Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By Anjeanette Damon (contact) 
Sunday, July 22, 2012 | 2 a.m.
More Line of Attack stories
Editor’s note: Line of Attack is a feature that will run each week until the Nov. 6 election. In Line of Attack, we will parse a political attack, looking at the strategy behind it, how the campaign is delivering it and what facts support or refute it. We’ll assign it a rating on the fairness meter: Legit, Eye Roll, Guffaw, Laughable or Outrageous.
Attack: President Barack Obama said: “If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
Method of delivery: Before the Romney campaign decided to put Obama’s flubbed line in a television commercial, the meme spread across the Internet like a hashtag-fueled wildfire. Romney supporters mocked Obama in sarcastic tweets, accusing him of giving the government credit for building everything from Steve Jobs’ Apple to Noah’s Ark.
Strategy: Obama’s misspoken line plays right into Romney’s central line of attack: that he doesn’t get the American dream of individuals building a prosperous life through individual initiative. It’s an easy mark to accuse Obama of always choosing government over the private sector, further alienating business owners and Main Street America.
Fairness Meter: This is a classic example of cherry-picking a speech for comments to wield as an out-of-context sword in a campaign ad. Yes, Obama flubbed the line, making the Romney campaign’s job much easier.
But here’s the full context of what Obama said: “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allows you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
Obama went on to give credit to “individual initiative” but remarked that success happens “also because we do things together.”
Obama wasn’t talking about “somebody else” building the business. Somebody else built the infrastructure. This Line of Attack is laughable.
"This Line of Attack is laughable."
------------------
Unless you are a gun enthusiast republican who s supporting the rich Massachusetts liberal who banned assault rifles in his state when he was Governor there.
Then it s extremely laughable mix together, you betcha..
You miss the real point of the attack on Obama altogether, This guy has a motive for the things that he says. Instead you should ask "What was Obama really getting at with his words?" His tag line was "You didn't do it" referring to building the business. Obama was deflating the notion that someone like a Steve Jobs ot a Bill Gates or even Joe or Mary, the small business person, should be CREDITED as one of those rare and exceptional people who have built a business from the ground up with their hard work, sweat, ability and risk capital. Instead Obama as the purveyor and cheer leader of the "big govenment is king" crowd was intentionally diminishing the importance of the individual in this business building process. Now, he really believes this, it being the basis for his own success in life. This is the real slam on the president--he just does not appreciate the basics of bulding his success though the prcess of building a business, and the ingredients that go into making a business successful. It's a void in his life, and it's obvious.
Sad how the president is demotivating everyone in this country from working hard and doing something productive.
The last line is an apt summation...
Laughable, indeed.
Houston, once again...
You ain't got JACK.
Of course this "line of attack" is laughable.
But, the facts will not stop some people from taking things out of context--or worse, twisting whatever is said--in furtherance of their own beliefs.
It's 'Angle-like', this silly game...
The Head-Nut @ TeaNut Central thought they really HAD something here...
You got NUTTIN'!
A handful of hot air.
Pffft!
And, as was the case with the Crazy one...
the voters don't buy this crap you peddle.
It's a waste of your precious resources;
"Obama wasn't talking about "somebody else" building the business. Somebody else built the infrastructure. This Line of Attack is laughable."
Ha ha ha ha!!!
Ms. Damon...
Good call.
RIght on 'da money.
You state "here's the full context". No, that is NOT the full context. It begins:
<i>You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.</i>
That is a mocking tear-down of the success of people who 1) were smart and 2) worked hard. Not only that, they used their smarts and energy to build something.
As Romney said, "President Obama attacks success, therefore we have less success". It is shameful for the President of the United States to denigrate the stalwarts of our biggest advantage, people who innovate and start businesses.
I heard ALL of what he said and only the small right-wing minds can't seem to understand it.
The use of "Osama" Obama is disgusting and disrepectful, but what can we expect from people who twist the truth and flat out lie? Hard to believe this is coming from people who think of themselves as "real" Americans. Not my country. Oh, wait, you'll probably twist that around to say I'm not a real American either. There are lots of words for people like this, and none can be printed in the newspaper. Absolutely disgusting.
Obama is the most anti-business president ever.
He is also clueless about the economy or what it takes to run a business.
For example, his WH stated that the "stimulus" would bring unemployment below 6% by now.
That is incompetence pure and simple.
Romney's entire campaign is built on lies, so this latest lie is no surprise. It's all the foot-in-mouth goofy gaffe machine has.
Willard claims to be a devout Mormon and I'm certain that religion believes that lying is a sin, but so what, says Willard? I'm a dishonest SOB, albeit a very wealthy, privileged one.
Lastly, another lie by the lying liar needs to be exposed: Corporations are not people, no matter how many times that sleazy tax evading vulture capitalist says they are.
Obama should have said, your business is successful because of you the owner and the employees you hired. Just like he is now President today and I'll bet his wife deserves some of the credit for him getting to be President. He should have further followed up with what FDR was doing which is telling business to please just hire "1" more employee! If business who could afford to do that actually did it, we would drop the unemployment back to below 5%. But now we have this debacle to deal with.
I still can't get past Ann Romney calling me "you people" in reference to their tax returns. Do I want to vote for a guy who's wife refers to me as "you people"? Geez, talk about looking down on the "commoners".
Who built the most advanced military in the world? Not the private sector.
Who landed on the moon? Not the private sector.
Who designed the internet? Not the private sector.
The private sector plays a very important role, but the key word here is 'role'. It is the synergy from the private/public relationship (capitalism) that makes our country great.
Some may believe 'games' would be better without rules. The truth is 'games' flourish because of rules. The cheaters (Romney Tax evasion in offshore bank accounts) are the problem, not the rule makers (government).
There is a reason Romney made his millions operating in the USA. Do you think he would have had the same success operating from the Cayman Islands where he parks his money? (lack of communications, lack of security, lack of infrastructure).
It is so sad that politicans no longer discuss real issues that are important in the lives of the 99%.
This is just more repugnican disinformation.
He made the comment. He meant what he said. If he would have gotten a positive response, he would have repeated it. He got a negitive response, so now he claims it was a Gaff. Give me a break, all he does as throw it against the wall to see what sticks...
@TomD1228: Before you get on Ann Romney you better catch up on that piece of news. You're WAY behind the ball on it. Of course for Libs like you thats not a surprise.
Dip my friend come on with the "You didn't build that" line from the Pres. Its bull and you know it. I can't believe for a minute you at least don't have the commen sense that what he said was wrong. No body helped me build my business. If anything the government made things even harder. Sorry I take huge exception to Obamas statement. In my opinion he's nothing more than a community organizing hack that doesn't know the first thing about business and how to make money with his own hard work.
Tony Rezko, bill ayers, Rev. Wright, Van Jones, Frank Marshal Davis, "For the first time I'm proud to be American" and Chris Mathew's tingle. Yea, it's fair, "You didn't build that", that's all this guy is about, cry, complain and blame.
All government haters should move to Somalia, a country that has no discernible govt, no taxing authority, few flushing toilets, no firefighters, police, postal service, but has plenty of armed bandits around every corner.
What's not to like about all that tax-free personal freedom? It's an anti-govt teabaggers utopia.
The race baiting president finally found his true voice. Its not being laser focused on job creation. because he has no idea how jobs are created. No, the great divider has found he is best at being laser focused on making his followers believe that success is a bad idea.
If you support success and tell people they can do better, than whats the purpose of being a liberal? Being successful means you are less dependent on Government, and in Obama's world, that's bad.
More government, less success, that's HIS American dream and that of his followers.
Mark Anthony wins the prize for the most obtuse comments so far. Given that Bill Gates is liberal and that everyone depends on the existence of law and government to get anywhere in life at all, Mr. Anthony is living in a fantasy land.
Mr. Gordon,
We have the most advanced military in the world because the Government paid for it but each and every weapon they have was created by the private sector.
We landed on the moon in a ship built and designed by the private sector, paid for by the government.
The Internet was designed by individuals and paid for by the government.
You have never seen Mr. Romney's tax returns or books or done business with him yet you state as fact that he is a tax evader.
Our tax laws are set up to be followed yet those same laws let people create less tax burden if they know how to follow them. I am not defending Mr. Romney but you are speaking of things you have no facts to back up.
Yes, limited government is needed, more so today then ever before because to many Americans feel they are entitled to a good life without working for it. They feel they are entitled to the riches of others that have made something of their self.
Deal in facts, not fairy tales.
Funny, how all the Democrat Party media shills feel the need to explain/spin Obama's every word and the meaning of them to us, especially when he sticks his foot in his mouth and pulls a Joe Biden.
It appears that what is required is that we take the Presidents speeches and run them through some "liberal speak" translation software to tell us what he really is saying because words do not mean words.
My parents used to tell me that everyone makes mistakes. They died long before Obama came onto the scene. According to his followers he can do no wrong not realizing that they are playing the mindless guilty dupes that the DNC is counting on.
Like a commentor mentioned on the RJ site, Obama has to denigrate the accomplishments of successful people in order to justify confiscating the fruits of their labor. In other words, in Obama's world, WE (the government)made your success possible, now it's time for YOU, to "give back". Sounds like the kind of stuff Robert Mugabe, racist tyrant of Zimbabwe, says to justify stealing white owned farmland and killing the farmers.
Vegaslee, Thank you for supporting my statement "The private sector plays a very important role, but the key word here is 'role'. It is the synergy from the private/public relationship (capitalism) that makes our country great."
I never stated Romney did anything illegal, just stated the fact he evades taxes with his offshore accounts. Your statement of "Our tax laws are set up to be followed yet those same laws let people create less tax burden if they know how to follow them" shows you agree with me.
People hide things because of the negative impact. Romney should follow his father's advice and release multiple years of tax returns proving he did nothing shady.
It just gives the lunatic far right-wingers another lame thing to rally around. There's plenty of legitimate differences between the two candidates that matter... I don't believe Obama hates small business and I don't believe Romney hates poor people!!!
Spending time reacting to what someone said 5 minutes ago, instead of focusing on real issues is ruining this campaign, but they're giving us what we want... we're a nation that lives on sound bites... God help us all!
The repugs have become so inane, so slimy, so down in the gutter I have them completely tuned out.
Ask Bill Gates if he did it alone. Ask Andrew Carnegie. Ask Vandebilt. Ask Eisenhower.
But don't ask the repugs.
@William Gordon
You have to be a blind man to miss the obvious that it was and is the private sector who built the most technically advanced military in the world, and who mobilized and applied the technology to voyage to the moon. It was all private sector businesses, owned and populated by private citizens. The government is nothing more than a creation of the private sector, and invididual citizens for who the government as a collective focal point has been formed by the private citizens to support and serve them.
You obviously miss the important point about government--it is created by the private sector, funded by the private sector and achieves its only succesess because of the private sector--- enterprises who support it as businesses who are built by private citizens.
The problem is that We The People have been asleep at the wheel and allowed the "goverment" to get out of hand. That will end soon.
I voted for this President and I regret it. I am tired of him making excuses and blaming everyone but himself for his performance. I am tired of the media attempting to provide him with cover from his critics.....He needs to act like a man and accept some responcibility. I will vote for change again but this time I will vote for Romney.
Unfortunately our President knows little about how businesses operate. He knows less about economics. If he knew a bit more he would not have said what he did. He is very naive.
Romney is not to be trusted for his lies and distortions of Obama's statements and record. First, let's see him release the 20+ years of tax-returns that he gave John McCain but won't give to the American people!
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
I find the ad to be an incredible peek inside the World of the Elites. Their green point-man all but exposes the grand plan in this one segment of speech.
Obama is right, without a ramp job from the Elites, nobody is ever rising above the pack in this rigged game. People thinking otherwise are not being realistic. Those folks have been sucking the Horatio Algier bull the CONservatives shovel as their platform a wee bit too much.
I like the ad. It is an wonderful admission of the Plan. More people need to understand how deep this con-job goes. They need to wipe this free-will bs from their minds. They need to understand most of what goes on is little more than the effects of some scumbags business operation and not some random result of unconnected causes.
The game is rigged, the tables are tilted.
http://youtu.be/CZzaY9CrQHs
@Mark Anthony 8:25 Great post!!
@ Mike Heeman 9:36 great post also!
Vegaslee@8:50 Another great post.
Seems that the Left is missing their points today!
Good try but no cigar. We all know what he said and meant. The intent of his comments were to inflame the audience. He deserves to have it fly back in his face.
Romney should post a few forged tax returns and a fake birth certificate, the media and Americans LOVE liars, scum always foats to the top.
It would be impossible for an individual to capitalize on his/her invention if not for patent laws.
It would be impossible for efficient billing and collecting without the US Postal Service (prior to the internet)
If not for clean water, clean air, and a multitude of other environment laws, we would be living like the Chinese with their polluted air and water.
Workplace safety would be non-existent without government. Compare our mining deaths with China.
Transportation, communications, energy, all are where they are because of government. Every business benefits from the infrastructure.
We all got a taste of finance deregulation that ended with Bush's Depression.
A vote for Romeny is a vote to go backwards to where Bush left off...destroying the American Dream where anyone has a shot at success, not just the privileged.
Why do people assume Obama has fudged his way up, but then will assume the bozo in the ad built some company all by himself squeaky clean?
The truth is BOTH of them are frauds because that is what this system caters to. Honest people don't succeed in this country, scumbags do. We all know this so why do people continue to believe otherwise?
Course Obama is bs, so is Romney, duh. So is Harry Reid and Dena Heller. All of them are tools of the Elite. Monsanto is bull as is GE and Walmart. Oscar Goodman and Tony Hsieh are as well not flying straight. All of these people and concerns have self serving agendas, are not being HONEST, and rely upon you people operating as if they did.
The rule is this, the higher one goes off the production floor the bigger the frauds you will find. Each notch in the ladder more corrupt than the last. The most honest hardworking chap in any concern is the Janitor. Upwards from there?
Comment removed by moderator. - -
"We've given you people enough"...
Anyone thinking she was referring to the media is missing the point. Just using the term "you people" implies an air of superiority. Telling.
The fact is Obama will win in November. Romney had a tough time beating Santorum and Gingrich. That's pretty much all you need to know.
So, just like all of hell bent radicals on the right who said ObamaCare would never pass...low and behold. I can't get caught up in their opinions because they've been wrong at every turn on their predictions. Romney beating Obama is just another one in the long list that will be proven wrong. Mitt doesn't stand a chance. The Republicans need to find an electable president. So far, none have come forward.
The logic used by some is mind boggling. It would be akin to me saying Steve Jobs did not build Apple, he simply financed the construction of huge factories in asia employing 3 million Asians. Those asians are the actual builders, Jobs just pays the bills. Right???
It is pretty obvious that neither the private sector nor the govt can exist without each other. Thus, there is a balance to be struck for both sides to produce. To successfully balance anything, the momentum must be placed near the middle.
Currently, the middle is marginalized by the tea party and religious-RIGHT hijacking one extreme, and the freeloader-loving, regulate-everything democrats hijacking the other side.
Until we can stifle these extremists and move the majority to the middle once again, we will continue to experience economic malaise.
@William Gordon 10:13
William, you sound like the annointed one. Obviously a hopeless collectivist mentality.
You are standing still sorry to say. You will be overtaken by the blinding speed of the private initiatives that are swarming all around you.
One of these days you must try to move on. After all what have you to lose ?
Another biased piece from the sun. Neither candidate will make the correct decisions to reduce spending and debt. Vote libertarian return to our roots . We need another Calvin Coolidge not a teddy Roosevelt .
I hear and read comments that our president is reckless and does nothing for the small business owners.
This is nothing but reckless hogwash.
I had a profitable thoroughbred breeding and racing business for 25 years.
Other than IRS taxes the Federal Government had very little control over my business.
I agree with the President, my business never could have succeeded with out the help of thousands of others.
To name a few; the farmers that grew the feeds, the delivery trucks and transportation infrastructures, the contractors that built my ranch, the thousands working at the race tracks, the bettors, and I can go on and on to a point that may include 50 percent of the localized population.
The City and State Governments were a bit of an obstacle at times but regulations must be adhered to.
I never blamed President Reagan, Clinton or Bush for any of my non-profit months but selling during the Clinton years was much more profitable than Bush years.
I will vote for President Obama because he has lowered the taxes for the workingman that supported my business and he has lowered the taxes for the vast majority of small businesses.
To say that the president is reckless is something that spews out of the likes of Michele Bachman, Glen Beck, and Rush Limbaugh that the saner end of the spectrum quickly dismisses. All the GOP members want to win but the majority of them try to avoid these types of childish and slanderous remarks.
William Gordon
Read this Economist article to see what private American enterprisers are doing without the aid of the government Obamists--if you like.
http://www.economist.com/node/21558576
Wow...
The TeaNut's are off the rails; AGAIN!!!
Reality...
Try it!
No rebuttal needed for Houstonjac and RedRocky. Any common sense person sees the failure in their arguments and propaganda. I actually think their comments drive the 80% in the middle to Obama. So thank you for repeating the failed 'talking point' dished to you from the right-wing extremists, it helps elect Obama. Keep it up. I love the name-calling, it's very telling of your character.
Houstonjac, your article, minus the intro of propaganda, shows the successes of Obama's policies. Thank you.
I'd rather Mitt just come out and say "I did it on my own" and this is what I want you to do...
I'm not going to help you with your pre existing medical condition where you can't buy insurance. Do it on your own.
I'm not going to mandate any government spending to help the economy. Do it on your own.
I'm not going to change the way corporations send jobs overseas for cheaper labor. Do it on your own.
I'd have more respect for that platform than Mitt trying to tell me how he's going to help. If his mentality is not to help anyone and let everyone make their own way without any outside interference..so be it. Don't sell me healthcare reform if you like the present system. Just tell me "you can't buy health insurance, too bad".
Just heard an interview with Louie Gohmert from Texas (R). It's amazing how many utter loon balls there are in the republican party. This guy got elected?
Obama wasn't talking about "somebody else" building the business. Somebody else built the infrastructure that helps and aids businesses sell and transport their goods. You know roads, dams, bridges.... et all. This Line of Attack is laughable.
Business owners pay dearly to use the resources that OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS HAVE PAID TO CREAT,
THE GOVERNMENT ONLY CHANNELS THE RESOURCES OF TAKEN FROM OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS, THEY PAY ALL THE TAXES, the deadbeats that support Obama pay next to nothing!
THESE RESOURCES THAT OBAMA TALKES ABOUT BELONG TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS, THEY PAID FOR IT,
It is clear what the President meant in his speech. The content is clear.
Houstonjac, is reaching, and reaching badly. Sounding unreasonable. You cannot have a discussion if your argument is unreasonable.
.Obama is the most anti-business president ever.
He is also clueless about the economy or what it takes to run a business.
For example, his WH stated that the "stimulus" would bring unemployment below 6% by now.
That is incompetence pure and simple.
There are interesting points about this "discussion":
1. It takes place in a newspaper in a town that exists thanks to government policies and government investment that private enterprises took advantage of. A. Judge Clark's railway was subsidized by federal land grants. B. The water which makes possible a permanent population larger than about 5,000 persons is of course the result of a federal irrigation and power project -- Hoover Dam. C. The discussion takes place on the internet, using technologies sponsored by the federal government.
2. Downtown Las Vegas is being revitalized by Zappos, an internet business. The casino industry by be benefited by the legalization of internet poker and other games.
3. The low taxes the area enjoys are funded by tourists who: A. Arrive by publicly subsidized means of transport (roads, airports, and air traffic control); B. Use publicly furnished water supplies; and C. Eat food which is largely the result of irrigated agriculture sustained by public dams and waterworks, and transported here by air and road -- both publicly subsidized.
And, yet, somehow, this governmental activity enabled, and apparently did not inhibit, private enterprises from becoming successful.
Longtimevegan--what we have here is a failure to agree on what the annointed one actually meant. He clearly is a collectivist/socialist, as you appear to be, and talking about a streatch in interpretation, you have got to see what he was attempting to do is diminish the importance of the private individual, and magnify the power of other intervening events in deciding some individual's success. If he was not, which , he clearly was, then of course you and I would not be talking right now.What is amusing to me is that for someone sticking up for Obama's slanted speech, you seem not to be in agreement with the conclusion I reached, while defending Obama. Do you give credit to the private initiative in the success equation, or to the intervening influences that were involved, such as government infrastructure or a "good friend" LOL.
William Gordon:
See if this puts it into perspective for you. The article essentially states that Obama has nothing to do with the success of the US. Read this and see if it helps clear out the confusion in your mind:
The fact is that people create jobs--not the government. What is government? Indidividual members of society create government entities to furnish the services and infrastructure that we as individuals require to function. Without the individual, government ceases to be. The thought that somehow, government is distinct from the individual is myth. Without the taxes. the government disappears. And who actually builds all these great monuments to progress if not the essential businesses who have been created by individuals based on their initiative, hard work, sweat and risk capital. These are the ones who do the real building--countless businesses acting as contractors in the process.
George Matthews
Your logic is foggy.
Was it the individual or the government who created the job?
Comment removed by moderator. - -
Bob Jack, I'll refer you back to my first comment, maybe it puts it into perspective for you..."The private sector plays a very important role, but the key word here is 'role'. It is the synergy from the private/public relationship (capitalism) that makes our country great."
"The fact is that people create jobs--not the government." So all the Republican whining about defense contractor job losses if the mandatory spending cuts go through, are full of it. Romney pledging to shut down the Department of Education and Housing and Urban Development will create no job losses, Am I correct in your logic?
Do you believe defense contractors simply present ideas or do they fill the orders from the minds at the Pentagon? When the Pentagon decided it needed better communications for a competitive advantage, the minds at the government agency DARPA developed the internet in the 1950's. Republicans fought Clinton's promise to open 'the information superhighway (the internet)' to the public, thankfully Clinton won that argument and the economy received a huge economic impact.
Bob, you'll never win the argument that the government plays no role in private business. But keep trying, it is very entertaining.
William Gordon:
This entire subject revolves about who creates businesses. The president believes that government infrastructure and a good friend are responsible.
I say it is the individual. Take Bill Gates for example. He had infrastucture--his garage.Anything could have been done with that garage--it could have been empty. It could have been a meth lab. Who made the difference? I submit it was Bill Gates--the individual who made the difference.What say you?
It's unfortunate that political campaigns have devolved into engines of division; their purpose is to put voters into "for" or "against" categories. One of the greatest strengths of a free society is grounded in the freedom of speech. Professional political operatives, which all major candidates are guilty of hiring, have corrupted this freedom into a weapon. The hero of the day could be the free press, but their voice needs to be much louder than the occasional editorial (although I do applaud this one)pointing out the flawed claims and inaccurate portrayals made my the candidates.
I say the liberal Bill Gates benefited from copyright and intellectual property laws. One of Bill Gates biggest complaints is the rampant infringement by the Chinese costing his company billions.
I say Bill Gates benefitted from a public education, flushing toilet, electricity, roads, mail service, and property laws and on and on.
I'm surprised we haven't seen ads using Obama's words from barely two months into his term on March 26, 2009. He was talking about jobs that had been out-sourced when he said this:
"So I guess the answer to the question is, not all of these jobs are going to come back. And it probably wouldn't be good for our economy for a bunch of these jobs to come back..." - http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_offi...
He has clearly believes that since he (and to be fair, Congress) has done nothing to bring them back.
The current statement being discussed is not out-of-line with that earlier one. The US population should depend upon the government to take care of them and not do it for themselves.
Comment removed by moderator. Personal Attack
No matter what the president says the people who hate him will happily believe he meant something nefarious and will twist it out of proportion.
Any successful American who did not attend a private school has a publicly funded institution to thank for their leg-up in the world. Simple. There's nothing Communist about that statement or creepy or subversive. Bain Capital didn't build the highways, Goldman Sachs doesn't build hospitals, Walmart doesn't lay the infrastructure for the electrical grids. It's pretty simple.
If you hate government funded programs so much then turn off your power and water, stop using the roads, pull your kids out of school, and go live on a hill in West Virginia where you never have to visit a hospital funded by tax dollars or cross a bridge that was built by a state and taxpayer dollars. But don't bitch the next time there's a ecoli outbreak in fresh vegetables that the government isn't doing enough to regulate the food industry and keep you safe.
And guess what, Vegas boobs, the Federal Government built Hoover Dam, not some enterprising genius who never needed anyone else's help or advice but his own.
Mr. Romney forgets that while he was tripping around France on a religious exemption from fighting the Vietnam War a lot of other Americans were fighting to protect his right to have fun in Europe while they were being maimed and killed. While Mr. Private Prep School was being treated like a prince in a house his father bought for him and staffed with servants (while in college) thousands of American soliders were losing their lives overseas so that Romney could claim later on in life that government doesn't help anybody and that he got where he is on his own.
Pathetic argument any way you look at it.
By the way, has anyone asked Romney what jobs he had to work to pay his way through college or how much his student loans were?
One word answer: Daddy
I can't resist, does President Obama place Nobel Prize winners in the same category as those who build business? That is, would he say that they should receive those awards because their work would not be possible without everything that has gone before and all the infrastructure required to produce their work?
I will agree that Obama's remark contains some valid observations, but I think his emphasis is misplaced.
Oops! Make that "...would he say that they should NOT receive those awards ..."
jwlasvegas I really like the post.
For once I will agree this is NOT Obama's fault or rather it should be such a surprise he made a statement like that.. He has never run a small business and has no idea what it entails, so it should not be expected he could talk coherently about starting and running one.
Infrastructure was built to encourage commerce, duh! If you really want to think who built the railroads that provided links across the country? Government or private companies? That was also to get commerce, again, the staple of any country as it puts people to work and creates economic activity. We could have Obama say the same speech expect insert "union member" for "successful" and it has the same effect.
Mitt got a nice break from Vietnam...didn't he?...while my father, married, 2 kids, career, volunteered to help the country with his knowledge and experience in any way that could help. Mitt was on a religious sabbatical while his Lower class peers were in the jungles fighting.
Mitt, Clinton, Cheney....all these guys got a pass when they should not have.
Re RedRocky. Why don't you change your user name to GOP water carrier? It's just the same ol' same ol' with you right wing sycophants isn't it? Lot's of BS rhetoric, and the same crap I've been reading here for years. LMFAO, bagger.
President Obama was talking about roads and bridges, by making it seem otherwise Romney, Faux Noise, etc are all scammin' the public!
At least his remarks didn't cause any divisiveness.
It really highlights the differences between to takers (liberals) and the makers (Conservatives).
I will give the libs their due.... they will follow Obama to the Gates of Hell if he needs them to.
btw, I stand by my prediction.... Obama will be re-elected because the takers outnumber the makers.
William Gordon
Your case keeps getting weaker. You have a flushing toilet too just like Bill Gates. But you did not use your life, capital and sweat to create Microsoft, and neither did the annointed one,who also had a flushing toilet and mail delivery. Who stands out in this picture? You , or Gates?
"btw, I stand by my prediction.... Obama will be re-elected because the takers outnumber the makers."
------------
You better start understanding why the takers have outnumbered the makers. When people are losing their company sponsored health insurance and are forced to go and buy their own to the tune of $12,000 for him and his family...he's going to look for an advocate. Some things the American spirit can't overcome. This is being played out daily not because that person wants to be a taker but because he's felt he's done what he had to do to make it. Went to college, studied and worked hard. When his kids are no longer convered for healthcare thru no fault of his own...he might look for help. That's what you're seeing.
Let's face it, it didn't get like this (bad economy, job loss, benefit loss, healthcare loss, housing crash, corporate bailouts, disintegration of the middle class..because your neighbor was a taker. Don't sell me that garbage..
We sold our soul for a new world order, free market economy. Sending jobs overseas for 1/3 to 1/5 the pay. What corporate entity isn't going to take advantage of that? You got what you wanted. Open borders, no tariffs. Nothing changes as wages will flatten here as they rise overseas. By then you'll have what you have in Pakistan, Philippines, India....rich and poor with no middle. Happy?
Bob,
How many people worked with Bill Gates creating "his" product?
Mark
Read it below:
"Paul Allen and Bill Gates, childhood friends with a passion in computer programming, were seeking to make a successful business utilizing their shared skills. The January 1975 issue of Popular Electronics featured Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems's (MITS) Altair 8800 microcomputer. Allen noticed that they could program a BASIC interpreter for the device; after a call from Gates claiming to have a working interpreter, MITS requested a demonstration. Since they didn't actually have one, Allen worked on a simulator for the Altair while Gates developed the interpreter. Although they developed the interpreter on a simulator and not the actual device, the interpreter worked flawlessly when they demonstrated the interpreter to MITS in Albuquerque, New Mexico in March 1975; MITS agreed to distribute it, marketing it as Altair BASIC.[5]:108, 112--114 They officially established Microsoft on April 4, 1975, with Gates as the CEO.[7] Allen came up with the original name of "Micro-Soft," as recounted in a 1995 Fortune magazine article. In August 1977 the company formed an agreement with ASCII Magazine in Japan, resulting in its first international office, "ASCII Microsoft".[8] The company moved to a new home in Bellevue, Washington in January 1979.[7]"
YES, its fair to used anything Obama says, because he himself doesn't know what he is talking about. Obama campaign ads have been nothing but lies and made up stuff. I sure a presidential candidate is going to run a campaign on raising taxes for the middle class and cutting them for the rich and corporate America, that makes no sense unless Obama does plan on raising taxes on the rich and corporate America another 25% and leave the middle class tax rate the same which will do nothing for the middle class. Obama wants you to think that his $9 trillion economic package he spent over the last three years is what keeps a roof over your head and food on the table is greatly mistaken. My life is no better off since Obama took office but I have seen many of my relatives struggling and going backwards in their standard of living. Obama is full of it, he does not have a plan, he want to spend his way to success and will hurt anyone along the way. Obama arrogance and smug attitude is not good for America. We gave him his chance, now its time to bring an ex business man and governor in an get things turned around before we get in too deep.
There are a number of less than flattering rumors about how Bill Gates came up with MS-DOS that might suggest that his generosity today comes from a sense of guilt. Those rumors are about the only thing that would support those who say he couldn't do it on his own.
Excuse me. . . when you say "the military" pay for things, where do you think the money comes from - IT'S THE PRIVATE SECTOR!! The Private Sector makes the money to keep the public sector going. And I must say, in most cases,they're handling the money quite poorly (solar bankruptcies).
Oh beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain, for Swiss accounts and off shore banks,and funds acquired at Bain.America,America, income declared tax free.And crowned thy good with brotherhood, send all jobs overseas.
That's a killer ad. Mitt even screws up the words. "Fruited plains"....?
Kalihi, awesome lyrics. If you aren't already, you should think about becoming a professional songwriter.
BTW, if Willard butchers that song again in public it'll cost him another 10% of the vote.
Bob Jack, You have hit new lows in civility, I'm sure nobody is interested in my contributions to society.
While we are on the topic of great businessmen; tell me what product did Romney invent that made him 100's of millions of dollars? Please explain to me how Romney made millions with no products, no creative invention or idea. Don't give some bull of he invested capital, all the evidence shows he did just the opposite, he sucked capital from otherwise healthy companies...putting them on a path to bankruptcy...and parking his ill-gotten gains offshore to avoid taxes. Doesn't sound like a job creator, more like an American job destroyer.
William Gordon
It's wrong to diminish the contributions of our great innovators and risk takers who have built this nation by attributing their feats to flushing toilets as you did. Now to Mitt Romney.
President Obama and you demonstrate your lack of understanding of American capitalism when you criticize Mitt Romney for his role as Bain Capital's chief.
Bain is a private equity firm that for many years has invested in companies that are usually considered by Bain to be undervalued. It then blends the talents of its own management team with those of the acquired entity, restructuring and adding new talent.
Bain undertakes a long-term commitment to these entities with the objective of improving performance, increasing their value and ultimately selling them for a profit.
Under our capitalist system, Bain and Romney both participate in a virtuous activity.
"Bain is a private equity firm that for many years has invested in companies that are usually considered by Bain to be undervalued. It then blends the talents of its own management team with those of the acquired entity, restructuring and adding new talent."
Ah, BS. The main course of action for companies like Bain is buy, restructure, sell off pieces, layoff employees and reap millions. The end result is companies that were performing fine, paying and employing many were "streamlined" (corporate speak for squeezing out every last dollar)....employees lost jobs, benefits. I've seen it first hand. Bain was essentially a corporate raider masquerading as a "savior" to so-called down and out companies which were actually in many cases functioning fine.
TomD, If the companies were doing fine, why were they "down and out"? Raiders, as you call them, don't buy successful companies, they purchase companies that are struggling. The reason they part them off is due to the fact that some companies have extremely valuable divisions, in fact, these divisions are often what keep a struggling company afloat.
I can see why you are voting for Obama. You evidently are a closet socialist. This also explains why you so vigorously defended the takers of society.
You are the reason Obama will get elected. No clue how the real world works when it comes to finance. You probably have the touchy-feely thing down though.
Life is tough, wear a cup!
Heretic: "You are the reason Obama will get elected."
Good to see some of the far-right extremists on this site are beginning to accept reality. Yes, President Obama will be reelected because of sane voters like TomD and millions of others.
Obama is a joke who doesn't care about people who work hard and deserve to reap the fruits of their labors. Instead, he's rather take care of the bums that didn't pay attention in school and instead want to live off of everyone else who's successful. It's pure socialism and a joke.
LMFAO
@Heretic
More BS. "Down and out" is a word Mitt and his buddies used to describe companies they could buy, cut employees and benefits, sell off the pieces, make a profit and move on to the next conquest. They build nothing, create nothing but put millions of dollars in their pockets. You want to call that progress, be my guest.
You're going to lose in November because you cannot grasp the fact many people thru no fault of their actions are suffering. They are going to seek out advocates.
You're a right wing extremist. You guys are like dinosaurs. Those days are over. You just can't accept that..so you'll just complain instead of finding someone who is electable.
TomD1228,
You are right, there are many, too many, people who through no fault of their own are suffering and need an advocate.
What you have not stated, or possibly don't want to admit, is that there are many, again too many, people who choose to take advantage of those who would be advocates for those in need.
The people who choose to take advantage of others are no different than pimps or drug dealers.
The reason that President Obama, and other Democrats, might lose in November is that there are many, hopefully enough, people who want to help those who are truly in need but have no desire to see our valuable and limited resources wasted on those who are nothing but scam artists who do nothing and have no desire to improve human society or the human race.
How is a guy who lost his company supplied health insurance benefits and can't afford the $12,000/year out of pocket for his family a "scam artist"?
Real unemployment is at 10-15%. Did those workers suddenly want to "scam the unemployment system"? Worked their entire lives and they got laid off. Now they are scam artists because they can't get work.
How about the guy who came to Las Vegas in 2006 and bought a home for what he thought was market value..when the reality is the markets we artificially pumped up thru bogus loans to any warm body. He's now a scam artist for seeking help?
Better start asking yourself the question why..the chicken or the egg. Which came first...the scammers or a busted economy?
No one likes dead beats....but the numbers who are truly suffering are growing and youre worried about a few welfare mom deadbeats and the guy ollecting undmployment for 99 weeks? How do you tell a guy "go out and buy your own health insurance for 12k"....it's not going to happen. How about the 100 million affected by pre existing conditions who can't buy health insurance if they had to. What's Mitts plan? He wants to kick it back to the states. That solves nothing. Obamacare is no godsend but it's better than standing there with your arms folded when 100 million people are potentially affected..no?
The republican agenda is inaction is better than action. I'd rather have a guy up there swinging the bat than the guy with the bat on the shoulders. Life is short. Get it done. Something.
TomD1228,
It would seem like we have some common ground in that I freely admit that there are people who have been screwed by circumstances beyond their control and you admit that there are deadbeats such as welfare moms.
The problem we face is how to tell the difference between them, and what we do, and more importantly, don't do about it.
You say to get something done, so do I.
It starts by finding ways to get people like us who will see *both* problems elected, from either party, instead of the partisan tools that we have been presented with.
With regard to the problem of healthcare, I submit that it will be impossible to arrive at a real solution as long as the people we elect put ideology ahead of reality, no matter what party they belong to. What is needed is to get people who will adopt rational, practical solutions in place and then debate the question of healthcare as being part of the infrastructure instead of both sides seeing it as an entitlement.
Find a new way of looking at the problem and maybe, just maybe, our leaders might see a solution.
I don't disagree with anything you say though I think there are also larger issues at play that may be impossible to solve. Our new world order, free market, no tariff, open borders transition has pushed our corporations to find employees overseas. Who wouldn't when you can pay 1/5, 1/10th the pay? How do you stop the middle class (the backbone of this country) from disappearing when a good portion of their jobs are being sent overseas. I haven't heard ANY candidate offer a plan to stop that. The simple fact is that they can't unless we go back to the old ways. By bringing up wages worldwide, we lower them here in the process until everyone is on equal footing. The concept is nice...maybe 100 years from now. Maybe not. If wages don't rise in the Philippines, India, Bangladesh....we will get here what they have there....a 2 class system, rich and poor. Then we might as well pack up and go home.
The truth is I don't know what the solution is and I dont think any politician is going to solve it. We've conned ourselves into believing electing a liberal or a conservative will fix what just might be beyond broken. When I hear my retired Dad (an engineer for 35 years) say he'd rather cut off his right arm then start his career in these economic times...I know it's bad.
You start to wonder. Why did we elect the MOST liberal president in probably 70 years? Circumstance? I begin to wonder that our strong middle class that continues to dissolve into the lower middle/poor class will morph towards the advocate, the helper instead of the guy yelling "stand on your own 2 feet". Standing on your own 2 feet is nice and way it should be but man o man are the obstacles mounting up against that (lower wages, benefit cuts, health insurance cuts, loss of jobs)
I'm just not optimistic...whoever is in charge.
I'm not optimistic at all. In fact, I am more committed than ever to vote "None of the above" this year after hearing the remark in question made by President Obama.
Something that would help a lot, in my opinion, is if we can ever break the two and only two party mentality that we have today. I think we would see a lot more compromise in Congress if no single party had a clear majority. Get members from the Libertarians, Greens and Whigs in there to help sway the discussions.
That would be a Congress that more truly represents the American people.
With any luck we won't have to deal with BHO after November.
http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article...
Keep reminding me that this president is 'smart'. So difficult to tell otherwise.
Bob,
Who built that Altair simulator? How wealthy was Bill Gates father and how did that help? How many people did it take to provide the electrical and other infrastructure that was like the air we breathe but crucial for anyone's success? How did Bill Gates learn programming? When he attended Harvard was it? Who wrote this?
"If I have seen further than other men it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants"
With any luck "we" won't have to deal with Tom Allison after November.
By the way Bob,
Did you notice how Bill lied about having an interpreter up front when he and his partner didn't have any such thing? Do you condone lying by business people in pursuit of profit?
Also,
Bob has, albeit unwittingly, shown that Bill Gates DIDN'T do it on his own. In fact, he couldn't have done it without the infrastructure and partner he had.
Now that it appears that Romney has associated himself with people doing business with Chinese gangs http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/0... it appears he has blood on his hands, likely not enough blood to scare off the tea party zombies, but enough to warrant Barack Obama's re-election. Here is the story:
Mitt Romney founded Bain Capital with the help of wealthy families from El Salvador tied with the right-wing, Reagan administration-backed death squads.
Sources: "The roots of Bain Capital in El Salvador's civil war" (http://www.salon.com/2012/01/20/the_root...) by Justin Elliott, Salon.com
"Bain Capital started with help of offshore investors" (LA Times, 7/19/12) (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...)
El Salvador video narrated by Tom Brokaw is from the Oct. 10, 1983 "NBC Nightly News" (http://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/diglib-full...)
Now it turns out he's got past connections to El Salvadorian death squads too. Can Romney stay in the presidential race with new bombshells dropping every day?
So, the you didn't build it comment pales in comparison to you built it with murderers money.
You can't be a good American or a good Christian and vote for Romney. He is tainted.
MORE than fair. Every politician is required to have some sense of priorities and than seems to be exactly what is lacking now. We must prioritize the American way of life, not the illegals, not the dependent whiners, not every other country that has "needs", but the workers, the taxpayers, the self-reliant, and those who were but are now senior or retired and rely upon the infrastructure they paid for but haven't received--Medicare, SS, senior "discounts" for Americans. Instead, all the "slack" has been usurped and handed to illegals, dependent whiners, foreign aide.
This is a perfect example of 1. How low the Romney campaign and its supports will stoop to lie about Obama and his intentions and beliefs and 2. How stupid and delusional the Teabaggers and right wing nuts truly are to believe this line of attack.
Anyone wondering how our governance structure is in such a state of disrepair and dysfunction need only read the comments to this article. We've become conditioned to hate and distrust anyone who doesn't agree with "our" side. We call them names and completely discount anything and everything they have to say (I've fallen into it myself at times).
Our politicians have to get elected and have to choose one side or the other. No one really cares if they solve problems, as long as they don't break ranks to so.
Our whole political system resembles a game of dodgeball these days... while a nation suffers.
I think the primary topic of this article was lost in the discussion. The question of is it fair to use these words against him? The answer is yes, as long as the complete statement is used. You can't take a three sentence statement and use only the middle sentence without using the descriptive sentences to keep it in context. I have a problem with anyone who uses incomplete statements, and wordsmith's that change such statement's for their Political gain.
As for the discussion, The Private sector needed the Gov. and the Gov needed the Private sector. A good example of this is Package delivery. Until the 1950's the Post Office was pretty much the sole deliverer of Packages. Then the PO said this is too expensive and UPS was created from a small company to what it is now. Also, Express mail was created by the PO and FedEx expanded it and refined it, into the business it is now.
We need both in proper size and context.
I want to know if it was fair to inflict that horrible rendition of "America the Beautiful" upon us for the next 4 months.
Red Rocky -- Spewing nonsense again!
Scenario Analysis
How often the following situations occurred during repeated simulated elections.
Electoral College tie (269 electoral votes for each candidate) 0.2%
Recount (one or more decisive states within 0.5 percentage points) 5.9%
Obama wins popular vote 67.8%
Romney wins popular vote 32.2%
Obama wins popular vote but loses electoral college 2.4%
Romney wins popular vote but loses electoral college 2.6%
Obama landslide (double-digit popular vote margin) 10.3%
Romney landslide (double-digit popular vote margin) 1.9%
Map exactly the same as in 2008 0.9%
Map exactly the same as in 2004 0.1%
Obama loses at least one state he carried in 2008 88.2%
Obama wins at least one state he failed to carry in 2008 28.6%
Again it is the right wing that is out distorting what they know is true but cannot bring themselves to admit because it was Obama that said it. Even when their own Romney said the same thing to the American Olympic Team!
Nobody in this country created their business by themselves! NOBODY!
We need Currency to conduct trade to start with, we need infrastructure for you to even have a business, you need power to operate that business, you need laws and regulations that ensure business can be conducted to begin with!
So for all those HoustonJack type people that are so thick headed to not want understand this ( they really do). You only created the actual company and idea of your business. Everything else came from existing infrastructure including the loans for buildings and startup capital, machinery made by other companies that you need, which also depended on existing infrastructure. Unless your a commune farmer and don't employ any modern methods or currency in your trade... you did it with the help of the existing infrastructure.. some of it Public some of it Private... but not "all" on your own; period! That was the OBVIOUS point of the speech.
Get a life and turn off Fox news for a couple hours a day. Maybe even take a class in economics and business to get a better understanding of things!
Sheeesh!! Stupid is as stupid does ! Arguing this makes you...
And for those that still disagree... please explain to the rest of us in detail how you single handedly created and operate your business with no use of any existing infrastructure! We would all love to read about that...
Red Rocky:
Here is more, from Nate Silver, the boy genius you laugh at at your own peril:
"Another factor during this early period may be name recognition. There are some people who (quite reasonably) will not be willing to tell pollsters that they will vote for a candidate whom they have never heard of. And the challenger is typically much less well known than the incumbent-party candidate, who is normally the sitting president or vice president.
This name-recognition factor might not have been as much of an issue for Mr. Romney as for some other candidates. Mr. Romney ran for president in 2008 and many voters remembered him, so his name recognition was already on the order of 75 percent as of early last year. But some candidates in past years -- like Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter -- have emerged from relative obscurity to win their party's nomination, and their polls may suffer until they become more of a household name.
Once a candidate wins the nomination, however, he will almost certainly be universally known, as Mr. Romney now is. (Mr. Romney's name recognition is now about 95 percent, and the few Americans who do not yet know his name are presumably deeply disconnected from politics and are unlikely to vote in November.)
The other anomaly has been in the summer months -- June, July and August. In these months, the polls have tended to low ball the position of the incumbent party's candidate. In July polls, for instance, the incumbent-party candidate has trailed by an average of 4 points in elections since 1968. However, the incumbent-party candidate has actually won these elections by an average of a little more than 3 points. In other words, there has been a seven-point swing on average toward the incumbent party's candidate from the July polls until November.
What accounts for this? It may be the effects of the party conventions, which can produce sharp -- but ultimately ephemeral -- "bounces" in the polls toward the party holding its convention. The challenging party always holds its convention before the incumbent party, and until the most recent years, it often held its convention in July. So it gets its bounce first, making its numbers artificially high for a month or so."
In other words Rocko the Clown: He ain't got many voters left to pick from.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com...
bimmerdude,
Here is the full context of the remark, including the preface to it that most have been omitting, and what I think is the real meat of the complaint:
"There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back. They know they didn't -- look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet." - http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-offi...
The first paragraph makes it abundantly clear that the President was denigrating people who took pride in what they have accomplished.
And the final sentence is just laughable. Yes, the Internet research was funded by DARPA, but I can assure it was not done with an intent for future commercial use. In fact, many of us who used the Internet in the early days fought very hard for years and years to prohibit or greatly restrict commercial activity on the Internet other than necessary communications between participants, especially in usenet. (Remember the green card lottery?) It was the creation of the World Wide Web that turned the Internet into a full-blown commercial arena.
I think it is legit to go after the President on this comment in so much that I feel he has placed too much emphasis on "infrastructure" (which can be seen as a "tool" in its broadest sense) while forgetting that any tool is only as good as the person putting it to use.
boftx,
I read the whole speech and I see that you feel he was being denigrating where I don't see it that way. Maybe you are predisposed to find evil in anything he says where I simply look at what is said. I didn't see that myself but then I am not right wing or left wing. So I don't naturally look for evil in things Obama says. I have owned a small business 3 times. I know for a fact that simply creating my business depended heavily on the existing building blocks that I had obtained from my education as well as the building blocks available to me from the public and private sectors. Yes, I did a lot of the work, but I cannot say I did it by myself and didn't need any help!
The Right seems to want to push that as their view and angle of attack. THey are more wrong than Obama on that view.
bimmerdude,
Like you, I am neither right or left. I was not looking for "evil" in what he said, but just calling it like I see it.
I come at this from a somewhat different angle having done the programming that put tens of millions of dollars in my boss' pocket as well as helping my brother start a computer store. I have always played the supporting role (though I do independent contracting on occasion.)
My main point is that infrastructure should be seen as a tool that needs to be used by someone in order to have value.
So far as the political debate goes, I am going to vote for "None of the above" in November unless someone invents a machine to establish and maintain a wormhole that allows for a human to traverse through time and survive first.
boftx said:
"So far as the political debate goes, I am going to vote for "None of the above" in November unless someone invents a machine to establish and maintain a wormhole that allows for a human to traverse through time and survive first."
I say:
It is time to retire from commenting, it has tetched yer brain Jimmy, you should know darn well those wormholes are designed for progressives and liberals, can't get the republicans and whigs to pass the minimum IQ tests.
Jeff,
I think that since I am a Whig I can refute at least part of your statement since I know what a wormhole is and the likelyhood that my conditions will be met.
Besides, scientific fact honors no politics (regardless of what those on either side of the global warming debate say.) :)
Mark
You said:"Also,
Bob has, albeit unwittingly, shown that Bill Gates DIDN'T do it on his own. In fact, he couldn't have done it without the infrastructure and partner he had."
It is the INDIVIDUAL achievement that must be credited--In this case Allen (an individual)and Gates (an individual) who deserve the credit for the birth of a major business--the infrastructure is indifferent--it's there no matter what. You get it Mark--it just rubs your collectivist mentality rhe wrong way.
Houstonjac,
Bravo!! BRAVO!!
How many American financiers did it take to build the Cayman Islands? How many wealthy financiers did it take to pay for the Republican Primaries? Let me know what you discover (hint: it's less than 100).
I think I've seen it all now; a neocon wearing a whig. My have you changed Jim, used to think you had a grip on reality, what happened? (just teasing ;-)
I'll enjoy the next 4 months debating, I've been working on my library, just need my old nemesis Patrick Gibbons to join back, he at least brings 'reality' to the table.
Bob Jack, please explain "the infrastructure is indifferent--it's there no matter what". You worked at a major engineering firm that specializes in designing public infrastructure, that's just astounding.
William,
I doubt that anyone would ever call me a neo-con. :)
The left says I am too much to the right on finances, the right says I am far too much of a bleeding heart who doesn't pray, and the Libertarian Party can't stand how I say a free education is the right of every American along with roads, police and fire protection.
That leaves only the Whigs for me. :)
Here, take a look: http://www.modernwhig.org
Boftx:
I just think that the information contained herein is strictly forbidden to be the same thing as the best way to get the latest version of the most popular games and more importantly I will have to be able to find out more information about your favorite social security number, and the teabaggers would like to see you again for your help in making your own risk of developing the same thing as well as the first time in the trash. This intellectual property rights reserved for Jeff from Vegas
Jeff,
I would think that you would be open to the idea of infrastructure being seen as a tool waiting to be used (and even more so to the idea that healthcare should be discussed a form of infrastructure.)
I feel it is perfectly fair to call out the President on his remarks that are the subject of this ad for the reasons I have given. At the same time, I have also said that there is some validity to Obama's remarks in as much as infrastructure does make progress possible in almost every case.
There *is* a middle ground on this. But President Obama and Governor Romney seem to have little desire stand on it or have their supporters find it.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Anyone want to take a stab at who said that? No one accomplishes anything without the help of others. From our earliest days with family, to school, and well beyond we are always dependent on others. Name one person born, abandoned, and left alone that flourished. You can't because they all died.
Mark,
No rational person will deny the truth of that quote. That said, no rational person will deny that those who go beyond what the giants saw deserve credit for what they have seen.
The past is but a tool waiting to be used by those who want the future.
Boftx--Point well stated!!
William Gordon
We are focusing on the individuals who had the courage and applied the effort and risk capital and sweat, drive an ingenuity to create the business at present. In my example that was Ralph Parsons, and his successor Bill Leonhard who were the individauls who created Parsons so that it could engineer and build the infrasructures for society. It is necessary to distinguish betwwen the individual who creates the business, and the product of that business.The collectivist mentality is incapable of that feat--making that distinction. It is contrary to their mind set--so you can be excused for that. I understand your mentality on that point. That is exactly the problem that Obama has--he is a collectist, and cannot separate the individual and his or her contributions from the surrounding environment, and it is a waste of time to attempt to explain it--to him or you. You either get it or you refuse to see it.
The point is that no one does it on their own. We all owe others a debt and humanity is a group effort.
boftx: "Here is the full context of the remark, including the preface to it that most have been omitting, and what I think is the real meat of the complaint"
Full context, not quite, why did you leave off the very next line that defeats your argument:
"The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That's how we funded the GI Bill. That's how we created the middle class. That's how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That's how we invented the Internet. That's how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that's the reason I'm running for President -- because I still believe in that idea. You're not on your own, we're in this together."
FactCheck.org also did a very good analysis here http://factcheck.org/2012/07/you-didnt-b...
And even Romney himself agrees when he stated in response to Obama's comments on July 17, 2012:
Mitt Romney: "And, of course, he describes people who we care very deeply about, who make a difference in our lives: our school teachers, firefighters, people who build roads. We need those things. We value school teachers, firefighters, people who build roads. You really couldn't have a business if you didn't have those things."
Forgot the link for Romney's comment here http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/201...
When was the last time Obama met with his Jobs Council?
Someone else .... is almost as logical as the violent tax protestors claiming they pay the salary of government employees so they are the boss. Think again, if you don't pay taxes, you are NOT supporting the system. OK if you miss a year or two during extended unemployment but not OK if you are forever receiving social welfare benefits whether or not you clock some time as an employee. But then, one could conclude that the incumbent is disinterested in sustaining the American way of life but sure would like to be re-elected and at the helm...... So it seems likely that should he be re-elected things WILL CHANGE--to more and more taxes for the middle and working classes, for fewer and fewer considerations for the employed and more and more freebies for the whining dependents. They've all but bought billboards saying "ONE more year and then we're gonna HIKE EVERYTHING. Just wait until the election and then we'll gear up."