Thread: Thomas Paine on 'you didn't build that'

Originally Posted by American

Are you actually going to sit there and pretend that Thomas Paine in any way, would agree with the policies of Barack Obama; are you ****ing kidding me???? Obama's speech wasn't misread at all, we know where he stands on how the GOVERNMENT has made everyone what they are, and to sit there and try to use Thomas Paine to make Obama look less socialist than he really is, is disingenuous to say the least.

If Barack Obama had had his way in 1776, the Founders wouldn't have had guns to shoot with. I can tell you that Paine wouldn't have approved.

1) That's not what I said, and no I don't think Obama's policies would sit well with the Founders at all. In fact neither the Republicans or the Democrats or their policies would sit well with the Founders, but again thats not what I'm saying but you went and established a straw man to argue against instead of addressing my point.

2) Obama didn't say the government has made everyone what they are, its a perfect example of misreading what he's saying.

3) I didn't compare Thomas Paine to Obama or anyone for that matter, nor did I use or invoke Thomas Paine anywhere in my post; my post has nothing to do with Thomas Paine I was speaking on something else entirely.

Originally Posted by American

Are you actually going to sit there and pretend that Thomas Paine in any way, would agree with the policies of Barack Obama; are you ****ing kidding me???? Obama's speech wasn't misread at all, we know where he stands on how the GOVERNMENT has made everyone what they are....

now you're just being dishonest, and willfully misrepresenting what Obama said.

Originally Posted by Thunder

well, this "Thomas Paine" sounds like a Communist.

Well Paine was a socialist. But some very "smart" people think socialist=communist soo in some books yes he is a communist.

Notice the conservatives "Obama is a Commie" crowd, don't have any arguments, quotes in context, anything, just assertinos.

i.e. "what thomas paine said is different ... because ... he's .... AMERICAN."

btw, the idea that property is social and economic success is build on societal foundations has nothing to do with socialism or cpaitalism or communism or whatever, its just an economic fact.

Originally Posted by Wiseone

1) That's not what I said, and no I don't think Obama's policies would sit well with the Founders at all. In fact neither the Republicans or the Democrats or their policies would sit well with the Founders, but again thats not what I'm saying but you went and established a straw man to argue against instead of addressing my point.

2) Obama didn't say the government has made everyone what they are, its a perfect example of misreading what he's saying.

3) I didn't compare Thomas Paine to Obama or anyone for that matter, nor did I use or invoke Thomas Paine anywhere in my post; my post has nothing to do with Thomas Paine I was speaking on something else entirely.

It sounded to me that this is exactly what he was saying. He said that the roads were there that a teacher inspired the flash of brilliance and that they are just a few of many who are smart and hard working.

He said pretty clearly that the rich are not deserving of their wealth and that they happen tho have it only because the society and the government makes it available to them.

He is setting the stage for taking their wealth, and mine and yours away from you because nobody deserves their wealth. All wealth in Obama's mind is the property of the government and we only get to use it for a while before he takes it back.

Originally Posted by code1211

It sounded to me that this is exactly what he was saying. He said that the roads were there that a teacher inspired the flash of brilliance and that they are just a few of many who are smart and hard working.

He said pretty clearly that the rich are not deserving of their wealth and that they happen tho have it only because the society and the government makes it available to them.

He is setting the stage for taking their wealth, and mine and yours away from you because nobody deserves their wealth. All wealth in Obama's mind is the property of the government and we only get to use it for a while before he takes it back.

No thats not what he said either. In fact he even said what the point was

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.

Of course what he's making that point for is to gain support on his plan to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, thus increasing their taxes. But arguing to allow a temporary tax cut to expire is not the same as saying someone doesn't deserve their wealth, that is something you've made up because it fits into your predetermined narrative of some kind of communist conspiracy.

Originally Posted by code1211

He said pretty clearly that the rich are not deserving of their wealth and that they happen tho have it only because the society and the government makes it available to them.

He is setting the stage for taking their wealth, and mine and yours away from you because nobody deserves their wealth. All wealth in Obama's mind is the property of the government and we only get to use it for a while before he takes it back.

How can one so grossly malign and distort such simple concepts? Let us hope that you arrived at these conclusions soley because of political bias, not with the intention of presenting them as rational interpretations among serious circles.

Originally Posted by Hare

How can one so grossly malign and distort such simple concepts? Let us hope that you arrived at these conclusions soley because of political bias, not with the intention of presenting them as rational interpretations among serious circles.

I agree some allow their hatred for President Obama to truley blind themselves of all reason, the interpretations here of the simple concept the President presented are so suspicious and distorted I can't help but feel sorry for them it must be hard to live with
Such hatred in your hearts.

Originally Posted by Wiseone

No thats not what he said either. In fact he even said what the point was


Of course what he's making that point for is to gain support on his plan to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, thus increasing their taxes. But arguing to allow a temporary tax cut to expire is not the same as saying someone doesn't deserve their wealth, that is something you've made up because it fits into your predetermined narrative of some kind of communist conspiracy.

If you don't see the Obama administration, and the Bush administration for that matter, as a power grab by the Feds and a sacrifice of fiscal resposibility to gain short term political advantage over long term responsible governance, you are blind.

The only narrative that I see being fulfilled by this speech is the same as always with the divider in chief. The problem is that guy over there and it's time we go after him. This is exactly the same tactic executed by every authoritarian. Obama cannot deliver a speech without a good, strong dose of us vs them. It's always rich against poor, white against minorities, old against young, well against sick. It is never we as Americans. It is always the splinter groups that make up his constituency being abused by whatever group he can identify or conjure.

If he said that ALL of the tax cuts should expire because we need the money or that ALL of them should stay the same, that speaks to all of us working together to fix the problem.

The way he does his job is to create hate, envy, suspicion and anger. This is not the approach of the leader of the American people. It's the approach of a Chicago political activist.

Originally Posted by Hare

How can one so grossly malign and distort such simple concepts? Let us hope that you arrived at these conclusions soley because of political bias, not with the intention of presenting them as rational interpretations among serious circles.

IF his comments were the only comments that he had ever said on the topic, you may be justified in granting him the pass that you obviously do. However, he has a lifetime of this kind of attack on business and individual achievement. His opinions are not unknown in this area.

He refers to working in the private sector as being behind enemy lines. His administration sues companies for creating noon-union jobs. He shuts down companies that hire non-union employees. He ignores court orders to prevent drilling in the Gulf. His administration says that killing the first three people you see is a good way to implement policy, just like the Romans. His administration boasts that it has its boot on the throat of business.

He is a strong advocate of redistributing wealth and of penalizing anyone who shows a profit in business. He ignores legal precedent to reward the UAW while he dissolves the investment of the bond holders of GM.

Why do YOU think he brought up the topic?