(this is long but well worth the read...you can find some truths in this no matter what side of the fence you sit)


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Many commencement speeches are boringly predictable Neal Boortz, a Texan, a lawyer, a Texas AGGIE ( Texas A&M), and now a nationally syndicated talk show host from Atlanta . His speech is far different from what either the students or the faculty expected. Agree or not, his views are thought provoking. It would have been particularly entertaining to have witnessed the faculty's reaction! Don't stop reading if and when you find things that disturb you, you'll find other stuff that you'll find genuinely part of the reality of life in the Untied States of America.

His Commencement Address:

'I am honored by the invitation to address you on this august occasion. It's about time. Be warned, however, that I am not here to impress you; you'll have enough smoke blown up your bloomers today. And you can bet your tassels I'm not here to impress the faculty and administration. You may not like much of what I have to say, and that's fine. You will remember it though. Especially after about 10 years out there in the real world. This, it goes without saying, does not apply to those of you who will seek your careers and your fortunes as government employees.

This gowned gaggle behind me is your faculty. You've heard the old saying that those who can - do. Those who can't - teach. That sounds deliciously insensitive. But there is often raw truth in insensitivity, just as you often find feel-good falsehoods and lies in compassion. Say good-bye to your faculty because now you are getting ready to go out there and do. These folks behind me are going to stay right here and teach.

By the way, just because you are leaving this place with a diploma doesn't mean the learning is over. When an FAA flight examiner handed me my private pilot's license many years ago, he said, 'Here, this is your ticket to learn.' The same can be said for your diploma. Believe me, the learning has just begun.

Now, I realize that most of you consider yourselves Liberals. In fact, you are probably very proud of your liberal views. You care so much. You feel so much. You want to help so much. After all, you're a compassionate and caring person, aren't you now? Well, isn't that just so extraordinarily special. Now, at this age, is as good a time as any to be a liberal; as good a time as any to know absolutely everything. You have plenty of time, starting tomorrow, for the truth to set in.

Over the next few years, as you begin to feel the cold breath of reality down your neck, things are going to start changing pretty fast... including your own assessment of just how much you really know.

So here are the first assignments for your initial class in reality: Pay attention to the news, read newspapers, and listen to the words and phrases that proud Liberals use to promote their causes. Then, compare the words of the left to the words and phrases you hear from those evil, heartless, greedy conservatives. From the Left you will hear 'I feel.' From the Right you will hear 'I think.' From the Liberals you will hear references to groups -- The Blacks, the Poor, The Rich, The Disadvantaged, The Less Fortunate. From the Right you will hear references to individuals. On the Left you hear talk of group rights; on the Right, individual rights.

That about sums it up, really: Liberals feel. Liberals care. They are pack animals whose identity is tied up in group dynamics. Conservatives and Libertarians think -- and, setting aside the theocracy crowd, their identity is centered on the individual.

Liberals feel that their favored groups have enforceable rights to the property and services of productive individuals. Conservatives and Libertarians, I among them I might add, think that individuals have the right to protect their lives and their property from the plunder of the masses.

In college you developed a group mentality, but if you look closely at your diplomas you will see that they have your individual names on them. Not the name of your school mascot, or of your fraternity or sorority, but your name. Your group identity is going away. Your recognition and appreciation of your individual identity starts now.

If, by the time you reach the age of 30, you do not consider yourself to be a libertarian or a conservative, rush right back here as quickly as you can and apply for a faculty position. These people will welcome you with open arms. They will welcome you, that is, so long as you haven't developed an individual identity. Once again you will have to be willing to sign on to the group mentality you embraced during the past four years.

Something is going to happen soon that is going to really open your eyes. You're going to actually get a full time job!

You're also going to get a lifelong work partner. This partner isn't going to help you do your job. This partner is just going to sit back and wait for payday. This partner doesn't want to share in your effort, but in your earnings.

Your new lifelong partner is actually an agent; an agent representing a strange and diverse group of people; an agent for every teenager with an illegitimate child; an agent for a research scientist who wanted to make some cash answering the age-old question of why monkeys grind their teeth. An agent for some poor demented hippie who considers herself to be a meaningful and talented artist, but who just can't manage to sell any of her artwork on the open market.

Your new partner is an agent for every person with limited, if any, job skills, but who wanted a job at City Hall. An agent for tinhorn dictators in fancy military uniforms grasping for American foreign aid. An agent for multi-million- dollar companies who want someone else to pay for their overseas advertising. An agent for everybody who wants to use the unimaginable power of this agent's for their personal enrichment and benefit.

That agent is our wonderful, caring, compassionate, oppressive government. Believe me, you will be awed by the unimaginable power this agent has. Power that you do not have. A power that no individual has, or will have. This agent has the legal power to use force, deadly force to accomplish its goals.

You have no choice here. Your new friend is just going to walk up to you, introduce itself rather gruffly, hand you a few forms to fill out, and move right on in. Say hello to your own personal one-ton gorilla. It will sleep anywhere it wants to.

Now, let me tell you, this agent is not cheap. As you become successful it will seize about 40% of everything you earn. And no, I'm sorry, there just isn't any way you can fire this agent of plunder, and you can't decrease its share of your income. That power rests with him, not you.

So, here I am saying negative things to you about government. Well, be clear on this: It is not wrong to distrust government. It is not wrong to fear government. In certain cases it is not even wrong to despise government for government is inherently evil. Yes ... a necessary evil, but dangerous nonetheless ... somewhat like a drug. Just as a drug that in the proper dosage can save your life, an overdose of government can be fatal.

Now let's address a few things that have been crammed into your minds at this university. There are some ideas you need to expunge as soon as possible. These ideas may work well in academic environment, but they fail miserably out there in the real world.

First is that favorite buzzword of the media, government and academia: Diversity! You have been taught that the real value of any group of people - be it a social group, an employee group, a management group, whatever - is based on diversity. This is a favored liberal ideal because diversity is based not on an individual's abilities or character, but on a person's identity and status as a member of a group. Yes, it's that liberal group identity thing again.

Within the great diversity movement group identification - be it racial, gender based, or some other minority status - means more than the individual's integrity, character or other qualifications.

Brace yourself. You are about to move from this academic atmosphere where diversity rules, to a workplace and a culture where individual achievement and excellence actually count. No matter what your professors have taught you over the last four years, you are about to learn that diversity is absolutely no replacement for excellence, ability, and individual hard work. >From this day on every single time you hear the word 'diversity' you can rest assured that there is someone close by who is determined to rob you of every vestige of individuality you possess.

We also need to address this thing you seem to have about 'rights.' We have witnessed an obscene explosion of so-called 'rights' in the last few decades, usually emanating from college campuses.

You know the mantra: You have the right to a job. The right to a place to live. The right to a living wage. The right to health care. The right to an education. You probably even have your own pet right - the right to a Beemer for instance, or the right to have someone else provide for that child you plan on downloading in a year or so.

Forget it. Forget those rights! I'll tell you what your rights are! You have a right to live free, and to the results of 60% -75% of your labor. I'll also tell you have no right to any portion of the life or labor of another.

You may, for instance, think that you have a right to health care. After all, Hillary said so, didn't she? But you cannot receive healthcare unless some doctor or health practitioner surrenders some of his time - his life - to you. He may be willing to do this for compensation, but that's his choice. You have no 'right' to his time or property. You have no right to his or any other person's life or to any portion thereof.

You may also think you have some 'right' to a job; a job with a living wage, whatever that is. Do you mean to tell me that you have a right to force your services on another person, and then the right to demand that this person compensate you with their money? Sorry, forget it. I am sure you would scream if some urban outdoorsmen (that would be 'homeless person' for those of you who don't want to give these less fortunate people a romantic and adventurous title) came to you and demanded his job and your money.

The people who have been telling you about all the rights you have are simply exercising one of theirs - the right to be imbeciles. Their being imbeciles didn't cost anyone else her property or time. It's their right, and they exercise it brilliantly.

By the way, did you catch my use of the phrase 'less fortunate' a bit ago when I was talking about the urban outdoorsmen? That phrase is a favorite of the Left. Think about it, and you'll understand why.

To imply that one person is homeless, destitute, dirty, drunk, spaced out on drugs, unemployable, and generally miserable because he is 'less fortunate' is to imply that a successful person - one with a job, a home and a future - is in that position because he or she was 'fortunate.' The dictionary says that fortunate means 'having derived good from an unexpected place.' There is nothing unexpected about deriving good from hard work. There is also nothing unexpected about deriving misery from choosing drugs, alcohol, and the street.

If the Liberal Left can create the common perception that success and failure are simple matters of 'fortune' or 'luck,' then it is easy to promote and justify their various income redistribution schemes. After all, we are just evening out the odds a little bit. This 'success equals luck' idea the liberals like to push is seen everywhere. Former Democratic presidential candidate Richard Gephardt refers to high-achievers as 'people who have won life's lottery.' He wants you to believe they are making the big bucks because they are lucky. It's not luck, my friends. It's choice.

One of the greatest lessons I ever learned was in a book by Og Mandino, entitled 'The Greatest Secret in the World.' The lesson? Very simple: 'Use wisely your power of choice.'

That bum sitting on a heating grate, smelling like a wharf rat? He's there by choice. He is there because of the sum total of the choices he has made in his life. This truism is absolutely the hardest thing for some people to accept, especially those who consider themselves to be victims of something or other - victims of discrimination, bad luck, the system, capitalism, whatever. After all, nobody really wants to accept the blame for his or her position in life. Not when it is so much easier to point and say, 'Look! He did this to me!' than it is to look into a mirror and say, 'You S. O. B.! You did this to me!'

The key to accepting responsibility for your life is to accept the fact that your choices, every one of them, are leading you inexorably to either success or failure, however you define those terms.

Some of the choices are obvious: Whether or not to stay in school. Whether or not to get pregnant. Whether or not to hit the bottle. Whether or not to keep this job you hate until you get another better-paying job. Whether or not to save some of your money, or saddle yourself with huge payments for that new car. Some of the choices are seemingly insignificant: Whom to go to the movies with. Whose car to ride home in. Whether to watch the tube tonight, or read a book on investing. But, and you can be sure of this, each choice counts. Each choice is a building block - some large, some small. But each one is a part of the structure of your life. If you make the right choices, or if you make more right choices than wrong ones, something absolutely terrible may happen to you. Something unthinkable. You, my friend, could become one of the hated, the evil, the ugly, the feared, the filthy, the successful, the rich.

The rich basically serve two purposes in this country. First, they provide the investments, the investment capital, and the brains for the formation of new businesses. Businesses that hire people. Businesses that send millions of paychecks home each week to the un-rich.

Second, the rich are a wonderful object of ridicule, distrust, and hatred. Few things are more valuable to a politician than the envy most Americans feel for the evil rich.

Envy is a powerful emotion. Even more powerful than the emotional minefield that surrounded Bill Clinton when he reviewed his last batch of White House interns. Politicians use envy to get votes and power. And they keep that power by promising the envious that the envied will be punished: 'The rich will pay their fair share of taxes if I have anything to do with it'. The truth is that the top 10% of income earners in this country pays almost 50% of all income taxes collected. I shudder to think what these job producers would be paying if our tax system were any more 'fair.'

You have heard, no doubt, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Interestingly enough, our government's own numbers show that many of the poor actually get richer, and that quite a few of the rich actually get poorer. But for the rich who do actually get richer, and the poor who remain poor ... there's an explanation -- a reason. The rich, you see, keep doing the things that make them rich; while the poor keep doing the things that make them poor.

Speaking of the poor, during your adult life you are going to hear an endless string of politicians bemoaning the plight of the poor. So, you need to know that under our government's definition of 'poor' you can have a $5 million net worth, a $300,000 home and a new $90,000 Mercedes, all completely paid for. You can also have a maid, cook, and valet, and $1 million in your checking account, and you can still be officially defined by our government as 'living in poverty.' Now there's something you haven't seen on the evening news.

How does the government pull this one off? Very simple, really; To determine whether or not some poor soul is 'living in poverty,' the government measures one thing -- just one thing. Income. It doesn't matter one bit how much you have, how much you own, how many cars you drive or how big they are, whether or not your pool is heated, whether you winter in Aspen and spend the summers in the Bahamas, or how much is in your savings account. It only matters how much income you claim in that particular year. This means that if you take a one-year leave of absence from your high-paying job and decide to live off the money in your savings and checking accounts while you write the next great American novel, the government says you are 'living in poverty.'

This isn't exactly what you had in mind when you heard these gloomy statistics, is it? Do you need more convincing? Try this. The government's own statistics show that people who are said to be 'living in poverty' spend more than $1.50 for each dollar of income they claim. Something is a bit fishy here. Just remember all this the next time Charles Gibson tells you about some hideous new poverty statistics.

Why has the government concocted this phony poverty scam? Because the government needs an excuse to grow and to expand its social welfare programs, which translates into an expansion of its power. If the government can convince you, in all your compassion, that the number of 'poor' is increasing, it will have all the excuse it needs to sway an electorate suffering from the advanced stages of Obsessive-Compulsive Compassion Disorder.

I'm about to be stoned by the faculty here. They've already changed their minds about that honorary degree I was going to get. That's OK, though. I still have my PhD. in Insensitivity from the Neal Boortz Institute for Insensitivity Training. I learned that, in short, sensitivity sucks. It's a trap. Think about it - the truth knows no sensitivity. Life can be insensitive. Wallow too much in sensitivity and you'll be unable to deal with life, or the truth. So, get over it.

Now, before the dean has me shackled and hauled off, I have a few random thoughts.

* You need to register to vote, unless you are on welfare. If you are living off the efforts of others, please do us the favor of sitting down and shutting up until you are on your own again.

* When you do vote, your votes for the House and the Senate are more important than your vote for president. The House controls the purse strings, so concentrate your awareness there.

* Liars cannot be trusted, even when the liar is the president of the country. If someone can't deal honestly with you, send them packing.

* Don't bow to the temptation to use the government as an instrument of plunder. If it is wrong for you to take money from someone else who earned it -- to take their money by force for your own needs -- then it is certainly just as wrong for you to demand that the government step forward and do this dirty work for you.

* Don't look in other people's pockets. You have no business there. What they earn is theirs. What you earn is yours. Keep it that way. Nobody owes you anything, except to respect your privacy and your rights, and leave you the hell alone.

* Speaking of earning, the revered 40-hour workweek is for losers. Forty hours should be considered the minimum, not the maximum. You don't see highly successful people clocking out of the office every afternoon at five. The losers are the ones caught up in that afternoon rush hour. The winners drive home in the dark.

* Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection.

* Finally (and aren't you glad to hear that word), as Og Mandino wrote,

1. Proclaim your rarity. Each of you is a rare and unique human being.

2. Use wisely your power of choice.

3. Go the extra mile ... drive home in the dark.

Oh, and put off buying a television set as long as you can. Now, if you have any idea at all what's good for you, you will get the hell out of here and never come back.

Class dismissed'

Really? Libs or leftys talk about feelings life in abstract feelings? Really? Rights talk in individual rights? Really? Like the right to ones own body perhaps? This is not well worth reading Helen it is drivel. I will debate this to death but then as I think about this now I realize that this is your reality and the sad fact is you do not see how vapid this post really was.

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

I said it gives anyone food for thought..I did not say I agree with all of it but it is right on in some areas (IMHO) If I say what I feel you attack me, not once have I attacked what you have said..not once,
I figure we can read it and move on accept or reject it..its you that needs to lighten up, people are afraid to put down there thoughts here because they will be blasted by people like "YOU"......give us your thoughts I wont blast you so stop doing that to me...


edited to add some of my "own shit"

Helen you have posted a number of things that have been just plain offensive on a number of different occasions here. You do not see what you post as being offensive and so to you there is no problem. I guess if you intended your post to be food for thought then the only thought I can produce is that your posting is the same far rightwing neocon blather that I have been hearing for over a decade. What this guy did was go on the attack all in the name of a "reality" check. I suppose I could produce some reality checks of my own like the fact that number of homeless increased the moment federal spending for mental health faded, and that many of those "bums" on the side walk are not there by choice but are mentally handicapped and just have not had the good fortune to end up in prison or jail. I suppose it would not hurt to mention that the average household requires at least two wage earners and their combined work week averages well over 80 hours a week. I suppose that it does not really matter that the wealthiest 1 percent in the US control 38 percent of the wealth and they pay less in taxe percentages than the struggling two income family. I suppose it really does not matter that corporations pay the least in taxes yet manage to get the largest benefits from governmental welfare and bail outs. That is where our tax dollars go Helen. So you can be upset or you can reaquaint yourself with the bright individual you are and maybe look at what you posted with hard eye as to its veracity.

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

At first I was going to try weasel out and say I was not or did not intend to attack you and that would be wrong of me. I apologize for that. Helen I am sorry I attacked you personally.
That being said here is the thing, if you wish to post something that you think is interesting and the main body and point of it harbors a mean spirited and spiteful tongue, than who do I address my complaint to? While I may not agree with you on a great deal of social issues or political responses you possess the right to have differing opinions from mine. I do respect that right. All of that being said I reserve the right to honestly lambaste any piece of drivel posted here, just as everyone else has the right to lambaste any of my pieces of drivel. If I see more neocon dixiefied crapulance posted here I am damn sure going to tear into it. I suppose tha means I can get a new torn also but that is ok right? This is still the screech, right?

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

but how you responded was....if its not YOUR point of view then its "neocon dixiefried crapulence drivel", again I say "stop it, that's a horrid way to respond..if you do not like something, say so but to fill it with your own version of mean spirited is drivel at its best.

I think you should reread your original post. If you think that is just realism at its finest then bully for you Helen. In your original posting the writer plainly stated he was going to hurt some feelings on his description of reality, well what the fuck I don't mind hurting a few feelings when express sentiment is neocon social idiocy at its finest. If you think I am going to apologize any further then guess again, I have nothing to apologize for where as you my dear have posted some of the more tasteless, vile, bigoted, and ethnocentric postings on this section. If it is not exactly your belief then why keep posting the same sort of political/social comments? Surely you must know I am not only one who gets offended. Thus I can only conclude that: A, you do believe most if not all of what you post, B, you do not care if you offend anyone else and C, that being the case I should not feel overly bad about upsetting your apple cart because D, I have yet to see you apologize for offending anyone else, thus E, take your own advice in this situation and get the fuck over it.

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

You,ve posted this diatribe style of writing so much its become your theme song.In my mind your VERY wrong.......Davey

it does give food for though.............no matter what side of the fence one is on.

Just curious.

It gave me indigestion..........Davey

There is some generalization and as Tuck pointted out, some is a tad over the top but for the most part that was a refreshingly candid and spot on commencment address. Thanks Helen.

Really Randy? I thought you folks already had socialized medicine up that way. Hell we pays our taxes and then another healthy chunk out to health insurance companies. I wonder how you would have faired down here as small business owner when you had your accident? Would you have remained solvent or would have gone under and been saddled with 200,000.00 in medical bills if you did not have health coverage, something a good many small business owners down here cannot afford.

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

Well, if, as a small business owner, I was in your country, I'd likely have purchased a good health coverage plan with money I earned. You perhaps assume that I would rely on your kindness? However, I brook no argument with you on that score. Your medical coverage down there seems to be wanting, Is ours better, the system perhaps, the quality of care, definitley not.

One thing the guy says that I disagree with is the choice deal. Yeah there is some truth to being responsible for our personal choices but he fails to address those that cannot. In BC, they've closed down most of the facilities that used to house folks mentally incapable of tending to their own best interests. Our homeless problem has doubled. I disagree with the dude who wrote this while at the same time applauding his stance on taking responsibility for your choices. Like I said, some of it is over the top, some of it is spot on. Always fun to give stuff like this a chew.

The average health insurance coverage down here for a family of three costs around $1,100.00 per month. It was only a few years ago that Labor and Industries would cover the small business owner for on the job accidents. I was not hinting that you were relying on the kindness of strangers, I was merely pointing out that while your system may have some flaws, our system needs a major overhaul.

Tucker

But again it is the absurd and its contradictory life that teaches us. For the mistake is thinking that quantity of experience depends on circumstances of our life when it depends soley on us.

Albert Camus: The Myth of Sisyphus, translated by J. O'Brien, copyright 1955 by Alfred A. Knopf

The population is 1/10th of ours, so I always wonder when people use it as an example of universal health care (either for or against).  I am lucky enough to have a job with great benfits, but I have spent a fair amount of my life without any insurance.  Luckily, nothing big happened (I was in my early 20's).

I think this is an example where both sides have good arguments and I'm honestly torn on the issue.  I think health costs are getting ridiculous, but I'm not sure that even the best universal health plan can work here.  So, that leaves me without much of an opinion.

I think that a couple of the biggest problems we have right now are:

1.  Nobody (with insurance) knows how much a doctor's visit costs.  You don't really see the bill, you just pay what your insurance doesn't cover.  As 90% of the people out there (with insurance) how much a trip to the doctor costs and I'll bet they don't know.

2.  We give the same level of coverage to people that are 23 as we do to people that are 55.  In many cases a single person in their early 20's would do much better to just have catastrophic coverage and just pay their own way for their twice a year trip to the dentist and once a year (if that) trip to the doctor.

3.  Insurance costs for the doctors.  I know this is one area I agree with the conservatives on, it's really getting to be burdensome on doctors.  That cost has to be passed on to the consumer, and it is a sizeable chunk of the recent increases in costs.  I don't agree with their stance on limiting lawsuits though, I think that would cause way more problems.

-Craig

And, I would think several times before I paid $150 out of pocket for an exam. And, I'll bet that's cheap in a lot of the country.

It kills me that people without insurance pay more than what doctors bill insurance companies. If I had no coverage, I'd get hit with $150, while they bill the company $90.

In Canada, it's somewhat the opposite, at least as regards dental insurance. If a crown will cost me 800$ if I pay out of pocket, that same crown will be billed out at 1200$ if I present my dentist with my insurance card.

No, insurance companies get a discount. The company sets an allowed fee, and if the doctor wants the business of people covered by it, she accepts that amount. If I don't have insurance, she just bills me her regular fee.

has to give a discount if they are signed up as primary insurance Drs...
I went without insurnce for a yr and negotiated my fees with the clinic, for s little as $14.00 per visit......I had to go to the head Dr but they did reduce for me.

My co-pay is more than that.

In BC, perhaps all of Canada, the provincial goovernment sets the maximum rate that any dentist can charge for a set procedure. It's fairly high but the kicker is, that rate is what the dentist can charge your insurance company. If the dentist wants, he can charge less or more but cannot exceed the government set rates for  what he bills the insurance company. The balance of his excessive rate, he passes on to you. So you get a better rate than the government standard because your dentistry coverage pays a portion of the higher bill. If I buy the crown, it's $800, if I use my 60% coverage, then I pay 40% of $1200, or $480. This, believe it or not, is very good dentistry coverage in Canada.

We happen to have it, because we're lucky enough to work for a good employer. It's not great insurance, but it's far better than no insurance, and it's free. Most people don't have any kind of dental coverage.

We have to go to a participating dentist to get the best deal, which is two cleanings and a set of x-rays for free each year. There are also set rates of coverage for different procedures, which isn't nothing. So, for example, if I choose to go to a participating dentist to get a bridge, it's free. Any other dentist, it's about a $1000 discount.

Now that I write that out, it sounds pretty good. For free, and all.

And I ask - why is it usually people who are well set with regard to their situation who write so vehemently?

I remember getting this "forward" a while back and looked it up on Snopes - this is their bottom line:

Origins: Although this much-forwarded piece was indeed penned by syndicated radio talk show host Neal Boortz, it was never given by him as a commencement address at a university or college, nor was it written with that intent. Mr. Boortz wrote it as a protest of his never having been invited to deliver a commencement speech, despite decades of hosting radio talk shows. As he says, "The final straw was when Kermit the Frog got an invitation from a Northeast college."

He has delivered the speech on his radio show and used in his 1998 book, The Terrible Truth About Liberals.

Last updated: 13 September 2007
The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/boortz.asp>

and the rest of you go fuck yourselves."

Roxi....you sumed up his speach....with a lot less words.........Davey.....the long winded bastard needs to get a job himself...

Like Reagan's non-existent welfare queen driving her Cadillac around Chicago's south side.

I'd wager that this guys who says you have no right to the life and labor of another also favors free market/free trade and the rights of Wal*Mart to make money any way it can. Just a guess, though.

stuff is nothing new...not even to this forum.Its the way those in power have always justified evil,against those they see as lesser men.All I can say is,"forgive them lord for they know of not what they speak"........or do they...if they do....theres not much hope left......Davey

Thanx for posting this Helen, it definately did give some food for thought. It is interesting to me that I have found myself tired of feeling and basing my decisions on emotion. Lately, I have wanted more the cold hard reality of life. But there are plenty of people like that with a view of "I have mine, what's mine is mine, and no one can have any." But those aren't the ones taking a role in making the world a better place. Materialism can be a powerful blinder. They are the consumers. There so many of these blinded people that folks in need have to form groups to be seen, otherwise they are too small to stand out. I am in real estate and it still amazes me how I can show a multi-million dollar home one day with every possible bell and whistle, three kitchens and a home theatre that takes up an entire floor, etc. and the next day show a home with an old woman in it who has no heat. To make a blanket statement that says that the million dollar person got that way because he worked for it and the poor woman was that way because her decisions brought her there, would be dangerous thinking. Even so, it is true in some instances, but not all. Some do have simply a string of bad luck that puts them on their backs. I know this guy who has been struggling for four years now. Struggling with job, health, child support, child custody, in fact his list seems to go on and on. He was hit by a truck and took over a year to recover, that was bad luck, but the decisions he made after that kept him from progressing to the point where he was before. The decisions one makes are based on their own educations, their life experiences and exposures. If you measure someone's worth by what luxury car they have in their driveway, then there is probably a recipe for all of the right decisions that will lead someone to attain those. That recipe is passed on from family/friends in the same status. Just as the recipe for many wrong decisions are passed on for those less fortunate. It is a form of survival of the fittest in the material world. Those who are willing and work beyond the 40 hours per week and those who take the initiative and are motivated to read and continue to eductate themselves, will make better decisions, monetarily and financially. Unfortunately, there is more to life than one's bottom line. That is the only thing that I think was missing from this article. We are humans and we do need the feelings. It is what makes us who we are. If you take the content of this article on the whole, it is very materialistic. I for one would like to think (or at least hope) that we as humans are cut out for so much more. There is room in the world for both, let me get mine and if you need help, I can help.
~Stella

PS The fishy part of spending $1.50 for every dollar earned is a no-brainer: visa/mastercard.

emotional status and IQ level has a lot to do with it..........Davey