Tags: Boortz | News/Talk | Radio | Personality | the | Year

Boortz Is News/Talk Radio Personality of the Year

Monday, 25 February 2002 12:00 AM

I also want to thank my two partners, Belinda Skelton and Royal Marshall. It's a collaborative effort here, and I absolutely assure you that award wouldn't have happened without those two.

Now ... a word of apology to the other attendees at the Radio & Records convention and to the R&R staff. I swear, if I thought that there was any way in the world that I was going to win that award on Saturday I would have opted for that late flight home.

For those of you who don't hear "The Neal Boortz Show" in your cities: Now's the time! Call your local station and tell them you want Boortz! Paul Douglas is waiting to take syndication inquiries from your local talk station at 404-962-2078.

Gary Condit is telling California voters that if they send him back to Congress he will work to solve the Chandra Levy case. Wow! What a guy! Maybe he can team up with O.J. and figure out who killed Nicole, too!

It happens year after year, election after election. Every time the control of the White House or the Congress of the United States is on the line the Democrats can be absolutely, completely depended upon to play the Social Security card.

The game is simple. You wait until the last days of the campaign and then you crank up the phone banks and issue ads warning wizened Americans that if they vote for Republicans they will be in grave danger of losing their Social Security benefits.

The Social Security card is sure to be played extra hard this year. Two reasons. First, George W. Bush has actually had the political courage to suggest that in a free country people ought to be free to take some, if not all, of the money they earn with their own labor and invest that money in their own retirement.

It's a universal truth. When a proposal is made to give individual Americans more autonomy over their lives, Democrats will oppose it. People of an independent spirit don't vote for collectivists. Democrats are collectivists.

Well, the Republicans have actually been reading the words of some rather brilliant columnists. One is Bruce Bartlett, a former Wall Street Journal editor. Several years ago he came up with an idea of a Social Security benefit guarantee. Now Bartlett is going to see his idea take wings.

The House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, is going to pass a bill next month and send that bill on to the U.S. Senate. That bill is going to require the Treasury Department to send a certificate to each and every person in this country currently receiving Social Security benefits. That certificate tells these people that their Social Security payments will never be reduced. We'll just assume that the certificate will be suitable for framing.

House Majority Leader Dick Army says that the guarantee bill will "assure Social Security recipients that their retirement security will be protected by a Republican Congress – while we begin making the case, forcefully and without fear or apology – for wide-ranging reform of the system."

The Social Democratic Party, as you might guess, isn't thrilled with the idea at all. Daschle and Gephardt are making it clear that this bill won't get through the Senate.

So – here's what the Democrats are facing. The issue that they used to gain seats in the House in 1982 and in 1986 may well get turned against them! Oh, the humanity!

Let's follow the different scenarios.

First, the most unlikely scenario – the Democrats pass the bill and the ripest segment of our population gets their certificates. With those certificates in hand, senior citizens are not going to be inclined to listen to the Democratic "Those Republicans want to take your Social Security" nonsense.

Scenario No. 2. The Democrats just sit on the bill and never bring it to the floor for a vote. Good for Republicans. When the election rolls around, all the GOP has to do is remind voters, "Hey, we had a bill in Congress to give you a certificate guaranteeing your Social Security benefits! The Republican House passed it. The president was ready to sign it. The Democrats in the Senate killed it. So, who do YOU think is threatening your Social Security benefits?"

Scenario No. 3. Democrats try to load the bill down with various amendments designed to prevent any meaningful Social Security reform from taking place. Again, the Republicans just remind the voters that at the present time there is no law on the books guaranteeing future Social Security benefits. The Republicans tried to pass one – and the Democrats blocked it. So, just who is out there trying to protect your benefits?

I don't know just when it was that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Colin Campbell tired of trying to trash Billy Payne and the 1996 Summer Olympics … but he's been on a tear since then. He's at his best when he deals with the misdeeds and malfeasance of the hideous Campbell years in the City of Atlanta.

Campbell thinks that the City of Atlanta School Board should cut school taxes to offset the increase in property taxes that the Atlanta City Council is getting ready to pass.

OK ... now you might need to sit down. Don't read on until you have cleared your mouth and throat of coffee, milk, etc. You wouldn't look good blowing coffee out of your nose in front of your co-workers.

Nationwide, government schools spend an average of $6,500 per pupil. So, do you think the City of Atlanta spends more or less than the national average?

If you've been paying attention, you know that Atlanta schools rank at the bottom of Georgia government schools, and Georgia ranks right there at the bottom nationally. That makes Atlanta schools arguably the worst of the worse. So – which is it? More or less spent per pupil than the national average?

The answer? More. Much more. In fact, it's twice as much. Atlanta spends about $13,000 each to educate the 56,000 unfortunate kids who attend city schools.

Can you believe that? $13,000 each and most of these kids can't read a simple apartment lease or make change.

No, I still haven't caved to the politically correct "African-American" nonsense. We're still whites, and if that's good enough for us, then I guess "blacks" will do in those situations where racial identification is necessary. I still laugh every time I think about Jay Leno's wife struggling to find a way to differentiate between white and black South Africans. She finally settled on "African-American-African."

My thanks to Antonio and his wife. They became U.S. citizens in 1980. That's over 21 years ago. Antonio tells me that they received a booklet titled "The Meaning of American Citizenship" when they took their oaths. On page three of that booklet you'll find the following:

So … do you think you would find that same paragraph in a book handed to new citizens in our present PC age? Antonio tells us you won't. One of his relatives was sworn in just a few days ago. No book. No surprise.

Now's as good a time as any to remind you of the words of President Theodore Roosevelt on this very subject. In a speech before the Knights of Columbus Roosevelt said:

"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities.

Or how about squabbling races, Teddy?

She hasn't attended one single day of the trial. She hasn't read one deposition. She hasn't asked the Fulton County district attorney any questions regarding the case … but suddenly Coretta Scott King is interested in the murder trial of H. Jamil Rap Abdulla Yadda Brown Yadda Al-Amin.

Coretta says that all of the inconsistencies brought forth at the trial should be "explored and fully investigated." So there you have it, folks. It's "Coretta's Rule." Anytime different witnesses bring forth conflicting testimony at a trial, all trial proceedings should halt so that the inconsistencies in the testimony can be fully investigated.

Or – Instead of Coretta's Rule, we could just go with state law, and the way things have been done in criminal trials for hundreds of years. We could just let the jury listen to the testimony, judge the truthfulness of the witnesses, and draw their own conclusions.

Oh … and we have another new rule from The Queen. Before you can convict someone of murder, you have to prove a motive. She says that "a clear and unequivocal motive must be established for the verdict to have the credibility needed for closure."

So, under this rule from Coretta you can have a man brutally murder another man in front of 1,500 witnesses – but unless you establish a motive for the murder, you should let the guy go. Hey, Coretta. How's this for a motive? He didn't want to be arrested!

Interestingly enough, Coretta's statement was not released through the usual King Center channels. Instead, it was released by a spokesman for an Islamic group that has been steadfast in its defense of Al-Amin.

And just why not? Because here you have all of the proof you really need that governments – especially local governments – are often treated by politicians as nothing but glorified jobs programs.

Last Friday, as the Atlanta City Council met to hash out spending cuts and tax increases, several council members, Debi Starnes chief among them, made proposals to increase property taxes beyond the suggested 47 percent, for the sole purpose of saving city jobs.

There were no statements on the record that these city workers were absolutely needed to deliver essential city services. There were no suggestions made that the two-day-per-month non-paid furlough would hinder the delivery of city services. The only reason given for the proposed increase in the tax hike was to rescind the furloughs and make it easier on city employees.

Guess what? We don't pay taxes to make things easy on city employees. We pay taxes to pay for essential city services. It's time to stop looking at governments as the last-chance employer for marginally literate refugees from the Atlanta public schools.

Remember, now. This tax increase is going to have little or no impact on the majority of Atlantans, who own middle- or lower-priced homes. As usual, the brunt will be borne by the high achievers.

There's a treaty banging around Europe that bans "hate speech" in e-mail or on the Internet. The treaty is a proposal from the Council of Europe. (http://www.coe.int/portalT.asp)

More on this later this week. Just remember that different people have different definitions of "hate speech." To a leftist, hate speech is any utterance or writing in opposition to leftist goals. It hearkens back to the Soviet definition of "peace," which was "an absence of opposition to world communist domination." It's all in the definition, folks.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
I also want to thank my two partners, Belinda Skelton and Royal Marshall. It's a collaborative effort here, and I absolutely assure you that award wouldn't have happened without those two. Now ... a word of apology to the other attendees at the Radio & Records...
Monday, 25 February 2002 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved