Talk radio host with audience of millions acknowledges Independent Political Report, but thinks we issue press releases rather than report them

According to wikipedia, Neal A. Boortz, Jr. (born April 6, 1945) is an American radio host, author, and political commentator. His nationally-syndicated talk show, The Neal Boortz Show, airs throughout the United States on Dial Global (formerly Jones Radio Networks). It is ranked seventh in overall listeners, with 4.25+ million per week.

As reported at Poli-Tea

http://politeaparty.blogspot.com/2010/04/boortz-affair-libertarian-politics-and.html



Unless you’re a fan or a connoisseur of talk radio, you are probably not very familiar with Neal Boortz. Though he holds a number of Libertarian-leaning positions, the radio entertainer and political commentator is a staunch supporter of the global warfare state who allies himself with conservative Republicans, justified on the basis of a misguided analysis of Democratic-Republican Party politics. On April 2nd, Boortz announced that, though he is a Libertarian, he is against any and all advocacy of third party politics. Boortz stance is conditioned by his hysterical embrace of lesser-evilism:

I’m a Libertarian. I’m a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party. I’ve voted for Libertarian candidates on the federal and local level for the past 15 years. Now what I’m going to say here is going to earn no small amount of rage from fellow Libertarian Party members . . .

I believe with every fiber of my being that the survival of our Republic is dependent on removing as many members of the Democrat Party from the Congress as possible. The Party of Big Government must be removed from power. I’m not at all confident that America could survive another two years of Democratic control. This means that we must say no to third party movements. No doubt, the Republicans have been a huge disappointment. They vastly expanded government size and spending during the years they ran the show. They promised to get rid of the Department of Education. Instead, they doubled it’s size. Not good. The Republicans say they’ve learned their lesson. Have they? Don’t know. What I do know is that the Democrats are hell-bent on destroying economic liberty in this country.

Boortz was right in thinking that Libertarians would not be pleased with his capitulation to the logic that sustains the Democratic-Republican political establishment, the two-party state and duopoly system of government. Many Libertarians have long been uncomfortable with Boortz’s positions relating to both foreign and domestic policy, see for instance the Boot Bortz Blog, which was maintained throughout 2003 and 2004 in opposition to Boortz’s scheduled appearance at the 2004 Libertarian Party national convention.

Boortz was also scheduled to speak at this year’s Libertarian convention. On April 5th, three days after Boortz stated his opposition to third party advocacy and his reactionary embrace of duopoly ideology, the Libertarian Party announced that Boortz would be moved from his scheduled speaking slot. From the LP Blog, via Independent Political Report:

Our speaker lineup continues to evolve and is always subject to change. One recent change is that Neal Boortz has been moved from the Sunday evening banquet dinner speaker position. We do expect Mr. Boortz to speak in a different time slot.

Five days later, a press release from the Libertarian Party of Texas announced that Boortz had in fact been removed from the speaker’s lineup. From Independent Political Report:

Syndicated radio talk show host Neal Boortz, a Libertarian Party member, has been uninvited as a speaker to the Libertarian Party’s national convention in St Louis the weekend of May 28 -31. Boortz stated on April 2 that voters should not support third parties in the 2010 and 2012 elections in order to get Republicans elected.

Boortz had been a regular national convention speaker for the Libertarian Party through the 2004 convention in his home city of Atlanta. In 2008 he cancelled his appearance shortly before the convention to schedule some medical treatment. When the Libertarian Party removed him from the 2010 convention schedule due to his recent comments, Boortz removed himself again claiming he had medical treatment scheduled. [Emphasis added. Rumor has it that Boortz used the same excuse to get out of serving in Vietnam. -d.]

“We do not need an unreliable and reluctant individual promoting the Republican Party to be given a speaking slot at our convention” said Texas state chair and national party committee member Pat Dixon. “We will have a great convention in St Louis and continue to offer voters a choice that neither the Republicans nor Democrats offer.” . . . .

Dixon concluded “Neal Boortz has a very entertaining show has has been a great supporter of our party. Of course we respect anyone’s decision to support the candidates or party of their choice. We also get to choose who speaks at our convention, and at this time Neal is not a good choice.”

Incidentally, it is worth noting that aside from a few warfare statist Republican Party trolls, the response in the comment thread at IPR is overwhelmingly in favor of Boortz’s removal from the speaker’s lineup. Yesterday, however, Boortz defensively emphasized that he withdrew from the speaking position and was in no way “removed” from the event, stating in reference to the press release at Independent Political Report:

Sorry Mr. Butler, but you have this a bit wrong. Last week I instructed Belinda to inform the Libertarian Party that I would be unable to keep this speaking engagement for personal reasons.” According to Butler The Libertarian Party “removed me” from the schedule because of comments I made regarding voting for a 3rd party this November. Whatever, Mr. Butler. If you want to say that I was “booted” from the schedule, have at it. It’s your credibility that suffers, not mine.

Boortz also reiterated the logic that motivates his support for the Republican wing of the professional political class and ruling establishment, but attempted to salvage his reputation among Libertarians with an addendum:

We cannot afford a 3rd party effort this year if it is going to leave one single Democrat in office who otherwise might have been removed. I still plan to vote Libertarian in local elections

Next he’ll be telling us that some of his best friends are Libertarians! Nonetheless, Boortz has done a service in providing such a succinct articulation of the reactionary political practice that is lesser-evilism. His support for the Republican wing of the ruling corporatist party is not predicated on support for the Republican wing of the ruling corporatist party – indeed, he admits that Republicans cannot be trusted either –, but rather on rejection of the Democratic wing of the ruling corporatist party. So long as American voters continue to allow themselves to be manipulated by the imaginary calculus of the greater and lesser evil that is Democratic-Republican Party politics, we will never be free of the evil that is Democratic-Republican Party government.



(end of PoliTea article).

Following the link back to Boortz’s blog

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2010/04/not-that-i-care-but-setting-th.html


NOT THAT I CARE .. BUT SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
By Neal Boortz

If you will click here you can read a news release from something called the “Independent Political Report.” [p: emphasis added; link is at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/04/libertarian-party-boots-boortz/ ] The headline is “Libertarian Party Boots Boortz.” The news release, written by Robert Butler of the Libertarian Party of Texas (512-758-9134) says that “Syndicated radio talk show host Neal Boortz, a Libertarian Party member, has been uninvited as a speaker to the Libertarian Party’s national convention in St Louis the weekend of May 28 -31.” Sorry Mr. Butler, but you have this a bit wrong. Last week I instructed Belinda to inform the Libertarian Party that I would be unable to keep this speaking engagement for personal reasons.” According to Butler The Libertarian Party “removed me” from the schedule because of comments I made regarding voting for a 3rd party this November.

Whatever, Mr. Butler. If you want to say that I was “booted” from the schedule, have at it. It’s your credibility that suffers, not mine.

By the way …. I have an email from a top-ranking official in the Libertarian Party who, after listening to my comments regarding voting for a 3rd party in November, is going to resign his position. Why? Because he felt that what I said made sense. We cannot afford a 3rd party effort this year if it is going to leave one single Democrat in office who otherwise might have been removed. I still plan to vote Libertarian in local elections .. but I simply cannot afford the luxury when it comes to the Congress.


Comments from me (Paulie) previously published in the comment section of IPR a few days ago:

Neal (Boortz) apparently thinks we issue press releases rather than just (re)print them, but thanks for the link anyway, Neal. As far as I know this is the first time he has noted something I’ve done — in this case, reposting an LPTX press release.

I tried to post a comment on his article that clarifies that we at IPR don’t issue press releases, we report on them.

However it went into moderation queue, so we’ll see.

UPDATE: Just checked, and my comments have not been published yet. I don’t know if they ever will be.

Following up on d. eris’ reprint of my comment about Neal Boortz’s medical excuses embedded in the article reposted from Poli-Tea above, my source is John Sugg of Atlanta’s Creative Loafing weekly metro area newspaper.

For example see http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A14346 (emphasis added)


Neal Boortz is no John Galt
Libertarians will ensure their irrelevance if they embrace radio ignoramus
Published 12.18.03
By John F. Sugg

b>Atlanta’s radio offerings are so, so, so very awful that, yes, on my drive to the office, in desperation I am forced to tune in to the city’s pinnacle (or is it pit?) of know-nothingness, Neal Boortz. But I have a rule. At his first lie, gross misrepresentation of the truth, or race baiting, I go to a book on tape. Often, I don’t make it out of the driveway. Seldom do I travel the five miles to I-85, and never have I completed the 30-minute drive to the Loaf without Boortz bellowing some deceitful absurdity.

Neal dissembles, John hits the off button.

For example, just last week Boortz proclaimed that the Bushies told no fibs to con Americans into supporting the war. Huh? I paused for a minute before switching on my current recorded book to make sure Boortz wouldn’t qualify that astounding fiction or giggle and say, “Just kidding,” since all the world now knows George Bush lied. So did Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the rest of the contemptible gang. They politicized and distorted intelligence, and when that didn’t work, they fabricated and uttered gross untruths. They have even admitted it, but now claim it doesn’t matter.

I sometimes jot down Boortz’s lamest deceits. It’s a long list. Ranking at the top was his hysterical claim, in the days before Bush’s invasion of Iraq, that Saddam Hussein’s military might surpass that of Nazi Germany. I slapped my forehead at that one — the claim went beyond mere bad information and makes me wonder if there isn’t serious impairment of Boortz’s reasoning capacity. The fellow needs a 12-step program for the chronically dishonest and incorrigibly stupid.

The truth, by the way, was that in 1939 Adolf Hitler boasted 98 divisions, with 1.5 million well-trained men, for the invasion of Poland. For the Western offensive, Germany had 2.5 million men, and 2,500 tanks. In June 1941, Hitler had available 3 million men and 4,000 tanks to invade the Soviet Union. Saddam, prior to our invasion, never had more than 400,000 troops and 2,200 tanks, and the demoralized and largely broken-down Iraqi military was never in the same universe as the Wehrmacht.

In other words, Boortz equals bullshit.

I don’t want to argue the war here, but it was just so Boortzian for him to proclaim that pure lunacy as truth. And the sheep that follow him bleat their belief that they are actually getting “information.”

That Boortz struts about touting himself as a libertarian would make his daily mission of mendacity a good laugh — except for one thing: For Big Brother to win, the Bush regime needs to bovine-ize America. Ignorance and the Orwellian capacity to simultaneously believe glaring contradictions are the essential intellectual diet of the Bushies. Force feeding America the swill are Faux News and the phalanx of talk show screechers, of which Boortz is, to his chagrin, merely a farm team lightweight.

(In October a University of Maryland survey measured how much false information — such as that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq — people believed and whether they primarily relied on Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN or print. Those relying on Fox were far less likely to know the truth about critical world and national issues, and far more likely to believe distortions of the truth. Boortz, of course, gets it wrong more often than the heavy-hitting propagandists he worships on Fox.)

America needs real libertarians, whose origins are firmly rooted in the Bill of Rights. The Libertarian Party (libertarians with a big “L”) is holding its national convention in Atlanta in May, and the party has invited Boortz to be a speaker. I’m told by Libertarian activists the decision was rooted in the group’s cheapness — they didn’t want to foot the freight for major talent.

Well, you get what you pay for — free traders such as the Libertarians should understand that. In lib — or Lib — ertarian land, there has been a howl of protest over the invitation to Boortz.

One of the few points on which Boortz’s rants coincide with the Libertarians is ending the Drug War. Hell, there are a lot of tokers out there who can’t even spell Libertarian who are in tune with the party on that point.

Boortz is no libertarian. He is a sorry shill for the Bush big-government, interventionist, xenophobic, authoritarian regime. Imposing our will on the world, looting resources and guaranteeing Halliburton billions in profits — that isn’t free trade; it’s empire. Gutting the Bill of Rights, spying on law-abiding citizens, manipulation through agitprop — that isn’t freedom; it’s slavery.

“The Libertarian Party is so desperate, it has led them to abandon their issues in favor of seeking popularity,” says Eric Garris, who helps run a libertarian website, antiwar.com, and who has long been involved with the party at the national and state (California) levels.

On the key issues confronting America, Boortz clearly stands on the side of those who attack freedom, and those who want to turn Big Government into Gargantuan Government (as long as someone besides rich people and corporations pay for it).

Examples: He applauds the FBI investigating anti-war demonstrators, making a broad smear recently on his website (that could have been authored by Karl Rove, and maybe was) that activists should be hounded by the feds because they are “pro-Saddam and anti-U.S.,” and that they are “largely anti-American communists and Islamic radicals.”

Likewise, in the same epistle, he applauded the police riot last month against trade demonstrators in Miami. I never met someone who claimed to be a libertarian but was so antagonistic toward the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendments. It just doesn’t compute.

In Boortz’s best imitation of Joe McCarthy, he has insinuated that Justin Raimondo — a nationally prominent Libertarian since the 1970s and the prolific editor of anti-war.com — is a red. Raimondo “doesn’t like me,” Boortz huffed on his website last week, “because I approve of our actions in Iraq. Fair enough. Do you know who else doesn’t like our Iraqi actions? Well, communists, for one.”

Slimey, slimey, slimey.

On economics, Boortz worships Ronald Reagan — ignoring the fact that government grew much faster under the Gipper than under, say, Bill Clinton, who the talk show host blames for just about every ill that has ever happened (another script line from Karl Rove). And, of course, Boortz has nothing but gushing praise for Bush’s economics, somehow equating fiscal responsibility with pumping up government spending to $21,000 per American household, compared with $16,000 during the Clinton administration — the biggest increase in more than 50 years.

That remarkably un-libertarian accomplishment, coupled with Bush’s tax cuts for the plutocrats, has created record deficits that will indenture our children and grandchildren — hardly what Ayn Rand, the spiritual guru for Libertarians, had in mind in Atlas Shrugged.

It’s the war, however, that has real libertarians frothing at the invitation to Boortz. The Libertarian Party platform is decidedly anti-war, stating: “We call for the withdrawal of all American military personnel stationed abroad. … There is no current or foreseeable risk of any conventional military attack on the American people, particularly from long distances. We call for the withdrawal of the U.S. from commitments to engage in war on behalf of other governments and for abandonment of doctrines supporting military intervention such as the Monroe Doctrine.”

Pretty clear writing, and it’s at the heart of Libertarian thought. An irony is that since Boortz is peachy happy with the FBI snooping on anti-war activists, and since most Libertarians are anti-war, the radio blowhard is all in favor of the government investigating the very people who invited him to address their convention. And, in the witch-hunting delusions that substitute for thought in Boortz’s diseased mind, it’s quite likely all those Libertarians are really either commies or radical Islamists.

Boortz doesn’t like me. I outed him as a chickenhawk. He keeps changing the story about how he evaded military service during Vietnam (was it the asthma or your eyesight, Neal?). Last week, he was claiming the military wouldn’t take him. More precisely, when he couldn’t get a relatively cushy job as a pilot, he wasn’t about to get dirty (or dead) crawling through rice paddies. It’s so easy to be bellicose when it’s the other guy — probably an oh-so-expendable member of the working class and a minority — who is getting shot.

But that’s Neal Boortz, the apotheosis of cowardice. He doesn’t like to debate when he can’t be in control. He keeps his finger on the disconnect button so that when callers start to score points, he can quickly cut them off.

If that’s who the Libertarians want to hear, the party — already victim to several internal scuffles — might as well admit that it’s history. If its program is to imitate the Democrats’ emulation of the Republicans, the Libertarian Party stands for nothing.

Neal Boortz was offered space for his unedited remarks on libertarians’ “boot Boortz” efforts. Boortz apparently preferred to pout in silence. For those who would like to sign the petition to give Boortz the heave-ho from the Libertarian convention: www.petitiononline.com/noboortz/petition.html.

Senior Editor John Sugg — who says, “Neal, you gutless bag of wind, this is a challenge to a smackdown” — can be reached at john.sugg@creativeloafing.com or at 404-614-1241.


Note that this article is from 2003, so I have no idea whether Mr. Sugg’s contact information is still current.

5 thoughts on “Talk radio host with audience of millions acknowledges Independent Political Report, but thinks we issue press releases rather than report them

  1. mabamford

    to view a partial list of crimes committed by FBI agents over 1500 pages long see
    forums.signonsandiego. com/showthread.php?t=59139

    to view a partial list of FBI agents arrested for pedophilia see
    campusactivism. org/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=29

    also see
    ctka. net/pr500-king.html

  2. Chuck Moulton

    Who is the “top-ranking official in the Libertarian Party who, after listening to [Boortz’s] comments regarding voting for a 3rd party in November, is going to resign his position”?

    I think sending out these press releases about Boortz was pretty damn stupid.

    First, sending out a press release just gives Boortz more media for his message to not vote Libertarian. Second, saying Boortz was booted (whether he actually was or wasn’t) makes an enemy out of Boortz and makes him less likely to come back on board after the 2010 elections. Let him cite personal reasons and just leave it at that.

    I don’t agree with Boortz on the war or the Fair Tax. But when dealing with people who aren’t 100% pure libertarians, I’d rather forge alliances where we agree and politely try to change their positions where we disagree than alienate those people.

  3. d.eris

    “politely try to change their positions”

    Sure, but Boortz’s position is that if you vote Libertarian, you are threatening the very survival of the nation!

    Is there any evidence that Boortz isn’t just a Republican activist who seeks to swell the GOP’s ranks by leading libertarians away from the Libertarian Party?

  4. paulie Post author

    “Who is the “top-ranking official in the Libertarian Party who, after listening to [Boortz’s] comments regarding voting for a 3rd party in November, is going to resign his position”?”

    I don’t know. All I know is the non-specific claim by Boortz quoted here. Whether this person exists, or who it is, is outside the realm of my knowledge. I’d be curious to know, too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *