He's a 3rd generation communist, weaned on Marx and Lenin.
Posted on 07/18/2012 4:54:20 AM PDT by Mikey_1962
Perhaps the rain made the teleprompter unreadable. That's one thought I had on pondering Barack Obama's comments to a rain-soaked rally in Roanoke, Va., last Friday.
Perhaps he didn't really mean what he said. Or perhaps -- as is often the case with people when unanchored from a prepared text -- he revealed what he really thinks.
"There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back," he began, defending his policy of higher tax rates on high earners. "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.
"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."
In other words, Steve Jobs didn't make Apple happen. It was the work of a teacher union member -- er, great teacher -- and the government agencies that paved I-280 and El Camino Real that made Apple happen.
High earners don't deserve the money they make, Obama apparently thinks. It's the gift of government, and they shouldn't begrudge handing more of it back to government.
And that's true, as he told Charlie Gibson of ABC News in 2008, even if those higher tax rates produce less revenue for the government, as has been the case with rate increases on capital gains. The government should take away the money as a matter of "fairness."
The cynical might dismiss Obama's preoccupation with higher tax rates as an instance of a candidate dwelling on one of his few proposals that tests well in the polls. Certainly, he doesn't want to talk much about Obamacare or the stimulus package.
Cynics might note that he spurned supercommittee Republicans' willingness last year to reduce tax deductions so as to actually increase revenue from high earners, without discouraging investment or encouraging tax avoidance as higher tax rates do.
But maybe Obama's Captain-Ahab-like pursuit of higher tax rates just comes from a sense that no one earns success and that there's no connection between effort and reward.
That kind of thinking also helps to explain the approach taken by Sen. Patty Murray in a speech at the Brookings Institution on Monday. She wants a tax rate increase on high earners so badly she said she'd prefer raising everyone's taxes next year to maintaining current rates.
Murray was first elected in 1992 as a state legislator, who had been dismissed by a lobbyist as "just a mom in tennis shoes." But in 20 years she's become an accomplished appropriator and earmarker.
"Do no harm," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told members of Congress at a hearing yesterday, urging them to avoid the sharp spending cuts and tax rate increases scheduled for year's end.
But Murray is threatening to do exactly that kind of harm. Those prattling about how irresponsible Republicans are might want to ponder her threat.
And to consider that Republicans remember what happened to the last Republican who agreed to such rate increases, George H.W. Bush in 1990. Seeking re-election in 1992, he won only 37 percent of the vote. Republicans won't risk that again.
The Obama Democrats seem to believe there's no downside risk in threatening huge tax increases for everyone and in asserting that if you're successful "someone else made that happen."
But the Wall Street Journal's Colleen McCain Nelson reported yesterday how affluent Denver suburbanites have soured on Obama. Obama tied John McCain 49 to 49 percent among voters with more than $100,000 income in 2008, but in NBC/WSJ polls this year, they've favored Mitt Romney 50 to 44 percent.
Affluent voters trended Democratic over two decades on cultural issues. But economic issues dominate this year, and they may not appreciate Obama's assertion that they don't deserve what they've earned.
He's a 3rd generation communist, weaned on Marx and Lenin.
Obama believes success is a gift from government.
In his case he is correct.
For some...Government is the ‘Gift’ that keeps on Giving
For others....Government is the ‘Gift’ that keeps on Taking
“If you are broke, you didn’t do it. Somebody else made it happen. Me. And the Democrat party.” Good excuse, huh?
Dear Mr. Obama: Please complete this syllogism:
The government built the roads that allowed workers to drive to Apple headquarters.
The government built the roads that allowed workers to drive to Solyndra headquarters.
Therefore, ___________________________________________.
I believe it is because he does not have any belief in the Devine.
That’s the “joy” of fascism.
If you’re Government, you get to take credit for success, and blame the private business owner for any hardships.
Obama says you got help from the grace of God and the intercession of saints.
Oh, that’s right, if he said that he’d have been vilified.
Never mind.
I'd love to hear Obama's definition of the American system. I'm sure it would make my toenails curl.
Well, of course that is what Obama believes, why shouldn't he? For that has been his only experience his entire life. HE never had to actually earn anything. He had handlers and facilitators and affirmation action who set it all up for him and paid for it.... all the way to the white house. He just had to be a "good boy" and believe in uncle Frank, shake the right hands (ie: Ayers) and give them the nod of approval, pose eloquently and read from the teleprompter what the handlers wrote for him.... and all that he dreamed of appeared.
If roads and teachers made businesses successful, why doesn’t everyone own a business? Infrastructure is available to all.
That's why in kindergarten you got a gold star on your paper, if you did well.
Reinforcing effort and industry are BASIC to everything in the education of children and that lesson carries over into adulthood.
For so long, Liberals have been trying to diminish and demonize the concept of personal achievement, so ‘success’ both as a habit and an ultimate goal have become anathema.
Rewarding indolence and failure will NOT cultivate good citizens or productive members of society!! THAT is so obvious that I wonder anyone needs to be reminded of it!
For what it is worth: I remember in grade school, some ‘boys’ beat up my brother outside the school on the way home, because he won a gold star on his paper.
There is you ‘anti-success’ mentality!
“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. The gift the government has given to each of us is the opportunity to succeed. Predominantly through the sacrifices of hundreds of thousands of men and women who’ve gone before us.
Mister President PLEASE stay off the ‘prompter. It is revealing the “true you”. Don’t let Axelrod and Gibbs load up TOTUS with their propaganda. Stay on your Marxist, central management, totalitarian regime message....PLEASE!
Those are rights that come from God, not gifts from the government. The government has no right to interfere with any of them.
He should -- Andy was a great character actor.
Or perchance, just an old fashion f’en moron.
If Stalin, Mussolini had the internet and MSM in their day they would have said the same thing.
This is history being made, this is socialism being raised in a fertile country like America.
Does anyone really wonder why its been kicked out of the Soviet Union?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.