I listened to the piece and Boortz makes a good point that the future of this country depends on Republicans regaining the Senate. Otherwise, Democrats will be able to fill D.C. courts with partisan judges allowing Obama to rule by Executive Order.
We can't afford to blow winnable Senate seats with candidates like Akin, Mourdock, O'Donnell, Angle, etc. who embrace massively unpopular positions on conservative issues and send voters fleeing. His current fear is that we're going to lose retiring Senator Saxby Chambliss' seat in Georgia to Democrat Michelle Nunn (daughter of Sam) by running Paul Broun, a tea party favorite who also happens to be a die-hard young earth creationist and conspiracy nut.
First of all, I know exactly where Boortz is coming from and has been coming from for decades on this: and you and Neal are basing your arguments on a several VERY VERY FLAWED templates. First, the idea that the tea party is the problem and the estabs should get their candidates is at the bottom of this. The tea party folks on NET were POSITIVE.
Second, that these people support MASSIVELY unpopular positions is wrong. In the case of Akin and Mourdock, they said profoundly stupid things. Akin, btw, is NO tea party guy…he was a stupid estab hack who was already in congress six terms and who won the primary with McCaskill voters crossing over.
Third, the positions are not unpopular, but some folks like Santorum and Huckabee do lead with them, and that is a problem IMO, and I've said so here often. And in AT and in my books….often
But fourth, Phil Robertson showed the way to WIN - do not back down, do not agitate for government action, but be yourself. The Pajama boy V Phil model for manhood is a WINNER.
And fifth, the idea of "blowing winnable seats" is Rove bullsh-t, Haley Barbour bullsh-t. If they want us to accept Mike Castle in Delaware, then they need to work with us to defeat Graham in SC, Cornyn in Texas, Chambliss in Ga, Alexander in TN, Corker in TN, Burr in NC, etc. They only like to look at this "winnable "thing from the liberal blue state side.
BTW I will not take Boortz' comments on Hannity separate from his decades old hatred of Christians, at least in the political sense, that he's held for years. His supposed libertarianism is full of philosophical holes, he accepts the liberal media premise of social conservatives (I am a LImbaugh Reagan Levin Palin type myself, NOT a Santuckaee at all) - and he's an anti smoking Nazi. Boortz is an intellectual mess.
That will be done before the next Senate is sworn in.