Just got back from a dinner with Osborne..

[NEBRASKANHEAT]

(sorry mods, I can't find a place where this thread belongs. But feel free to move it.)

 

 

 

Was at a dinner tonight, will spare you the details but T.O. was the speaker.. He touched on so many different issues from Tony Blair, Al Qaeda (sp?)to Lou Holtz to Scott Frost, but the one thing that stuck out to me was..

 

 

If you didn't know better, you'd think he was anti capitalaism- a communist-socialist- slash whatever you people call Democrats these days.

 

 

The vast majority of his speech was about how he grew up believing a mans worth was valued in his character, not in his clothes, or the size of his house, or the car he drove. But how a man's life was valued in the way he treated the poor. The steps they took to share their wealth with the less fortunate etc.etc..

 

 

It was a great speech from a legend. I was honored to hear it. But it got me thinking. If anyone, lets say, the President, made this exact same speech, it would be all over the internet as proof he was trying to destroy America.. Just saying.

[dixie normous]

sooooo he is trying to destroy America how...?

 

[Hercules]

 

The vast majority of his speech was about how he grew up believing a mans worth was valued in his character, not in his clothes, or the size of his house, or the car he drove. But how a man's life was valued in the way he treated the poor. The steps they took to share their wealth with the less fortunate etc.etc..

 

 

Socialist.

[Ringer02]

It's late so all the conservatives are in bed, but by morning this thread will be completely out of hand.

[typ3kal]

It's late so all the conservatives are in bed, but by morning this thread will be completely out of hand.

 

 

Liberals have a lot more time on their hands since none of them work and are all on welfare.

[WCHusker]

What church/cult did he tell you to give all your money to?

[HuskerNMO]

You're off base, the value is in voluntarily sacrificing to help the poor.

 

Taking someone else's wealth, and giving it to someone else is a completely different thing.

 

If I decide to help people with what I have, I have the choice of who it goes to. If the government does it, some of my money immediately vanishes for overhead, more vanishes to those that scam the system.

 

Quote from Thomas Jefferson says it better than I ever could.

 

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

[Hercules]

You're off base, the value is in voluntarily sacrificing to help the poor.

 

Taking someone else's wealth, and giving it to someone else is a completely different thing.

 

If I decide to help people with what I have, I have the choice of who it goes to. If the government does it, some of my money immediately vanishes for overhead, more vanishes to those that scam the system.

 

Quote from Thomas Jefferson says it better than I ever could.

 

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

 

Right, and if the government didn't take our money and give it to someone else, the world would be so much better off. Because, deep down inside, we know that all human beings are incredibly charitable people who would give up their grossly oversized meal portions and big-screen televisions for the sake of our less well off brothers and sisters living down at the homeless shelter.

 

Anyways, yeah this is about to get way out of hand, so I'm gonna go argue about whether Taylor Martinez is faster than Eric Crouch or something stupid like that. Out.

[Cob Mob]

You're off base, the value is in voluntarily sacrificing to help the poor.

 

Taking someone else's wealth, and giving it to someone else is a completely different thing.

 

If I decide to help people with what I have, I have the choice of who it goes to. If the government does it, some of my money immediately vanishes for overhead, more vanishes to those that scam the system.

 

Quote from Thomas Jefferson says it better than I ever could.

 

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

 

Right, and if the government didn't take our money and give it to someone else, the world would be so much better off. Because, deep down inside, we know that all human beings are incredibly charitable people who would give up their grossly oversized meal portions and big-screen televisions for the sake of our less well off brothers and sisters living down at the homeless shelter.

 

Anyways, yeah this is about to get way out of hand, so I'm gonna go argue about whether Taylor Martinez is faster than Eric Crouch or something stupid like that. Out.

 

Maybe that's what he was getting at. If more people would freely give to the more needy, we wouldn't have to bork up what was once the greatest economy in the world with something like socialism or communism.

[ZRod]

That's exactly what he's getting at.

 

It’s a round about way of saying we've become too greedy. And don't slam me for this because I don't think there is anything wrong with it, but it's the same religious ideologies we've heard our entire lives. In reality it should have nothing to do with politics whatsoever so far as it’s a view point a lot of people in this country whether they be democrat, republican, independent, liberal, conservative, what have you, share. I know it’s idyllic but that’s the way I see things.

[zoogs]

Maybe that's what he was getting at. If more people would freely give to the more needy, we wouldn't have to bork up what was once the greatest economy in the world with something like socialism or communism

 

^ Not that we are doing so anyways. All those are are alarmism-driven names driven by one political faction in a bid to inspire fear and hatred for the goals of another political faction, which in turn has countered with similar names like "neocons" (to less effect).

 

I agree with jliehr that the real question is what is the role of the federal government, and this is a point often misunderstood amidst the attempts by every political faction to paint every other political faction as populated by completely heartless, stupid, alien people.

 

That said...Politics and Religion seems a more appropriate final resting place for this thread, but I got no problems with starting it here.

[kansas husker]

You're off base, the value is in voluntarily sacrificing to help the poor.

 

Taking someone else's wealth, and giving it to someone else is a completely different thing.

 

If I decide to help people with what I have, I have the choice of who it goes to. If the government does it, some of my money immediately vanishes for overhead, more vanishes to those that scam the system.

 

Quote from Thomas Jefferson says it better than I ever could.

 

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

 

Right, and if the government didn't take our money and give it to someone else, the world would be so much better off. Because, deep down inside, we know that all human beings are incredibly charitable people who would give up their grossly oversized meal portions and big-screen televisions for the sake of our less well off brothers and sisters living down at the homeless shelter.

 

Anyways, yeah this is about to get way out of hand, so I'm gonna go argue about whether Taylor Martinez is faster than Eric Crouch or something stupid like that. Out.

 

 

I wasn't there but it sonds to me that T.O. was talking about the charicter of man, volunteering to give his money to the poor shows good charicter and is how a man should be judged. I don't belive he ever said that the government should take money that one person earned and give it to another that didn't eran it. Maybe lil red can clairify that. But the statement that he put in the op sounds more like something out of the New Testament than a call for more social programs. When he was in political office his voting record was pretty conservitive.

[ZRod]

^ Not that we are doing so anyways. All those are are alarmism-driven names driven by one political faction in a bid to inspire fear and hatred for the goals of another political faction, which in turn has countered with similar names like "neocons" (to less effect).

 

I agree with jliehr that the real question is what is the role of the federal government, and this is a point often misunderstood amidst the attempts by every political faction to paint every other political faction as populated by completely heartless, stupid, alien people.

 

That said...Politics and Religion seems a more appropriate final resting place for this thread, but I got no problems with starting it here.

 

I completely agree. This always reminds me of the debate we had in our civics class in high school, is the government responsible for protecting the people or simply guarenteeing a republican form of government to the states.

[NEBRASKANHEAT]

Maybe that's what he was getting at. If more people would freely give to the more needy, we wouldn't have to bork up what was once the greatest economy in the world with something like socialism or communism

 

^ Not that we are doing so anyways. All those are are alarmism-driven names driven by one political faction in a bid to inspire fear and hatred for the goals of another political faction, which in turn has countered with similar names like "neocons" (to less effect).

 

I agree with jliehr that the real question is what is the role of the federal government, and this is a point often misunderstood amidst the attempts by every political faction to paint every other political faction as populated by completely heartless, stupid, alien people.

 

That said...Politics and Religion seems a more appropriate final resting place for this thread, but I got no problems with starting it here.

 

 

 

I appreciate the move, I knew I had stumbled on a political section on this board at some point but for the life of me couldn't find it in my probably more than a little buzzed state last night..

 

Back to T.O.

 

His speech was a call to get more active in the community. To help out the schools. To donate money to charity etc.etc. That part didn't raise my eyebrows at all.. Good stuff..

 

But then he continued. And said 'the difference between America today and the way I was raised is, we now place character and a mans worth on the car he drives, the size of his house or the suits he can afford. That's what's going wrong. Character is about how you treat others around you, how you help those in need.'

 

He even made mention of how this new way of worshiping the material things was more dangerous to us than AL-Qaeda.

 

I was shocked. Could you imagine what would happen if Obama said our own greed is more dangerous than Al-Qaeda?

 

Anyways, I'm not a big political guy really. But found this interesting.

[HuskerJosh]

Yeah, clearly you weren't trying to turn this political from the beginning.