TGHusker

I would respect the Koch Brothers more if they started dressing the part: I always imagined the Koch Brothers more like I thought about Palpatine, but he hatched a plan from within with little more than his wits and Sith training. The Koch Brothers are just relying on the brute force of their daddy's millions and brainwashed Randian ignorance--still evil, but without nearly as much critical thought. You guys might find this surprising, but I happened to hear Glenn Beck, who I don't listen to unless I want to see what is going on far right, on the radio, I know , and what caught my ear was that he was aligning the Koch Bros, wt Carl Rove, and Grover Norguist the big anti-tax, supposedly arch conservative in a plot of supporting Muslim Brotherhood and other shady types. I thought, "this is a new twist". The story from Beck's The Blaze: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/26/grover-norquist-gets-his-chance-to-defend-against-accusations-of-being-an-agent-of-influence-for-radical-islamists-not-true/ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/25/the-message-glenn-beck-got-in-the-middle-of-his-special-on-grover-norquist-that-will-affect-the-rest-of-the-week/

You're 100%, but remember, they're all about love and if you don't agree with them, they'll f*cking kill you... That's the Tea Party for you--they're all about love, and if you don't agree, they'll f*****g kill you. I suppose it would make for a good 2016 Presidential Campaign slogan for Ted Cruz, at any rate. VectorVictor can you not post without labeling people. TP has noting to do wt this thread same as Ted Cruz. I'm sorry you don't care for me labeling things in the same fashion as what was done above. Yea, don't want to single you out. Sorry about that - I apologize for that.. Yours was just the last post wt the label and I could have been more general. You weren't the 1st to use the TP label.

You're 100%, but remember, they're all about love and if you don't agree with them, they'll f*cking kill you... That's the Tea Party for you--they're all about love, and if you don't agree, they'll f*****g kill you. I suppose it would make for a good 2016 Presidential Campaign slogan for Ted Cruz, at any rate. VectorVictor can you not post without labeling people. TP has noting to do wt this thread same as Ted Cruz. You can have some good things to say on different topics but doing the label thing without justification or merit diminishes what you have to say. I'm trying to get away from using the 'liberal' label as a derogatory statement as I understand it causes people to close their ear to what I have to say. I can embrace liberals as being sincere, good willed, American supporting without being derogatory. Knapp's moderation is wearing off onto me. We all come from different perspectives - some conservative, some liberal - that is not right or wrong in itself. There are some very sincere minded people on the far right (tea party) and some very sincere minded on the far left. That doesn't make them bad people - just a different perspective in how to fix a problem or meet a need. Hopefully the center right or the center left can be the answer in most cases as the far extremes have their solutions modified by the process. Regarding the topic of this thread I'll have more to say later, but I'll add this for now: We are all skeptics in one way or another. Even believers have moments of doubt (“I believe, help me with my unbelief”). Skeptics range from ‘near belief’ all the way to atheism. On some topics I’m a skeptic – certain political views, certain religious views for example. Thus, I like to think all of us are on the same journey – the journey of finding truth in our lives and a world view that makes sense of life. It does no good to show the arrogance of thinking you have cornered the truth on knowledge. There are many brighter lights that have debated this subject throughout the centuries then those of us on this forum. For every ‘believer’ who has become an unbeliever, there are atheists who have become believers – at the highest level of this debate. So criticism of another person’s belief in ‘an invisible friend’ only shows unfounded arrogance in my opinion. Instead we should respect each others path they have walked. We aren't all that different and we can gain from each other in different ways if we allow ourselves the freedom to ‘listen’.

This. And let's not forget this isn't just an 'Obama' thing, no matter how hard TGHusker herps and derps, as the prior administration was also involved in securing Bergdahl. If anyone should apologize to those family members, it should be Bergdahl (assuming he is found guilty), and frankly, the U.S. Military for taking Bergdahl on when, had they not let their standards lax in an effort to get bodies to fill uniforms, Bergdahl would not have been accepted. As for Susan Rice's comments, yes, she shouldn't have said what she did without having all of the facts. But then again, when has having all the facts kept Tea Party idiots and the extreme fringe of the GOP from opening their mouth? Or is TGHusker now asking for all of them to apologize for every falsehood and misstep they've taken as well? Good grief you are all over the map - you bring in the tea party, the last admin (double good grief 6+ years in and you still bring up Bush when that wasn't even the topic - get over it - must be the "Bush derangement syndrome". If this happened under Bush I'd be saying the same thing. If Condi Rice said Berg served wt honor and Bush released 5 high ranking terrorist, I'd say the same thing. You also need to get over the Man-Crush you have on Obama. It isn't anti-American to disagree wt the president and to be critical of him and to label anyone who does as being Tea Party (again way off topic ) is showing blind faith in Obama and childish. I may be conservative but I'm not tea party. I do agree that Berg should be apologizing.

A bit of an over reaction. Yet, I'm really curious what the 'agreement' will be that Kerry will be signing. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/John-Bolton-nuclear-weapons-Obama-deal/2015/03/26/id/634716/

The bold: It would be so funny if it wasn't so sad - deserving of a double :facepalm: and a triple :waste

Soldiers died looking for the deserter http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/02/we-lost-soldiers-in-the-hunt-for-bergdahl-a-guy-who-walked-off-in-the-dead-of-night.html Obama should apologize to each of these families.

How will the admin spin this one?? -- Susan Rice said he served wt honor. Justification for releasing 5 thugs who want to kill Americans. http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/03/25/susan-rice-flashback-bergdahl-served-with-honor-and-distinction/

Guys, my wife suffers from fibromyalgia. We have been thinking of relocating wtin Tulsa, downsizing now that we are empty nesters. However, I got to thinking that Oklahoma weather is tough on her - constant weather changes makes her pain worse. Have any of you had any experience (either self, spouse, relative or friend) in which they found relief from pain by moving to a new state? We hear that San Diego is the best place but as nice of a town that it is, it is too expensive to eventually retire too. I've heard recommendations for NM, Ariz, Utah, Wy and Colo. but like to see if any of you have first hand knowledge that such a move made a difference. Thanks

This thread is hilarious but it is also so - you can tell it is the off season. Me: I wash, note I not wife, everything once a week except towels - every 2 weeks. I figure, hey my body is clean - I'm just wiping off clean water. But then again one does have to consider the dry skin stuff. Everything gets washed after one time on the body except shirts if I wore a T-shirt under the shirt. If it can stand the under arm smell test , it goes back on the hanger. Blue jeans - typically wear 3-4 times before washing. So they may make the weekly wash. Tell, me I've never considered wearing them for a month or many days without washing. What makes you think they don't get BO (as in body odor not former coach who gave off a sulfur odor when he left) on blue jeans?

Man's quest for immortality continues.

Yea, that struck me too - made me proud to be a Husker. I think this whole staff feels fortunate and not entitled. We'll see it on the field. Embrace tradition and then they will play up to that tradition (and coach up to it as well)

You got that right. Makes me think - Hey we are Nebraska, what are we doing wt a rookie head coach, a rookie DC, Rookie OC, converted grad assistants. Our standard was way to low.

agreed

Artificial Intelligence taking over the world seems like sci fi stuff from the 60s. But some believe it is just around the corner - literally. How concern are you that AI will get beyond our ability to control it - where it ends up controlling us? Is the song "In the Year 2525" coming before its time? Will we humans 'de-evolve' as we use less and less of our own brains and muscles? Will the frozen custard stands go out of business because robots don't eat frozen custard? How will robotics help or hinder your career? In my world of corp credit, there are more and more tools available from a computing, analysis perspective that it has helped me to become more efficient and lower costs. As an adjunct teacher, technology has enhanced the classroom experience, bridged distance - making brick and mortar buildings not a requirement for "school to happen". The fully "robotic" classroom may be in the near future, and in some ways is available today. Students are able to access a 'cafeteria' of subject matter and be able to be both the 'teacher' and the student. The faculty may become like that clerk at the 'self help' cashier lines. Just watching over the process in case there are questions or problems. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/steve-wozniak-future-ai-scary-154700881.html Machines to replace almost half of jobs in 20 years: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/sci-tech/robots-to-replace-almost-half-of-jobs-over-next-20-years-expert-20150323-1m5oei.html

Knapp, I don't have an issue with your post. I would agree that many 'church practices' have been borrowed from pagan sources and visa versa. We all know Christmas isn't the actual birth date of Jesus for example and we could site other practices. My post and the book by Nash pertains to central doctrine - Christ's resurrection for example. Perhaps the current home church movement may be the closest thing to the 1st century church. I recognized some of the authors you note in that regards. I have found that different people have different "Pathways to God" (see Gary Thomas book with that title). Some find great solace & meaning in the high church liturgy and others in the very informal home church setting. I think you will find more of those pagan issues associated with the more deeply organized institutional church. I think any organization (religious, civic, etc) looses its 'purity' over time as it rubs elbow with the culture at large. The challenge, which I think many of the authors you site are addressing, is to restore the foundation of why the organization exists and bring life back into it.

Examples please https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Parallels_between_Jesus_and_Horus_an_Egyptian_God.pdf This is just the similarities of the Jesus story to Horus. Not trying to start an argument, just noting that there are other religions that were around long before chrisitianity. And they all have similar ideas, so to think that 'yours' is the only right one... I just think it's kind of arrogant. Yeah, figured you'd link something with supposed Horus parallels. They're cherrypicking straw men. I won't waste my time debunking all of them, because it is, in fact, a waste of time, but just as a few examples: Horus wasn't born of a virgin. He was born of a magically fashioned golden phallus by Isis, who then impregnated herself. There is no "Anup the Baptizer" in any Egyptian mythos. Anywhere. That is the brain child of Gerald Massey, who happens to not have any reputable regard by pretty much anyone other than people trying to invent Christ/Horus parallels. Horus was born sometime in Oct/Nov, and there is no record of when Jesus was actually born - Christians later adopted the winter solstice in order to celebrate and worship in safety from persecution. Horus didn't have twelve disciples - he had four demigods that followed him around, and some traditions have 16 human followers, and some blacksmiths and stuff, but nowhere is there mention of 12 disciples or anything close. I really hope you're not trying to pass this off as your own. Of course not, I'm no scholar on ancient Egyptian mythology. Might I suggest: The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? (The Student Library) Paperback – February, 2003 by Ronald H. Nash (Author) Formerly titled Christianity and the Hellenistic World. A critical examination of the claim that Christianity borrowed some of its essential beliefs and practices from Hellenistic philosophy, Greco-Roman mystery religions, and Gnosticism. "Professor Nash has written a lucid and superb book." (Professor Edwin Yamauchi, Miami University - Ohio) http://www.amazon.com/The-Gospel-Greeks-Testament-Thought/dp/0875525598 Josh McDowell in his book "A Ready Defense" does a good summary of the these issues and quotes Nash and others extensively. From Amazon, a reviewer of the Nash book had this to say: 17 of 20 people found the following review helpful 5Jason Santiago ByJason Santiago "J_santiago"on September 19, 2006 Format: Paperback On the surface, many folks might think that the topic is very obscure or not all that important. And while it's true that the subject matter is somewhat complicated and can initially appear pretty irrelevant to present day Christianity, it is nonetheless a topic with enormous present day relevance and deserves to be explored. In a nutshell, this book attempts to analyze whether early Christianity was influenced by pagan philosophical systems or by ideas that existed in the pagan mystery religions. There are a number of reasons why such an examination is so important. First, as this book mentions, a link of influence of paganism on early Christianity has been a common tactic among various folks in academia who are looking to discredit the Christian faith in front of an impressionable audience, and while not mentioning it, the Jesus Seminar has also been diligent in advancing such arguments in an effort to dedeify Jesus. And the reason is clear. One can make major inroads in discrediting the authenticity of Christianity if they can demonstrate, for example, that the resurrection of Jesus as described in the Gospels was really a mythical story copied from allegedly similar recountings in the pagan mystery religions. If this could be demonstrated, any number of additional negative ideas could be argued with greater force, such as that Jesus wasn't really God because the resurrection recountings of the Gospels are not historical but mythical and parallel other myths of the time, or that Jesus is no more special or unique than other supposed gods or deities in other religions. It is clear that the ramifications of these kind of theories, if proven, would be devastating to Christianity. Thus, the importance of this book. Nash carefully divides the book into 3 sections; analyzing the possibility that early Christianity was influenced by pagan philosophy such as Platonism or Stoicism, analyzing the possibility that early Christianity borrowed some of its stories from the pagan mystery religions such as Isis/Osiris or Mithra, and analyzing whether Christianity was influenced by Gnosticism. In each case, Nash does a good job of beginning his analysis by clearly defining the terms of the debate, and fairly representing the claims made by those who positively assert pagan influence on Christianity. These introductions give the reader a very good starting point for seeing how these arguments, when left unscrutinized, can on the surface appear to be compelling. By presenting the arguments fairly and completely, Nash does a good job of peaking the interest of the reader to read on in order to find out whether these arguments really hold water once we get below the surface. And particularly in the analyses of pagan philosophy and the mystery religions, Nash's analyses are very detailed and meticulous. Nash's analyses are very effective in meticulously discrediting these arguments and in most cases, showing very clearly the lazy scholarship that often fuels such arguments. By doing this, Nash not only puts these arguments in their place, he affirms the historical reliability, uniqueness, and truth of the Christian faith as described in the New Testament and clearly demonstrates that there is absolutely no evidence of a pagan influence on Christianity, and in fact, there is sufficient evidence to suggest a Christian influence on paganism. In summary, after one reads this book, it is likely that they may scratch their heads in wonder when one thinks about why this book had to be written, given the lazy and even contrived scholarship that is the basis for so many of the arguments affirming a pagan influence on early Christianity. One might reasonably wonder how such ideas ever had any credibility to start with when Nash so completely destroys the arguments with very simple facts and analysis. I applaud Nash for being so thorough in the topics covered and in the analysis. There are over 30 pages of footnotes at the end of the book for the reader who is interested in conducting additional research and examining other pertinent resources. I completely concur with what Nash says in this book when commenting on the alleged influence of the mystery religions on early Christianity, "These..arguments against Christian syncretism help us understand why biblical scholars today seldom claim any early Christian dependence on the mysteries. They constitute an impressive collection of reasons why scholars in such other fields as history and philosophy should rethink their methods and conclusions and finally put such views to rest." This is an excellent book, and one that can greatly help any Christian easily and effectively counter the claims of pagan influence on the early faith. A 'must have' for any apologetics collection.

From early last century: qThe London Times Essay : “What’s Wrong with the World” Perhaps the shortest Essay in history: Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely yours, G. K. Chesterton (If you don't know who GK Chesterton is- look him up)

Not to but I found this article interesting. You will see a lot of staff members previously associated wt NU. But outside of Ron Brown & Carl P, most were grad assistants What I found amusing is Bo's cap - the picture is one of him wt a Husker cap on. This was on the YSU's official sports web page. Does the program not have enough money to buy Bo a new hat? Maybe it was all of the NU references in the article - giving credibility to the program. The article states that this in an impressive staff- appears to me to have very limited experience outside of a few people - but perhaps it is par for the course for a school like YSU http://www.ysusports.com/sports/fball/2015-16/releases/coaching-staff

good interview

BRB I agee wt you on Fannie and Freddie. They have been around so long, I suspect there is some money changing hands under the table for this to be put forward. As you know, I tend to be 'small' govt conservative but govt has a vital role in serving to protect the small from the big and work for the common good of all. I agree the bigger these 'too big to fail' institutions get, the greater the hidden danger they present to the society as a whole. When a few big institutions can 'corner the market' on banks, investments and insurance - where can the individual go when they fail or when they unfairly control?

The agree with this statement more and more. This also lends it self to VectorVictor's statement about moderation. With all of the money in politics, no one politician can hardly afford to be compromising, to be moderate in some areas, conservative in others and liberal in others - they have to be "all in' one camp or another otherwise the money stops. With all of the money buying off candidates instead of being put to 'real good' in the society, I wonder if we'd be better off if we could remove all of the 'franking' privileges of Congress as well as all foreign 'fact finding' trips, etc and that money used to somehow equally finance federal campaigns. That may be an impossibility and a mess to manage but perhaps a spending cap. Then that get's into 'free speech' issue like the Corp free speech issue ruled on by the SC a few years ago. I don't know what the answer is but the status quo is a problem

Got to agree with this Maybe all of us on huskerboard should lead the way and take over govt

Is this a good thing or not? I'm not an economist so I have yet to form an opinion. I wonder when replace something that was put in place due to a crisis, if we are not in effect setting ourselves back up for a fall again. The deeper the crisis, normally the greater the swing of the pendulum back the other way to correct the crisis. Did Dodd-Frank go to far? My 1st gut check reaction: who will this legislation benefit? Follow the money, or the lobbyists and see if we can find a hidden motive. Repubs would like to gut Dodd-Frank. Like Sarbanes-Oxley before it, many repubs see D-F as an over reaction and overly cumbersome law. Both acts were initiated after a deep financial crises hit our economy. Within the proposed legislation, Congress would return bank insolvency/ bankruptcy action back to the bankruptcy courts. They want to also move the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau out from under the Federal Reserve & its budgetary control to Congress' budgetary control 3rd they want to privatize Fannie and Freddie full article: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-republicans-aim-dodd-frank-160833670.html A part of the article here: 1.They have said the measure perpetuates government bailouts, and that any collapse of a large firm should be left to a bankruptcy court. In the past, Republicans were unable to get any traction repealing the measure, largely because the U.S. Senate was controlled by Democrats. The plan still faces major hurdles, including a likely veto from President Barack Obama if it ever reaches his desk. Nevertheless, Republicans in the House are making a fresh push targeting bank resolution and other major Dodd-Frank provisions now that the Senate is also controlled by Republicans. 2. In addition to targeting resolution powers by banking regulators, the Republican budget plan also takes aim at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a new regulatory agency that serves to protect consumers from predatory loan practices by credit-card and mortgage servicing companies. The bureau's budget is not appropriated by Congress and is funded through the Federal Reserve. That has irked Republicans because it gives them less control over the regulator. 3. In addition to targeting the Dodd-Frank law, Tuesday's plan also calls for privatizing housing finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were both seized by the government in 2008 after they nearly collapsed beneath the weight of bad loans.

You didn't know that? was invented to accompany the Rueben sandwich Reuben starts with "R" and so does Runza......... MMMMMMMMMMM 2 of my all time fav sandwiches - if you could call a Runza a sandwich - wish they would have in Okla