Boortz: "Let's ask Obama how many prayer rugs he has"
SUMMARY: Radio host Neal Boortz falsely suggested Sen. Barack Obama is a Muslim, saying: "Let's ask Obama how many prayer rugs he has." Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim.
On the August 21 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, host Neal Boortz falsely suggested that Sen. Barack Obama is a Muslim. While discussing Sen. John McCain's inability to answer the Politico's question about how many homes he and his wife own, Boortz said: "Let's ask Obama how many prayer rugs he has." As Media Matters for America has noted, Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim.
From the August 21 broadcast of Cox Radio Syndication's The Neal Boortz Show:
BOORTZ: How many houses do you have?
ROYAL MARSHALL (engineer and "sidekick"): Two.
BOORTZ: OK.
MARSHALL: But I want to say one thing here. It could also be wealth envy, like you said, but it also could be a matter of age. He's so old he can't remember --
BOORTZ: Oh, jeez.
MARSHALL: -- how many houses. He forgot he's got two houses in Florida. He forgot about the house in Boca.
BOORTZ: Oh, jeez. OK.
MARSHALL: I mean, it's a possibility. The guy is 72.
BOORTZ: Senile. He's senile. He can't remember -- he goes -- he keeps going to the wrong home, too, at night.
JAMIE DUPREE (Cox Radio correspondent): Sometimes, it's the dumbest things that get you in trouble in a campaign, you know?
BOORTZ: Well, like I said, if this is it in this campaign, then this country just deserves whatever is gonna happen to us.
DUPREE: Well, just wait and see. Just watch if that thing keeps coming up in the next few days.
BOORTZ: Let's ask Obama how many prayer rugs he has.
DUPREE: See? And, you know, somebody would say that's not fair.
BOORTZ: Well, I'm not trying to be fair.
DUPREE: Well, exactly.
Boortz probably still has a few in his audience that operate on one lonely brain cell. They'll lap this up.
This smear has gotten old. Give it up Neal, you sound like a fool.
He has been cancelled here in Washington, DC along with O'Reilly and Beck.
Good riddance to all three.
No-one. The station that carried them changed the format and is now a relay for all-news WTOP. The format was changed because of poor ratings. Those three are not on any other DC-area signal and there are no plans presently for any of them to land on another station.
O'Reilly was on WJFK-FM prior to being on 3WT... he was booted from JFK for the same reason - lack of ratings.
Here's a fine example of O'Reilly being a hateful POS. I know this thread is about Boortz but O'Reilly essentially is no different.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/26/94234/4331/444/573162
BOORTZ: Well, I'm not trying to be fair.
Finally...some truth out of Boortz.
So basically what's "fair" to Bortz, is countering an actual McCain blunder in the media, with a completely false statement about Obama?
Oh yeah, I guess that sounds about right coming from Bortz.
Is this what the media means when it presents news as fair and "balanced" ?
Boortz (8/26/08) - I got on, uh, Media Morons today about my "prayer rugs" comment.
You know it's coming.
BOORTZ: ...he (McCain) keeps going to the wrong home, too, at night.
Gee, that's how the former POW hooked up with his present wife... ;>)
I believe that Obamas answer is ...NONE....three less that the number of people who care about Boortz' show. And that includes family.
He was booted off KDKA in Pgh. a while back.
I was making a little fun of Rush Limbaugh's sorry attempt at a comeback to this topic the other day. His was basically "Oh, Yeah? I wonder if Obama knows how many half-brothers he has?"
Now I see that, in comparison to Boortz's joke, Rush's had a tiny connection to reality, and was much closer to what modern Homo Sapiens would call a "joke".
Maybe Rush just keeps these second string wingnut radio guys on his payroll. After the average zombie listens to somebody like Boortz, Rush might seem pretty reasonable.
If you're wondering how to pronounce Neal's last name, it goes like this: Neals last name is prounced exactly like the sound of gas escaping ones butt-checks
Yep, all those free market folks think that Boortz, Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest "rose" on the radio by merit. Hah! There's buckets of right wing money that propped up these people by putting them on the air in all their monopoly of stations.
All this negativity on our airwaves is producing greenhouse gases and contributing to global warming.
Despite his assertion, two years ago, that he would no longer carry the GOP's water... he's still toting that bucket.
Oh Neal. You're so hilarious!
Of course, you're not really. I wonder how many white sheets Neal has hanging in his closet?
Why don't we ask George W Bush how much money he recieved from Salem Bin Laden in 1977 when he funded Dubya's first business venture Arbusto Oil? I kind of think if a Democratic candidate had a long time business partnernership with the Bin Laden family it would be a well-known fact among Americans - particularly in light of the hands-off policy the mastermind of 9.11 attacks has received from the same adminstration that did nothing to stop those attacks.
Considering the bizarre stretches the rightwing (and by extension the national media) are trying to make to tie Barack Obama to "terrorist groups", the fact that Bush entered the business world in 1977 with funding from Osama Bin Laden's brother, Salem, AND on the morning of the September 11th attacks George Bush Sr. was in a meeting with Bin Laden's brother, AND Bush's top priority in the aftermath of the attacks was to escort the Bin Laden family out of the country when all other flights were cancelled, AND (most importantly) NOTHING has EVER been done to get Osama Bin Laden (nor has there ever been any clamoring by the rightwing to get him), this endless attempt to link Barack Obama to terrorist groups when the Bushies cozy relationship with the Bin Ladens has basically ensured Osama Bin Laden's freedom is sickening.
It's hard not to imagine that if FDR had deep ties to Hirohito and never responded to the attack on Pearl Harbor, as Bush has never responded to the 9.11 attacks (before, during, or after), it would have Americans outraged! Instead, because the media NEVER talks about the deep Bush-Bin Laden ties, their incredibly questionable alliance never gets any scrutiny by the press (just as the government's hands-off approach to Osama Bin Laden never gets any scrutiny from the "liberal media")
"Considering the bizarre stretches the rightwing (and by extension the national media) are trying to make to tie Barack Obama to "terrorist groups", the fact that Bush entered the business world in 1977 with funding from Osama Bin Laden's brother, Salem, AND on the morning of the September 11th attacks George Bush Sr. was in a meeting with Bin Laden's brother, AND Bush's top priority in the aftermath of the attacks was to escort the Bin Laden family out of the country when all other flights were cancelled, AND (most importantly) NOTHING has EVER been done to get Osama Bin Laden (nor has there ever been any clamoring by the rightwing to get him), this endless attempt to link Barack Obama to terrorist groups when the Bushies cozy relationship with the Bin Ladens has basically ensured Osama Bin Laden's freedom is sickening.
It's hard not to imagine that if FDR had deep ties to Hirohito and never responded to the attack on Pearl Harbor, as Bush has never responded to the 9.11 attacks (before, during, or after), it would have Americans outraged! Instead, because the media NEVER talks about the deep Bush-Bin Laden ties, their incredibly questionable alliance never gets any scrutiny by the press (just as the government's hands-off approach to Osama Bin Laden never gets any scrutiny from the "liberal media")"
Now, I'm no fan of George W. Bush, let's put that out there right now. I own a "I Still Hate George W. Bush" t-shirt. You, my friend, are making some far stretches yourself in your assertions. And we must be careful to get the facts straight before putting things out there, because if we don't, we're not any better than the GOP liars correct?
First, Salem Bin Laden is a step brother, and cousin to Osama Bin Laden. He was also the family's patriarch after his father died, basically managing the entire Bin Laden company. It also would have been hard for Bush to have been in a meeting with Bin Laden the morning of 11-Sep-01, because at that point in time, Salem Bin Laden was already deceased. Anyway, George HW Bush attended a meeting with Shafiq Bin Laden on 10-Sep-01. George W. was not there, nor was he at a meeting on 11-Sep. Those are dibious claims which have been refuted, and proved incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_bin_Laden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family
The 9/11 commission also refuted the claim that members of the Bin Laden family, and other Saudi nationals, were flown out of the country while other flights were grounded. In other words, you claim about that happening is incorrect as well. There has never been any proof found that this happened.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
To also claim that "nothing" has ever been done to get Bin Laden is so laughable, I don't even know where to start. First, we have the entire invasion, and subsequent occupation of Afghanistan, which was to un-seat and make for a regime change for the Taliban, and also to try and capture and or kill Bin Laden because that's where he was. There are now, and there was then, teams of special forces operators working in the tribal regions of Afghanistan and the border of Pakstan tracking, killing, and detaining terrorists and terrorist supporters, and they're also looking for Bin Laden. During our "war on terror", there have been some big kills for the US, and also some big arrests. Iraq, of course, had nothing to do with 9/11, but that's an entire other topic. Where do you think Delta, the Green Berets, most Ranger battalions, and other spec ops warriors from the US currently are? They're in Afghanistan, looking for Bin Laden and his cohorts. Again, to claim that Bush has done nothing to get Bin Laden is just plan flat out wrong. I won't defend the man on much, but there are military forces working hard to get that man.
Now, I know that there have really been no major movements to tie Obama to terrorist groups. Not really. There have been dubious arguments set forth, and some people really like to say his middle name in a sneering tone, but there have not been any real attempts to actually link him to terrorist groups.
This gives a good timeline of that morning, and where Bush was during that time as well:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20031006/alterman
I'm trying over here, trying. It is actually easy to get the facts on things like this, that it's not even funny really.
Wonder if these jackasses listen to Boortz, Hannity, et al:
http://cbs4denver.com/investigates/assisination.plot.obama.2.802827.html
Now who wants to come on here and say that these POSs are disgruntled Hillary supporters? Anyone? I'm all ears... whoops, eyes.
He was absolutely insane last night with his ridiculous 'attacks' on Obama and Biden. I have officially changed his name from 'His Dumbness' to 'His Vileness'. The man is pure unadulterated scum.
I've had the displeasure to hear Mark Levin on the radio a few times here and there. Talk about a bad radio voice. He is the worst. He's sort of high pitched, and very whiney. And that's just his voice. He uses pedantic arguments, and name calls everyone, which basically destroys any basis of fact that he may stumble across.
I consider myself somewhat lucky, in that, I live in a place where there is a progressive (actually 2) radio stations that I can hear the left wing talk show hosts, and I've got to say, for the most part, and for the majority of the time, they tend to make a lot more sound arguments, spend less time attacking someone else, and more time analyzing positions, and policies. Sure, there are exceptions, but prime example, Thom Hartman, has probably one of the best talk radio shows I've ever heard. He's respectful, thoughtful, and when he's talking about something he rarely ever has a guest on who agrees with him, but instead he normally has someone on representing the opposite view of his, and they debate their ideas, opinions, and facts of whatever it is they're talking about. I've actually not heard him have someone on that actually agrees with him.
Boooooooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrttttttttttttttttttttzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz is one of those gabby talk-show hosts that spends 50 minutes out of every hour talking about himself! Fast to jump on someone for not agreeing with him, but anyone that has more than a 12th grade public high school diploma, he avoids!
In real life, he's a over 60 four-eyed,balding galoot who knows the sun is setting on his lard arse! He's told some many lies that he has a hard time recognizing the truth, even if the truth walked up and bitch slapped him!
He loves sucking up to War Veterans, seeing how he lied to Selective Service for over 3 years, at the height of the bloodiest years of the Vietnam conflict! He claimed for years until about '05, that he was 4-F in the draft. Lying about being in ROTC after quitting after only 3 semesters, but carried the deferment almost a year after he had quit or dropped out of college for good! Then when his daughter was born, he used her as a deferment! He went as far as to purchase a Texas A&M Class of 1967 ring, 8 days or so before quitting college for good! Probably bought the ring to BS his parents, and hopefully carry his charade on,to the grave!
Oh I almost forgot, up until 2005 I believe was telling anyone who would listen, that he had in fact graduated from Texas A&M! Even in his different radio station bios he had to change it from "Graduated in 1967" to "Finished up at" he was lying!
In other words, don't believe anything he says, he's a confirmed, card carrying, yellow chickenhawk liar!
I agree with the earlier post that these guys are maintained on the air to be attack dogs, to constantly beat the drum of suspicion, fear, and hate. And this stuff does have its effect - so many people assume war with Iran is an inevitability - mostly b/c these extremists have created the psychological environment that will remove as much resistance to war as possible.
The thing I question more and more is the financing behind people like Levin and Savage - the two worst ones. I don't think that advertising dollars alone are enough to sustain them. They must be supported by more "quiet" money, like donations from groups that like to describe themselves as "for the American way" or some such thing. ie: Republican money. Does anyone know more about the financing of hate radio? Can it really be supported completely by advertisers?