GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/09/05/is-barack-obama-a-democratic-richard-nixon/trackback/

  1. Obama is Nixon with his brains knocked out.

    Comment by Cece — September 5, 2012 @ 12:31 pm - September 5, 2012

  2. This is a subtlety that most liberals can not comprehend. After all, they can’t distinguish the difference between intentions and deeds. In my family, “I meant to do that” is equivalent to “I did that”. I am glad that I have 4 non-voting liberal siblings. They all do hate Romney though.

    Comment by TnnsNE1 — September 5, 2012 @ 1:04 pm - September 5, 2012

  3. This no different than other Obama denials, like the one walker just posted in another thread. The situation there was:

    1) Obama was ripping on independent business people in a speech, and capped it by saying “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” As proven by the White House’s own transcript of the event.

    2) But then Obama found that He needed to deny it, so He said ““Those ads [criticizing His words] are taking my words about small business out of context… Of course Americans build their own businesses… And what I said was that we need to stand behind them…”

    The pattern is, Obama denying something by stating the opposite of the truth and implying His critics are terrible people, for having believed/repeated the truth.

    The Dear Reader seems practiced at it, like it’s a technique that He has gotten away with, His whole life. He certainly has enough followers who will swallow it all.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 5, 2012 @ 1:43 pm - September 5, 2012

  4. Reminds me of how Hillary didn’t care so much about Bill cheating on her as she claimed to care about him lying about it.

    Comment by V the K — September 5, 2012 @ 1:43 pm - September 5, 2012

  5. Actually, the White House’s transcript uses an em dash, which is often used in transcription to indicate a interruption in thought or a mid-sentence change of course.

    http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/GuideTranscribing.pdf
    http://cms.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/docs/otherpublications/guide_to_transcribing_and_summarizing_oral_histories.pdf
    http://www.sandhills.edu/academic-departments/english/punctuationguide.html

    You’d have a much stronger case if the official transcription used a comma rather than an em dash.

    Comment by walker — September 5, 2012 @ 5:47 pm - September 5, 2012

  6. My default position is to believe that when a politician makes a “gaffe” by expressing an opinion that is entirely consistent with his policies and governing philosophy, I am going to believe he meant what he said initially; not what he backtracked and claimed to have meant after the remark becomes a political liability.

    Then again, I have common sense and know how to capitalize.

    Comment by V the K — September 5, 2012 @ 6:17 pm - September 5, 2012

  7. Actually, the White House’s transcript uses an em dash

    walker, the White House transcript speaks for itself:

    There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

    If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

    What part of English don’t you understand? Are you a non-native speaker?

    Wanna talk about context? Then look at how the White House, in its transcription, uses a dash to indicate a *continuation* of thought. “They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own” uses it as a continuation. “They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own” uses it as a continuation. And look at how the larger context is Obama putting down business people who have the temerity to believe that they are indeed successful because of their smarts and hard work.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 5, 2012 @ 6:20 pm - September 5, 2012

  8. Sorry, the second example was supposed to be, that “Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there” — uses it as continuation.

    You’d have a stronger case, walker, if you weren’t busy fighting Obama’s actual words.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 5, 2012 @ 6:21 pm - September 5, 2012

  9. Show me who your policies empower — bureaucrats or entrepreneurs — and I’ll show you what you really believe in — Government or free enterprise.

    Comment by V the K — September 5, 2012 @ 6:23 pm - September 5, 2012

  10. And grammar. If Obama had meant the “roads and bridges” of the preceding sentence, then He would have said “You didn’t build them” (colloquially), or “You didn’t build those” (grammatically).

    And emotional context. Listen to the audio, Obama’s meaning is even clearer there, than reading the transcript.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 5, 2012 @ 6:24 pm - September 5, 2012

  11. And “There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back” — uses dash as a continuation.

    Three times in a row, the White House transcribers use it for continuation. Then, all of the sudden, on the fourth time, they clearly used it to indicate a radical break in Obama’s thought? One radical enough to completely negate the plain meaning of the transcribed English sentences, “f you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”?

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 5, 2012 @ 6:30 pm - September 5, 2012

  12. Yep, the transcript uses the em dash in multiple ways, just as it uses commas in multiple ways, and (if you look at the whole transcript) just as it uses apostrophes in multiple ways.

    What’s troubling is your insistence that there’s only one way intellectually honest people can interpret the quote. If I listen to the speech, I can hear his phrasing and intonation, and it’s clear to me that your interpretation is wrong, but I can allow that there’s some ambiguity, at least when written down rather than listened to.

    If I look at the transcript, and read the very next paragraph (the one you usually leave out): “The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together,” then it’s clear that your interpretation is wrong — Obama clearly does credit the work of the individual. I see less ambiguity there, but…I can still see why that em dash troubles you (more so if you’re reading rather than listening).

    But it looks like you’re not willing to admit any ambiguity at all, and worse, you’re not willing to grant any intellectual integrity to the many people who listen to the quote in good faith and disagree with you in good faith. And on that count, you’re simply wrong.

    Comment by walker — September 5, 2012 @ 6:40 pm - September 5, 2012

  13. Obviously, “that” can refer to a group of things: specifically, the group of things that the business owner didn’t build.

    Comment by walker — September 5, 2012 @ 6:42 pm - September 5, 2012

  14. I can with my friends on Thanksgiving Day, watching my guests stuff themselves with turkey, stuffing, mashed potatoes, and gravy, and think with satisfaction, “I made that.”

    Comment by walker — September 5, 2012 @ 6:50 pm - September 5, 2012

  15. Make that “I can sit with my friends on Thanksgiving Day…”

    Comment by walker — September 5, 2012 @ 6:51 pm - September 5, 2012

  16. It’s irrelevant whether the SCOAMF was referring to the business in question or to “roads and bridges” because either way the point is the same: Collective Government is more important than individual entrepreneurship.

    Obama’s policies have vastly expanded the scope, size, and power of Government. These same policies (ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, EPA Regulations) have shackled private enterprise and made it harder for businesses to compete, innovate, and create jobs. It’s very clear what the president values and supports, and it isn’t free enterprise.

    Comment by V the K — September 5, 2012 @ 6:57 pm - September 5, 2012

  17. “depends on what the definition of IS….is.”

    Please, please keep playing wordsmith with those Democratic QUOTES, and broadcast every MEDIA kneeler in the party to “think” they can interpret WHAT the D-onkey speaking actually meant.

    If they have to send in the mind readers, perhaps they call Miss Cleo and her crystal ball to decipher what is in the MIND of one of the Lefts BEST ORATORS EVAH!

    His NLP style speaking makes me want to throw up. BLAH BLAH BLAH…..blah blah. (PAUSE……..) BlahBLAHBLAH….BLAH. (sycophant applause) LET ME BE CLEAR…(as mud).

    People are tired. They feel even more tired when they have nothing left to live on after they feel the huge SUCKING sound of Government…..wooooosh.

    Moderates, blue dogs and independents that lean right are JUMPING off the D-ship in droves and with a chance of rain at 20% the ONE moves to a place that is 1/3 the size. “its more intimate”…ummm yeah.

    It is SOOOOO BAD this year, not a single LOCAL campaign sign for any Democrat running, mentions the party at all. Why hide that affilation? They can’t chew off their D-arm fast enough.

    Comment by 5 * Mom — September 5, 2012 @ 8:37 pm - September 5, 2012

  18. 5* Mom, the Democrats said one man was crazy for talking to an empty chair. What does that make a guy who talks to 50,000 empty chairs?

    Comment by V the K — September 5, 2012 @ 9:16 pm - September 5, 2012

  19. Obviously, “that” can refer to a group of things

    … but didn’t.

    Really, walker, your rationalization are pathetic. How can you stand the mental contortions? Wouldn’t it be easier to just say, Obama misspoke?

    More to the point: Wouldn’t it be easier, and more honest and honorable, if Obama said that He misspoke? Rather than blaming people for hearing and understanding THE WORDS HE ACTUALLY SAID? Hint: yes…

    read the very next paragraph (the one you usually leave out): “The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together,” then it’s clear that your interpretation is wrong

    Sorry, I thought it was too obvious to have to explain. Obviously, walker, one must explain it to you.

    The paragraph that you want to bring up makes the context, which was already bad, even worse! Not better: WORSE. Here is the full thought (which, for some reason I can’t imagine, you chose to quote selectively or out of context, as they say):

    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. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

    So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together. (Applause.)

    Obama is packaging several horribly false, wrong, and anti-business and anti-individual premises into one package:

    1) That any “we” activity, necessarily means government. Government is the fount of all good things that people do together. There is no “we”, without government. That which might have been individuals or communities helping one another without government, in Obama’s earlier paragraphs, is now to be made synonymous with FEDERAL PROGRAMS.

    2) That government (euphemized as “we”) literally “created the middle class”!

    Sorry walker, government did not create the middle class. Private citizens did, acting for their own good (or their families’). Government “aid” programs were minimal to non-existent, in most of the historical period when the American middle class was created.

    And NONE the additional paragraphs contradict Obama’s earlier thought, “If you’ve got a business – You didn’t build that.” On the contrary, they REINFORCE it. Obama is saying that government literally created the middle class. Obama is saying that any “we” which does good things, should be synonymized with government. Obama is saying that that government “we” did all these great things that built people’s businesses – in other words, walker, “If you’ve got a business — You didn’t build that.”

    The added paragraphs make it worse! Not better!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 6, 2012 @ 12:38 am - September 6, 2012

  20. ILC, you’re going to see what you need to see to make Obama be what you need him to be. No amount of reason is going to change whatever it is that’s driving you there.

    Comment by walker — September 6, 2012 @ 1:01 am - September 6, 2012

  21. Afterthought for the other folks – This all gets back to what Rush Limbaugh is always saying: that Democrats can’t win elections, by speaking honestly or being honestly themselves.

    Who they are, is: worshippers of Big Government. Big Government occupies the place in their psyches and moral feelings that God occupies, for religious people. Who they are, is: collectivists. If they aren’t socialist (people who advocate government literally taking over of the means of production), then, sadly, they are fascist (people who advocate a government-planned economy, with ‘fig leaves’ preserved of what used to be private property or private enterprise, before government planning took over). Obama is some mixture, I’m not sure what exactly, but it does not make a great difference, since socialist and fascist economics have influenced each other and are both collectivist.

    But the first point is that the worship and adoration of Big Government goes against what the American Revolution once fought for, and what once operated to turn America into the greatest fount of progress in human history. Which was: Small (or tightly limited) government… GENUINELY free enterprise… having people compete on merit, not on their ‘pull’ with the regulators and other central planners… etc.

    Thus, the adoration of Big Government runs against the American grain. It rarely wins national elections (1936 is probably closest to an inarguable example of when it did). And since it usually doesn’t, the Democrats usually won’t espouse it openly. And so, when they do – i.e., every time they drop the mask – they just made a terrible political mistake. And they must cover up the mistake, by attempting to confuse, distract and/or attack others.

    And the present cases are in point. Obama said “If you’ve got a business – You didn’t build that.” His context is clear, from the paragraphs before and after. In the paragraph before, His tone is disdainful toward business people who would dare think they did “build that”. In the paragraphs after, He praises government as the fount of good things that people (“we”) do together, making an almost psychotically inaccurate claim that a Big Government, much like what He envisions, had historically “created the middle class.”

    So, the mask was dropped. People saw. What does Obama do next? Does He say “Oh my God, I’m sorry I got a little crazy there”? Or even “Oh my God, it didn’t come out right, I’m sorry I misspoke”? No. He, and his lockstep-marching supporters say, in effect, “We never said that!!1! Don’t believe your lying eyes! You quote us out of context! It’s YOUR fault for thinking our plain words meant that! You’re to blame, you liar!”

    So: as Limbaugh says, Democrats can’t afford to represent themselves honestly to the People. When they do – if they drop the mask a bit, by mistake – they must try to confuse, distract and/or attack anyone who may have noticed. In a nest of illogic which is indeed worthy of Harry Mudd (which V cited in another thread), being dishonest has become their manner of being honest. If they were to admit an honest mistake (or try to), they would be contradicting or hiding their real agenda – and so going against who they are; being dishonest, in a different way.

    Or as David Gelertner and Dan suggest: Barack Obama is, morally and practically, a Democrat Richard Nixon.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 6, 2012 @ 1:46 am - September 6, 2012

  22. ILC, you’re going to see what you need to see

    Your way of admitting you “have nothing”. Thank you.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 6, 2012 @ 1:48 am - September 6, 2012

  23. V the K, my dad is 72 and a lifelong DFLer and a big fan of Clint Eastwood. He didn’t see Clint because he was sleeping to get ready for his nightshift job so I played it on the computer for him yesterday.

    Today he took his empty chair off the back deck and put it out front on the grass beside a federal highway that they live on. He does not support taxpayer funded abortion, did NOT like that they even toyed with removing GOD, or messed with Israel in the party platform. Oh and women like Fluke should get a job and control her own crotchcare or find a man willing to keep up his own pubic playground.

    He’s DONE with the Democrats. He thinks they went full tilt stupid on issues that aren’t as important as getting the nation back on it’s feet again. Those distractions will not gain them much support for a second term for the One.

    Comment by 5 * Mom — September 6, 2012 @ 2:01 am - September 6, 2012

  24. Obama supporters want to ban corporate profits outright – they hate business that much: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/05/peter-schiff-to-democrats-at-convention-would-you-support-banning-profits/

    These are the people who knew exactly what Obama was talking about, when He said “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” – and roared out their approval, on the audio.

    But hey, don’t you DARE claim Obama said it! Even though it’s right in the White House transcript, no need to fool with ellipses or any other tricks (like some people do), and surrounded by entire paragraphs of reinforcing context in the form of pro-Big Government, anti-individual propaganda. /sarc

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 6, 2012 @ 3:20 am - September 6, 2012

  25. Update – As of yesterday, Obama is caving a little bit: http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/09/obama-regrets-youdidntbuildthat-syntax-134603.html

    President Obama walked back his infamous “you didn’t build that” line in an interview that aired Wednesday with NBC 12 in Richmond, Va. “Obviously, I have regrets for my syntax,” Obama replied.

    But homer/walker still doesn’t, LOL!

    To continue:

    “Obviously, I have regrets for my syntax,” Obama replied. “But not for the point, because everyone who was there watching knows exactly what I was saying.”

    Yes, Dear Leader – WE KNOW. And so did your audience, who called out “Yes!” at the exact moment you said, smoothly and with NO change or break in thought, “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

    But there’s more!

    Obama also said without hesitation that Americans were better off than four years ago.

    “We are absolutely better off than we were when I was sworn in and we were losing 800,000 jobs in a month,” Obama said.

    Last weekend, two Obama surrogates hesitated to say that the country was better off after four years of Obama. The campaign later walked those remarks back.

    ROFL :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 6, 2012 @ 10:26 am - September 6, 2012

  26. Whenever Democrats are challenged about Obama’s record, they point to that one month of heavy job losses and pretend that was the entire Bush Record.

    I have also noticed that it keeps growing. At first they would say, “600,000 jobs lost in one month.” Then it became, “700,000 jobs lost in one month.” Now, the JEF is saying “800,000.” By October, they’ll be claiming that the economy was dropping 10,000,000 jobs a month and people were eating rats.

    Comment by V the K — September 6, 2012 @ 2:13 pm - September 6, 2012

  27. Just to update you V the K, as of last night’s Clinton speech, it was modified to 750,000. We’ll see what number it is tonight.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — September 6, 2012 @ 2:19 pm - September 6, 2012

  28. (cont to V the K) Which would be a more accurate number if you go by the last three months Bush was in office and take an average. Maybe slightly less, like 733,333, with Clinton rounding up.

    The 800,000 figure would have been accurate for one month, but that was also the month that Obama took office for the last 2/3rds of the month. So, using the term plural term of “months” and the “800,000″ figure would have been grossly inaccurate. “750,000″ for one month would be fact. “700,000″ for one month would be fact. One could also round up a singular month to “600,000″ and another singular month to “500,000.”

    Comment by Cinesnatch — September 6, 2012 @ 2:26 pm - September 6, 2012

  29. Sorry, last “1/3rd.” Having to teach simple math to “susan” today has gotten me mixed up.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — September 6, 2012 @ 2:27 pm - September 6, 2012

  30. But, yeah, with “1/3,” I did round down. It would be more like, the last “2/5th’s” of January “belonged” to Obama.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — September 6, 2012 @ 2:30 pm - September 6, 2012

  31. (cont V the K) So, more accurately, if one is going to make a claim about job loss in the last “months” of the Bush presidency, a more precise figure would be “710,000,” or “700,000″ if you’re going to round down. But, the Dem’s are obviously not going to round down in this instance.

    Clinton asked, “Are we better off than we were when he took office, with an economy in free fall, losing 750,000 jobs a month?” That figure is off. A more accurate number would have been 700,000, if we’re talking about months in succession, and short-term at that.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — September 6, 2012 @ 2:38 pm - September 6, 2012

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.304 Powered by Wordpress