Thursday, June 26th, 2008
Q: How do you know when Neal Boortz is lying? A: His lips are moving!
Case in point: an entry in the “Reading Assignments” section of his daily program notes for June 25. The entry in question reads as follows:
The New York Times ran an Op-Ed saying that Bush actually got one right in his war against Islamic extremism.
Apparently, Boortz expects his suckers sycophants listeners to read that line and think, “See? Even the evil editors at the librul New York Times agrees that Bush has done a wonderful job of microwaving all Muslims fighting Islamic terrorism! Eat it, f*cking traitor DemonRAT scumbags!!!11!1!1!1!!eleventy-one!!11!!”
Sadly, their trust in Boortz as a teller of Painful Truths™©® would be sorely misplaced, as the link goes not to a NYT Editorial Board-endorsed essay, but to the latest Bush-apologia from known hack David Brooks. Worse for Boortz’s alleged credibility, the subject of Brooks’ column was not the War on a Tactic™ in general, but the invasion of Iraq specifically (which, despite the neocons’ protests to the contrary, had absolutely nothing to do with the hunt for Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar, etc.).
But then, when was the last time that Boortz ever said anything that had even the most tangential relationship with the truth?
Oh come now, you are being way too hard on the High Priest of the Church of the Painful Truth.
I’m a faithful Boortz listener, he makes me chuckle
Comment by stageleft — June 27, 2008 @ 8:10 am
*shrugs* To each his own I guess. Frankly, I find his “painful truth” to be more like having a root canal. I will say however, that I like the fact that he has no use for the “Theocracy NOW!” crowd.
Comment by J. A. Baker — June 27, 2008 @ 8:28 am