• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

Here's his thesis: "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.”
 
Here's his thesis: "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.”

You are determined not to answer the question, "so what?" So no one succeeds alone. And . . . ? He brings this up, why? C'mon, Boo; show your "non-partisanship." Answer the question.
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Learn your history, polution did catch fire in a river. And LA is better than it was. And no, the meat industry wasn't. I know you want to convince yourself of these fanasties, but you simply don't know your history.

And yes, they are communist, and don't have the people pressing them to have helpful regulations. You missed the point.

And no, derugulation did more to cause the crisis than anything else. And companies fail from time to time, but don't let too much misinformation get inside your ideology. ;)

It's apparent you're the slave to ideology and ignorant of history. You just used China as an example of what we should fear without beneficent government, when in fact China is an example of what happens when governments control or own markets.
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Here is the far left douchenozzle from whom Obama steals his talking points:

 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Here is the far left douchenozzle from whom Obama steals his talking points:

[deleted video link]


Do other readers think that a person is losing, or has already lost, a debate when denigration without description is all they offer in response?
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Do other readers think that a person is losing, or has already lost, a debate when denigration without description is all they offer in response?

Did you watch the douchenozzle in the video? Rather close to Obama's talking points.
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Do other readers think that a person is losing, or has already lost, a debate when denigration without description is all they offer in response?

Did you watch the douchenozzle in the video? Rather close to Obama's talking points.


Do other readers think that a person is losing, or has already lost, a debate when denigration without description is all they offer in response?
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

Do other readers think that a person is losing, or has already lost, a debate when denigration without description is all they offer in response?

I offered a description, you chose to ignore in an attempt to degrade me. Maybe you should take your own advice.
 
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

It's apparent you're the slave to ideology and ignorant of history. You just used China as an example of what we should fear without beneficent government, when in fact China is an example of what happens when governments control or own markets.

No, you miss the point. They don't have people who can push for regulations. You mistakenly think the two are separate. But regulations largely have a history, and largely promoted by people. Government doesn't come to them on their own. When that si the case, you have China. So, you merely missed the point.
 
You are determined not to answer the question, "so what?" So no one succeeds alone. And . . . ? He brings this up, why? C'mon, Boo; show your "non-partisanship." Answer the question.

No, people do succeed because of their own intititive. And they work together to achieve things. This is the point, hence one is not enemy of the other. You do know Romney has said the same things? It has been linked often enough. I didn't fault Romney for it. But you completely ignore it, . . . you partisan. :coffeepap
 
the middle-class are WAAAAAAAAAY more productive than the wealthy.

not in terms of taxes. the top 5% pay more taxes than the rest of the country

the bottom 60% are net tax consumers
 
No, people do succeed because of their own intititive. And they work together to achieve things. This is the point, hence one is not enemy of the other. You do know Romney has said the same things? It has been linked often enough. I didn't fault Romney for it. But you completely ignore it, . . . you partisan. :coffeepap

And the question you continue to ignore . . .

"So what?"

Not that I need to keep pointing it out to you -- you know you're ignoring it.
 
And the question you continue to ignore . . .

"So what?"

Not that I need to keep pointing it out to you -- you know you're ignoring it.

Did you ask Romney so what? I'm sorry you don't like the answer, but the answer is, now read slowly . . . . One . .. is . . . not . . . the . . . enemy . . . of . . . the . . . other. It's not radical, major, significant, or even orginial. But it is also not the silliness your side wants to pretend it is.
 
Did you ask Romney so what? I'm sorry you don't like the answer, but the answer is, now read slowly . . . . One . .. is . . . not . . . the . . . enemy . . . of . . . the . . . other. It's not radical, major, significant, or even orginial. But it is also not the silliness your side wants to pretend it is.

Jesus H Christ, what is your problem?

This does not answer anything. "One is not the enemy of the other?" Again, so . . . the . . . **** . . . WHAT? It's the same goddamn truism.

So, I guess your answer is, it was empty rhetoric, nothing more.

If it's not, please supply the substance.
 
the middle-class are WAAAAAAAAAY more productive than the wealthy.

By what measure, for heaven's sake?

That "wealthy" guy down the street pays a landscaping company that employs a dozen people to cut his grass and tend his gardens. He pays a cleaning service for housecleaning every week. That cleaning service probably employes dozens and dozens of less-than-skilled immigrant ladies. He spends thousands of dollars every year on home maintenance/decorating that also employs dozens of lower-skilled workers. He spends more money in a month to invigorate our economy than you probably do in a whole year. He owns four cars. Pays $25,000 or more in real estate taxes. May employ dozens/hundreds/thousands of people.

By what measure, for heaven's sake?
 
Am I? What makes me partisan? Voting for Bob Dole when I did? Arguing for a divided government because when one side wins it goes to ****? Calling for compromise? Saying both sides lie? Exactly what makes me partisan?

Hey everyone! Boo says he's non-partisan! Does ANYONE believe that?


When you ignore a fact, like a clear thesis statement, you are neither reasonable nor honest.

I'm not ignoring anything, you are. Your partisan bias has you making excuses for what the anointed one said.

Of course, he did not say that. So, you have it completely wrong.

Nope. That's what he said.
 
Did you ask Romney so what? I'm sorry you don't like the answer, but the answer is, now read slowly . . . . One . .. is . . . not . . . the . . . enemy . . . of . . . the . . . other. It's not radical, major, significant, or even orginial. But it is also not the silliness your side wants to pretend it is.

Would that be different than your side, Boo?
 
Would that be different than your side, Boo?

What's funny is that Gimmesometruth is in another thread calling me stupid for not reading the speech exactly the way Boo claims the right-wing is distorting it. "Your side," indeed.
 
Would that be different than your side, Boo?

On this issue, yes. But does both sides have those who are dishonest? Sure. I've said so many times. But on this, it is your side being dishonest.
 
Hey everyone! Boo says he's non-partisan! Does ANYONE believe that?

Not exactly what I said, I asked you to note what makes me partisan. We might move on from there. Having liberal points of view isn't equal to being partisan. I want to make sure you understand the difference.

I'm not ignoring anything, you are. Your partisan bias has you making excuses for what the anointed one said.

You're ignoring what was actually, and factually said. I'm sorry, but you're reading your own bais in and not objectively reading his words.



Nope. That's what he said.

Factually, you're completely wrong. Sorry. But facts are not that maluable.
 
On this issue, yes. But does both sides have those who are dishonest? Sure. I've said so many times. But on this, it is your side being dishonest.

Which side is my side? My side of this issue, or my side?

Still claiming you're non-partisan?
 
Not exactly what I said, I asked you to note what makes me partisan. We might move on from there. Having liberal points of view isn't equal to being partisan. I want to make sure you understand the difference.

Boo, everyone here knows who your side is.

You're ignoring what was actually, and factually said. I'm sorry, but you're reading your own bais in and not objectively reading his words.

No, actually what he said was "If you've got a succesful business --- you didn't build that!" He did not say "If you've got roads and bridges --- you didn't build those!" It is your side that is ignoring what he actually said. In a campaign speech, no less. Why bring it up at all....in a campaign speech?


Factually, you're completely wrong. Sorry. But facts are not that maluable.

No. Not so much.
 
Last edited:
Boo, everyone here knows who your side is.

Translation: Proving evidence is hard.

No, actually what he said was "If you've got a succesful business --- you didn't build that!" He did not say "If you've got roads and bridges --- you didn't build those!" It is your side that is ignoring what he actually said. In a campaign speech, no less. Why bring it up at all....in a campaign speech?

No, that refered to roads. You doing the lazy dishonest partisan sheep thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom