What a tool.
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
The Pro-Life vote is the #1 net gain issue the GOP has year after year after year. Pro-life people are the biggest block of one-issue voters there are, period. Pro-lifers are motivated and they vote.
Boortz is a pro-abortion jerk.
- JP
What's more important is that - surprisingly - a greater percentage of young people are pro-life with a plurality of the younger people believing in the pro-life position. I suspect it has something to do with the younger generation obsession with technology and them growing up with those wildly powerful 4D pictures and videos of gestating babies.
In short, pro-life is a winning position - politically - and will only become more so advantageous as the 60's feminists die-off and the young begin to age.
2008?! Abortion was the reason republicans lost?! It’s been only a year, but I don’t remember abortion being much of an issue in the election. I think there was 1 question in the debates about it and McCain & Obama gave the standard party answers. And besides, how does Beck explain Republican success in 1994,2000,2002,2004? The party was as pro-life during those years as they were during the years they lost.
Boortz is an opportunist content to feather his retirement account and personal largesse. He found out long ago that he could make money with his mouth. Unfortunately for most of the audience, his mouth-action is verbal.
He's a boor and succumbs to his prurient interests very frequently (commenting on boobs, ass and what not of whatever woman he's got the hots for).
He's basically an undesirable opportunist looking to get some recognition or make a buck. His first FTax book he said he'd donate his proceeds to charity (turned out the charity was one of his current wife's endeavors - can you say neat tax dodge?) Also, you used to hear him 'pre 9/11' talk about his father/mother being alcoholics, after 9/11 and his desire to relate to the patriotism, his dad all-of-a-sudden was a hero pilot. He's a despicable person and for the life of me I can't figure out why anyone listens to him.
As for abortion, it wouldn't surpise me a bit if his first marriage was the result of not convincing his then-wife to get one. Good luck with him. He's not worth listening to.
I think Boortz feels that it is more of a control issue with many pro-life people. He would rather let someone make their own decisions and hold them resposible for their actions.
Boortz is overrated.
Boortz was right—the pro-lifer contingency will hijack their own party’s candidate and destroy them if they refuse to profess their dedication to the one and only cause that pro-lifers care about. Maybe we need to consider candidates whose number one priority is not overturning Roe v. Wade, but nevertheless have a passion for and commitment to protecting our constitution, and are strong conservatives overall. Otherwise, we can count on more rule by the left. Boortz is merely suggesting that we not cannibalize our own party.
Don’t send me nasty comments. Don’t assume I am pro-whatever. You don’t know me. Someone needs to offer the opinion of the other voices in the conservative movement. We all need to get logical regarding the future of the GOP, and Boortz addressed a serious underlying issue.
He is completely against Planned Parenthood and associated groups receiving one dollar of tax money from local, State, or Federal sources. He also thinks Roe V. wade should be overturned and the issue decided by the State.
Typically libertarian view. It'd do more than all the bloodied placards have done to date, but doesn't go far enough by far for some on the Religious Right. Too bad as those two little things would be a lot easier than any Amendment possibly could be.
Boortz claims that this faction of the GOP has caused the Party to lose the popular vote in the '96, '00, and '08 Presidential elections.
He does, and this is utterly ridiculous. Abortion was hardly on the radar in the 2008 race -- it was mainly economic issues + a referendum on Bush. There probably aren't three people in the United States who said to themselves, "I desire personal liberty, fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, and Constitutional governance, and I know Obama is an opponent of all those things, but I'm voting for him anyway because he supports abortion rights."
Boortz’s contention that the Pro-life movement is driving ordinary people away from the GOP is based on a 1970’s and 1980’s understanding of the abortion issue. Then, the fight was over whether a women may legally have an early abortion. In a legal sense, that fight is over and the abortionists won.
What Boortz does not understand is that the abortion battle today is being fought over:
a) taxpayer funded abortions here and abroad
b) forcing religious hospitals and doctors to carry out abortions
c) partial birth abortion
d) unrestricted abortion opportunities to persons not old enough to even get a tatoo without parental consent
e) exempting abortion clinics from the same licensing, sanitary and safety rules all other medical facilities must abide by
f) providing women in crisis pregnancies information about alternatives to abortions and proven consequences thereof
These issues are being fought in front of a public that is becoming more and more pro-life.
Like all libertarians, Neal follows his own thinking rather than walking in lockstep with a specific so-called libertarian platform.
He is hated by some libertarians for supporting Patriot Act and specific military expeditions. He is hated by religious dogmatists because he demands separation of church and state. He is hated by the left because of his opposition to big government. But in all things, Neal is Neal.
A quick look into libertarian websites show most libertarians believe the government has no right to decide for you what you do with your body. However, they also argue that the government has no right funding what you do with your body. And the government has no right forcing abortion, such as seen by the ChiComs. If your doctor is the person prescribing and deliberating on your health, compensated by your money, then your doctor should do what is in your best interest. The government has no say.
I’m not Neal Boortz but I think he follows the idea that people have freedoms to choose many things but he seems to keep a rational outlook. The Bible should be exercised or ignored by a freely practiced electorate.
As for the assertion that the GOP lost ground on social issues, I agree. GOP candidates demand the government remove themselves from their lives but they’re the same people that demand the government intrude in other portions of our lives. I don’t think the government has a right to tell me my girlfriend is committing an offense by performing fellatio because the government defines that as a crime based on some religious dogma. This is the sort of thing that stops people from supporting you if you (being a imperfect human) demand faith-based perfection on others. It’s unconstitutional! And it loses elections. Same goes for a number of other social activities that conservatives stereotypically oppose and liberals say, “Oh yeah, gives us unlimited power and we’ll let you be X, Y, or Z” Most people I know understand libertarianism but fear GOP telling them how and who they can and can’t boink, can’t get drunk in some dry county, or they cant get a divorce.
I think that’s what he’s trying to say. If you believe in limited government in one part of society you shouldn’t be a hypocrite by demanding government intrusion in other parts.
Boortz is a Libertarian (capital L, as in member of the Libertarian party.) He buys into the extreme positions you see in the Libertarian party plank (even if he doesn’t push them too hard.)
He is pro-choice. Not because he doesn’t believe the fetus is a human being, but because he doesn’t recognize that an unborn child has any rights. Only the mother has rights. If you could convince him that Singer’s arguments about a baby not having any legal rights until age 2, Boortz would be right on board with post-natal abortion.
In the 1980s and 1990s Libertarian candidates consistently drew about 5% of the vote statewide in GA. Due mostly (imho) to Bootzes influence on the radio. Of course, during that time Republicans were losing statewide offices to Democrats by 1-2%. All Boortz and the Libertarians in the state managed to do was gurantee Republican wouldn’t start winning statewide races in GA until 2002 instead of starting in 1986 (for those that don’t know, every GA govenor from the Civil War until 2002 was a Democrat.)
He said the AM that the Libertarian party should put all their effort into electing a Libertarian in Fla. to replace the nut case Democrat. Of course, the only thing that would do is draw enough votes away from any Republican to gurantee the nut case Democrat gets reelected.
What a tool.
I listen to Boortz but I don’t agree with him on this issue. He doesn’t like Republicans so he is going to blame them for something.
Boortz, like all Libertarians, is good on fiscal issues, but on moral issues? Forget it. The abortionists, “Queer Nation” people, and perverts of every stripe, must love the support they get from the Liberaltarians.
Boortz is not only pro-abortion (what’s with all this “pro-choice” I see on this thread? The left puts these terms in your mouth), he is also an atheist - he has said as much on his show. No wonder he is a Libertarian.
I have only a slight more respect for Libertarians than the Dems. On moral issues, they are no better.
Savage acknowledged being a party to 2 abortions (wife) when they were young and liberal.. he has seen the light and atoned , he now holds consistant and logical positions ... Neal HATES Savage with a passion ,, I wonder if this is part of it because Neal has never come clean and has always languished in the ratings ,, even compared to a newcomer like Savage.
El Jeffe George W. Bush was the biggest reason we lost the popular vote in 00 and 08. It just that simple.
read later -I accidently tuned into the middle of his convoluted reasoning on why he is pro “choice”.
Will read thread later. Thanks for putting it up