Many are unaware of this and I see it as crucially important information for left-leaning social activists. The energy drink Rockstar is owned by Michael Savage's son who runs Rockstar (along with his parents who are often in the office) under an assumed name so as not to leave a paper trail. How do I know? Saying so would endanger a friend who has provided me with this info under the condition of anonymity. Here is my point:

For years I have been trying to inform my progressive friends who also consume Rockstar of this. They all continue to buy and drink it, saying it's not really all that important who owns the company. I disagree. Mr. Savage regularly disparages "Rockstar drinking liberals" on his show. He is insulting you and you are paying him to do it. He could not do this legally if he owned the company outright as it is a violation of the law, so he hides behind his child in order to get free airtime mentioning his product. The number of people who are aware of this is very, very small. I will say it again: Mr. Savage is absolutely and heavily invested in the company Rockstar and is regularly in their corporate offices. He does not want this information exposed.

Tell everyone you know.

Seeing many of my friends regularly give this despicable man their money causes me great distress and highlights the deceptive practices used to funnel our money into the coffers of those who hate and despise us for not sharing in their hatred. I mention this every single time I see a can of Rockstar, in a store, in a house, a car, a friend's hand - anywhere. In the last two years of this direct action none of my friends have stopped using the product. Zero. Think on this.

If you are not a neocon supporter and you buy Rockstar energy drinks you are being conned and supporting these people with your hard earned money, which is now their money. They will use it against you.

Boycott Rockstar!!!
Boycott Michael Savage!!!
Boycott all neocon companies, products and information!!!

Free your body, free your mind, free yourself from lies and deception!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

About a year ago I began to notice that all of these so-called shock jocks look alike. They are all heavily jowled, fat-faced, sweaty-looking men who without their racially-divisive pornographic celebrity could not attract a woman or even a cockroach. They stink!

Their own filth will bring them down.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What else is there to say.I believe english is Limbaugh's first language?Maybe he's back on the oxycontin again.Highly suspicious.Fomenting violence in the streets as a strategy shows how desperate these neocons are to hang onto power.Rush never had much going for him as a human being.Now he's lost even that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Howard Stern ROCKS!

Jiff
www.privacy.cz.tc

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Several years ago, I wrote the following in a nonfiction book about politics:

George W. Bush is a conniving rightwing ideologue who hijacked the once respectable GOP and turned it into a sanctuary for the dregs of American society -― rich bigots, racist rednecks, gun nuts, homophobes, hypocrites, fascists, control freaks, Confederate flag wavers, ultraconservative Bible pounders -- the Trent Lotts, Tom Delays, Pat Robinsons, Ralph Reeds, Bill Bennetts, Charlton Hestons, Ann Coulters, Rush Limbaughs, G. Gordon Liddys, Sean Hannities ... the list goes on and on.

Those assorted groups and individuals have one thing in common. They hate liberals with a passion, which I don’t understand.

According to my dictionary, liberal means being a “free-man, not restricted,” someone who “favors political reform.” Our forefathers who fought the British Red Coats in 1776 fit that description perfectly. They, too, wanted unrestricted freedom and political reform.

In my mind, those brave souls and the millions of Americans like them today -- modern liberals -- are our nation's true patriots, not rightwing Republicans.

Liberals cherish individual freedom and will defend it to their deaths, if necessary. I think that’s admirable. Rightwing Republicans feel just the opposite. Listen to Talk Radio or watch Fox News, substitute “Jews” for “liberals” and you will get a taste of what Nazi Germany was like before WWII.

Vet against McCain
To find out why, click on the links below:

Songbird McCain (Popular anti-McCain Web site)
American View (My favorite anti-GOP Web site
Vietnam Veterans Against McCain (self-explanatory)
Vote Vets (supported by 100,000 by Iraq and Afghan war vets)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

any speech i hate to hear.

My radio came equipped with:

1) a dial

2) a power button

3) a requirement for an electrical source.

These features allow me to decide what and whether to listen. Considered an upgrade?

If things get too bad, I can write advertisers and stations and express my displeasure with their programming choices. It's worked before--M.S. used to have a TeeVee program, and so did R.L., for those not acquainted with the relevant history. I'm not a huge fan of television, but there's your model for effectively *attacking folks* who say things you consider outrageous.

Or, I suppose I could write a book wailing my hate over uppity folks who harbor conflicting opinions, and have the nerve to voice them.

"Hate speech" indeed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Has moved beyond "enabler" and on to "accessory". Are they all sleeping over there?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If we don't stop the bible thumping WHITE MALE SUPREMACY we're all going to end up like the POLYGAMISTS in Colorado City, Arizona...BAREFOOT AND PREGNANT.

POLYGAMISTS ALL VOTE REPUBLICAN.

This cideo clip will BLOW YOUR MIND.

http://www.bankingonheaven.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Howard Stern is a "shock jock." Opie and Anthony are/were "shock jocks." They do material that is designed to prove "shocking" to some segment of the audience.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Boortz, O'Reilly, et al. ad nauseam are NOT "shock jocks." They are ideologues. They do what they do as a means of giving direction, inciting their audiences toward action. They are, in fact, far worse than "shock jocks."

Calling that crowd "shock jocks" is both an insult to true practitioners of the craft, and a diminution of the real harm these right-wing hate merchants purvey with such commercial glee.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I know quite a few people who listen to Rush every day and watch FOX News and guys like Bill O'Reilly whenever possible. Day after day they immerse themselves in hate talk... but they make sure to go to church on Sunday!

Unfortunately for those of us who know these people, the Words of God don't have a chance against a constant barrage of angry hate speech they soak up all during the time they're not in church.

These people wind up being mad all the time and if you don't agree with them on ANYTHING, you're one of the enemy legions out to get 'em.

By the way, they don't tend to vote Democratic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It was a skillful evasive tactic but the story/fable about the tribal elder to close this piece was swell.

Basically he waffled the whole of the evidence the story put forward: that RWA hate-jocks provoke their audiences to act out. Moyers makes a presumptive statement inconsistent with facts or evidence: that the RWA hatejocks didn't/wouldn't have want to see the TN shooting. Sorry Bill, you blew it right there.

That's the problem wiht a liberal... they have extinction behavior down pat--as long as the sentiment is there that's enough. If the theater's on fire, call for caution and inaction, if an angry mob of brownshirts is bearing down on you with clubs and torches, just assume they don't really intend any harm towards you, not really.

Stoopid. These people are lethally dangerous and a threat to the nation state and body public alike. It's time to put human beings of that ilk "off the table" until they can get hold of themselves and act like people again. But on the Left, such progressive survival-awarness is called "radical"... oooh, watchit, don't wanna raise an alarm or nuttin.

I'm not going to participate in a repeat of Berlin 1938. When I see a fascist, I call 'em one. Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The reason the conservative talk show hosts are so popular is because the conservative message is rarely heard in the mainstream media.
The first time I heard Rush Limbaugh back in the 80's it was the first time I heard anyone talk about conservative ideas on the radio before.
When the FD was in play the talk shows I listened to were not only boring you could hear the subtle liberal slant in the opinions expressed and the choice of guests on the programs.
I know to many of you hard core libs the very thought of the conservative message being heard is anathema...that's too bad.
I would never want to shut down ideas opposed to mine as I am all for free speach.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Either he doesnt realize, doesnt care, or is unable to express the true paradigm here. These so called conservative talk show hosts are not conservatives. If you want to win the Info-war against them, that is the place to start. Because they hide behind the shield of Conservatism, and that gives them far more power than they would have if they were exposed. How do you disarm them? Start with a list of real conservative principles, and see how their rhetoric matches up to them. It doesnt. That makes them phony conservatives. Exposing this fact puts both liberals and conservatives against them. This program did not atempt to do that, and it will be ineffective because of it. Hell, we already have Rush Limbaugh attempting to incite violence. He could be charged with conspiracy to incite terrorism. That just speaks to the level of corruption we're dealing with. As if anyone needs to know...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Today on another thread, a poster named Illiteratilumen surfaced after (his words) "giving Alternet a break for awhile because of the hard-on the editors have for Sarah Palin."

Here's what Illiteratilumen said about me:

My bet is that you are a fraud who cannot be honest with himself or with the people who stumble upon your website or any other works you have out there.

My bet is that you are nothing more than a wanna-be journalist with too much time on your hands.

My bet is that you are so egotistical and morally bankrupt that you don't have a problem pretending to be a Vietnam veteran when you are probably not.

It is an insult to the Americans and Vietnamese who actually got caught up in that war.

End of Illiteratilumen's comment.

Last week, I responded to another GOP troll named Lionheart also has also personally attacked me in spite of AlterNet's NON-enforced policy against such postings. In my rebuttal to LionHeart, I wrote about "gettting caught up in the Vietnam War" this way:

I served my country honorably during the Vietnam War as a combat crewmember in the 320th SAC bomb wing stationed at Mather AFB, California.

One June 26, 1965, we flew "Arc Light One" -- the Strategic Air Command's first bombing mission of the war. Tragically, while flying through a typhoon at night, the historic operation turned into horror when two B52s from my wing collided and went down in flames over the South China Sea, killing eight crewmembers.

Years later, I wrote about Arc Light One in a nonfiction book this way:

To our rear, the second B52 wave, consisting of three-ship cells on five refueling tracks, approached the Air Refueling Control Points where their tankers should have been orbiting for the refueling rendezvous. To close the gap, the KCs were flying faster than normal and the bombers had slowed.

One cell of B52s used a different method to kill time -― the wrong one. Inexplicably, the three-ship cell made a 360-degree turn and flew through a formation on the adjacent track.

Two bombers from the 320th, one in each cell, collided and went down in flames. At least six crewmembers ejected and made it to the water, a surging maelstrom of churning waves. I knew some guys were alive because I could hear their emergency radio beacons in my headset.

I remember the noise as a high-pitched whine that tailed off at the end, then repeated itself. In my brain, it sounded like “Help me...help me...help me...”

I couldn’t help thinking what a terrible and sad way to die -— alone, soaked and seasick in a one-man dinghy thousands of miles from home.

If I’d been alone in the cockpit, I would have cried.

Imagine how you would feel after living through that experience, and then to be called a "fake" veteran by Lionheart.

I can't begin to express my outrage over such a scurrilous charge, one of many by LionHeart that AlerNet has tolerated despite its policy against personal attacks on other posters.

That goes double for.Illiteratilumen.

Vet against McCain
To find out why, click on the links below:

Songbird McCain (Popular anti-McCain Web site)
American View (My favorite anti-GOP Web site
Vietnam Veterans Against McCain (self-explanatory)
Vote Vets (supported by 100,000 Iraq and Afghan war vets)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can't stop folks from hating someone. Ignorant prAggressives, ignorant neo-clowns, ignorant libbuhruls...

...ignorant folks will resort to irrational hatred, and you can't stop them, and that's not to imply that all acts of hatred are irrational. Someone might hate Sharia law due to its inhumane treatment of women and it's enforcment tactics, and draw a series of cartoons "Cartoon Jihad" to satire/lampoon that particular cult. Members of that cult, then, might irrationally take up torches and guns and go after those who have insulted their feelings towards their superstition.

Can you fathom the difference between expression and violence, then? If you try really, really, hard? Did ya' ever learn about sticks and stones versus words?

There are laws against committing acts of violence. You can't start making laws in a liberal society against thoughts, ideas, and political speech unless they are directly threatening to someone's safety: "I hates me some libbuhruls" (and any variation thereof) just doesn't reach the threshhold for using government lawyers backed by government troops to shut someone up.

I get that you don't like the Limbaughs and Savages of the world going "nana-boo-boo". I get it, I understand, and I sympathize. Do something about it--join me in tuning it out.

Or shill a book based on how much you hate certain speech. Some folks are more resistant to boredom than others, I suppose?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... there's always been someone somewhere to hate!

the largest human bloodbath of the 19th century was fought over it...
the largest human death toll in known times happened in the 20th century because of it!
and there is still people with enough hate in them to see it last a few more times
before we finally get it!

call it what you want...
racism, nationalism, communism ...republicanism...
they all seem to end in a "ISM" are politically motivated and is about the "hatred" of something,
its the glue that's become the Raison d'être!

time to recognize it for what it is... hate!
and long past time to legislate an end to it... hate!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]