@ican711nm,
I think that's a fair question. Now, unless I lost count, the answer ran to twenty-eight paragraphs. My own questions is: did any part of the answer address the question? Talk about staying on message.
@roger,
Roger, my own translation of Obama's 28 paragraph answer to the question, "is it a wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care?" is:
It does not matter to me whether or not my decision is a wise decision, since it is only one among many of my decisions that cause more taxes to be added to the taxes of those who pay taxes.
Lest we forget, Obama's thinking is a product of Saul Alinsky's thinking.
Saul Alinsky wrote:The revolutionary’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots, and then see what happens;
...
Radicals should be political relativists and should take an agnostic view of means and ends;
...
@ican711nm,
I've to a confession to make. I don't know Saul Alinsky from Adam's off ox. I don't much care for the tactic of making a vaguely related speech that purports to be an answer.
@roger,
Roger, for a better understanding of Obama's thinking, start with this excerpt:
In BARACK OBAMA'S RULES FOR REVOLUTION, THE ALINSKY MODEL, David Horowitz wrote:
Three of Obama's mentors in Chicago were trained by Saul Alinsky. Obama was hired in 1986 by the Alinsky team to organize residents on the South Side. The proposed solution to every problem on the South Side was distribution of government funds.
According to Alinsky in his two books--which can be ordered from Amazon.com--Reveille for Radicals, and Rules for Radicals :
Radicals should be "political relativists."They should take an agnostic view of means and ends;
The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
The radical is building his own kingdom, a kingdom of heaven on earth;
The revolutionary’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the HAVES and giving it to the HAVENOTS and then see what happens;
We should not forget to acknowledge the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom"Lucifer;
We are not virtuous by not wanting power. We are really cowards for not wanting power, because power is good and powerlessness is evil;
The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and liberals;
The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution."The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is accumulation of power to make the revolution;
The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth"truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing; He is a political relativist;
To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles.
Life is a corrupting process;
He who fears corruption fears life;
The standard of the revolution is democracy--a democracy which upends all social hierarchies, including those based on merit.
Alinsky, built his initial power base among the underclass and the urban poor by calling to make the last ones first and the first ones also last ones.
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:
The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
Radicals are not constructive people, ican.
@ican711nm,
But, I'm not asking about his thinking. I am wondering why he spend so much time responding to the question without attempting to answer it. Actually, I am pretty sure I know why, and am only pointing out the instead of answering, he used the question as a springboard for an only somewhat related speech.
Look here, ican. If you are selling me a house, I might inquire about property drainage. You say "Hey Rog, it's in New Mexico. How often does it rain in New Mexico?". Fine. You said something about rain and New Mexico. If you didn't answer my question, and you didn't, I am going to have to guess at the reason, and you ain't selling me a house. Ever.
ican711nm wrote:
Quote:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/04/02/obamas_remarks_on_jobs_in_charlotte_105031.html
Obama's Remarks on Jobs in Charlotte
By Barack Obama
Celgard, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
12:02 P.M. EDT
...
Q Thank you, Mr. President. We're honored to have you here today. I'm
Doris Ravis (sp) from Lake Wylie, South Carolina. I work at Celgard. We have wonderful CEOs that take care of us and have really helped the company grow.
My question is, though, in the economy times that we have now, is it a wise decision to add more taxes to us with the health care? Because it -- we are over-taxed as it is.
@roger,
I wonder, who is 'us' in her question? Because, I'm afraid I cannot figure out who the answer would be that matches the petitioner's description of being taxed 'too much' already.
Cycloptichorn
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:We have wonderful CEOs that take care of us and have really helped the company grow.
Well, I don't know either. Sounds like 'us, the employees of some particular company'. Still, CEO is pluralized, and I don't know of a company with more than one, and am not sure I want to depend on any one company or its CEO to "take care of us. . . ". Sounds like she prefers a nanny corporation to a nanny state.
Does that explain the circumlocutions used to evade answering?
@roger,
roger wrote:
Quote:We have wonderful CEOs that take care of us and have really helped the company grow.
Well, I don't know either. Sounds like 'us, the employees of some particular company'. Still, CEO is pluralized, and I don't know of a company with more than one, and am not sure I want to depend on any one company or its CEO to "take care of us. . . ". Sounds like she prefers a nanny corporation to a nanny state.
Does that explain the circumlocutions used to evade answering?
No, of course not. Hardly shocking to see a politician doing that though!
Even more to the point, HC reform doesn't raise taxes on anyone who are already taxed at too high a level, corporation or private citizen. So it's a bad question to begin with.
Cycloptichorn
Voight:
"In one year, the American people are witnessing the greatest lie that is cleverly orchestrated by President Obama and his whole Administration, the lie is a potent aggression that feeds the needs of people who either have not educated themselves enough to understand the assault upon us all, or the very poor and needy who live to be taken care of.
President Obama feeds these people poison, giving them the idea that they are entitled to take from the wealthier who have lived and worked in a democracy that understands that capitalism is the only truth that keeps a nation healthy and fed. Now the lie goes very deep, and President Obama has been cleverly trained in the Alinsky method and it would be very important that every American knows what that method is, it is a socialistic, Marxist teaching and little by little he rapes this nation, taking down our defenses, making new language for the Islamic extremists. The world looked up to us as a symbol of hope and prosperity now wonders what would become of the entire world if American is losing it's power...
This will be the first President to ever weaken the United States of America, President Obama uses his aggression and arrogance for his own agenda against the will of the American people when he should using his will and aggression against our enemies"
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
Voight:This will be the first President to ever weaken the United States of America, President Obama uses his aggression and arrogance for his own agenda against the will of the American people when he should using his will and aggression against our enemies"
Hmmm. What am I supposed to a think about a writer who has not only forgotten about the last administration, but didn't learn in 7th grade what a comma splice is?
@H2O MAN,
Also, I think the President's success can be measured by the amount of outrage and bullshit posted by H2O Man and Okie.
Meanwhile, the panic and fear on the left grows stronger.
The Change that is Required
Alas, too many Americans have already discovered "they can vote themselves money from the public treasure." An increasing number of Americans do this by electing candidates who ignore our Constitution and promise to vote and do vote some Americans "money from the public treasure." As a result we are headed from "complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, and from dependency back to bondage."
To stop and reverse this damnable trend, we must find and support candidates who shun the politics of envy and greed for power for the politics of freedom: the politics of securing our God given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Who among the current candidates shuns the politics of envy for the politics of freedom? Indeed, who among all of us Americans shuns the politics of envy for the politics of freedom?
For us to be true Americans, we must root for everyone to become the best they can be, and we must stop seeking to suppress those who accomplish more than we do.
@ican711nm,
Quote:
Alas, too many Americans have already discovered "they can vote themselves money from the public treasure."
Ah, you mean 'people who vote for tax cuts.' Like yourself. In a scenario in which the country is heavily in deficit and debt, any vote to cut taxes on yourself is a vote to give yourself money from the public treasury, period.
Cycloptichorn
Obama's approval ratings continue to plummet.
Obama is going to be a one term community organizer in chief.
@H2O MAN,
Becuase
you say so? What do you call your organization, Down's Syndrome Press?
@Gargamel,
You are a dangerous, hate filled racist... they are watching you.
Way too many Americans vote themselves money from the public treasure by voting for candidates for Congress and the Presidency who promise to transfer to their voters the tax money taken from those who earned it .
Those Americans who vote for reduction of their taxes and government spending, are not voting themselves money from the public treasure. They are voting to reduce the amount of their money paid into the public treasure that can be transferred to those who have not earned it.
