Author Topic: Obama: "If You've Been Successful, You Didn't Get There On Your Own" - lmfao!!  (Read 44998 times)

Soul Crusher

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

Return to the Article   


July 26, 2012
You Didn't Build It...because I Didn't Earn It

By Abraham H. Miller
It isn't socialism that explains Obama's dismissive "you didn't build that" remark toward people of talent and individual initiative; it's the culture of affirmative action.  As I listened to Obama's silly, if not pathetic, comments, I was reminded of nothing so much as the comments and attitudes of people like him: the so-called "multicultural" affirmative-action students one encounters in colleges and universities.

These are people who, like Obama, earned little except a greased skid because of the color of their skin.  They knew that by any competitive standard of merit, they were undeserving.  The faculty and other students knew it.  And the affirmative action students knew that everyone knew it.

Obama knows he didn't have what it took to get into Columbia, and he didn't have what it took to get into Harvard Law.  Let's face an inescapable reality.  If Obama had great grades, his transcripts would be in a full-page ad in the New York Times.

Obama became president of the Harvard Law Review (HLR) without ever having an article published in it, a status that separated him from every other HLR president who preceded him.  In fact, while Obama was the HLR's first black president, few people know that 70 years earlier, Charles Houston had become the HLR's first black editor, contradicting the myth that black people cannot succeed without affirmative action.  Obama didn't possess the skills to be on the HLR, let alone to be the review's president.

What Obama had was an ascriptive characteristic, slightly black skin, at a time when there were racial divisions -- some real, some manipulated -- that were fracturing the Harvard law student body.  Obama was chosen to ameliorate political tensions, not because of his brilliance.

If you come of age in an environment where nearly everyone around you competed and worked hard to get where they are and you didn't, the way you defend against the inevitable ensuing feelings of inadequacy is to create a psychological rationale that no one, absolutely no one, got anywhere except with a leg up and a helping hand from others.  Their "affirmative action" is just less conspicuous than yours, but the bottom line is that you are no different from them.

When faculty make affirmative-action hires, each of those hires knows that there were people passed over who were eminently more qualified for the position -- people who worked harder and published more in better places.  In an environment that truly valued achievement over ascription, they, not you, would have been hired.  Your very presence is a testimonial that the system is corrupt.

So, the inner voice says, I didn't build it; I know that, but neither did they.  I assuage my guilt by making my reality their reality.  I am redefining success and all that goes into it to conform to my own reality.

For Obama, the psychological dissonance was made even greater when he was granted a Nobel Peace Prize not for what he accomplished, but for what he was supposed to accomplish and obviously hasn't.

There have been calls in colleges and universities to exempt black students from all examinations -- not just standardized tests -- because such examinations are culturally biased.  There has been a heated discussion over the elimination of the AP (advanced placement) and honors programs at elite public high schools because few minorities qualify for the classes.  And hardly a semester goes by without someone calling for grading black students on Ebonics rather than on the criteria of standard college English, the English which, allegedly, everyone is supposed to master in college. 

This mindset proposes that whites made it only because the culture itself is their affirmative action.  They didn't build it; the culture enabled them to build it.  No one builds anything; every creation is a product of cultural accommodation, an accommodation that minorities do not receive.

This is the racial variant of Marx's fundamental concepts of the base and superstructure, concepts from which the entire Marxist critique of civilization emanates.  The economic base -- the system of production -- determines everything else.  That everything else, Marxists call the superstructure.  Consequently, art, history, literature, drama, even science are all determined by the economic base and designed to legitimize it.

Racial nationalists have simply supplanted economics with race.  With race as the base, the superstructure -- the culture of society -- is simply the legitimizing instrument of race.  According to this mindset, blacks and other minorities can't succeed because the system is designed intrinsically to cause them to fail.

With Obama, we have entered a new cultural era, one where the very foundations of individual initiative, creativity, and achievement are called into question.  Obama didn't build it -- and it only appears that others did, because their skin color enabled them to achieve.

Welcome to the new post-racial society, where there is no such thing as individual achievement.

 

Watch related American Thinker Video selection.




Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/07/you_didnt_build_itbecause_i_didnt_earn_it.html at July 26, 2012 - 07:09:47 PM CDT

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Return to the Article   


July 26, 2012
You Didn't Build It...because I Didn't Earn It

By Abraham H. Miller
It isn't socialism that explains Obama's dismissive "you didn't build that" remark toward people of talent and individual initiative; it's the culture of affirmative action.  As I listened to Obama's silly, if not pathetic, comments, I was reminded of nothing so much as the comments and attitudes of people like him: the so-called "multicultural" affirmative-action students one encounters in colleges and universities.

These are people who, like Obama, earned little except a greased skid because of the color of their skin.  They knew that by any competitive standard of merit, they were undeserving.  The faculty and other students knew it.  And the affirmative action students knew that everyone knew it.

Obama knows he didn't have what it took to get into Columbia, and he didn't have what it took to get into Harvard Law.  Let's face an inescapable reality.  If Obama had great grades, his transcripts would be in a full-page ad in the New York Times.

Obama became president of the Harvard Law Review (HLR) without ever having an article published in it, a status that separated him from every other HLR president who preceded him.  In fact, while Obama was the HLR's first black president, few people know that 70 years earlier, Charles Houston had become the HLR's first black editor, contradicting the myth that black people cannot succeed without affirmative action.  Obama didn't possess the skills to be on the HLR, let alone to be the review's president.

What Obama had was an ascriptive characteristic, slightly black skin, at a time when there were racial divisions -- some real, some manipulated -- that were fracturing the Harvard law student body.  Obama was chosen to ameliorate political tensions, not because of his brilliance.

If you come of age in an environment where nearly everyone around you competed and worked hard to get where they are and you didn't, the way you defend against the inevitable ensuing feelings of inadequacy is to create a psychological rationale that no one, absolutely no one, got anywhere except with a leg up and a helping hand from others.  Their "affirmative action" is just less conspicuous than yours, but the bottom line is that you are no different from them.

When faculty make affirmative-action hires, each of those hires knows that there were people passed over who were eminently more qualified for the position -- people who worked harder and published more in better places.  In an environment that truly valued achievement over ascription, they, not you, would have been hired.  Your very presence is a testimonial that the system is corrupt.

So, the inner voice says, I didn't build it; I know that, but neither did they.  I assuage my guilt by making my reality their reality.  I am redefining success and all that goes into it to conform to my own reality.

For Obama, the psychological dissonance was made even greater when he was granted a Nobel Peace Prize not for what he accomplished, but for what he was supposed to accomplish and obviously hasn't.

There have been calls in colleges and universities to exempt black students from all examinations -- not just standardized tests -- because such examinations are culturally biased.  There has been a heated discussion over the elimination of the AP (advanced placement) and honors programs at elite public high schools because few minorities qualify for the classes.  And hardly a semester goes by without someone calling for grading black students on Ebonics rather than on the criteria of standard college English, the English which, allegedly, everyone is supposed to master in college.

This mindset proposes that whites made it only because the culture itself is their affirmative action.  They didn't build it; the culture enabled them to build it.  No one builds anything; every creation is a product of cultural accommodation, an accommodation that minorities do not receive.

This is the racial variant of Marx's fundamental concepts of the base and superstructure, concepts from which the entire Marxist critique of civilization emanates.  The economic base -- the system of production -- determines everything else.  That everything else, Marxists call the superstructure.  Consequently, art, history, literature, drama, even science are all determined by the economic base and designed to legitimize it.

Racial nationalists have simply supplanted economics with race.  With race as the base, the superstructure -- the culture of society -- is simply the legitimizing instrument of race.  According to this mindset, blacks and other minorities can't succeed because the system is designed intrinsically to cause them to fail.

With Obama, we have entered a new cultural era, one where the very foundations of individual initiative, creativity, and achievement are called into question.  Obama didn't build it -- and it only appears that others did, because their skin color enabled them to achieve.

Welcome to the new post-racial society, where there is no such thing as individual achievement.

 

Watch related American Thinker Video selection.



Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/07/you_didnt_build_itbecause_i_didnt_earn_it.html at July 26, 2012 - 07:09:47 PM CDT

why do you constantly post articles from other websites or blogs
Most of the time they are redundant and just regurgitate the same false information

If you're going to contribute nonsense why can't you just use your own words

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
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. 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.


jesus h christ.. what are we talking about here




Again i ask... What are we talking about over here

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
President Obama Can't Even Give Away His Big Government Product







US President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign event July 13, 2012  in Roanoke, Virginia. "If government is as wonderful as Obama says it is, why doesn’t he ask us to pay what it costs? Why doesn’t he raise the price – taxes – to a point where the deficit is zero?" AFP PHOTO/Mandel NGAN. (Image credit: AFP/Getty Images via @daylife)
 
If Bill Clinton threw six feet of dirt on the love of bureaucracy when he declared “the era of big government is over” in his 1996 State of the Union speech, President Obama is a grave-robber, a Dr. Frankenstein determined to jolt some life back into the corpse. In a way he has succeeded: Federal spending has jumped from 20 percent to 24 percent of GDP on his watch. And yet concurrent with that, there has been a mass revulsion toward the lumbering monster Dr. Obama is telling us we should regard as our benevolent friend.

Even more remarkable is that we fear additional government even though Obama has not yet succeeded in charging Americans more for all of this supposed bounty, having largely gone along with Republican wishes to keep income taxes at the same level. Somehow, the polls suggest, even a people showered with freebies aren’t feeling grateful.




Think about that. You don’t begrudge Apple when they charge you for their latest work of niftiness. You know they earn a profit, and that doesn’t bother you either. You think you’re better off with their product than with the cash you parted with. You leave the store whistling a happy tune.

Not so with government, much to Obama’s chagrin. Not only do the voters not like the idea of buying what he’s selling, Obama can’t even give away his product. He is like a mother who offers her children ice cream first, spinach later — and the kids are rejecting the ice cream.

Let’s do the president a favor and interpret his instantly notorious “You didn’t build that” speech the way he would like us to: “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help,” he said in Roanoke, Va., on July 13. “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.”

Let us assume all this is true (it isn’t: for instance, it was not “government research” alone that gave us what we now know as the Internet), and that all of it had to be true (that public schools are the only way to encounter a “great teacher” is a curious implication coming from a man who attended private schools and sends his children to one, while roads need not be funded by broad taxes on everyone but could easily be paid for by user fees such as gasoline taxes and tolls ).

If government is as wonderful as Obama says it is, why doesn’t he ask us to pay what it costs? Why doesn’t he raise the price – taxes – to a point where the deficit is zero?

Instead, Obama keeps insisting that only a few people should be asked to pay “a little bit more,” by restoring Clinton-era income taxes on high earners. The president frames this argument in terms of fairness, though, not pretending that it would make much of a dent in the deficit, which would continue to be gargantuan in any case.

The top 20 percent of earners already pay two-thirds of federal income taxes, hence they pay disproportionately for the things Obama implies they do not pay for at all (the top 20 percent aren’t driving two-thirds of the cars on the roads and bridges, nor are their children taking two-thirds of the seats in the public schools). Taxation has gotten much more progressive since 1979, when this group paid only 55 percent of all federal income taxes.

The great myth of the Democratic party is that the voters simply need to be vigorously reminded that government does great things for them, and when at last the citizenry is properly educated it will happily agree to pay for everything it is getting. Sure, at first only the rich will pay more, but as society gets remade along Western European lines eventually everyone will realize that we’re all in this together —  and grow up and pay for the privilege of membership in such a cozy, warm family.

 Federal tax revenues from all sources amounted to $2.3 trillion in fiscal 2011, yet we are getting $3.6 trillion in those government programs Obama loves so dearly. If Obama’s Roanoke speech ended by saying, “and by the way, I’m offering you all of this at the low, low price of a tax increase on you of over 50 percent,” would he have any supporters at all?


http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2012/07/26/president-obama-cant-even-give-away-his-big-government-product


Soul Crusher

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

Why the Obama campaign is suddenly so worried.

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL




What's the difference between a calm and cool Barack Obama, and a rattled and worried Barack Obama? Four words, it turns out.

"You didn't build that" is swelling to such heights that it has the president somewhere unprecedented: on defense. Mr. Obama has felt compelled—for the first time in this campaign—to cut an ad in which he directly responds to the criticisms of his now-infamous speech, complaining his opponents took his words "out of context."



Related Video



 

Columnist Kim Strassel on Scott Brown's new ad contrasting Elizabeth Warren and President Obama to Presidents Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, and Johnson. Photo: Getty Images
.
.
That ad follows two separate ones from his campaign attempting damage control. His campaign appearances are now about backpedaling and proclaiming his love for small business. And the Democratic National Committee produced its own panicked memo, which vowed to "turn the page" on Mr. Romney's "out of context . . . BS"—thereby acknowledging that Chicago has lost control of the message.

The Obama campaign has elevated poll-testing and focus-grouping to near-clinical heights, and the results drive the president's every action: his policies, his campaign venues, his targeted demographics, his messaging. That Mr. Obama felt required—teeth-gritted—to address the "you didn't build that" meme means his vaunted focus groups are sounding alarms.
 
The obsession with tested messages is precisely why the president's rare moments of candor—on free enterprise, on those who "cling to their guns and religion," on the need to "spread the wealth around"—are so revealing. They are a look at the real man. It turns out Mr. Obama's dismissive words toward free enterprise closely mirror a speech that liberal Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren gave last August.
 
Ms. Warren's argument—that government is the real source of all business success—went viral and made a profound impression among the liberal elite, who have been pushing for its wider adoption. Mr. Obama chose to road-test it on the national stage, presumably thinking it would underline his argument for why the wealthy should pay more. It was a big political misstep, and now has the Obama team seriously worried.

Associated Press/Don Petersen

The president at a campaign stop in Roanoke, Va., July 13.
.
And no wonder. The immediate effect was to suck away the president's momentum. Mr. Obama has little positive to brag about, and his campaign hinges on keeping negative attention on his opponent. For months, the president's team hammered on Mr. Romney's time at Bain, his Massachusetts tenure, his tax returns. "You didn't build that" shifted the focus to the president, and his decision to respond to the criticisms has only legitimized them and guaranteed they continue.

The Obama campaign's bigger problem, both sides are now realizing, is that his words go beyond politics and are more devastating than the Romney complaints that Mr. Obama is too big-government oriented or has mishandled the economy. They raise the far more potent issue of national identity and feed the suspicion that Mr. Obama is actively hostile to American ideals and aspirations. Republicans are doing their own voter surveys, and they note that Mr. Obama's problem is that his words cause an emotional response, and that they disturb voters in nearly every demographic.

It's why Mr. Obama's "out of context" complaints aren't getting traction. The Republican National Committee's response to that gripe was to run an ad that shows a full minute of Mr. Obama's rant at the Roanoke, Va., campaign event on July 13. In addition to "you didn't build that," the president also put down those who think they are "smarter" or "work harder" than others. Witness the first president to demean the bedrock American beliefs in industriousness and exceptionalism. The "context" only makes it worse.

This gets to the other reason the Obama campaign is rattled: "You didn't build that" threatens to undermine its own argument against Mr. Romney. Mr. Obama has been running on class warfare and the notion that Mr. Romney is a wealthy one-percenter out of touch with average Americans. Yet few things better symbolize the average American than a small-business owner. To the extent that Mr. Romney is positioning himself as champion of that little business guy and portraying Mr. Obama as something alien, he could flip the Obama narrative on its head.

It would be all the more potent were Mr. Romney to use "you didn't build that" to launch his own economic narrative. One unexpected side effect of "you didn't build that" is that it has emboldened the GOP to re-embrace and glory in free enterprise (so abused since the financial crash). And the president's disparaging attack on business has also made voters more open to a defense of it.

Meaning, it's a perfect time to marry emotion with some policy. Mr. Romney has explained why the president doesn't get it. The next step is to explain why his own tax policies, regulatory proposals, and entitlement plans are the answer for those who actually do the building. The president is on defense. We'll see if Mr. Romney can keep him there.

Write to kim@wsj.com

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum

Again i ask... What are we talking about over here

IMHO opinion he is basically saying is that no matter how smart or hard working you are you will not succeed unless someone else ( implying government ) is there to "help" you. Ridiculous.

"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."

Who exactly invested in roads and bridges? The government? Well the only way that happens is through taxation since the government itself doesn't produce anything. As if to imply if not for the government there would be no roads or bridges, I disagree. And by judging the quality of the roads in IL, I can believe the government had a hand in it, the roads suck.

My opinion on the "If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that" statement, is most likely a continuation of the roads and bridges "thought". Implying if not for the roads and bridges the business could not succeed. But since we have all been told that the POTUS is the greatest orator of all time, he would never make a mistake like that.

The government created the internet? Not so much.

The whole speech is simply more of the Obama collectivist bullshit.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

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

Obama: I Defy You To Believe What I Said About Business
Townhall.com ^ | July 27, 2012 | David Limbaugh
Posted on July 27, 2012 7:43:03 AM EDT by Kaslin

Obama's desperate protests that his anti-business rant was taken out of context are betrayed both by that very context and because they are a part of a piece -- just one more component of his war against the American entrepreneurial spirit.

He would have us believe that his words "you didn't build that" referred to roads and bridges and not businesses.

Given his accompanying statements -- "you didn't get there on your own," etc. -- that is an absurd construction. But even if that's what he meant, why would he have felt compelled to point out that businesses don't succeed without access to roads and bridges? Do roads and bridges not connect the population to failed businesses?

Why would any American president be inclined to think or talk this way? Of course governments -- funded by individual and business revenues, by the way -- build the roads and bridges, to successful and failed businesses.

But why isn't Obama moved instead to echo the words of past presidents, who championed small businesses, such as those showcased in Sen. Scott Brown's campaign ad?

Can anyone imagine Obama, on or off prompter and not under duress, saying the following words, which were said by President Lyndon Baines Johnson? "I am so proud of our system of government, of our system of free enterprise, where our incentive system and our men who head our big industries are willing to get up at daylight and work till midnight to offer employment and create new jobs for people."

Can you picture Obama, like Ronald Reagan, praising American small businesses as heroes for feeding "a hungry world and keep(ing) our families warm while they invest in the future to build a better America"?

Obama is way too busy criticizing capitalism and the free market for any number of sins that exist only in his mind. Obama can't possibly champion as heroes those whom he believes have so unfairly exploited a system at the expense of a victim class.

Obama hasn't only attacked small businesses; his war against Americana is much more wide-sweeping. He has embarked on an unmistakable course to reward sloth, dependency and covetousness and punish hard work and achievement. He has stood on its head the old adage that it is better to teach a man to fish than to give him fish.

Nor has he fostered a climate of voluntary Christian charity. He hasn't even encouraged fishermen to give their fish to others. He doesn't want them to do it on their own. He insists on government's taxing and regulating the fishermen and their fishing poles -- not to mention a surtax for crossing the roads and bridges leading to their fishing ponds -- and impounding their fish for redistribution to those he is discouraging from even visiting the pond, much less grabbing a pole.

For example, there was a bipartisan consensus that the 1996 welfare reform measures were overwhelmingly successful, reducing the number of people on welfare, illegitimacy and poverty, especially among minorities. The reforms were helping people regain their dignity and self-sufficiency, but Obama simply couldn't tolerate it, so he unilaterally and lawlessly removed the work requirement in the law.

Why? Does he want fewer people supporting themselves? In his term, the number of people not paying income taxes has greatly increased. He is incentivizing states to expand, as opposed to reduce, their food stamp programs. He has insisted on extending unemployment benefits, despite evidence showing that such extensions increase, rather than decrease, unemployment.

In addition, Obama vilifies the so-called wealthy and uses his bully pulpit to deceive Americans into believing they are not paying their fair share, when they pay staggeringly more taxes than all other income groups. In stumping for the "Buffett rule" and higher taxes and more burdensome regulations, he has led Americans to believe that millionaires and billionaires are paying less than their secretaries -- an out and out lie.

He has attacked corporations and their executives, suggesting they are impersonal, malicious, profit-sucking entities that exist to exploit people and prey on the poor.

Indeed, if it weren't so obvious that Obama is contemptuous of the free enterprise system and longs for some utopian workers paradise where equality of outcome is guaranteed instead of equality of opportunity, he wouldn't have to spend so much time pleading he is a fierce advocate of the market.

Obama doesn't have to fool all the people all the time -- just enough to win the swing states. If you can believe that Obama was truly against same-sex marriage when he said he was, that he is for an "all of the above" energy policy, that Obamacare won't come between patients and their doctors and will decrease costs, or that Obama has been the most frugal president in the past 60 years, I could sell you any bridge (or road), and I suppose you can believe he isn't the enem

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
IMHO opinion he is basically saying is that no matter how smart or hard working you are you will not succeed unless someone else ( implying government ) is there to "help" you. Ridiculous.

"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."

Who exactly invested in roads and bridges? The government? Well the only way that happens is through taxation since the government itself doesn't produce anything. As if to imply if not for the government there would be no roads or bridges, I disagree. And by judging the quality of the roads in IL, I can believe the government had a hand in it, the roads suck.

My opinion on the "If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that" statement, is most likely a continuation of the roads and bridges "thought". Implying if not for the roads and bridges the business could not succeed. But since we have all been told that the POTUS is the greatest orator of all time, he would never make a mistake like that.

The government created the internet? Not so much.

The whole speech is simply more of the Obama collectivist bullshit.

thats exactly what it is... you know it... i know it.. stevie wonder can see it...but hey if its a rallying cry... fuck it..

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
The obamabots are trying to bail out barry claiming that it was taken out of context, which it wasn't. Stating the he didn't mean what he clearly said. And some are stupid enough to agree and actually try to defend his warped thinking on this issue.

Obama is reeling now. Those are words that he can't take back and his supporters will not be able to explain away those statements.  He is on the defensive and will stay there as long as the focus of the election is on what is most important, which is the economy.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
The obamabots are trying to bail out barry claiming that it was taken out of context, which it wasn't. Stating the he didn't mean what he clearly said. And some are stupid enough to agree and actually try to defend his warped thinking on this issue.

Obama is reeling now. Those are words that he can't take back and his supporters will not be able to explain away those statements.  He is on the defensive and will stay there as long as the focus of the election is on what is most important, which is the economy.


When you hear the whole clip its even worse.   

Straw Man

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

When you hear the whole clip its even worse.   

why do you keep constantly posting other peoples words

hey when are you going to thank the government you hate so much because without the help of the government you never would have gotten the student loans which enabled you to become the dumbest lawyer on the planet


Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
thats exactly what it is... you know it... i know it.. stevie wonder can see it...but hey if its a rallying cry... fuck it..

It is what it is, he is the POTUS, and supposedly this great speaker. He should know better than to leave anything to question which is exactly what he did. Do I think it's petty bullshit? Yes, but in this day and age you better have all your shit together before you open your mouth.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
It is what it is, he is the POTUS, and supposedly this great speaker. He should know better than to leave anything to question which is exactly what he did. Do I think it's petty bullshit? Yes, but in this day and age you better have all your shit together before you open your mouth.

Ill give you that... but understand.. nothing will ever get settled if we waste time over 100% confirmed bullshit...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Ill give you that... but understand.. nothing will ever get settled if we waste time over 100% confirmed bullshit...




The problem is that there are so few and rare moments when obama is off teleprompter that these statements get so much attention. 

These candid statements, just like "Our plan worked" reveal far more about obama than 100 of his fake speeches. 

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Ill give you that... but understand.. nothing will ever get settled if we waste time over 100% confirmed bullshit...



That is exactly what this petty bullshit is about, keep the peons distracted from real issues. If we actually were interested in what was going on behind the scenes not one politician would still have a job come election time
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
That is exactly what this petty bullshit is about, keep the peons distracted from real issues. If we actually were interested in what was going on behind the scenes not one politician would still have a job come election time
yes

SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...


These candid statements, just like "Our plan worked" reveal far more about obama than 100 of his fake speeches. 

The fact that you are finding so many articles by Romney supporters who don't realize that Romney feels the exact same way...is quite humorous.


The fact that you said the above statement is proof you are either trolling or mentally incompetent.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
The fact that you are finding so many articles by Romney supporters who don't realize that Romney feels the exact same way...is quite humorous.


The fact that you said the above statement is proof you are either trolling or mentally incompetent.

No its not the same thing.   Obama rattled off GOVERNMENT spending only.    Huge difference. 


SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
No its not the same thing.   Obama rattled off GOVERNMENT spending only.    Huge difference.  



 Obama stated, "...Somebody along the line gave you some help."

Obama's exact words:
-"Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive."  (Our Founding Fathers)

-"A great teacher" (I assume that you are familiar with private schools, guitar teachers, etiquette teachers, etc.)

-"Somebody invested in roads and bridges"  (Are YOU the "government" 333?)



Wrong again.

Grape Ape

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22523
  • SC è un asino


-"Somebody invested in roads and bridges"  (Are YOU the "government" 333?)



Wrong again.

Who gives the government the money to invest?
Y

SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
Who gives the government the money to invest?

The taxpayers do.  Why do you ask?

Grape Ape

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22523
  • SC è un asino
The taxpayers do.  Why do you ask?

Because you asked this:



-"Somebody invested in roads and bridges"  (Are YOU the "government" 333?)



Wrong again.


So 333 is the government in this case.
Y

SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
So 333 is the government in this case.

 ???

He pays taxes to the government.  He is not the government.

Soul Crusher

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

SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
:D

No its not the same thing.   Obama rattled off GOVERNMENT spending only.    Huge difference. 



Obama stated, "...Somebody along the line gave you some help."

Obama's exact words:
-"Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive."  (Our Founding Fathers)

-"A great teacher" (I assume that you are familiar with private schools, guitar teachers, etiquette teachers, etc.)

-"Somebody invested in roads and bridges"  (Are YOU the "government" 333?)



Wrong again.

I answer your questions using his EXACT words.