bushwacked Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 In case anyone really wonders how the the non-partisan Annenberg Public Policy website Factcheck.org weighed in on the issue: It’s clear from the context what the president was talking about. He spoke of government — including government-funded education, infrastructure and research — assisting businesses to make what he called “this unbelievable American system that we have.” In summary, he said: “The point is … that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.” GMOZ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 In case anyone really wonders how the the non-partisan Annenberg Public Policy website Factcheck.org weighed in on the issue: GMOZ! Please point out where it shows he did not say what he said. TIA. He said it and it was a stupid statement and all of the crap and arguing about it proves how stupid he actually is to even say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 IMany on here have agreed on what he meant to say. The debate now seems to have shifted more towards how much govenment aids in creating success. Please point out where it shows he did not say what he said. I guess I spoke too soon. There still seems to be some debate on whether or not Obama said what he said. I'll have to side with gbp on this. I've seen the video and the words "If you've got a business, you didn't build that" were spoken by Obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I guess I spoke too soon. There still seems to be some debate on whether or not Obama said what he said. I'll have to side with gbp on this. I've seen the video and the words "If you've got a business, you didn't build that" were spoken by Obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) If the roads (and infrastructure) are available to all people equally, then wouldn't it be immaterial to consider in what one person accomplished that another did not? Success factors that are limited to some but not all would be worthy to discuss in how someone was successful and others failed or did not try. Every generation should stand on the shoulders of the one before it just as the future relies on us now. We also have to deal with the problems of the past as well. I guess the argument could be my starting The Huddle required the internet to exist which is absolutely true. I could not have done it without everything that went into creating the web. But so what? Everyone had the exact same access to the internet that we did. And trust me, there have been literally hundreds of fantasy football sites in the last 16 years which have failed and shut down. While I agree the internet was a platform that I was able to use but it was our vision, extensive sacrifice, hard work and diligence that made us one of the top FF sites for the last 16 years. Seems like telling a sprinter that he did not set a record because he did not make his own shoes or lay the gravel on the track. Everyone has shoes... I want no part of any political argument. I am just not understanding how the infrastructure of a society is germane to one person's success or failure. I do understand how words are used out of context and with political agendas. Just seems like a strange discussion to me. Agreed - you couldn't have built the Huddle without the internet. No website would have been possible but for the internet pioneers who came before you. And recognizing that truth takes absolutely NOTHING away from the fact that, of all the people on the planet, YOU were the one who actually made it happen. The infrastructure issue is germane because of the overarching theme of the president's speech. He was discussing financial cuts that would adversely impact infrastructure spending - infrastructure without which tomorrow's DMD might not otherwise have the logistical possibility of building something awesome. Perhaps its hard see through all the BS that's flying around here, but the President was saying that we shouldn't cut infrastructure spending for fear that it would hurt future opportunities for entreprenuers like yourself. Without question greatness is only achieved by great people. But is it really so controversial to acknowledge that a vibrant and functional infrastructure, and a well-educated and stable society, are catalysts to that individual greatness coming to fruition? I, for one, have no problem recognizing that my individual accomplishments were made possible because of the various influences that contributed to my ability to achive them in the first place. Edited July 31, 2012 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice1 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I think politifact got it right. Many on here have agreed on what he meant to say. The debate now seems to have shifted more towards how much govenment aids in creating success. Always remember, Context is a variable. You know and use that variable to fit your personal agenda in conversation. Obviously, one can also flip the question and debate the issues on how much government hinders success given massive spending, waste, taxation, and overreach. BTW, isn't there a Biggest Lie of the Year Award for Politifact? Using them as any proof source on either side is speculative at best. They are just another rag in the world of media steered in large part by the writers viewpoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Without question greatness is only achieved by great people. But is it really so controversial to acknowledge that a vibrant and functional infrastructure, and a well-educated and stable society, are catalysts to that individual greatness coming to fruition? I, for one, have no problem recognizing that my individual accomplishments were made possible because of the various influences that contributed to my ability to achive them in the first place. Exactly, no one's denied that. In my neighborhood we had businesses that did alright for years. Then, the subway opens in this section of town and they are doing better than ever before - because of the traffic the subway brought to them. Somehow, that kind of nuance is getting ignored. Their taxes went into the subway but they didn't build it. And their reward was much greater than their tax expense. Their businesses are now flourishing, they have been working as hard but now more people are here to spend money. WIn-win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) Exactly, no one's denied that. In my neighborhood we had businesses that did alright for years. Then, the subway opens in this section of town and they are doing better than ever before - because of the traffic the subway brought to them. Somehow, that kind of nuance is getting ignored. Their taxes went into the subway but they didn't build it. And their reward was much greater than their tax expense. Their businesses are now flourishing, they have been working as hard but now more people are here to spend money. WIn-win. Good point. You can say the same about a lot of sports stadiums. Edited July 31, 2012 by SayItAintSoJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Subways and sports stadiums is Socialism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 so now we've got bushwanked desperately citing the "non-partisan facktcheckers" to tell us the president didn't say what he said, and actually said what he didn't say. again, the "full context" here reveals exactly what he was getting at. which is that government should get more credit for american economic success. government is what makes all that innovation and growth and efficiency possible. and of course, the implication is that government planners and technocrats hold the keys to steering us into a more prosperous and perfect future. plenty of people buy into that vision, and to them the comments are going to sound benign and unoffensive, almost obvious. a lot of other people don't buy into that economic vision at all, and they see government as having a vitally important role as referee in the economy, but that when it tries to go beyond that role to become quarterback and head coach as well, it results in an inefficient allocation of resources and ultimately crates a drag on in the real engine of the economy. " ", as the president likes to call them. since these folks see government as more of a parasite on the true creation of wealth than a host, his telling them "you didn't build that, government did" is offensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 Obviously there needs to be a balance, but I think the z.o.m.g. socialist crap has gotten pretty freaking stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Obviously there needs to be a balance, but I think the z.o.m.g. socialist crap has gotten pretty freaking stupid. agreed, but who, other than bushwacked and chavez, is talking about "z.o.mg socialism"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) z.o.m.g. socialist crap has gotten pretty freaking stupid. Given Az's, Ice's, and pastey's reaction to something so stupid and non-consequential, the 2nd tard verse is going to be same as the 1st. Edited July 31, 2012 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 It's completely laughable that the United States has a President who is so utterly clueless about economics. Infrastructure benefits all of society. It allows businesses to move goods, but simultaneously allows all consumers to benefit from the competition that the movement of those goods fosters. Therefore, since businesses and consumers rely equally on each other, the benefits of the infrastructure are likewise shared. That makes the implication by Obama that businesses have some kind of special obligation to government foolish. The government creation of infrastructure is made possible by the contributions of the people due to their needs and desires. Businesses are created by people who identify an opportunity and accept the risk and are willing to do the work nessary to take advantage of that opportunity. The government contributes nothing in the formation and evolution of that business (unless the business contracts with the government) that it does not simultaneously do for all people, and therefore business does not have some special responsibility to the government that the rest of us do not share. Obama's position is clear and simple: businesses owe their existence to the government. That's patently BS. We don't work for the government. The government works for us. Funny how easily that's transposed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Here is the real truth meter. Did Obama say: "If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." Why yes Bushwacked, it is completely 100% TRUE that President Obama said that. He made a major gaffe, trying to infer what he said or meant to say is politics, nothing more. Wow these debates get old, who is denying that Obama said that? We all know he said that. What you apparently want is somebody to admit it, and say it was a dumb, or a gaffe. Ok, I'll bite, Obama said something stupid, and made a gaffe. There, are you happy? Does it mean what Romney and some others are saying, that he hates or doesn't understand business. That he's using it as a way to say "see you need to pay more, because government does all these things for you? No, of course not. He simply mean - if you build a business you didn't do it all on your own, others helped to make it happen (with educated citizens, infrastructure, etc). - let's not sacrifice maintaining the quality of these services, because it could greatly impact the ability of others to start or maintain their businesses. But since its an election year, everything gets twisted around. And yes both sides do it, they'd be crazy not to to use every tool in the box to win. But this nonsense that "Obama hates business owners" is about as believable as "he wasn't born in the US". Just as politfact pointed out, its similar to "Romney said he likes to fire people" thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) So, are we allowed to look up gaffes now and insist that every gaffe ever uttered is 100% truth. I don't have the time or inclination to look all the many gaffes said every day by politicians, but I am sure somebody does. This place could get crazy. Edited July 31, 2012 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 agreed, but who, other than bushwacked and chavez, is talking about "z.o.mg socialism"? Well, the whole Tea Party in an effort to influence the GOP for one thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 "57 states" is a gaffe. this thing is the president speaking his mind about the economy. if you agree with his economic outlook, it doesn't really even sound like a gaffe. at most a poor choice of words for convicining those who aren't already in agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) So, are we allowed to look up gaffes now and insist that every gaffe ever uttered is 100% truth. I don't have the time or inclination to look all the many gaffes said every day by politicians, but I am sure somebody does. This place could get crazy. I alluded to this earlier, but if the lefties on this board were as desperate to blow every Romney gaffe out of proportion in the similar fashion as this; there would be a dozen multiple page Romeny threads on the first page at all times. Edited July 31, 2012 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 "57 states" is a gaffe. this thing is the president speaking his mind about the economy. if you agree with his economic outlook, it doesn't really even sound like a gaffe. at most a poor choice of words for convicining those who aren't already in agreement. +1 This wasn't a gaffe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 "57 states" is a gaffe. this thing is the president speaking his mind about the economy. if you agree with his economic outlook, it doesn't really even sound like a gaffe. at most a poor choice of words for convicining those who aren't already in agreement. +1 This wasn't a gaffe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) I alluded to this earlier, but if the lefties on this board were as desperate to blow every Romney gaffe out of proportion in the similar fashion as this; there would be a dozen multiple page Romeny threads on the first page at all times. No. If it was just a gaffe - do you think there would be this much talk (not just around here) if it was a gaffe?? You see what is really happening here is that the president said something very stupid and nobody can argue that he did not say it. What you are arguing is that you KNOW what he meant to say and that opinion has to be the truth. Others are arguing that he said something very stupid and the way he governs and the way they think his beliefs are that there was some meaning to what he actually said. Why is that so insane to think? So it kind of comes down to the issue that you say your opinion is a fact and other opinions should not count??? Edit - Bushy I am not trying to be an A$$ but why is it so wrong for people to have a different opinion on what he said? That is what I am having trouble trying to understand? Edited July 31, 2012 by gbpfan1231 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) If it was just a gaffe - do you think there would be this much talk (not just around here) if it was a gaffe?? eh, absolutely?!?! have you perhaps caught the news recently? What you are arguing is that you KNOW what he meant to say and that opinion has to be the truth. Others are arguing that he said something very stupid and the way he governs and the way they think his beliefs are that there was some meaning to what he actually said. Why is that so insane to think? its not, but what does that have to do with it being a gaffe? it kind of seems like whenever there is a gaffe some folk try to find the truth of the matter and some folk try to take advantage of it. you and bushy might disagree on who is who with this - but this does not make it 'not a gaffe' Edited July 31, 2012 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Edit - Bushy I am not trying to be an A$$ but why is it so wrong for people to have a different opinion on what he said? That is what I am having trouble trying to understand? because he followed it up with 'what I mean to say' or 'what I am saying is' or something like that. Isn't he supposed to be the teleprompter reader in chief? I have often read things aloud and had to go back and correct myself (and I get far more sleep than Obama) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) Mitt Romney's press Secretary doesn't want to talk about gaffes. "Kiss my ass, this is a holy place....shove it" Edited July 31, 2012 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.