Skip to comments.Paul Ryan rips Obama’s comment that ‘if you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that.'
Posted on 07/17/2012 10:27:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
It was Rep. Paul Ryan's wife, Janna, who first saw --- via Twitter --- President Obama’s recent comments about American entrepreneurs, that "if youve got a business you didnt build that. Somebody else made that happen."
And the Wisconsin Republican --- thought to be on Mitt Romney's running-mate short list --- couldn't believe it. He thought someone must have been putting words in the presidents mouth.
But Obama said it all. And Ryan absolutely tore into the president in a chat I had with him earlier today. Among the highlights:
- "The idea that these entrepreneurs owe all their success to some government bureaucrat or some centralized planner just defies reality."
- "Every now and then, President Obama pierces the veil. Hes usually pretty coy about his ideology, but he lets the veil slip from time to time."
– “We believe in free communities and this is a statist attack on free communities.”
– “Hes deluded himself into thinking that his so-called enemies are these crazy individualists who believe in some dog-eat-dog society when what he’s really doing is basically attacking people like entrepreneurs and stacking up a list of scapegoats to blame for his failures.”
– “As all of his big government spending programs fail to restore jobs and growth, he seems to be retreating into a statist vision of government direction and control of a free society that looks backward to the failed ideologies of the 20th century.”
– “Those of us who are conservative believe in government, we just believe government has limits. We want government to do what it does well and respect its limits so civil society and families can flourish on their own and do well and achieve their potential.”
– “He wants to be as transformational as Reagan by undoing the entire Reagan revolution.”
Now here are some longer excerpts:
Every now and then, he pierces the veil. Hes usually pretty coy about his ideology, but he lets the veil slip from time to time. His straw man argument is this ridiculous caricature where he’s trying to say if you want any security in life, you stick with me. If you go with these Republicans, they’re going to feed you to the wolves because they believe in some Hobbesian state of nature, and its one or the other which is complete bunk, absolutely ridiculous. But it seems to be the only way he thinks he can make his case. Hes deluded himself into thinking that his so-called enemies are these crazy individualists who believe in some dog-eat-dog society when what he’s really doing is basically attacking people like entrepreneurs and stacking up a list of scapegoats to blame for his failures.
His comments seem to derive from a naive vision of a government-centered society and a government-directed economy. It stems from an idea that the nucleus of society and the economy is government not the people. It is antithetical to the American idea. We believe in free communities, and this is a statist attack on free communities. As all of his big government spending programs fail to restore jobs and growth, he seems to be retreating into a statist vision of government direction and control of a free society that looks backward to the failed ideologies of the 20th century.
This is not a Bill Clinton Democrat. Hes got this very government-centric, old 20th century collectivist philosophy which negates the American experiment which is people living in communities, supporting one another, having government stick to its limits so it can do its job really well … Those of us who are conservative believe in government, we just believe government has limits. We want government to do what it does well and respect its limits so civil society and families can flourish on their own and do well and achieve their potential.
How does building roads and bridge justify Obamacare? If you like the GI Bill therefore we must go along with socialized medicine. Its a strange leap that he takes. … To me it’s the laziest form of a debate to affix views to your opponent that they do not have so you can demonize them and defeat them and win the debate by default
I think he believes America was on the right path until Reagan came along, and Reagan got us going in the wrong direction. And and he wants to be as transformational as Reagan by undoing the entire Reagan revolution. … I think he sees himself as bringing about this wave of progressivism, and the only thing stopping him are these meddling conservatives who believe in these founding principles so he has to caricature them in the ugliest light possible to win the argument.
I could be less happy about a VP pick. Ryan I would like actually.
The full quote, and it’s context, say something quite different. I hope the Pubbies aren’t hanging their hopes on clipping portions of quotes out of context.
What is it we’re missing, Wolfie? How is what Obama said different that what Eliz Warren said in all her glory?
I think it was wasserman-schultz that made it an issue that taxes built the roads, regulated the industry, controlled commerce etc. and we were supposed to be grateful for that.
The leftists are always bragging about the &%(# roads (at city, state, fed levels). You should see what the leftist-controlled People’s Republic of Tucson looks like. ALL but the newest streets are cracked and full of potholes. You practically need a tank to drive here, and that’s not even during monsoon season.
So typical of them.
Actually, the Party of Bush has done its own share of damage to the Reagan revolution.
The statement is entirely consistent with the Obama/DNC collectivist belief system. This is their justification for property seizing policies, namely: Since you did not earn it you have no right to keep it.
Sadly there a lot of American who agree with this - at least in theory and as far as the rich go. What they don't understand is that in practice collectivism eventually extends down to the guy who owns an old trailer on a 1/4 acre of wasteland.
Paul Ryan is doing exactly what needs to be done in this campaign. Romney could definitely be tougher than he has so far (never ask for an apology, just refute the lie) but he can’t wallow in the mud with Obama and retain a presidential persona. However, guys like Ryan can. He called out Obama in very specific ways that will resonate with those who care to listen. One hopes this kind of deconstructing of Obama’s inane comments will be strong enough to garner media attention but more likely, they’ll try to bury it. We’ll see.
-One inside joke I have with my wife is that you can tell every city run by dims: The gas prices are too high, the streets are all torn up and there is an over representation of illegal aliens.
RE: I think it was wasserman-schultz that made it an issue that taxes built the roads, regulated the industry, controlled commerce etc. and we were supposed to be grateful for that.
Actually it is the fake Native Indian American, Elizabeth Warren, who wants to be the next Senator of MA, who first brought it up. Obama is just channeling her:
Usually when he wanders away from his teleprompter ...
Paul Ryan for VP...and eventually the President. His intellect is much admired....and his looks please me as well!
I’ve had a crush on him for awhile now.
Imagine a debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden.
Let’s dump Romney and get Ryan.
Look at Detroit, or my home, the Peoples Republic of Cleveland. Look at any Dem-run major city.
The infrastructure is crumbling around them after decades of neglect. Coincidentally, the decades Demoncrats controlled the cities.
I wish Ryan had run for President. It would have made life as a conservative so much easier.
There is no context here, it is pure Marxist anti-American philappghy. The business owner is not smart, the business owner does not work hard. He is lucky, and he does it on the backs of others.
That’s the context.
There is no context here, it is pure Marxist anti-American philosophy. The business owner is not smart, the business owner does not work hard. He is lucky, and he does it on the backs of others.
That’s the context.
Good idea !
Ahhh thanks for the information. I knew it wasn’t something the chosen one could think up on his own.
That’s exactly how one of my crazy-liberal relatives thinks. She said, “Anyone who owns a business, just profits off the labor of others.” Of course, she has a virtuous job, working for an Alaska HIV Health consortium and begging for Federal Grants/$$$$.
Words fail me....
When has a liberal ever NOT done that when debating a conservative? They jump to personal attacks and mischaracterizations within the first 90 seconds of any discussion. This is standard procedure for them.
Yet it always works so well for Democrats...
Don’t get as hung up on his statements as on what he’s trying to justify by them.
He’s trying to justify rapacious tax rates on “the rich”.
He hates small businesses because they are too independent.
Guess I don’t have to pay my federal quarterlies then, if it’s not my business - you know, the one I didn’t build.
These people are so stupid there’s not even any way of arguing with them. Paying a wage is “profiting off the labors of others”?
Obama has made us into Europeans: all good comes from the government, and the only good employment is government employment.
I think ObamaStalin sums it up quite nicely.
If you are a success, it’s because you had a great teacher inspire you!.....And a host of lousy ones to overcome.
Usually when someone claims something is “out of context” and then doesn't provide the actual context - it is because it WAS in context.
I am looking for his full remarks now......
“Weve already made a trillion dollars worth of cuts. We can make some more cuts in programs that dont work, and make government work more efficiently We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didnt -look, if youve been successful, you didnt get there on your own. You didnt get there on your own. Im 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 youve got a business. you didnt build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didnt get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
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 dont 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. Thats how we funded the GI Bill. Thats how we created the middle class. Thats how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. Thats how we invented the Internet. Thats how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and thats the reason Im running for president because I still believe in that idea. Youre not on your own, were in this together. 0bama
Here it is in context:
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me because they want to give something back. They know they didnt look, if youve been successful, you didnt get there on your own. You didnt get there on your own. Im 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.So, what point does the full quote make that the sound bite doesn't? In what way is the GOP being deceptive in using the sound bite?
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 youve got a business you didnt build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didnt get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
In the context, Obama trots out a few obvious but irrelevant facts: great teachers are good, roads and bridges are useful, the internet is fertile ground for innovation (almost all of it private). He gives lip service to that "unbelievable American system", even as he works to destroy it! Obama's facts do not support his sound-bite conclusion. Somebody had actually to learn and apply the lesson the great teacher was teaching. Someone had to have the insight to see new ways of combining the work of others and the energy and courage to make it happen.
There are indeed
a whole bunch of hardworking people out there, but working hard is not enough. You've got to work smart! Working hard but stupid is to waste yourself. The economy doesn't benefit from your wasting your human resource. Therefore, the system should not reward you for working stupid. If we are too grow the economy, we've got to make sure working smart is well rewarded and that people working stupid are given the opportunity to work smart and are motivated to take it.
Steve Jobs created the iPhone. Sure, he had a lot of help, and a lot of his helpers made lots of money, too. And, they, not the government, not the stinking sheeple who want something from the government, are the ones who deserve the credit! And we, the lazy consumers, get the benefit of using amazing electronic tools we didn't know we needed. And we, in millions of free choices at the point of purchase, not in the voting booth through our scummy elected representatives, were the ones who decided that Steve Jobs, et al, should get rich! And ultimately, it was because Steve Jobs was
just so smart!
Me too. Is it too late to start over? :(
That’s so accurate, lol!! Except it’s too run-down here even for the illegals, so they mostly head to Phoenix or somewhere else. :0)
You know what the kicker is... We pay more in property taxes than most of the country. That money largely goes to educating illegal/ anchor babies and good little “La Raza” students.
Meanwhile, the infrastructure collapses, businesses flee ( don’t get me started on the Dem-imposed regulations here), meth areas grow, the place looks as much of a war zone as parts of the actual border.
IF we were actually getting some “bang for our buck,” it wouldn’t be as bad to pay so much. But, you and I know full-well that it never works that way, especially in the Dem-infested and run areas.
So BO can take his boasting about bridges and highways and shove it.
Wouldn’t it be nice to finally dump grijalva? I thought that was going to happen last time with Ruth McClung. Maybe this time...
I’ve said before that Dems could have advanced their socialism agenda by many times over if they had just been able to keep their corrupt little fingers away from basic infrastructure enough that they didn’t choke it completely as they have.
Most people would give them far more latitude if roads, bridges, sewer, etc were in good repair.
. . . but far above the issue of the wealth gained by his helpers is Steve Jobs point about polling customers about what they want. Approximate quote from memory, I dont ask the public what they want because they dont know what they want until I show it to them.
Of course Steve Jobs was a genius of an entirely different order than the proprietor of an ordinary store or other small business - but the point remains in all cases - the person who founds any business has a vision of prospering by giving people what they want or need, and there is always the possibility of failure due to overestimating the market or underestimating the competition.
The governmentist has a vision of building, too - but in that vision there is no possibility of failure because there is no competition and no bottom line criteria for failure. The government builds a road, yes - but always too late or too soon. Build too late, and prosperity is delayed. Build too early, and you have wasted a lot of money. But it doesnt matter, because in either case it doesnt come out of the pocket of the governmentist. There is no bottom-line discipline.
I hope!!! Smarmy Communist waddling down the steps of Congress...
All so true!
VERY well said, Congressman Ryan!!
LOL Biden would be going into that battle of wits, unarmed!
Every time I’ve seen the quote on the news, they say Obama is saying that someone didn’t build his own business. He was talking about the infrastructure that makes commerce in the USA possible. Two different things, not that anybody will acknowledge that.
That may well be the model he is more familiar with - crony capitalism, Solyndra, etc - but it simply is not the case that American entrepreneurs are DEPENDENT upon government as much as they are dependent upon government doing a few essential services that make freedom and commerce possible and then STAYING OUT OF THEIR WAY.