Author Topic: Obama: "If You've Been Successful, You Didn't Get There On Your Own" - lmfao!!  (Read 44906 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Editorial: If you 'didn't build that,' they can take it2012-07-19 16:04:41


http://www.ocregister.com/common/printer/view.php?db=ocregister&id=364594



 
President Barack Obama, who promised to transform America, told a campaign gathering this week, "If you've got a business, you didn't build that."

Whether you take his words at face value or prefer to infer he simply meant government can help businesses by building bridges and roads, the president's speech was troubling.

Implicit in the president's message is that private individuals and privately held companies are not sufficient. Big Government is the engine that pulls the train, in his view.

The National Review's Rich Lowry captures the president's economic philosophy succinctly: "The Obama theory of entrepreneurship is that behind every successful businessman, there is a successful government. Everyone is helpless without the state, the great protector, builder and innovator. Everything is ultimately a collective enterprise."

On even a superficial level, this economic understanding is greatly flawed, and insulting, as Mr. Obama's presumptive Republican opponent in the fall pointed out.

"The idea to say that Steve Jobs didn't build Apple, that Henry Ford didn't build Ford Motor ... to say something like that is not just foolishness, it is insulting to every entrepreneur, every innovator in America, and it's wrong," Mitt Romney said.

On a deeper level, Mr. Obama's vision of what made America great reveals how he would further transform an economy that already has seen his bailouts of the auto and banking industries, the federalization of health care insurance and contrived creation of profitless green industries, all at great cost but with little to show for it.

"The president's remark was a direct attack on the principle of individual responsibility, the foundation of American freedom," writes the Wall Street Journal's James Taranto. "If 'you didn't build that,' then you have no moral claim to it, and those with political power are morally justified in taking it away and using it to buy more political power."

As Mr.Taranto reminds, it was candidate Obama who said in an earlier moment of candor, "I think that when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

What is indispensible in the American economy isn't government. Even roads and bridges can be built by without government. But government can't build roads and bridges without private peoples' money.

Private industry can flourish without government regulations, taxation and other interference. But government regulators and tax collectors can't even exist without private individuals and companies to regulate and tax.

The president should have said: "If you've got a business – you did build that. Somebody in the government just made it more difficult for you to do it."


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Krauthammer: Obama's Philosophy Is "Government As The Root Of American Success"





CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: That is the process but the content here is utterly damning. I mean, Romney said it's not a gaffe. A gaffe defined in Washington is when a politician accidentally speaks what is really in his heart. This is his political philosophy. And it's elaborated. I don't care about that one sentence, al though I would say I disagree with Steve [Hayes] that one sentence as I just heard it, and as anybody looking at it would see in print, that you build, 'that' is a reference to person's idea he built his own business. It is not a reference to roads and bridges.

But let's look at the whole context and let's ignore that one sentence. He starts with a mocking reference to people who succeed believing it might have something to do with intelligence or hard work. Sort of laughing at them.

So he is mocking people, a Korean immigrant who works 16 hours a day in a candy store and he builds it and he sends his kids to college with that, you know, with the money he finally makes 20 years later. Or a physician in medical school, you know, who goes 60 or 80-hour weeks, works hard and then in his 50s, begins reaping the rewards of his work. That is number one. Secondly, everybody he says who helped you along the way. It's no accident everybody in his example is an agent of the government. It's either a teacher, or a road, or a bridge, or the internet, which he says incorrectly was invented by the government so we could create opportunities in the marketplace.

It's all government. And this is his philosophy that government is the root of the success, individual and national and it's not individual enterprise -- he has to some extent to individual enterprise. But anybody who thinks it's that, obviously is rewarding himself in a way that is undeserved, it's the government. And that's the heart of his philosophy. That is the real real division between left and right in the country. That's why Romney ought to hit it everyday until election day.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
http://freebeacon.com/cronyism-built-that





Cronyism Built That

Dem donors rake in billions under Obama administration


AP

Email Us


BY: Andrew Stiles - July 18, 2012 5:00 am


President Obama’s record of rewarding political donors with taxpayer dollars and plum administration posts is facing a new round of scrutiny thanks to GOP challenger Mitt Romney’s effort to make it a central issue of the campaign.
 
“[President Obama] thinks it’s his right to give taxpayer money to those who have supported him financially,” former Gov. John Sununu (R., N.H.) said Tuesday on a conference call hosted by the Romney campaign. “It’s insulting to hard-working entrepreneurs who really do create jobs.”
 
The most publicized instance of so-called “crony capitalism”—investing taxpayer dollars in firms tied to political donors—is the failed solar panel company Solyndra. The Fremont, Calif., firm was the first to receive a taxpayer-backed loan guarantee from the Department of Energy (DOE) in September 2009, worth more than $530 million. The funding for the loan was allocated in the controversial stimulus package passed earlier that year.
 
Obama bundler George Kaiser was a major stakeholder in Solyndra through his Kaiser Family Foundation, and made several trips to the White House in March 2009 to meet with senior administration officials. In July 2009, Kaiser bragged about securing face time with “all the key players in the West Wing of the White House,” as well as his “almost unique advantage” when it came to steering taxpayer funds toward his pet causes.
 
“There’s never been more money shoved out of the government’s door in world history, and probably never will be again, than in the last few months and in the next 18 months,” Kaiser told members of the Tulsa Rotary Club. “And our selfish parochial goal is to get as much as it for Tulsa and Oklahoma as we possibly can.”
 
Although things did not pan out for Solyndra—the company filed for bankruptcy in September 2011—Kaiser can expect to see a better return on his investment than American taxpayers. As part of an agreement to restructure Solyndra’s loan agreement in 2010, Obama’s DOE granted priority status to private investors like Kaiser with respect to the first $75 million recovered in the event of the firm’s bankruptcy, a move that many suspect violated federal law.
 
Taxpayers, meanwhile, are unlikely to recover much of the money invested on their behalf.
 
Emails uncovered by Congressional investigators reveal that Solyndra helped secure its $535 million loan guarantee with the help of Steve Spinner, another prominent Obama donor. After bundling more than $500,000 for Obama in 2008, Spinner was named to the White House transition team and later served as “chief strategic operations officer” of the DOE loan program that funded Solyndra.
 
Spinner’s wife Allison worked for a law firm that represented Solyndra and several other green energy outfits that applied for taxpayer funding. Records show that her firm, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, received $2.4 million in federal funds in legal fees associated with Solyndra’s loan application.
 
Spinner left the administration in September 2010 to become a senior fellow at the left-wing Center for American Progress, and has already bundled more than $500,000 for the president’s reelection campaign.
 
Solyndra is just one of many examples of quid pro quo in the DOE loans program; even the liberal Washington Post editorial board has described it as a “real scandal.”
 
“You can call it crony capitalism or venture socialism—but by whatever name, the Energy Department’s loan guarantee program privatizes profits and socializes losses,” the paper wrote in November 2011.
 
More than 70 percent of DOE and loans under Obama went to Democratic donors and bundlers, Peter Schweizer reported in Throw Them All Out.
 
A confidential 2009 memo authored by former White House economic adviser Larry Summers paints a damning picture of the administration’s approach to crafting the stimulus package.
 
“The short-run economic imperative was to identify as many campaign promises or high priority items that would spend out quickly and be inherently temporary,” Summers wrote. “The stimulus package is a key tool for advancing clean energy goals and fulfilling a number of campaign commitments.”
 
In several cases, including Solyndra, advancing the president’s green energy agenda went hand in hand with providing financial payoffs to prominent campaign donors.
 
California investment guru John Doerr, for example, has personally contributed more than $170,000 to Democratic campaigns and committees since 2008, and more than $2 million over the past 20 years. His investment firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB), which lists former Vice President Al Gore as a partner, has given more than $1 million to Democrats since 2005.
 
An early and outspoken advocate for federal investment in “green” technology, Doerr was named to the president’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board in 2009, where he helped craft the $787 billion stimulus package. Of the 27 companies list in KPCB’s “green-tech” portfolio, 16 received some form of taxpayer support.
 
Another prominent Obama donor who has benefitted handsomely from the president’s policies is Steve Westly. A frequent guest at White House events and state dinners, Westley served as California co-chair and a National Finance Committee member of Obama’s 2008 campaign and currently sits on the DOE’s Energy Advisory Board.
 
He has bundled at least $700,000 in campaign donations for Obama since 2008 and personally given about $260,000 to Democratic campaigns and committees since 2007.
 
Westly’s investment firm, the Westly Group, had a financial stake in four green energy companies that received more than half a billion dollars in federal funding in 2009. The group’s website once touted the firm as being “uniquely positioned” to take advantage of the influx of taxpayer funding in green technology, and currently notes that “To win in the clean technology space, a company must navigate the halls of government.”
 
Westly has openly acknowledged that knowledge of federal policy is key to investing in green technology. In response to a reporter’s question about which green energy companies he likes to invest in, Westly said: “Who cares what I think. Let’s talk about ‘what does Obama like? Here’s what he likes,’ because here’s where the federal government is putting money. And let me tell you, whatever he likes, that’s what I like.”
 
One of the companies Obama “liked” was the Exelon Corporation, a Chicago-based utility and recipient of hundreds of millions of dollars in stimulus funding. One of the most politically connected firms in the country, Exelon employees have made up one of President Obama’s top sources of campaign contributions throughout his career.
 
Exelon was Obama’s fourth-largest campaign donor when he ran for Senate in 2004, contributing more than $73,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The firm donated $326,000 to Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008. The firm has ties to several top Obama bundlers, as well as to Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod and former White House chief of staff and current Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel.
 
As the Washington Free Beacon reported in June, an Exelon subsidiary was recently awarded a lucrative 20-year contract to install solar panels manufactured by federal inmates on government facilities.
 
Such cronyism is not exclusive to the green energy sector. DreamWorks Animation CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg has bundled at least $500,000 for Obama’s reelection campaign, and is the largest contributor to Priorities USA, the Obama-allied Super PAC.
 
The Securities and Exchange Commission is currently investigating whether DreamWorks made illegal payments to Chinese officials in order to secure exclusive film rights in the communist nation. The New York Times reported that Katzenberg, as well as Vice President Joe Biden, were intimately involved in negotiating an agreement under which China would up its annual quota of foreign-produced films from 20 to 34 and allow studios to keep a greater percentage of box-office revenue.
 
DreamWorks announced a $2 billion deal with the Chinese government in February to build a production studio in Shanghai just days after Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping held an extensive meeting with Barack Obama in Washington, D.C.
 
Obama’s penchant for crony capitalism, critics say, explains his comment over the weekend that “If you’ve got a business, you did not build that—somebody else made that happen.”
 
“He thinks that government is there to pick who should succeed and who should fail,” Sununu said on the conference call. “It’s in his political genes.”
 
“Big government lends itself to big cronyism,” said political analyst Jay Cost. “In Obama’s legislation, we see vast payoffs to interest groups that have benefitted the Democratic Party.”

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Trashing Achievements
By Thomas Sowell - July 20, 2012




There was a time, within living memory, when the achievements of others were not only admired but were often taken as an inspiration for imitation of the same qualities that had served these achievers well, even if we were not in the same field of endeavor and were not expecting to achieve on the same scale.
 
The perseverance of Thomas Edison, as he tried scores of materials for the filament of the light bulb he was inventing; the dedication of Abraham Lincoln as he studied law on his own while struggling to make a living -- these were things young people were taught to admire, even if they had no intention of becoming inventors or lawyers, much less President of the United States.




 
Somewhere along the way, all that changed. Today, the very concept of achievement is de-emphasized and sometimes attacked. Following in the footsteps of Barack Obama, Professor Elizabeth Warren of Harvard has made the downgrading of high achievers the centerpiece of her election campaign against Senator Scott Brown.
 
To cheering audiences, Professor Warren says, "there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You build a factory out there, good for you, but I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers that the rest of us paid to educate."
 
Do the people who cheer this kind of talk bother to stop and think through what she is saying? Or is heady rhetoric enough for them?
 
People who run businesses are benefitting from things paid for by others? Since when are people in business, or high-income earners in general, exempt from paying taxes like everybody else?
 
At a time when a small fraction of high-income taxpayers pay the vast majority of all the taxes collected, it is sheer chutzpah to depict high-income earners as somehow being subsidized by "the rest of us," whether in paying for the building of roads or the educating of the young.
 
Since everybody else uses the roads and the schools, why should high achievers be expected to feel like free loaders who owe still more to the government, because schools and roads are among the things that facilitate their work? According to Elizabeth Warren, because it is part of an "underlying social contract."
 
Conjuring up some mythical agreement that nobody saw, much less signed, is an old ploy on the left -- one that goes back at least a century, when Herbert Croly, the first editor of The New Republic magazine, wrote a book titled "The Promise of American Life."
 
Whatever policy Herbert Croly happened to favor was magically transformed by rhetoric into a "promise" that American society was supposed to have made -- and, implicitly, that American taxpayers should be forced to pay for. This pious hokum was so successful politically that all sorts of "social contracts" began to appear magically in the rhetoric of the left.
 
If talking in this mystical way is enough to get you control of billions of dollars of the taxpayers' hard-earned money, why not?
 
Certainly someone who claimed to be part Indian, as Elizabeth Warren did when applying for academic appointments in an affirmative action environment, is unlikely to be squeamish about using imaginative words during a political election campaign.
 
Sadly, this kind of cute use of words is not confined to one political candidate or to this election year. The very concept of achievement is a threat to the vision of the left, and has long been attacked by those on the left.
 
People who succeed -- whether in business or anywhere else -- are often said to be "privileged," even if they started out poor and worked their way up the hard way.
 
Outcome differences are called "class" differences. Thus when two white women, who came from families in very similar social and economic circumstances, made different decisions and got different results, this was the basis for a front-page story titled "Two Classes, Divided by 'I Do'" in the July 15th issue of the N.Y Times. Personal responsibility, whether for achievement or failure, is a threat to the whole vision of the left, and a threat the left goes all-out to combat, using rhetoric uninhibited by reality.



Copyright 2012, Creators Syndicate Inc.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
It was not out of context.    No matter what context it was it's total crap from the choomer in chief.

of course it was only you're too fucking stupid to understand it

the best part is that Romney put out an out of context attack ad which includes clips of Romney speaking at a bus and truck repair shop and one of the owners in the shop who appeared in the ad goes on Neal Cavuto and actually admits he agrees with what Obama said about "getting help"

fucking hilarous

I'm sure Cavuto thought he was tossing this guy a softball and he goes off for 45 seconds about how what Obama said was correct


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45755883/vp/48252644#48252644

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
of course it was only you're too fucking stupid to understand it

the best part is that Romney put out an out of context attack ad which includes clips of Romney speaking at a bus and truck repair shop and one of the owners in the shop who appeared in the ad goes on Neal Cavuto and actually admits he agrees with what Obama said about "getting help"

fucking hilarous

I'm sure Cavuto thought he was tossing this guy a softball and he goes off for 45 seconds about how what Obama said was correct


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45755883/vp/48252644#48252644


The context even obama thought he was conveying is full of shit too. 

Without money from business and taxpayerS' PRODUCTIVE ENDEAVORS, there is no money for obama to spend. 

And BTW - Cuba, USSR, NK, had teachers, roads and bridges too remember? 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana

The context even obama thought he was conveying is full of shit too. 

Without money from business and taxpayerS' PRODUCTIVE ENDEAVORS, there is no money for obama to spend. 

And BTW - Cuba, USSR, NK, had teachers, roads and bridges too remember? 

Romney has said the exact same things as Obama on this subject and so does the person who appears in Romneys attack ad

clearly this guy understood the context

why can't you figure it out

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24230825@N02/7607288708/in/photostream/

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Hahahahahahahaha obama has to lie about his true ideology in order to get elected.  Every time he lets it slip he realizes americans reject socialism and do not want to help facilitate his workingclass revolution.  He will go back to lying about it and pretending to be something he isnt, an american christian, in oreder to get elected.   Hahahahahaha straw homo is a one trick pony.  Turn everything around and attack attack attack.  Stop defending your argument against this socialist piece of shit and just keep attacking barry soetero on the real things. 



Khalid al mansour
Frank marshall davis
His background
His marxist rehtoric
His anti white views

LOL - another closet case on this board

who are you 333's retarded cousin?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Tell us more about how you hate retards

never said I hated retards such as yourself

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

You use it as a slur.  Which some people find very insulting.  Very enlightened for a neo liberal progressive   ::)

Do you make fun of people with other disabilities too?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


LOL @ says the guy who loves the constitution but wants to throw political opponents into a woodchipper, and could laugh at a terror attack:

If a nuke went off in DC and took out all of these criminals and traitors, I would celebrate loudly. 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana

You use it as a slur.  Which some people find very insulting.  Very enlightened for a neo liberal progressive   ::)

Do you make fun of people with other disabilities too?

I use it as a colloquial term for idiots such as yourself

Spare me the phony claim of being offended since you obviously have no problem using  the term homo and I'm sure I can go through your other moronic posts and find similar examples


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
LOL @ says the guy who loves the constitution but wants to throw political opponents into a woodchipper, and could laugh at a terror attack:



You know - your right - nuking the traitors would probably be too nice a way to deal w them.  

I would prefer taking them and dropping them into kenya, zimbabwe, cuba, north korea, or somalia w $100 and nothing else and letting them go create their wonderful societies over there w the agreement that they never be allowed to return.  


SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
July 18, 2012



Ok, so now back to whether Obama's birth certificate is real or whether he was either a "professor" or "instructor" at the University of Chicago  ::)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Im not offended. I support your right to say anything you want.  It is progressives like you that want to limit free speech.  And attack people for being biggots.  Some people indeed find that insulting, i am not one of them.  It just expose you as someone who uses retard a a negative slur.  Tell me more about limiting free speech.  

when I have ever advocated limiting free speech

I want you to be as free to say as much stupid shit as you want


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Is freedom of speech a basic human right of the individual?  Or does government grant the people the right of free speech.  And should government place some limits on freedom of speech to protect the individual?

Straw is a nanny state type - everything begins and ends w the govt other than marrying another dude or killing your child.   

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana

Is freedom of speech a basic human right of the individual?  Or does government grant the people the right of free speech.  And should government place some limits on freedom of speech to protect the individual?

do you live in the US?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Straw is a nanny state type - everything begins and ends w the govt other than marrying another dude or killing your child.   

once again projecting you own delusions onto others

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
do you live in the US?

should be obvious answer to your question

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Its not obvious.  So, please elaborate.

sorry, your ignorance is not iportant enough to me to waste my time

why don't you contact Fred Phelps and have him explain it to you

you two will probably get along great

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana

Jesus isnt a real person.  You two have that in common.  Answer the question on freedom of speech, please.  Or you can continue to evade the issue.  Typical.  ::)

who mentioned Jesus ?

since you seem confused about freedom of speech what do you think about the US Supreme Court decision that money is basically equiavalent to speech

do you agree with that?


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Bump.  Tell me where the right to freedom of speech comes from.  And governments role in it please.

I'm not your parent or your teacher

I don't even know if you're smart enough to understand the concept so why would I waste my valuable time

If you live in the US you should know where it comes from

If you live in a country like North Korea you will also know where it comes from

where do you live and why are you so uninformed ?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
According to Obama: 

Someone who runs a marathon should be grateful since someone else ran those 26 miles. 

Someone who lost a lot of weight via exercise should be grateful because someone else ran those miles, staved themselves, and exercsed. 


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Try not to meltdown, shirley.  Im not the issue here.  You were asked who grants a person the right to freedom of speech.  It it the individual's innate right?  Or is it granted by the government?  And should the government protect society from certain types of speech?

what meltdown

do you see caps or exclamation points

if you graduated beyond the 8th grade you should know the answers to your questions

I've given you all the info you should need to answer your questions

if you honestly can't figure it out then it's not my problem

you should contact this guy if you a truly confused about feedom of speech in this country

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
According to Obama: 

Someone who runs a marathon should be grateful since someone else ran those 26 miles. 

Someone who lost a lot of weight via exercise should be grateful because someone else ran those miles, staved themselves, and exercsed. 

it's really a shame that you're not a Romney advisor