E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
COLUMBUS, OH -- Stumping for Mitt Romney in a key battleground state Wednesday, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal hammered President Obama over remarks he made last week about the government’s role in the private sector.
“You know, his aides will try to say he just misspoke – it's not what he meant. I think these comments reveal something about this President,” Jindal said, adding later that Obama “truly thinks wealth is created through government spending.”
Nati Harnik / AP
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal addresses the Nebraska Republican Convention in Grand Island, Neb., Saturday, July 14, 2012.
Jindal made the remarks during a brief speech to about 150 Romney campaign supporters, volunteers, and staff at a headquarters office here in Columbus.
It was just the latest in a series of Republican attacks this week on Obama’s Friday remarks in Roanoke, Va., where the president said private enterprise is reliant on public support.
“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,” Obama said.
“Somebody invested in roads and bridges,” Obama continued. “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
The remarks gave an opening to Republicans, who have argued throughout the election cycle that President Obama has over-emphasized a public finance approach to fixing the economy and lacks faith in small business.
Speaking at an energy services company Tuesday in Irwin, Penn., Romney told supporters that while the American people “appreciate” the sacrifices of government workers, “taxpayers pay for government.”
“The president’s logic doesn’t just extend to the entrepreneurs that started a barber shop, or a taxi operation, or an oil field service business like this,” Romney said.
Wednesday, Romney’s surrogates who advanced the attack ratcheted up the tone.
“Under President Obama, you’ve got what I label basically the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ perspective,” Jindal said, before adding that Obama is “trying to manage the slow decline of this great country.”
Speaking earlier, State Rep. Cheryl Grossman cited her worry about how the President’s economic policy will affect her children.
“I cannot recall any time in my memory when I have feared a president as much as I do our current president,” Grossman said.
Jindal, who supported Texas Gov. Rick Perry during the Republican primary, has become an increasingly visible and sharp-tongued surrogate for Romney – and a speculated-about choice for the vice presidential slot.
Later Wednesday, Jindal visited a private fundraiser for Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, a Republican running for U.S. Senate. Guests leaving the event said Jindal spoke knowledgably about Ohio politics and urged restraint when it comes to the state budget.
But few guests listed Jindal at the top of their own wish list.
Edd Dunlap, who works for a local homebuilding company, said he was impressed by Jindal’s management of the 2010 BP oil spill crisis, though he hopes Romney selects Ohio Sen. Rob Portman.
“He’s local,” Dunlap said of Portman. “So of course I’ve got to support him.”
Leave a Comment:
President Obama didn't misspeak. The real issue is which came first. Taxpayers paying for infrastructure, or success due to those taxpayers? His "collective" socialist views ignore the economic reality of the hands that feed us.
In the President's world the ACA is "affordable" because of heavy subsidies to Medicare and those within 4x the poverty level. In the real world the ACA is expensive and is being brought to you by the folks that paid for everything else.
Less federal government, more state power.
MJ....
To the point the President was making during that speech....I'd like for you to explain how businesses would flourish if there were no roads...or if they weren't taught when they were growing up. We actually have to debate this?
To say we are not involved within an American system where we all rely on each other to a degree isn't socialist, it is common sense.
If this is the argument you folks are going to use....I LOVE our chances in November.
They can't answer that one DoctorLogic.
The president didn't say we relied on the government to a degree. He said that without the government we couldn't accomplish anything on our own.
Kathryn....
What is so troubling is they don't answer ANYTHING and this it is fine with their ilk. These buffoons that are so anti-Obama that answers mean nothing...substance means nothing.
Example, they rail against the stimulus but when I ask, "what would you have done to stop job losses and get money moving in the economy again?" they have absolutely no idea.
In short, these are not intelligent people.
DoctorLogic
And who paid for those roads?
My bottom line is that the President likes to embrace the "collectiveness" of the larger part of the electorate, but does NOT praise the exceptionalism of the half that makes the system work.
Nor do I care for his new rhetoric last week, of calling the middle-class the job creators; which certainly could be debated.
But really? He now gives tax-cuts to the job creators?
My concern is that Presidet Obama spins so much that he crosses the line into propaganda.
Towne...
Explain how businesses move goods without infrastructure (airports, roads etc.) that government has built?
Even though you are misrepresenting what was said....it is silly to say government has NO role.
No one said the government has no role. The debate is about how big of a role the government has and should have. This is the basic difference between the republican and democrat parties.
MJ-
This is ridiculous. In almost every speech, he talks about American exceptionalism....he uses his own story to say it could only happen in America. This bull **** your ilk comes up with is just blatantly a lie.
Evidently, you don't know what a "system" is.....if the purchasers don't have money, the businesses making products aren't going to move them. Your 'trickle down economic' model has been tried for a decade....it has failed and failed miserably.
His rhetoric is nothing new...he has been saying this since he campaigned in 2007/8. Obama has been the only one fighting for the middle class....the GOP has done everything in their power to fight against them.
President Obama was speaking from the heart - he really BELIEVES that none of us are capable of ANYTHING without the 'helping' hand of government. The problem is that we ARE (as Maggie Thatcher famously said about Socialism) 'running out of other people's money'. Presdient Obama himself said that if unemployment was still high by the fall of 2012, his Presidency would be a 'one term deal'. We can only HOPE and pray that enough of his fellow citizens agree with him and decide to CHANGE the direction of the country. NOVEMBER 2012 - the end of Obamunism!!
Towne...
Right, but the GOP and Romney are railing against Obama for making the statement that businesses need government to build roads and teach kids.
Your admission shows you know what the Republicans are trying to sell is complete and utter nonsense.
Jonathon...
Let me ask you, would the economy be in better shape if the Jobs bill the House GOP killed last year (1.6 millions jobs according to the CBO) and the small business tax break the Senate GOP killed last week (1.1 million jobs according to the CBO) would've passed? To say "no" would be stupid....kind of rhetorical question. By the way, both bills were paid for. If both bills were passed, it is said unemployment would be in the mid 6%.
Your argument is an ignorant one....it reveals that either you have no clue how a bill is passed or just don't care. My guess is the latter....which is why McConnell and Boehner knew all they had to do was say no to everything at the expense of the American people.
He does, he talks about exceptional teachers, firemen and police, and...well he doesnt really credit anyone other than public servants, because they are the only real workers in the eyes of a dem, because they are a voting block.
Its unfortunate that exceptional teachers and cops are few and far between, there are some, they are just lumped in with the crappy majority who have no right to even hold the jobs.
tru...
Our conversation yesterday revealed that you are a simple rascist that lies about almost everything you post. You're a waste of time....and just a reminder that you aren't worth responding to the rest of today either.
Still rating up your own smug posts?
Hey look, a lib, everyone that disagrees with him is an idiot and a racist, what a shocker.
You guys are so f..ing stupid, keep your striving liberalism strong, and keep bankrupting states you sheep.
"he really BELIEVES that none of us are capable of ANYTHING without the 'helping' hand of government."
Actually that's not at all what he said. How about you actually read the speech text before opening your mouth and making everyone aware you didn't read it?
And for those of you complaining he doesn't talk 'enough' about American exceptionalism, you might want to google his speech to the DNC in 2004.
A Republican slinging sh1t? Has this ever happened before? Wow. Who would have thought?
I want to watch someone start a business without water, power, roads, phones, and hire folks who have never seen a public school........now do you get it? Dummies.
Exactly! This is the dumbest argument I have ever heard....I cannot believe the Romney folks are trying to run with this.
Ironically, I just saw video of Romney speech from yesterday where he was saying the EXACT same thing Obama did (how we rely on each other...evidently, that was that group wanted to hear so he said it).
He is the most disingenuous candidate I have ever seen run for President.
ya, everyone knows to start a business, any business, you pick up the phone and call lots of other folks and if you don't.......it can't happen. I understood the President perfectly but then I have a brain and know how to use it.
If there was no water, power, roads, phones or education, and the government would get out of everybody's way, the first businesses would be private sector companies created to provide water, power, roads, phones and education.
They'd do it cheaper and more efficiently than the government could because there would be competition. They'd charge a fee for it and that would be it.
They wouldn't come back years later after somebody who happened to use a road started a business and denigrate the business owner's accomplishment.
And what's with the name calling? How does that help?
This is what is wrong with our country.
Did you know that, before electricity became prevalent in the late 1890's, that businesses existed? Shocking, I know.
Don't get me started on the fact that public school didn't exist until the 20th century.
The things you listed make it easier. But don't ever, EVER, say it's not possible.
Sounds like a lot of posters here who believe that being an AMERICAN means learning ho to suck on the teat of mother government. NOVEMBER 2012 - the end of Obamunism!!
Some of you people are laughable! You admit that the government investments "made it easier" but that's a bad thing?! That takes so little common sense....it is this ridiculous thinking to why other countries are passing us up in energy, transportation, education etc..
Some of you people want to dial back to the 1800's. Bizarre.
Difference between government investments making things easier and claiming that people can't function without them. Get it?
I'm all for public transportation, renewable energy, and all that jazz by the way.
There was another comment on here about wanting to see how someone would survive without public water and sewers. Apparently that city slicker has never heard of a well and septic tank.
Its a good thing they have already paid their share for those things then isnt it.
Oh btw, the ingenuity of everything you listed, was created by an innovator, but we all know all innovation and all ideas were made possible by the government.
Matt...
What is the point you're making? Are you arguing that even though government offers important services and helps businesses, we'd somehow be better off with more inefficient businesses, that aren't policed, or protected from fire, and with a less educated populous? That's the platform you're going with?
The boy with the most ironic name on the web, how strange he takes what someone said and spins it into a completely delusional argument. Nno surprise there, spin is the liberal way.
Quick respond with something snarky that makes you feel important and smart but has no relevance, then rate up your post.
Dr,
I've you think government can do anything more efficiently that the private sector, I would really like to see an example.
They are great at defense, though hardly efficient. A private military would be a bad idea because of the questionable loyalty of mercenaries.
But that aside, how could the government be expected to be efficient? They have no competition. When they need money they just raise taxes or print more. They have no profit incentive.
If Obama ran a company like he's running the government would you loan him money? Would you invest in his company?
jt...
Example....let's say there is a river that needs crossing, a business isn't going to invest their own money to build a bridge to cross that river...far too much cost. They'd take the path of least resistence for them (obviously). However, if the government builds the bridge to cross the river, that business benefits, other businesses benefit, the local residents benefit etc.. Plus, could you imagine if I am a local resident that has to use their private bridge....would I pay a toll every time I use it?
Not everything has to be profit producing venture....there ARE things that are for the common good. That is what government is there for. In addition, when Republicans talk about "creating the environment for business"...isn't infrastructure part of that?
The incentive for government to be efficient is what is going on November 6th!
They may just fly over the river. The Wright brothers must have been govenrment agents, right?
If it costs me 2% more to deliver my product because I have to use a boat, ok, that becomes a component of the price. If somebody sees a need and wants to take a chance and builds a bridge, I will use the bridge if it's cheaper than using the boat.
If the government builds the bridge they are going to tax me. And I bet after the bridge is paid for, I'm still going to be paying the tax. Oh yeah, and now Obama is going to rub my nose in it that he helped me by building the bridge. And then he's probably going to raise my taxes because I used his stinking bridge that I helped pay for in the first place.
In fact he's going to denigrate my accomplishment AND raise may taxes even if I keep using the boat.
Is that your idea of a President? Really?
This is for Matt - did you not know that certain parts of this country did not receive electricity
In point - The Plains in Virginia did not receive electricity - until 1954?
Also Matt I did a study for the Dept of Agriculture in VA - in the back mountains of Virginia - 1978 - people there - in their homes were eating dog food to survive
So all of you people who know so much - I say to you just shut up
You know nothing of what our people have done to survive
Hasn't his visa expired yet?
Where would 90 million people be without a big government given the economic hardship that the rich guys on Wall Street brought us........think about that. No SS, no Medicare, no Medicaid, no food stamps, no housing aide, no public school, no place for starving homeless people to turn to for help.......come on someone answer me that?
They would probably be working.
Kathryn Sullivan
Have you entertained the thought that government brought on the financial collapse? Repeal of Glass-Steagal, GSE's in the home mortgage industry, and oversight of the latter by Mr. Dodd & Mr. Frank.
Take a look at the inflation growth of the cost of higher education and you will find that it went into high gear after the creation of the Dept. of Education.
I will not argue that we need government; we do. But we need to rein in the federal government and delegate more influence back to the states. We can handle a state or two failing, but we cannot handle the fed failing.
I wish we could try it with and without and see which works better. It would save a lot of bickering. We can compare before and after though.
In 1960 before big government, the out-of-wedlock birth rate for black Americans was 6%. By 1997 it was 32%. Today it is 72%. This despite 40+ years of State and Federal assistance programs.
How has big government helped these mothers? These programs have usurped the traditional role of the father and given mothers a viable alternative to marriage. The statistics show the results.
The children are the real victims of these programs. Children raised in single parent homes are at much higher risk for virtually every human malady, physical and social.
This is big government in action. I like to believe these programs were meant well. But for God's sake, stop helping them. They can't take much more help like this.
Anyone who thinks Jindall is so great should just drive through Louisianna and take a look. It is pitiful.
LA had been in poor shape long for Jindal got there.
Detroit is a ghost town. Democrats have been in charge since 1962.
“I cannot recall any time in my memory when I have feared a president as much as I do our current president,” Grossman said.
I cannot recall a time when I have feared a possible president as much as I have feared and loathed S**t Romney and facists like Bobby Jindull!
Get the hell out of my state you swine!
Romney scares me because he is so ignorant, just the puppet they are looking for.
Romney ignorant? He has made a ton of money and continues to prosper because he is ignorant? I want to be that ignorant!!!!
Kathryn Sullivan - Romney is not ignorant - he just is a blatant liar
If anyone is prospering in Bobby Jindalls state it is him and his rich crony friends. My god that state has nothing to offer........at the bottom of the list no matter what the list is about. I would be loathe to put that guy out there to represent me.
Has anyone heard about Mit-turd's time as Marriott CEO. They were caught w/ their hand in the illegal tax haven scheme. As I understand it Mit-turd set it up against advice of legal dept. More to come....
The President's remarks are another 'Joe the Plumber' moment, where he lets his TRUE feelings about America slip out. Of course we need both the public and private sector. The debate has always been about which of these is the true engine of growth. The President believes that the government is the engine, and the private sector exists merely to fuel that 'engine' and those who wish to ride the train without making a contribution (other than to the Obama campaign). AMERICANS feel that the private sector is and always has been the growth engine, and that the more that government piles on the train, in the form of taxes and regulations, merely slows the economic train down. Two points of view - the first has been in operation for the past 3 and a half years - how is that working out for you?
Jonathan
Here's where our education system has failed us; math.
It takes 5-6 private workers, on average, to produce the taxes to pay for 1 government worker.
So when the President offers to "create" teaching jobs, he sounds good to constituents, but actually createss more overhead for towns and cities. As a matter of fact, Governor Christie actually said no thank you to some fed grant money. It's the sugar-high effect, my words.
@jonathan
Where do you guys get this s*** from. You know what you are posting is not true..is not what he said... So why do you post lies? Why do you do that? What is the purpose? Everyone on here reads the news and know exactly what Mr. Obama said; we have seen the full clip so what is your purpose for deliberately paraphrasing what was said? It does not make you look smart, at all! Stick to the facts and stop being/saying stupid things! Ditto for Matt as well!
Its about investment in the future. Teachers develop those who become business owners, investors and workers of all types (including govt workers). Stop being shortsighted! I'm not sure where all of this hate of govt workers stem from but each of you needs to take a long "realistic" look at the real role of government in our lives. Stop spouting the company line.... its doesn't work in reality! But now your silly soapbox fox noise narrative is recognized for what it is! Bullcra*!
John F. Kennedy
"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
Barrack Obama
"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."
Signed,
A guy that used to be for Obama and now can't stand him.
Matt
President Obama sealed my vote the other way when he, and party leadership, chose to use Congressional majorities to jam through ACA. Healthcare is an issue, but should not have been top priority after 2008. I also believe that the decision to do this destroyed his promise of bispartisanship.
Matt - You lie you have never been for Obama - I looked you up you have no friends - you are just another troll - who spews lies
Go Matt you dishonor the name of Matthew - which happens to be my lovely son's name - who - now is in Cape Cod trying to cure the unhealthy
What the hell have you done ? You dishonor your name
Here's an excerpt as posted on NPR.ORG's Morning Edition.
"Romney was equally aggressive toward taxes in the business world. For years, he was a director of Marriott International, the hotel company founded by Willard Marriott. Kleinbard, who worked on Wall Street and served as chief of staff for Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation, says Marriott had a reputation.
"Marriott was always a tax shelter promoter's first call," he says. "Marriott was one of those companies that just loved to buy tax shelters."
Bloomberg reported this year on one Marriott tax shelter, known as "Son of BOSS." It involved creating paper losses to offset taxes on real income. The Internal Revenue Service challenged the shelter and Marriott lost in court. Judges called the shelter "fictitious" and a "scheme," and the company was forced to pay $29 million. Kleinbard notes that when the shelter was adopted, Romney was the chair of Marriott's audit committee.
"It's the job of the chair of the audit committee of Marriott to say, 'Hey, wait a minute, just because we have an opinion from Winkin', Blinkin' and Nod saying that this is a terribly clever idea, I need to apply some common sense as opposed to just signing on the bottom line,'" Kleinbard says.
A statement from Marriott says the company only engages in tax deals it believes are lawful."
@jonathan
Where do you guys get this s*** from. You know what you are posting is not true..is not what he said... So why do you post lies? Why do you do that? What is the purpose? Everyone on here reads the news and know exactly what Mr. Obama said; we have seen the full clip so what is your purpose for deliberately paraphrasing what was said? It does not make you look smart, at all! Stick to the facts and stop being/saying stupid things! Ditto for Matt as well!
If you can find something I said that is not a fact, please quote it here and I will apologize for it.
Direct quoting is not paraphrasing.
Where do you ... s*** from. You know ...what he said... So why do you post...? Why do you do that? What is the purpose? Everyone... paraphrasing what was said? It does...make you look smart...! Stick to the facts ...! Ditto for Matt as well!
That is paraphrasing.
If you can find something I said that is not a fact, please quote it here and I will apologize for it.
Actually, Matt's post is exactly what both Presidents Kennedy and Obama said, and the contrast is startling.
I think we all know what President Obama was saying, and it is a clear illustration of how he feels. His philosophy is rooted in the belief that the federal government needs to be in total control of the economy, the private sector, and every facet of our private lives, and that we would all be better off for it.
A very seductive argument for many, but false in that 1) it totally discounts the individual's role in his own fate, 2) disregards that the programs he pushes cannot be sustained economically, and 3) rely on the socialist idea that there is no truly personal property or freedom. However, all of this can be explained away by letting you know that he (and only he)%2
"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."
The above is paraphasing! It distorts the context and full understanding of what was said! Besides Gore sponsored the legislation which allowed the previously "stand alone" networks to interconnect which lead directly to what is now known as the internet. It was "Government legislation and funding" which advanced the internet into the interconnected system which we now have. Thats a fact! So I am awaiting your apology.
"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.
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.
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.”
That's the whole thing. I understand what he is saying. However, it's his tone that bothers me. Kennedy used the idea that "we work together, we can achieve something big". Obama uses the idea that "You are what you are because of others. Therefore, you owe us."
Understand?
Uh oh, bubblegum error.
This is so weird, most Americans are not entrepreneurs. Conservatives while disproportionately rich and likely to be such self made individuals are of the illusion that everyone can and should be a self made business tycoon, and if you are not it's your own fault. They feel no obligation or debt to their country of origin. No patriotic gratitude for being able to live in this great country, the only place on earth that afforded them the opportunity and support to become independently wealthy. They are entirely self absorbed, and self centered. They feel no debt of gratitude to the country and it's people who work to keep the engine of commerce running, who consume their products, who protect and serve. They take all credit for their success and in fact blame their homeland for constraining their opportunities at even greater wealth. They disdain their fellow citizens who simply work for a living rather than amass wealth. Heres a news flash for you, the percentage of self made millionaires is less than that of professional athletes or movie stars. Every one cannot aspire to these almost unattainable goals. If all we had were a country of entrepreneurs, movie stars and pro-athletes who would pick up the garbage? Who would clean the streets? Who would protect us? Who would care for the Ill? who would teach our children? Millionaires?
oats willy
But most Americans are involved in entrepreneurship...
The waitress at the local diner, the barber renting a chair at the local shop, the crew members of a lawn service.
The taxpayer protects us, cares for us, teaches us, builds our roads.
Waitresses and barbers are not entrepreneurs. Sorry I don't buy that. And no waitress or barber ever got rich. Which is by the way fine. These are valuable and honorable pursuits. Therein lies the problem. Because these pursuits are not paid a living wage. These pursuits do not allow for a life without uncertainty, the stress of healthcare costs, and the costs of sending a child to college. They are not the pursuits which allow for a dignified retirement. And the shame of America is that we have a wealthy class that does not give a damn about these people and their concerns. So, the only institution that will look out for these peoples best interests must be the Government. And in a democracy these people can vote, and their votes count as much as the millionaires, as long as we make sure these people can vote, and are not disenfranchised by some bigoted voter registration scam perpetuated by Guess who? Conservatives in that government hell bent on maintaining the wealth and power in the hands of the 1%.
oats willy
The waitress & barber are involved in entrepreneurship by working for an entrepreneur. If there were no entrepreneur, those jobs would not exist. Without the entrepreneur and those jobs, there would be no tax revenue.
And you are right about the living wage. And from here we differ... but hear me out.
Yes, the government can help through a safety net. However, the financial crisis and cost of living can be attributed to our government. What does health care, education, and housing have in common?
High inflation and government intrusion.
Higher education didn't start hyper-inflating until AFTER the creation of the Dept. of Education.
The housing crisis resulted from bad business practices of Fannie Mae (& other agencies) and the involvement of investment banking's mortgage-back derivatives (Clinton signed the repeal of Glass-Steagal)
And Health Care...
The housing crisis was largely the result of another manipulation of a markets value by the people who gained the most by it's inflation, the banks. I would not put that bubble or its subsequent popping on the government unless you are willing to concede that the problem was too little regulation and too little oversight. Higher education costs are driven primarily by the private institutions that have no connection whatsoever to the Dept. of Ed. Bottom line when I was young we had a vibrant middle class, there was a much greater wealth class mobility and the wealthiest Americans paid much higher taxes. Since the Reagan years that has changed dramatically. Wealth is now concentrated in much greater amounts in far fewer hands. The middle class is disappearing, there is more poverty, and less social mobility. What went wrong? Conservative rich folks decided it was time to return to the "Gilded Age". They were afraid that the middle class was too strong politically and too well off. For all their talk about opportunity and the American Dream, conservatives know the "pie" is finite and the more others have of it the less there is for them. Greed thats whats wrong with America plain and simple.
Attacking the other guy only highlights your own character. ALL politicians need to learn this simple lesson.
America is in the toilet. It doesn't matter who you blame. At the end of the finger-pointing and name-calling (on all sides), Americans are still facing a dire time.
Tell me about your plan for the next four years, not why the other guy is a schmuck.
Politicians get dumber every minute, I swear.
I am an Indian American like Piyush. But l have to tell you that I and the vast majority of Inidian-Americans think this guy is a douche bag.
He gave up his religion, culture, sanity and intellect so that he could become a rising star in right-wing politics...Such a waste.
HELLO FELLOW LOUISIANIANS ; HOWS THAT OVERNIGHT BILL THAT JINDAL RAN THROUGH BEFORE HEADING TO CAMPAIGN FOR '' BISHOP CLOSET POLYGAMY '' ??????????? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ; he's showed off the authority vested in him to shut down government jobs , and government welfare recipients rides to health facilities and hospitals. wow , he's found the problem with america , '' IT'S ALL THOSE POOR PEOPLES FAULT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What a joke. Mr. Jindal should stay home and take care of his state. His state's public school system is disgraceful. The health of his state isn't too good either.
Republicans” and their Stepchild “The Evil Violent Tea Billy’s” are just like a “Huge Power Outage ”. They are a Major Disaster, Cause Fear, Panic, Chaos, Misery and Destroy anything good in their Paths.
G. O. P. = GREED, OIL, POWER
Remember Folks, “Oil Prices" are about Corruption and Greed, not Supply and Demand.
This is from a Great Article I found Online:
A Senator goes whoring
It happened on the night of December 15, 2000. The country was in tumult over the Bush-Gore election. This diversion offered Republican Senator Phil Gramm of Texas an exquisite opportunity to push American financial stability back 100 years.
That evening, Gramm inserted a 262-page amendment into the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Leaked e-mails would later reveal that it had been written by lobbyists for Enron, Goldman Sachs and the Koch brothers, Kansas billionaires who would later fund the Tea Party movement.
Gramm had turned his office into a subsidiary of Wall Street. From 1997 to 2002, the securities and banking industries had lathered him with $640,000 in campaign contributions. His biggest sugar daddies weren't from Texas; they were Credit Suisse,Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Goldman. And he was more than willing to step-and-fetch-it on their behalf.
Big oil, big banks and big speculators such as the Kochs wanted to make monster bets in the futures markets. But they wanted to do it in secrecy — without any government regulation.
If you want to know the Truth follow the “Money Trail”. It will usually lead to the Lobbyist, Special Interest and the Self Righteous!
Jindels not one of us so why is he coming to Ohio?
We in Louisiana would be glad for you to keep him.....
The Top 10 Poorest States in the U.S. are Republican States. Do you ever hear the Republicans talk about the Poor or Poverty in those States? The answer is “Never”. It just so happens most of those States are in the South and have “Right To Work Laws”. How’s that working out for ya?
And here is da Real Kicker: All those Republican Politicians in those States have Good Salaries, Health Care, Pension, Vacations, and all kinds of Special Perks……paid for by our “Tax $$$$”. Hmmmmm.
The most impoverished state is Mississippi, and it's followed by Arkansas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Alabama and North Carolina.
Lets break this down in Simple terms. Republican TeaBilly Conservative = Self Righteous Hypocrite.
jindal needs to come home and deal with the mess he created here. i can not imagine why anyone would listen to him if they knew what his record really is..not just his spin on his record.it really is the epitome of hypocrisy!
Interesting how business is gravitating to some of those areas... wonder if these are "right to work" states. All but Kentucky...
Wonder what the most financially strapped states are...
10 Most Indebted States (averages exclude student loans)
State...........................Average debt............% change
1.
California...............$336,169.....................-4%
2.
Hawaii....................$321,258....................-7%
3.
Maryland................$263,524.....................-0%
4. New
Jersey.............$257,462.....................-1%
5.
Washington...........$243,758.....................-2%
6.
Massachusetts......$242,111.....................-0%
7.
Virginia.................$239,186....................-1%
8.
Connecticut..........$229,684.....................-3%
9.
Colorado...............$219,899....................-1%
10.
Nevada................$218,010....................-7%
Hmmm...
So if I run up all my credit cards I can be wealthy too?
Gee let me guess, the numbers are generated using median income.
Lets have a look at how unfunded liabilities compare in red vs blue states. Im gonna bank on blue states more often being the ones looking at bankruptcies.
Do you live in one of the top 10 welfare recipient states? What party do the governors of those states belong to?
1) New Mexico (Democrat)
2) Mississippi (Republican)
3) Alaska (Republican)
4) Louisiana (Republican)
5) West Virginia (Republican)
6) Alabama (Republican)
7) South Dakota (Republican)
8) Kentucky (Republican)
9) Virginia (Republican)
10) Montana (Republican)
Taken from July 13, 2012 speech by President Obama
“I’ve got a different idea. I do believe we can cut -- we’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make some more cuts in programs that don’t work, and make government work more efficiently. (Applause.) Not every government program works the way it’s supposed to. And frankly, government can’t solve every problem. If somebody doesn’t want to be helped, government can’t always help them. Parents -- we can put more money into schools, but if your kids don’t want to learn it’s hard to teach them. (Applause.)
But you know what, I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them. So I’m going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way. We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more. (Applause.) And, by the way, we’ve tried that before -- a guy named Bill Clinton did it. We created 23 million new jobs, turned a deficit into a surplus, and rich people did just fine. We created a lot of
millionaires.
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.
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.)”
Do you really not understand what he was saying, perhaps you will understand it the way Elizabeth Warren laid it out. “You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did.
“Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”
In other words where is the “trickle down” to the people who built the factory, built the roads, built your widgets, etc.
Lorr
Who took the risk to borrow to build the factory? Who pays the taxes that pays for the people that build the roads? Who pays the taxes for the benefits for the people that build the roads?
Right now the only thing we're building to give our kids is DEBT, with a game plan to build more DEBT.
The only thing "trickling down" is DEBT.
Lorr
Most of the taxpayers understand why taxes are paid. Unfortunately President Obama is suggesting that everything we have is because of everyone, including the 50% that contribute NO taxes.
That hardly seems fair to the 50% that pay their share.
We should be grateful for the taxpayer that allows everyone to have a road....
The people who do not pay taxes that you are referring do not earn sufficient to pay Federal Income Tax but do pay other taxes.
Yes someone took the risk to borrow to build the factory but his success was also because he hired good hard workers who built quality product for him or her to sell. Yes they pay taxes, but when they have the made the money why is it not be given to the people who work for him, increasing their pay checks so the middle class can grow.
Bureau of Labor and Statistics 2010
1.8 million earn Federal Minimum Wage
2.5 million earn wages below Federal Minimum Wage
48.01% of Americans earn less than 25K
27.23% of Americans earn between 25K and 50K
12.86% of Americans earn between 50K and 75K
5.29% of Americans earn between 75K and 100K
Lorr
I'm guessing you've never owned, nor had the responsibility of managing a business.
Do the worker's pay the rent/mortgage? Utility bills? Inventory?
Although "growing the middle class" sounds nice; ever since federal government size, spending, and debt have grown the middle class has suffered.
Don't blame the engine, blame the guy tinkering with engine.
Do not make assumptions you can not back up. When the profits were made 1/3 went back into growing the company, 1/3 went into my account and 1/3 went into salary increases and bonuses. When my husband had a safe fall on his head we sold the business.