FrumCA

Lou Holtz Nails It !!

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes and the America that doesn’t. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don’t. That’s the divide in America .

It’s not about income ine******y, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.

That’s not invective, that’s t***h, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income ine******y.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just. That is the rationale of thievery.

The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit.

It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president’s premise – that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful–seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences.

Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.

Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”

Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.

It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

“Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.”

Lou Holtz

Leo “Lou” Holtz (born J****** 6, 1937) is a retired American football coach, and active sportscaster, author, and motivational speaker.

Kalskag2

Hogwash.

NeilL Loc: British-born Canadian

Proof?

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

That statement pretty much nails it.

mwalsh Loc: Houston

Not sure telling folks like the doctor to pay 1-2 % more taxes will result in the loss of their freedom or their wealth.

However, regardless of who pays what percent in taxes, we gotta start cutting some spending, which has to include some social benefit progranms, and start weaning the rest of the world off the foreign aide tit.

We need the successful people to pay more, and the rest of us to get less. Get the debt down.

When do we blow up the world economy, $20 trillion in debt, $30 trillion ????

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

we have to stop spending half our wealth to protect the other half.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

The percentage of the wealth now being squirreled away by a few amounts to a tax on most of us that we get no return for. Pretty soon most of the means for producing anything will be owned by a few. Workers need to own some of the means of production. There was a time when there was less than one horsepower per capita. It is now some high multiplier of that but most of us don't have access to most of it. If something isn't done about it pretty soon we will all be serfs.
I wonder how much his doctor makes if he makes so much more than the author who is a retired American football coach, and active sportscaster, author, and motivational speaker. When rational people talk about income ine******y they are not talking about someone down the street who makes a million a year. They are talking about people who make many many millions of dollars a year. If you reinstated tax rates like existed until a very few decades ago, it would have to cut down on the deficit. If you cut the deficit until it is a negative you will be paying on the debt.

SBW

Your infantile post is what is hogwash.

Point out one thing he said that is not true.

SBW

Part of your post is nonsensical and the other part that can be interpreted is spoken like a true Marxist.

SBW

He has no proof or anything intelligent to say. His weak knees are just jerking in different directions.

Opus Loc: South East Michigan

As usual people don't fact check anything. This statement was not made by Lou Holtz but by writer Bob Lonsberry.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/louholtz.asp

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

but Lou Holtz is known for his strength of character and integrity...

it means a lot more coming from Lou. :|

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

“Remember when welfare mothers were robbing us all blind and driving Cadillacs? ”
― Joe Bageant, Deer Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War

Historically the lower classes are blamed for being poor. Being poor was proof of moral failings, laziness or both.

Where is the outrage over corporate welfare, subsidies and tax breaks for the "job creators" who then set up overseas, or the use of our military to benefit the profit takers in optional wars.?

We need a better system but until then, lower class welfare stems the tide of desperate people coming to your house with a gun.

SBW

Does not matter if Mickey Mouse said it, the content and intent are spot on and true.

Opus Loc: South East Michigan

Yes, it does. My point isn't whether or not the author makes valid points (he does) but it is wrong to attribute a statement to somebody falsely.

First is the sentence "My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant." Right there you know it not coach Holtz as he went to Kent State, he didn't go to work in a restaurant and I would imagine that coach Holtz makes much more that his doctor.

Secondly it promotes a position that coach Holtz (who is very conservative) may not hold. It is not right to put words into somebodies mouth. Every time I post a quote from somebody I take the whole 30 seconds needed to fact check it. The poster was too lazy to bother.

On UHH I fact checked 2 things today that looked suspect and one that I knew was an outright lie. Turns out they were all BS. A small minority of people here keep posting lies and half t***hs because the got it in an email or off of some blog that they frequent. Blogs are considered entertainment, not journalism and as such cannot be sued for malice and rarely can they be sued for libel of a public figure. That is why it is important for people to fact check everything, so they can make informed opinion based on facts.

Again I don't have a problem with the general tone of the statement but trying to make it more "acceptable" because it came from a highly respected public figure is wrong.