Savage Nation

I was listening to a snippet of Michael Savage yesterday on my way to pick up the kids from school. Yes, I do listen to the right-wing shock-jock, but no, I'm not the biggest Savage fan out there. I especially don't think he's infallible like Keith Olbermann groupies think Olbermann is, as this entry will show. But I do think that many of his points are largely overlooked by the MSM (that's the right-wing bloggers acronym for "main stream media", in case you were wondering) yet resonate with the majority of Americans today.

In spite of that, there was one thing that didn't jive with what he said yesterday.

In one segment, Savage was taking calls and some bloke called in on the topic of Iran
versus Israel and the United States. He said that if one surveyed the history of the Bible, you would see that when God's people strayed from being faithful, God would raise up an enemy army that would smite them and send them back to dependence on God. Then God would destroy that enemy and God's people would be saved and simultaneously humbled.

Savage responded with one of his previously stated opinions that all the decadence and sinful pleasure-seeking that America (and, indeed the West in general) is guilty of doesn't hold a candle to the evil that is Islamofascism. You know; what with the beheadings and suppression and murdering of women, rival sects, and so-called "infidels". In short, God's ire toward the Middle East should be stronger than His judgment of the West.

The very next caller called in to discuss the candidacy of Rudy Giuliani for the 2008 presidential race. She asserted that his stance on terrorism was really strong and was therefore a good candidate for the office of the President. Savage retorted with a clever quip: "if the terrorists were armed with suicide squeegees, I would agree", implying, of course that Giuliani was good at curbing petty crime in New York City but not suited for the Presidency. "What is [Giuliani's] stance on issues that matter?" he asked rhetorically. Savage went on to state that Giuliani was in line with the farthest left of democrats when it comes to abortion and gay marriage issues.

But wait.

Didn't Savage just say that Islamofascist terrorism was the greatest threat and the greatest evil and that all the 'bath houses' and 'pleasure-seeking' Americans experience doesn't even compare to it? Then why the flip-flop when a candidate is strong on terrorism but not so much on those other issues?

I suppose you could argue that there are even better candidates out there that are tough in all those areas. But if that's the case, then just say that. The hyperbole about which 'sin' is the greatest sin is all just rhetoric anyway, isn't it? From God's perfect point of view, one sin is not more or less evil than the next. Either is enough to cast you into eternal separation from Him so what's the diff?