PDA

View Full Version : Obama's Rhetoric



mikesilvia
07-19-2012, 05:20 AM
Barack Obama's great rhetorical gifts include the ability to make the absurd sound not only plausible, but inspiring and profound.His latest verbal triumph was to say on July 13th, "if you've been successful, you didn't...

More... (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2012/07/19/obamas_rhetoric)

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 10:56 AM
As usual, Sowell hits the nail on the head.

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 10:58 AM
As usual, Sowell hits the nail on the head.

Wickabee
07-19-2012, 02:33 PM
Talk about missing the point.
The point is "somebody helped you, don't be afraid to help someone else."
To even suggest it's about taking away freedom is ludicrous. Sowell hit something on the head, but I think it was himself. Why are Republicans:

A - So convinced they did everything themselves?
B - So against any help of any kind for anyone but themselves?

shrewsbury
07-19-2012, 03:16 PM
if help comes with conditions, then i can just mustard through it myself.

i have no problems helping others, but i expect nothing in return, when the government does the same, then i will jump on the bandwagon.

and their is a big difference in helping and giving

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 03:33 PM
Talk about missing the point.
The point is "somebody helped you, don't be afraid to help someone else."
To even suggest it's about taking away freedom is ludicrous. Sowell hit something on the head, but I think it was himself. Why are Republicans:

A - So convinced they did everything themselves?
B - So against any help of any kind for anyone but themselves?

No, you are missing the point. It was about the collective being more responsible for a person's success than the individual. It was CLEARLY about how individual success is built largely on the shoulders of government/others.

Wickabee
07-19-2012, 03:35 PM
No, you are missing the point. It was about the collective being more responsible for a person's success than the individual. It was CLEARLY about how individual success is built largely on the shoulders of government/others.

I believe you to be completely incorrect and I believe you agree with this because you don't like Obama and no other reason.

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 04:11 PM
I believe you to be completely incorrect and I believe you agree with this because you don't like Obama and no other reason.

Why do you disagree? What was the point of Obama's speech? The premise of the speech was that because you didn't build your business on your own, you have a moral obligation to pay higher taxes-- to "give back" to the government. One of the flaws in this logic is that both the unsuccessful and the successful have at the very least been equally benefited by government services. Many would argue that the unsuccessful have been benefited much more by the government than the successful, since they pay in less and receive more in benefits.

JustAlex
07-19-2012, 10:14 PM
http://www.x-entertainment.com/pics/kool1.jpg

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 10:17 PM
Where am I wrong. Please explain. Try to use reason and logic while formulating a response.

shrewsbury
07-19-2012, 10:49 PM
taxman, that is a huge issue, there is no relief for the middle class, sure we can still get by, but we qualify for little to no tax breaks, except education, and we receive no benefits.

I believe the points Obama was trying to make was that without the structure being in place no one could use it, but instead he insulted many hard working americans and at best left a very unclear message.

Romney's response got him one up in my book, but that doesn't mean much at this point.

JustAlex
07-19-2012, 11:11 PM
FAUX NEWS.....EPIC PROPAGANDA, AT IT'S BEST!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHzVPKWzkk&feature=g-u-u



Shameful, disgraceful, NAZI-STYLE Propaganda such as this should NOT be tolerated.

The truth is I don't even like Obama that much, but I utterly DESPISE the republican party!

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 11:16 PM
taxman, that is a huge issue, there is no relief for the middle class, sure we can still get by, but we qualify for little to no tax breaks, except education, and we receive no benefits.

I believe the points Obama was trying to make was that without the structure being in place no one could use it, but instead he insulted many hard working americans and at best left a very unclear message.

Romney's response got him one up in my book, but that doesn't mean much at this point.

Of course no man is an island, but we all know that. You don't give speeches about that. The only point of the speech was to imply that we cannot be successful without paying more to the government so that it can take care of us. It was a collectivist message.

Wickabee
07-19-2012, 11:25 PM
The point was tax money (theoretically) goes to help everyone, even the privileged, no matter how much the top 1% would have everyone believe otherwise. Every time I hear people complaining about taxes, it's "I'm sick of paying for welfare!" it's never "I'm sick of paying for roads, infrastructure, police, etc".

Anyone who is against paying taxes is against having a police force, roads and sidewalks and fire protection. Without these things, there would be no way to get to your business, no police and firemen to protect your business, the list goes on. But no, the wealthiest of the wealthy believe they got that way completely on their own and totally disregard what help they have garnered from the government in the form of infrastructure. Instead, they prattle on about how taxes do nothing. The wealthiest people want the poorest to pay for the nation's infrastructure. That simply isn't right.

JustAlex
07-19-2012, 11:36 PM
The point was tax money (theoretically) goes to help everyone, even the privileged, no matter how much the top 1% would have everyone believe otherwise. Every time I hear people complaining about taxes, it's "I'm sick of paying for welfare!" it's never "I'm sick of paying for roads, infrastructure, police, etc".

Anyone who is against paying taxes is against having a police force, roads and sidewalks and fire protection. Without these things, there would be no way to get to your business, no police and firemen to protect your business, the list goes on. But no, the wealthiest of the wealthy believe they got that way completely on their own and totally disregard what help they have garnered from the government in the form of infrastructure. Instead, they prattle on about how taxes do nothing. The wealthiest people want the poorest to pay for the nation's infrastructure. That simply isn't right.
I can definitely agree with you on this point.....and I believe that Obama was making the same point you're making.

But of course, the GOP and conservatives didn't see it that way, just check out how Faux News ran with this Obama speech and made incredible edits to make it seem like our President is saying ridiculous things.

AUTaxMan
07-19-2012, 11:48 PM
The wealthiest people want the poorest to pay for the nation's infrastructure. That simply isn't right.

That is nonsense. They already pay most of the nation's taxes and thus for most of its infrastructure. Obama wants them to pay even more. The argument isn't about whether we need tax revenue to pay for infrastructure. Everyone acknowledges the need for infrastructure and basic public services. The argument is about raising taxes while expanding entitlement programs. We should be slashing entitlements and reforming them, not raising taxes to pay for a small portion of the increase and printing/borrowing the money to pay for the rest. Obama's goal is to get as many people dependent on government as possible so that we gradually move toward a European-style socialist state, because he fundamentally believes that more government is the answer to all of our nation's problems. This is a very un-American ideal, and that is why he gets so much resistance from the right.

Wickabee
07-19-2012, 11:58 PM
That is nonsense. They already pay most of the nation's taxes and thus for most of its infrastructure. Obama wants them to pay even more. The argument isn't about whether we need tax revenue to pay for infrastructure. Everyone acknowledges the need for infrastructure and basic public services. The argument is about raising taxes while expanding entitlement programs. We should be slashing entitlements and reforming them, not raising taxes to pay for a small portion of the increase and printing/borrowing the money to pay for the rest. Obama's goal is to get as many people dependent on government as possible so that we gradually move toward a European-style socialist state, because he fundamentally believes that more government is the answer to all of our nation's problems. This is a very un-American ideal, and that is why he gets so much resistance from the right.

If you want to slash something, start with the bloated salaries of your politicians themselves. Maybe a perform-to-pay type deal.

AUTaxMan
07-20-2012, 12:16 AM
If you want to slash something, start with the bloated salaries of your politicians themselves. Maybe a perform-to-pay type deal.

Although I am no fan of Congress, that would not accomplish anything.

Wickabee
07-20-2012, 12:21 AM
Although I am no fan of Congress, that would not accomplish anything.

Of course it wouldn't

INTIMADATOR2007
07-20-2012, 12:23 AM
Folks, we used to live in a country where people wanted to be successful. People wanted to be millionaires. Today, we live in a country where people want to receive a government check, and wanting to be a millionaire is said to be greedy and selfish. Well, what is more greedy and selfish than living off of other people?-Rush Limbaugh