Savage's problem is a common one amongst political voices - they have no understanding of economics.
Most "liberals", especially the "New Left", are libertarians that don't understand capitalism and thus feel that the government can distribute wealth more fairly and efficiently than markets can. While this is obviously an absurd notion that is contrary to the entire history of human civilization, it the absurdity doesn't prevent it from being a mainstream opinion.
Most conservatives are in favor of "free markets" in rhetoric only - these are the sort that believe that Reagan was a small government politician. Whether they intend to betray small government philosophy or not, the reality is that most conservatives are either motivated by social concerns (dare I say a religious motivation for public service, wanting to save America from sin) or defense (wanting to save America from her enemies). While I will allow others to decide the rightfulness of those motivations to serve, what should be noticed is that few conservatives these are adamant defenders of capitalism and free markets - those are almost exclusively libertarians. The Conservatives arguments against drug legalization/decriminalization truly reveal their economic ignorance. Any objective look at the economics behind drugs reveals that prohibition only serves to increase violence, crime, addiction and death.
The Tea Party Republicans are, on average, more concerned than your average Bush-era Republican about such issues which is what gives me confidence about the movement.
Savage's ideology, especially on issues of domestic policy, are very similar to Pat Buchanan. I consider both men to be examples of "Conservative Fascism". Savage is a "Neoconservative" (though Buchanan is not, Buchanan is more of a weird sort of conservatism that for lack of a better word I will call paleofederalism with his Hamiltonian attacks on Free Trade, isolationist foreign policy and large role of the state in the lives of Americans in the name of "preserving tradition").
