Help, I posted Romney's Olympic statement about athletes not getting there on their own to

[rainy]

demonstrate how Obama's words were taken out of context and below is what I got in return: Please help me make a strong argument about the poor having strong work ethics and help me answer this:



Oh come onnnnnn....How in the world does praising and acknowledging family support of the individual compare at all to president Obama’s comments? Was Mitt Romney making the argument that these athletes were not more talented and worked harder than everyone else? He was acknowledging the sacrifices made by parents in regards to things like time and money that allowed these athletes to shine and realize their full potential.

The president, however, was making the argument that business owners do not succeed because of a hard work ethic and good ideas but rather because the government built basic infrastructure that EVERYONE has access to. These roads and basic government infrastructures, the “American system” and public education are provided to EVERYONE. They are not the determining factors for success. This type of ideology is what is ruining this country. The president’s remarks were made in the context of supporting his agenda of penalizing success. And guess what, those people who are making the most money are also paying (by FAR) the most in taxes that fund those roads and bridges and public educations.

Please lay off the MSNBC opinion pages and accept the facts of the situation. If you honestly believe that success should be penalized (taxed) at a higher rate in order to “spread the wealth around”, then at least admit your stance. That is not capitalism and it is not American.

[jberryhill]

1. Romney specifically included "communities that built venues"

The local ice rink is available to everyone.

As for the thing about roads and such, my local dairy, which moves a lot of product on those roads by truck, gets a heck of a lot more use and benefit out of those roads than I do.

Aside from criminal cases, do you know what most of our courts spend their time doing? Resolving business disputes.

Business cannot be conducted without the security of contract. What makes a contract worth ANYTHING is the fact that it is backed up by the ability to go to a court and have it enforced.

In fact, for most everyday commercial situations, government provides an automatic "default" contract to cover the sale and purchase of goods, among several other types of common transactions. The ultimate hoot of it all being that most people are in business to accumulate dollars - specified units of value backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. If they are not interested in doing that, I guess they can accept shiny rocks.

[rfranklin]

2. President Obama has recognized the work and contribution of business people constantly...

The poster should lay off the Fox News commentators and actually listen to Obama many quotes recognizing tthe efforts of entrepreneurs. However, no one can succeed in business without the regulations of government that create a fair game, without the support of an educated work force most of whom learned in public schools, or without that infrastructure that was created with taxes (which the right wing thinks is unnecessary.)

[Politicalboi]

3. I would just give up

If people don't understand what Obama said, they aren't worth talking to. Maybe try posting the complete statement Obama said, and ask them who built the roads to get to those business. Make them the dumb ones for not comprehending what the President said.

Or find the Elizabeth Warren tape and tell them this is what Obama meant.

[rfranklin]

4. I think you are correct...they don't want to actually listen and understand...

I have a lot of experience trying and it is usually hopeless. You might shut them down for a few minutes but they them carom off on another bogus talking point.

[treestar]

5. There is no penalty for success

They can shove that BS meme up their asses. I am so sick of hearing them whine about their success entitling them to so much more!

Talent is a gift of birth. If you work hard at it fine, but some don't have talent and have to just plain work hard and they're supposed to create the infrastructure for the "talented?" Heck, some people have enough talent that they don't have to work hard for success and it just comes to them.

Olympic athletes are supposed to be amateurs playing for the love of the game and there is no reason whatsoever for any of the rest of us to foot the expense. And yet if we do out of national pride (the basis it appears to happen on) then we're not supposed to get credit.

Conservatives can shove it all - most of them are deluded anyway. They work no harder than anyone else, take advantage wherever they can, and are not necessarily very talented or smart.

[rainy]

6. Thanks everyone. I'm going to keep adding to what I have so far with what you guys have said.

Here's where I'm starting:

How can you say Obama is not business supportive? Just because he values teachers and firemen and police as much? I'm not here really to defend Obama who governs from the right of center but the rights' desire to be so full of hate and willing to believe any lie that the internet or the crazies put out there is maddening.

We are in trouble. If you want to hate Obama why not hate him for drone attacks that are killing innocent people instead of the bs lies about him being a lefty socialist, anti-business muslim? Can we have a real conversation without saying Obama doesn't like businesses? How absurd. He has lowered taxes on businesses and supported them in every way as much and more than republican presidents.

Just because one has a business doesn't make them a hard working person with high work ethics just as someone with a low wage job is not a person with low work ethics. Most low wage earners are hard working and have very strong work ethics. Not sure I can say the same thing about those on Wall Street sitting comfortable in their offices stealing from us.

[Make7]

7. Obama: "The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative,"

From Obama's same speech:

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative,

Just post that - when you are accused of taking something he said out of context, see if they can actually discuss the context of what Obama really said.

Link to speech:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia

[rainy]

8. My final draft:

Obama's words were taken out of context and you should know that. I'm just pointing out how that happens in politics. We should be smart enough to understand that he was saying that you didn't build those roads etc… and if you listen to the whole speech you'd know that. How can you say Obama is not business supportive? That makes no sense whatsoever.

The issue is with the so called free market. There is no such thing as a free market. The government creates what businesses need to be successful such as roads, courts, educated workers, teachers, police, firemen, libraries, schools, laws, land rights etc….no one can succeed in business without the regulations of government that create a fair game, without the support of an educated work force most of whom learned in public schools, or without that infrastructure that was created with taxes. Business cannot be conducted without the security of contract. What makes a contract worth ANYTHING is the fact that it is backed up by the ability to go to a court and have it enforced.

In fact, for most everyday commercial situations, government provides an automatic "default" contract to cover the sale and purchase of goods, among several other types of common transactions. The ultimate hoot of it all being that most people are in business to accumulate dollars - specified units of value backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government.

In our country we privatize profits while socializing losses; the saving and loans bail-outs, the Enron scandal, the housing bubble, the dot-com bubble, next the college loan bubble, the tax payers absorb the risk while the 1% rake in the profits at our expense.

We are in trouble. If you want to hate Obama why not hate him for drone attacks that are killing innocent people instead of the bs lies about him being a lefty socialist, anti-business muslim? Can we have a real conversation without saying Obama doesn't like businesses? How absurd. He actually governs from the right of center. The left has been overridden by the rich and powerful. We have no representation save Bernie Sanders and a very few others. The rest of our politicians are bought and paid for.

PS Just because one has a business doesn't make them a hard working person with high work ethics just as someone with a low wage job is not a person with low work ethics. Most low wage earners are hard working and have very strong work ethics. Not sure I can say the same thing about those on Wall Street.

[Bluerthanblue]

10. ! well done- your PS

said what I was flailing around trying to say in my reply-

[Bluerthanblue]

9. the President ALSO pointed out the FACT that

it isn't just "businessmen" who 'work hard' something that Mitt Romney doesn't seem to understand- I think that is part of the problem. Much of Mitt's 'business' involved destroying the jobs of the lowly "non-businessman" within the companies.

That translates into the Olympic comparison. The media often only shows us the tip-top athletes, the medal winners and close runners up, but EVERY SINGLE athlete who makes it to the Olympic Games is represents an individual who has achieved quite an incredible feat, and despite the fact that they don't medal, doesn't mean they haven't been VERY hard-working, and that their efforts are somehow less worthy or honorable than the "king of the mountain" 'businessman/CEO" equivalent.

Romney's comments about what Pres. Obama said, actually are a kick in the teeth to the working man/woman, who are often VERY hard workers, who don't receive the social recognition or financial rewards that are offered to the "owner" and yes, while the owner stands to lose more, the owner can let the employees go pretty much at will- despite the fact that they may have done THEIR job superbly.

-

this link compares the two quotes that your OP talks about and may be helpful in refuting them.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/susan-milligan/2012/07/25/mitt-romneys-you-didnt-build-that-hypocrisy