"You didn't get there on your own"

[edthecynic]

 

[saveliberty]

EdtheLiar's fall back position, use cartoons. lol

The government takes money from its citizens, skims off some as graft and handling charges, then returns it to different groups. Some people mistake this for the government helping them. It was their money to begin with.

 

[Papageorgio]

You know you already posted that, right?
He's talking about being able to bid and win a few government contract jobs. How is that hypocritical? Is the government just throwing money at him for doing nothing?

You're fucking kidding me, right?

Barb the government needs to stop ALL business loans.

If the loans are available to every eligible business, then all businesses should be have equal access, otherwise government is determining who succeeds and who fails. It is not right for government to interfere, but if they do, all businesses need to do what they do to level the playing field, if that means taking loans and paying them back at a lower interest rate than another lender, then so be it.

All that said, the government needs to get out of the loan business, including student and home loans.

 

[Papageorgio]

EdtheLiar's fall back position, use cartoons. lol

The government takes money from its citizens, skims off some as graft and handling charges, then returns it to different groups. Some people mistake this for the government helping them. It was their money to begin with.

Funny how they can't defend the position, so they rely on others thinking for them.

 

[Meister]

Sounds like what NBC does, doesn't it?

 

[Stephanie]

"I've been on food stamps and welfare. Did anyone help me out? No."

- Craig T. Nelson

well how wonderful now that he has made the big time...he should give us taxpayers our money back

 

[Murf76]

Is he repaying the loans? Is there interest on them? Did the government help him earn the credit rating that qualified him for the loans? Is the government sending someone to his business every day to help with the work and earn the money to pay back those loans, with interest?

So basically, your arguments are still crap. Only a dimwit like you would think there's a "Gotcha!" moment in pointing out that the government exists and is the backdrop of everyone's life, as though anyone has argued that.

The government does not deserve gratitude for existing and functioning, and it sure as shit doesn't deserve credit for the success of the people who build on the basic playing field we're all given simply because it's part of that field . . . and CERTAINLY not when they're getting all their money back, PLUS a hefty fee for its temporary use.

Don't even TRY to tell me Mr. Gilchrist "owes" the government even more for the success HE put the blood, sweat, and tears into on top of his taxes, his contributions to the community, his loan payments, AND his fucking interest!

This is the left's classic "straw man" argument, arguing against positions that conservatives don't even take. Check this out... The Ultimate Takedown:

Excerpt:

When Obama implied at the Roanoke, Virginia rally that some businessmen refuse to pay for public works from which they benefit, he presented a thesis which, like a three-legged stool, relies on three assumptions that must all be true for the argument to remain standing:

1. That the public programs he mentioned in his speech constitute a significant portion of the federal budget;
2. That business owners don’t already pay far more than their fair share of these expenses; and
3. That these specific public benefits are a federal issue, rather than a local issue.

If any of these legs fails, then the whole argument collapses.

For good measure, we won’t just kick out one, we’ll kick out all three.

“Small Government” Is Not the Same as “No Government”

Progressives critique the fiscal conservative/Tea Party/libertarian position by purposely misrepresenting it as anarchy. When fiscal conservatives say “We want smaller government,” progressives reply, “Oh, so you want no government?”

(cont...)
Zombie » The Ultimate Takedown of Obama’s ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Speech

Do read the entire article though. It really does leave them with 'no leg to stand on'. (pun intended )
The idea that we're all some sort of anarchists is their invention. The conservative position is NOT that there should be "no government", it's that our federal government should be smaller and limited to functions enumerated by the U.S. Constitution.

Furthermore, as we read down Zombie's piece, we find that the federal dollars provided that would "go to projects and programs that benefit the general public and entrepreneurs", only amount to less than a quarter of what is spent.. and that's a more than generous accounting.

Our leftist friends have NO ARGUMENT. Their candidate has let the socialist cat out of the bag at a crucial moment in the campaign and there's just no way to spin it.
Of course, that leaves them testy and vitriolic, but their only alternative would be to re-think their entire ideology.

As I posted yesterday, you can't macromanage a society without micromanaging lives. And we can't have both a negative (what the government can't do TO you) Bill of Rights and a positive (what the government must do FOR you) Second Bill of Rights. They cancel each other out.

 

[Stephanie]

going after the guy who made a ad for Romney..

that's the Progressive-Obama way, when you have nothing else, tear down your fellow American citizens..

vote this administration out people

 

[Uncensored2008]

You know Barb, your post embodies all the thoughts and ideas of the left.

 

[saveliberty]

...and what of government employees having better pensions and pay in comparision to private jobs at same level? Now there's a group who certainly didn't get there on their own.

 

[Buford]

Have they put Barky back on the teleprompter yet?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Barb the government needs to stop ALL business loans.

Barb believes that the government needs to stop ALL business.

 

[saveliberty]

Unwavering support for small business from Obama: Nil, is not a good support level.

 

[Barb]

Is he repaying the loans? Is there interest on them? Did the government help him earn the credit rating that qualified him for the loans? Is the government sending someone to his business every day to help with the work and earn the money to pay back those loans, with interest?

So basically, your arguments are still crap. Only a dimwit like you would think there's a "Gotcha!" moment in pointing out that the government exists and is the backdrop of everyone's life, as though anyone has argued that.

The government does not deserve gratitude for existing and functioning, and it sure as shit doesn't deserve credit for the success of the people who build on the basic playing field we're all given simply because it's part of that field . . . and CERTAINLY not when they're getting all their money back, PLUS a hefty fee for its temporary use.

Don't even TRY to tell me Mr. Gilchrist "owes" the government even more for the success HE put the blood, sweat, and tears into on top of his taxes, his contributions to the community, his loan payments, AND his fucking interest!

This is the left's classic "straw man" argument, arguing against positions that conservatives don't even take. Check this out... The Ultimate Takedown:

Excerpt:

When Obama implied at the Roanoke, Virginia rally that some businessmen refuse to pay for public works from which they benefit, he presented a thesis which, like a three-legged stool, relies on three assumptions that must all be true for the argument to remain standing:

1. That the public programs he mentioned in his speech constitute a significant portion of the federal budget;
2. That business owners don’t already pay far more than their fair share of these expenses; and
3. That these specific public benefits are a federal issue, rather than a local issue.

If any of these legs fails, then the whole argument collapses.

For good measure, we won’t just kick out one, we’ll kick out all three.

“Small Government” Is Not the Same as “No Government”

Progressives critique the fiscal conservative/Tea Party/libertarian position by purposely misrepresenting it as anarchy. When fiscal conservatives say “We want smaller government,” progressives reply, “Oh, so you want no government?”

(cont...)
Zombie » The Ultimate Takedown of Obama’s ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Speech

Do read the entire article though. It really does leave them with 'no leg to stand on'. (pun intended )
The idea that we're all some sort of anarchists is their invention. The conservative position is NOT that there should be "no government", it's that our federal government should be smaller and limited to functions enumerated by the U.S. Constitution.

Furthermore, as we read down Zombie's piece, we find that the federal dollars provided that would "go to projects and programs that benefit the general public and entrepreneurs", only amount to less than a quarter of what is spent.. and that's a more than generous accounting.

Our leftist friends have NO ARGUMENT. Their candidate has let the socialist cat out of the bag at a crucial moment in the campaign and there's just no way to spin it.
Of course, that leaves them testy and vitriolic, but their only alternative would be to re-think their entire ideology.

As I posted yesterday, you can't macromanage a society without micromanaging lives. And we can't have both a negative (what the government can't do TO you) Bill of Rights and a positive (what the government must do FOR you) Second Bill of Rights. They cancel each other out.

Something rarely heard of in the talk of onerous tax burdens and the need to trim government largess in order to relieve us of big government is the host of government expenditures included within the welfare state that benefit the wealthy and corporations to a greater degree than they do ordinary citizens. A few examples are an educated workforce funded or subsidized by taxes, research and development for drugs pharmaceutical giants have patented and sold back to the public, and the medical and ecological agencies that cure, alleviate, or clean up after corporate damage, malfeasance, and waste.

Honorable mention must also go to the courts that regulate and litigate business transactions, the US military, which is used to control and “stabilize” (or destabilize, they don't care which) the world for global trade, and the police who protect the uppity crust from the ever more disenfranchised, disenchanted, and disgruntled rabble down here at the bottom

Hartman, Thom, Screwed: the undeclared war against the middle class-and what we can do about it, 1st Ed., Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, US 2006, 2007, 67-69

 

[Uncensored2008]

Unwavering support for small business from Obama: Nil, is not a good support level.

If Obama simply offered no support, that would be okay. But Obama has declared war on small business, determined to take what he wants from them with both of his greedy paws. Typical democrat, looting the fruits of the labor of another.

 

[Barb]

Unwavering support for small business from Obama: Nil, is not a good support level.

If Obama simply offered no support, that would be okay. But Obama has declared war on small business, determined to take what he wants from them with both of his greedy paws. Typical democrat, looting the fruits of the labor of another.

 

[Full-Auto]

Unwavering support for small business from Obama: Nil, is not a good support level.

If Obama simply offered no support, that would be okay. But Obama has declared war on small business, determined to take what he wants from them with both of his greedy paws. Typical democrat, looting the fruits of the labor of another.

As if we were not aware your offers were just another scam at picking winners and losers as those offers did not include all small businesses.

Fail..........

 

[Jarhead]

Unwavering support for small business from Obama: Nil, is not a good support level.

If Obama simply offered no support, that would be okay. But Obama has declared war on small business, determined to take what he wants from them with both of his greedy paws. Typical democrat, looting the fruits of the labor of another.

well....seems Barb is another person who falls for the games they play in Washington.

YUou do realize, Barb, that the folks in Washington count on the gullible to suppoort their little games..

Just as you did when you posted that cute little picture.

Start paying attentrion. They are makingh you look naive.

Fyi...if a bill sasys..."all people who make 100K or less will get a check in the mail for 20K...and in return we will give a 10% tax refund to small bsuinesses....the GOP will filliubuster or vote against it.

Not becuase they are against a tax break....but becuase they are against giving out free money to select people.

 

[Barb]

If Obama simply offered no support, that would be okay. But Obama has declared war on small business, determined to take what he wants from them with both of his greedy paws. Typical democrat, looting the fruits of the labor of another.

well....seems Barb is another person who falls for the games they play in Washington.

YUou do realize, Barb, that the folks in Washington count on the gullible to suppoort their little games..

Just as you did when you posted that cute little picture.

Start paying attentrion. They are makingh you look naive.

Fyi...if a bill sasys..."all people who make 100K or less will get a check in the mail for 20K...and in return we will give a 10% tax refund to small bsuinesses....the GOP will filliubuster or vote against it.

Not becuase they are against a tax break....but becuase they are against giving out free money to select people.

fyi, that's NOT what the bill said.

 

[Katzndogz]

They just want to be left alone to practice thier liberty as they see fit without government intrusion.

Obama prefers intrusion. That simple.

It's more fundamental than that. The left views people as a resource, no different than a bag of grain or a computer. All resources rightfully belong to the government, which includes all people. The government is to manage resources and distribute them as needed. Thus a small business owner is property of the government, who allows their success as long as it is viewed as beneficial to the collective as a whole. Obama did nothing unusual in the eyes of the left, he merely stated their basic belief, that small business, as all business, succeeds because government decided that it should. Everything the business owner has, including his life, is property of the state to be used as the state sees fit. Obama simple said what the left believes.

Then obama is merely reflecting what is the popular belief in the United Nations.