2007-02-09

Boortz Disappoints

Neal Boortz makes a big deal about taking calls that disagree with him first, and that's one of the reasons that he's my favorite right-wing talker. Unfortunately for me, it appears that he's starting to remember the pseudonym I use when I call the show...

I've called the Neal Boortz Show four times. The first three times were great (from my perspective, not so much from his). The first call was about the President breaking the law for no reason with the NSA Warrantless Spying Program. The second was about Hamdan vs Rumsfeld and why it should reinforce conservative opposition to the NSA Spying Program. The third was about the Detainee Treatment debate, and how the resulting law removed the right of habeas corpus by the President's say alone. All three of these calls were constructive enough for him to keep me through a commercial break, giving me about 8-12 minutes of airtime to bring him around, which I succeeding in doing each time. The fourth call was during the Michael J. Fox/Limbaugh flareup, where I quoted Neal from two years before saying that the women who lost husbands on 9/11 "would rather have their million dollars than their dead husbands back." That got me called a liar and disconnected.

Unfortunately, it looks like "Joseph in Athens" is becoming a known-entity to the staff of the show. Belinda, the screener, has done the same thing to me five times now. We'll talk for 20 seconds or so about what I want to say, then she'll ask me my name, at which point I'm told that I need to call back when I get a stronger cell signal - regardless of whether I'm on a landline or my cellphone. I got through her screening today, though, only to be disconnected by Neal himself because "Joseph has a scratchy cell phone, so lets make room for someone we can understand." All I want is a Right to Response, so that some of the ridiculous ignorance (or lies, depending on how good he is at his job) that comes out of Neal's mouth can be refuted. It looks like I'm going to have change names before I'll be allowed to continue this public service.

3 comments:

Diamond Dog said...

There is no such thing as a "Right to Respond". The invention of 'rights' by Leftists is typical of the way they pervert the constitution. Examples are legion....

Kepler said...

I know it isn't an established right. I was merely referring to something I had said in a previous post. Would you agree that having a Right to Respond might be a good idea to respond to falsehoods?

Diamond Dog said...

You have as much a right to say whatever as Boortz does already. Your right to respond in fact was so important that the founders of the our country made it the first amendment of the constitution. If you want to respond, get your own show, publish your own paper, heck, even put up a blog if need be, heh,....

But, to think that any control system can be applied by any authority to deal our some highly subjective form of fairness is not realistic. I hope i don't have to go into details of why this would be so bad.