Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libertarians turn against Neil Boortz [Title Mine]
Neal's Nuze ^ | December 8th, 2003 | Neil Boortz

Posted on 12/08/2003 5:17:21 AM PST by DeuceTraveler

MAYBE A NICE CRUISE IN THE GREEK ISLANDS WOULD BE FUN ....

Well ... it looks like I might want to make some alternative plans for next Memorial Day. Right now I'm scheduled to stay in Atlanta to deliver a speech to the Libertarian National Convention. We now have a "Libertarians for a Boortz-Free National Convention" petition online. The petition reads:

To: Libertarian National Committee and 2004 Convention Coordinator

We, members and supporters of the Libertarian Party, object to the scheduled appearance of talk radio host Neal Boortz as a speaker at the Libertarian Party's 2004 National Convention.

We further request that said appearance be cancelled.

The reasons for our objection and request are as follows:

1) Mr. Boortz's publicly stated opinions on foreign policy, especially with respect to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, diverge wildly from the Libertarian Party's positions;

2) Mr. Boortz's publicly stated opinions on the FBI's investigations and surveillance of anti-war demonstrators are flagrantly at odds with the Libertarian Party's positions on privacy, freedom of expression and the proper function of law enforcement in a free society;

3) Because of Mr. Boortz's prominent public profile, it is likely that any appearance by him at the LP's 2004 national convention will have a substantial impact on the public's perception of what the LP stands for;

4) It is not in the best interests of the Libertarian Party to facilitate public misidentification of its positions on foreign policy with Mr. Boortz's divergent views.

This petition will be presented to the Libertarian National Committee at its December 13-14, 2003 meeting in St. Louis, MO, with all signatures gathered to date appended. The petition itself will remain available for signing through May 26, 2004, the day prior to the opening of the Libertarian Party's 2004 national convention.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

You can view the signatures and the comments of those who signed by clicking here. http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?noboortz You will note that some of the signatories seem to think that I'm being paid to address this convention. Just to set the record straight, I spoke to the 2000 Libertarian National Convention in Anaheim, California and did not charge a fee. I spoke to the 2002 national convention in Indianapolis .. and only asked for a hotel room for that evening. No fee, no travel expenses.

I think I'm beginning to understand why the Libertarian Party has a tough time getting the respect one would like to see. Keep me posted folks. I'm loving the attention. One thing for sure .... If I remain on the speaker's schedule, the speech is going to be one helluva lot different than my two previous efforts. Then again ... I could be hiking outside of Zermatt.

WHAT DID I SAY THAT MADE THEM SO MAD?

Just trying to stir the puddin' I guess ... but here's a bit I put in Nealz Nuze about two weeks ago about the FBI spying on anti-war demonstrations in the United States. This is one of the things that have the Boot Boortz crowd so upset. Knowing, as we do, that communists and Islamic radicals have been behind much of the planning of anti-war demonstrations around the world, why is it so surprising that we would be gathering information on who is running these demonstrations in the US? Didn't 9/11 teach us anything?

WE MAY BE COMMUNISTS AND ISLAMIC RADICALS .. BUT DON'T INVESTIGATE US! The FBI is investigating the backgrounds and organizational methods of antiwar demonstrators in the US. Hopefully that doesn't come as a surprise to you. It is safe to assume that a large number of these demonstrators are out there in the streets because they want America to fail in its efforts to fight terrorism and its efforts to bring secular representative governments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Translated: Many of these demonstrators are pro-Saddam and anti-US. So, who wouldn't want them investigated by the FBI?

The demonstrators, that's who. Now we have so-called "civil rights advocates" and (God help us) "legal scholars" who are saying that these investigations could signal a return to abuses directed against civil rights protestors of the 1960's 70's.

Remember, as you've already learned, the organizers of the demonstrations last week in London were largely anti-American communists and Islamic radicals. So we're supposed to assume that all of the protestors in the United States are Boy Scouts and volunteers at nursing homes?

Know your enemy .. and keep him close.

Nealz Nuze, Monday, November 24, 2003


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: boortz; libertarians; neilboortz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: sheltonmac
"As it turned out, Iraq didn't have anything to do with those attacks"

Really, what about Salman Pak? I don't think we have heard all the details yet about connections with 9/11. There are most likely details that have not be found yet and some that have not been released yet. That is like the anti-war crowd saying there were never really any WMDs, because we have not found any proof. We just haven't found it yet. I supported the war, but not on emotional terms and not because of oil.
21 posted on 12/08/2003 6:05:52 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
Really? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1035320/posts
22 posted on 12/08/2003 6:06:49 AM PST by DeuceTraveler ((wedgie free for all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
What about the Reform Party? I am thinking of joining up with them, as I am feeling your pain.
23 posted on 12/08/2003 6:09:06 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: buffyt
That's odd. I write him on a regular basis, he has never responded, but he has read some of my emails on the air, and I even got put on NealzNuze one time!!

I don't know who responded to you, but I will bet it wasn't Neal Boortz. He has no need to curse like that, he is opne of the best debaters I have ever heard.

Something about that doesn't sound right.

Of course, unless you wanted to argue abortion or gays-choosing-their-lifestyle with him. But I'm pretty sure he wouldn't send an email full of profanities.
25 posted on 12/08/2003 6:10:19 AM PST by eyespysomething
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
I'm right there with you, and although the French government saw its own interests, the French people were definitely for the liberty they felt their own government was surpressing.
26 posted on 12/08/2003 6:10:45 AM PST by DeuceTraveler ((wedgie free for all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac; optimistically_conservative
...As it turned out, Iraq didn't have anything to do with those attacks...

Maybe, maybe not! I think there were many factors that led to the decision of war. Let's just stick to the fact that Iraq's leadership stuck their middle finger at us and the United Nations for too damn long! At some point one has to follow through with the consequences that are laid out if an undesirable behavior still is exhibited.

27 posted on 12/08/2003 6:13:10 AM PST by LowCountryJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: looscnnn
That is like the anti-war crowd saying there were never really any WMDs, because we have not found any proof. We just haven't found it yet

And when will 'yet' come to the realization that they just weren't there? How hard is it for 'conservatives' to accept the fact that perhaps, just perhaps, the reasons given for the war weren't the actual reasons? That if some of those reasons were shared, many 'conservatives' would bolt like lightning from the agenda. Over $200 billion dollars later when will we find these weapons?

We were told to wait for Kay's report. Kay searched and found nothing more than rudimentary labs, if they could even be called that. How many more searches will it take? Surely with the cutting edge technology available to the DoD, if they were able to pinpoint where these weapons were (remember Powell's presentation of 'facts'?), surely the same technology should be able to tell us where these weapons are now.

What's the next nation on the neocon agenda? Iran? Well surely they must be in Iran...

29 posted on 12/08/2003 6:14:21 AM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: William Creel
Libertarians were "against the war" in terms of the Constitutional legality.

If you think that sticking to Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution is "anal" maybe you are the type of person who has no problems with where our nation is in terms of Constitutionality.

While I agree with the war in general I don't think that making Congress and the President stick to the US Constitution is "anal".
30 posted on 12/08/2003 6:14:44 AM PST by bc2 (http://www.thinkforyourself.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xrp
It was Bush's seniors actions against these three that made me a libertarian in the first place.
31 posted on 12/08/2003 6:18:48 AM PST by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: CatoRenasci
There is a very good reason why: they are rigid ideologues who simply don't understand either human nature or politics.

As a card carrying Libertarian since 1984, there's some truth in what you say.

33 posted on 12/08/2003 6:19:59 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DeuceTraveler
It took long enough...I was wondering how long it would be before they went after Neal.

The LP's take on the War on Terror was enough to chase me out of the Party blame near two years ago.

As long as they side with the Dems on the war, they're gonna continue to look as if they are drifting even farther afield than they already are.

34 posted on 12/08/2003 6:22:34 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeuceTraveler
I listened to an interview with P.J. O'Rourke while the Iraq war was going on, and he didn't sound against it to me. In fact, I can't recall the exact wording, but I remember he made some comments about how the Iraqi army deserved what they were getting, based on the damage they caused to Kuwait in the first Gulf War.
35 posted on 12/08/2003 6:22:47 AM PST by LanPB01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimt
It's a pity, isn't it?
36 posted on 12/08/2003 6:27:02 AM PST by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo [Gallia][Germania][Arabia] Esse Delendam --- Select One or More as needed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: William Creel
I'm not familiar with Reagans 11th Commandment, however I will agree with the poster who said that a lot of times libertarians don't have a good handle on the art of politics.
37 posted on 12/08/2003 6:27:21 AM PST by bc2 (http://www.thinkforyourself.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LanPB01
Good to hear, but during the build up to war I went on a Libertarian homepage and found them opposing the war and using this famous O'Rourke quote:

"I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime."
O'Rourke, P.J.
38 posted on 12/08/2003 6:27:39 AM PST by DeuceTraveler ((wedgie free for all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: mhking
It's ashame, too, because I am all for their position on removing government involvement in people's lives.
39 posted on 12/08/2003 6:28:21 AM PST by DeuceTraveler ((wedgie free for all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson