' green cards and citizenship. Sandoval's resolution condemns Savage for "defamatory language ... against immigrants." The resolution was in response to Savage's July 5 broadcast, when the talker commented on a group of students who had announced they were fasting in support of changes in immigration policy. "I would say, let them fast until they starve to death," quipped Savage, "then that solves the problem." Sandoval's resolution calls Savage's comments "symbolic of hatred and racism." "I really for the life of me cannot understand why there is not more media outrage to what Michael Savage said," Sandoval said. He plans to hold a press conference on the steps of City Hall Tuesday just before the entire Board of Supervisors votes on his resolution against Savage. "The intolerant and racist comments of Michael Savage demand a strong condemnation," Sandoval insisted. In response, Horowitz wrote: "This Sandoval fellow accused you of using 'defamatory language ... against immigrants.' Of course, this statement by Sandoval is slander. I have listened to your show. You are very complimentary of immigrants. In fact, you frequently mention that your parents were immigrants. The slander by Sandoval arises because he claims that your opposition to illegal entry into this country is somehow a stand against Hispanics. That is like saying that every Border Patrol agent and every Congress person is anti-immigrant because they don't condone illegal border crossing." "I will back you, Michael, and file this lawsuit if you wish," concluded Horowitz. http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article...

---

Whos gonna listen to San Fransisco anyway besides gays? I listen to Michael even more now. I actually like him better then the others.

---

Local channel 2 coverage http://www.ktvu.com/video/13898630/de...

---

"I would say, let them fast until they starve to death," quipped Savage, "then that solves the problem."

 I agree; wholly reasonable logic because then their deaths would be on the hands of the ILLEGALS for not leaving the US as they LAWFULLY should have; then on the hands of the US government for NOT DEPORTING the ILLEGALS that these students are protesting for in a much more timely fashion.

---

  Isnt it horrible that we dont let all the world make us guilty for what they decide to do wrong?

---

---

I like Michael also.  I don't get to hear him often but every time I do I applaud because he is saying exactly what I say, but do not have the audience.

 

 

---

Michael Savage is a brilliant man, who has written scores of books and has a couple of Phds.

He speaks the truth and that's why the radical left in places like San Francisco can't stand him.

My definition of a liberal is a person who believes that "You have a right to express your opinion, as long as it agrees with theirs." Michael Savage exposes this hypocrisy dailey, on his radio program.

 One other observation: Has anyone noticed that most of these radicals groups are inundated by manly looking women and sissified looking men?

---

I wish we could get him here on radio in central Indiana. I'd listen to him. From what I have heard, we are on the same page. After viewing the video I know we are.

Regarding the video. That appears to be what anarchy is about. Those burned folk are floundering in their own hypocritical sess pool.

---