The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!
Hi, (not you?) | Member Center | Sign Out
Posted: 1:00 a.m. Thursday, June 17, 2004
By Neal Boortz
| Today's Nuze: June 17, 2004 | |||
![]() | |||
| Thursday, June 17, 2004
We're starting to get some leaks about the contents of the 911 Commission report. Yesterday the Associated Press said that the report "bluntly contradicts" the Bush Administration's claims that Saddam Hussein was linked to the September 11th terrorist attacks. Now it is true that the 911 Commission report actually says that there was no evidence of a connection between Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. So ... what is my problem here? The problem is that the Bush administration never ... and I mean never made a claim that such a connection existed in the first place. In fact, George Bush has repeatedly said that there is no evidence that such a connection exists. This creates a bit of a question, then, about the AP story. How can the 911 Commission report "bluntly contradict" that claim that has never been made? There can be no "blunt contradiction" of a claim that has never been made. So, what did George Bush say? He said that there is no question that Saddam had Al Qaeda connections. The 911 Commission report, by the way, agrees. CNN is no better than AP. This morning on CNN Bill Hemmer started the news story this way: "One of the original justifications for war in Iraq has been discredited by the 911 Commission." He then went on to relate the commission's findings of no Hussein connection with the 9/11 attacks. This is the same tact used by AP. Basing a story on a wholly false premise .. and doing so intentionally. This is getting ridiculous. The writers and the editors know that Bush never claimed that Hussein had any connection with the actual terrorist attack. Someone at AP made a conscious decision to include that bogus "bluntly contradicts" line into the story because they knew that the end result would be unfavorable to President Bush. Simply put, the purpose of that line was to portray Bush as either a liar or ignorant. The person or persons responsible for the "bluntly contradicts" line knows that people -- voters -- will read the story and believe that Bush asserted that such a claim exists, and was wrong. This, my friends, is a prime example of pure unadulterated media bias at work.
The United Nations, never a friend to the United States, is now showing its animosity toward American private business. Believe it or not, the UN has now condemned Caterpillar, the makers of heavy equipment, for selling bulldozers to Israel. Some of these bulldozers, you see, are being used to raze the homes of suicide bombers. This the UN calls a human rights violation. I don't seem to remember the UN ever calling the suicide bomb a human rights violation. The UN coddling of Saddam Hussein, it's comforting of Palestinian terrorists, it's cowardly run from Iraq, now it's unwarranted criticisms of American businesses ..... Sooner or later you folks are going to figure out that this organization is not our friend.
John Kerry is getting more specific with some of his spending plans when the people of this country actually make him our president. Yesterday he came out with a plan to increase the child care tax credit from $3,000 to $5,000. What's more, he plans to extend the eligibility for this credit to people who have no job whatsoever. First of all, let's make sure that we all understand that the meaning of the term "tax credit" has been completely destroyed by our free-spending, vote-buying congress. When you hear "tax credit" you might think of a credit applied against taxes that you actually owe. Not so. In this day and age the phrase "tax credit" is actually code for "income redistribution." If you qualify for a refundable tax credit such as the child care tax credit in the amount of $3,000, but you only owe $500 in income taxes against which to apply that "credit," the "credit" will wipe out your $500 tax liability, and the government will then take $2,500 away from some other taxpayer and give it to you. Pure income redistribution. Now The Souffle wants to increase this giveaway to $5,000. This means that the government would take $4,500, not $2,500, from another taxpayer to give to the credit recipient. Things get worse under Kerry's plan. He wants to extend this income redistribution program to single mothers who don't work! In plain language this means that the government would simply write a $5,000 check to every single, non-working mother out there every year and call it a "tax credit." Can't you just see these women stampeding to the polls in November to vote for Kerry! For $5,000 untaxed dollars a year ... why the hell not? Remember ... Democrats believe that wealth is distributed, not earned. Kerry is working the distribution angle to buy votes. What a guy.
Clinton calls his impeachment "a badge of honor." That's interesting...because as one of only two presidents to be impeached, it may be more like a badge of denial. Perhaps history will not be so kind. Lying under oath is not a badge of honor. And don't give me this "he only lied about his personal life" nonsense. Clinton lied under oath with the intent to deny to a plaintiff her day in court under a statute that Clinton himself signed into law! Did you understand that? Let me amplify things for you a bit. Early in his presidency Clinton made a big deal ... press conference and all
... about signing legislation that attached federal criminal penalties to some
incidents of sexual harassment. A woman named Paula Jones then uses that
very law to sue Clinton for his actions in that hotel room in Little Rock.
Then Clinton lies under oath in order to prevent Paula Jones from having a fair
and honest hearing of her complaint. Clinton calls this a badge of
honor? If perjury is a badge of honor, what would he call his rape of
Juanita Brodderick, the Silver Star? Listener John W. submits this: "We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records."
Aided and abetted by the rampant stupidity created by government education, the mainstream media now controls the flow of information in this country. Just like communist governments censor what their people see and hear, the liberal media is now deciding how an issue is reported. All news is positioned, stories are selected and written with a clear anti-individual, anti-capitalist, big-government bias. This year, their clear mission is to prevent the re-election of George W. Bush. They will stop at nothing...including withholding information, burying stories and reporting outright lies to achieve their ideological end. The mainstream media has become the propaganda machine for the left. Never is this more evident than when it comes to the case of the prisoner humiliation at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, Iraq. The media calls it "abuse," but what we've seen doesn't meet that standard. Some even go so far as to call it torture, which is a falsehood. Anyway, to do as much damage as possible to the war effort in Iraq, the media continually brings it up, runs as many Abu Ghraib pictures as possible. We're never going to hear the end of it. But that's not the worst part. The worst is how the media completely ignores Saddam Hussein's abuse at the same prison. Let's take a look at the score. A few coalition soldiers, who have been or are being disciplined, took photos of prisoners in humiliating positions. Those prisoners suffered no lasting physical damage. Were the photos and the behavior of those few bad apples wrong? Of course, and the military is dealing with it. Here is what happened under Saddam's rule at Abu Ghraib. Decapitations, fingers chopped off one at a time, tongues cut out with a razor blade and prisoners being fed alive to Saddam's Dobermans. We know this took place because there are videos the media is not showing. In fact, the American Enterprise Institute held a little showing on Tuesday. Journalists were invited to come view the videos taken by Saddam's henchmen in the Abu Ghraib prison as Saddam's torturers actually did their work. Only a very few of our esteemed "journalists" showed up to see the video. The problem here is if these journalists show up to watch the videos then they will feel some sort of a responsibility to actually report to their viewers or readers what they saw. If they then print stories about Saddam's atrocities it will make the actions of American Reservists at Abu Ghraib look like child's play. This would dampen the constant drumbeat of damnation being heaped on our troops and the Bush administration. In short ... it doesn't fit the template. Oh ... another thing. Remember that liberal icon Ted Kennedy said that
Saddam's torture prisons had not been closed, they had just changed
management. If Americans are given the opportunity to compare the Hussein
atrocities with the actions taken at Abu Ghraib under American control Kennedy
would be made to look like the blithering partisan fool that he is.
Remember, the media will do anything it needs to do to protect the image of The
Hero of Chappaquiddick.
Unable to stand idly by and let the celebration of the life of the greatest
president of the 20th century go unanswered, the media has their knives out for
Reagan. They now see it as their responsibility to bring Reagan down a
notch, and to belittle the man's accomplishments. This was to be expected.
The fear, of course, is that any good feelings toward Ronald Reagan might
transfer to George Bush. From a media standpoint, this isn't good .. not
good at all.
| |||
BOORTZ BLAST NEWSLETTER
NEAL'S FANS GET TOGETHER
Belinda Skelton, Ken Rogers, Laura Nunemaker and Brian Ganey assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze! |
© 2013 Cox Media Group. By using this website,
you accept the terms of our Visitor Agreement and Privacy Policy, and understand your options regarding Ad Choices
.
Already have an account? Sign In
{* #registrationForm *} {* traditionalRegistration_displayName *} {* traditionalRegistration_emailAddress *} {* traditionalRegistration_password *} {* traditionalRegistration_passwordConfirm *}Already have an account? Sign In
{* #registrationFormBlank *} {* registration_firstName *} {* registration_lastName *} {* traditionalRegistration_displayName *} {* traditionalRegistration_emailAddressBlank *} {* registration_birthday *} {* registration_gender *} {* registration_postalZip *} {* traditionalRegistration_passwordBlank *} {* traditionalRegistration_passwordConfirmBlank *} {* agreeToTerms *}We have sent you a confirmation email. Please check your email and click on the link to activate your account.
We look forward to seeing you frequently. Visit us and sign in to update your profile, receive the latest news and keep up to date with mobile alerts.
Don't worry, it happens. We'll send you a link to create a new password.
{* #forgotPasswordForm *} {* forgotPassword_emailAddress *}We have sent you an email with a link to change your password.
We've sent an email with instructions to create a new password. Your existing password has not been changed.
To sign in you must verify your email address. Fill out the form below and we'll send you an email to verify.
{* #resendVerificationForm *} {* resendVerification_emailAddress *}Check your email for a link to verify your email address.


You're Almost Done!
Select a display name and password
{* #socialRegistrationForm *} {* socialRegistration_displayName *} {* socialRegistration_emailAddress *} {* traditionalRegistration_password *} {* traditionalRegistration_passwordConfirm *}Tell us about yourself
{* registration_firstName *} {* registration_lastName *} {* registration_postalZip *} {* registration_birthday *} {* registration_gender *} {* agreeToTerms *}