jff Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm sorry I get a little heated on this whole subject but my take away was people do not become successful by working harder than other people. That statement really bothers me. Do you think you work harder than a coal miner or a soldier in a war? Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 C'mon man. There are smears and stretches on both sides and we all know it. To act like the right are the only ones doing it is inaccurate. I do not subscribe to the notion that Obama is anti-American. However, he and I probably disagree on what it means to be American. And I'm not being a smart ass.I listen and read from both political spectrums of punditry. I like to see both points of view and follow what I feel. I took an exact quote that happens to rub me the wrong way and go against everything I was raised to believe. I did not stretch it or manipulate it.If you read my last post, I've already acknowledged that distortions happen from all sides. At the moment, though, we're focused on how the Right is trying to smear Obama based on a particular comment. If you truly believe Obama's comment violates your concept of what it means to be an American, then I believe you are, indeed, stretching it to mean something it doesn't. Do you really believe that deep down Obama doesn't value hard work and doesn't believe personal initiative deserves reward? C'mon man. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Where do we draw this line? You raise some really good questions. Equity gets really tricky when it comes to enforcing social responsibility. One wealthy person calls being busy checking the growth on their investments and sipping the vintage, another is a 60 hour ghost, hustling to earn. It's so strange to live in a society that attributes value by price. My girlfriend has acknowledged that she has an easier job than mine, even though she makes almost twice as much as I do. Cubicle vs classroom. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 This whole concept of "what it means to be and American" line is a bunch of BS. You know what it means to be an American? It means you are either born in the US or have become a US citizen. That is all. You are an American. As an American you can hold whatever crackpot idea you want. You want everyone to be a socialist, fine. You want the government out of everything and we pay no taxes, fine. You think everyone should only wear green on Thursdays fine. As an American you have the right to believe whatever you want. The right (especially after 9/11) throw the term un-American around to put down those that don't agree with them. That is fundamentally wrong and only used to divide our country. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 It's surprising how these stupid little talking points/controversies have such legs. OMG! Obama loves the government, says everybody else sucks! OMG! Romney has money offshore! He's rich so he's bad! Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 It's surprising how these stupid little talking points/controversies have such legs. OMG! Obama loves the government, says everybody else sucks! OMG! Romney has money offshore! He's rich so he's bad! We live in a culture of the 24 news cycle, and the internet. People can't focus for more then 30 minutes on something they are interested it. If it is dry it has to be digested in to easily spewed sound bites. Then people, who think they are smarter than they are, senselessly argue with one another. I am including myself in on this. I have always found this quote by Shakespeare apt when people endless argue, or I see pundits in a rage about things. "It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 We live in a culture of the 24 news cycle, and the internet. People can't focus for more then 30 minutes on something they are interested it. If it is dry it has to be digested in to easily spewed sound bites. Then people, who think they are smarter than they are, senselessly argue with one another. I am including myself in on this. I have always found this quote by Shakespeare apt when people endless argue, or I see pundits in a rage about things. "It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." It's maddening. Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 American political discourse has been overwhelmed by carny barkers, drowning out serious people of all stripes. I guess we found our common ground! Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 ummm...thread has over 1200 posts. Time to close and open a new one? Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 ummm...thread has over 1200 posts. Time to close and open a new one? Only if we promise to argue the opposite view point than we have been for the last 62 pages. Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Sumbitted for your consideration. I am still on the fence on this issue. I wouldn't wind having this law in my state (Iowa), but I am not make sure it makes sense in larger states with fewer DMV offices like Texas. BTW, this article was tweeted by Iowa' Secretary of State who is really pushing for its passage. If you're going to read it, make sure to read the whole thing. Page 2 gives context to the pro side that I haven't seen much. http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/0723/Voter-ID-laws-are-inherently-reasonable-not-racist-or-Republican Link to post Share on other sites
calvino Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 This makes me sick. It is revealing. "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." -Barack Obama Below is the full quote taken in context. Of course, it's politics 101 to create ads out of quotes taken out of context....both sides do it. I am glad the President is pushing back, though. I am sure Romney will get his chance to push back on an ad about him. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia 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. 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. (Applause.) Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Sumbitted for your consideration. I am still on the fence on this issue. I wouldn't wind having this law in my state (Iowa), but I am not make sure it makes sense in larger states with fewer DMV offices like Texas. BTW, this article was tweeted by Iowa' Secretary of State who is really pushing for its passage. If you're going to read it, make sure to read the whole thing. Page 2 gives context to the pro side that I haven't seen much. http://www.csmonitor...t-or-Republican I really didn't want to get into this again, hopefully I'll remain less holier than thou for you. Here is an article on the flip side http://www.huffingto..._n_1697980.html Which states in part In a stipulation agreement signed earlier this month, state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect."There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,” the statement reads.According to the agreement, the state “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” nor will it "offer argument or evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.” Which is interesting, considering the only marginally tangible evidence that supported voter fraud in the CS Monitor article was Gov. Corbett's assertion that some democratic precincts showed had more than 100 % of registered voters vote. So is that odd? Yes. Does it prove voter fraud? No. If election officials really worried that there is fraud in that area there is ways of finding that out. Recounts happen all the time (albeit costly) officials can match up voter logs with phone calls and door to door visits confirming that they voted. No side has a perfect argument for or against this. Voter Fraud occurs, voter suppression occurs. You have to ask yourself does voter fraud occur to the level where it is detrimental to our election integrity. And are the current laws so ineffectual at stopping voter fraud that we need to potential disenfranchise thousands of potential voters. Link to post Share on other sites
IRememberDBoon Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 wasnt Mitt Romney born rich?? Can someone please point me to the characters on the left that mirror the inane garbage that comes out of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and OReilly and even Fox and Friends mouth?? But especially beck and limbaugh and hannity. day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after dayafter day after day after day after day after day after dayafter day after day if you think Bill Maher is the same as those guys well then thats why youre a conservative. Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 No one, not even Hannity is in the same ballpark as Limbaugh, left or right. But in terms of people who hold those from the other side of the aisle in contempt? About half of the MSNBC lineup. Maddow's pretty cool. I used to like Lawrence O'Donnell, but he's getting pretty grating. That Toure guy has said some pretty douchy things, Ed Schultz, Olbermann. Most commentators these days (probably always, but certainly now more than ever) preach to the choir rather than engage or persuade the other side. Clearly the right wing is better and louder at this than the left, but the left-wing media is not all a choir of truth-telling angels. And thank you, IRDB, for telling me why I am a conservative. I appreciate it. Kevin, I liked your article and found it relevant to the one I posted. Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Maddow is about the only political talking head that I can tolerate these days ... and I still more often than not turn her off before the end of her show. But Stephanie Miller is hot and funny, so I suppose she's still got a special place in my heart. Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I don't watch Stephanie Miller but I do listen to her on the radio. I listen to WCPT in the Chicago area alot actually, but it too gets irritating. Rachel Maddow can also be irritating on TV, as can Ed Schultz. LouieB Link to post Share on other sites
calvino Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Regarding WCPT, not a big fan of Miller, Schultz is okay for about 5 minutes and Press and Hartmann are pretty good. I got burnt out on radio and TV political discourse right after President Obama was put in office - too much of the same thing over and over. I don't get MSNBC, so I do not watch Maddow too often, but when I do she seems fine. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Obama doesn't hate success, he just wants the workers to think the government is as responsible for their jobs/wages/benefits/etc. as the employers/corporations are. Without his help keeping the companies and rich business owners in line, all hell would break loose. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I think it goes beyond that. He's pointing to the fact that typically the haves owe much of their opportunities to their family and community, and often times the have nots are not handed the gift of these resources. Wealthy families create dynasties; knowledge, capital and connections are passed down. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Sure they owe much of their opportunities, but it's still just an opportunity. In most cases, those haves still have to show they can run and maintain a business and all the bullshit that goes along with it. It's not just showing up. Whether or not Obama believes this, he still wants the workers to think otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Obama doesn't hate success, he just wants the workers to think the government is as responsible for their jobs/wages/benefits/etc. as the employers/corporations are. Without his help keeping the companies and rich business owners in line, all hell would break loose. Without government regulations and infrastructure I am pretty sure hell would break loose. What is the problem with having workers, business owners, hell every single person in American, understanding that government has an integral and important roll in our daily lives and success? In this country we really take the opportunities afforded to us for granted. I am not saying we need to bow down and thank the government for every little thing, but what Obama is saying as society we work together and we make great things happen. The second half of the speech gets ignored, but really it gets to the point of the 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 I don't think anywhere has he expressed that CEO's and owners do nothing (that would be Mitt Romney, or at least in the case of Bain form 1998 -2002). I understand being a CEO or running a business is extremely hard and small business is the engine that drives our economy. The president understands this. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I understand being a CEO or running a business is extremely hard and small business is the engine that drives our economy. The president understands this. He may understand this, but he doesn't want his voters to. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 He may understand this, but he doesn't want his voters to. Really? Maybe I am missing something, but has Obama ever said that? Has his policies ever projected that notion? Is this just a feeling that you get, or can you provide examples? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 It's pretty clear. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts