The truth is the opposite of what our campaigner-in chief claims.
(Page 2 of 2)
Rather than Barack “you didn’t build that” Obama and Elizabeth “you didn’t get rich on your own” Warren griping about the success of the successful and crediting themselves for the accomplishments (and, in Warren’s case, the heritage) of others, they should be offering sincere and profound thanks for those Americans who do things that Obama and friends could never do, who take risks that Warren and friends would never take.
If Obama wants entrepreneurs to thank government for what it builds or creates, he should first thank successful businessmen and women for paying for all of it.
The right response by businessmen to President Obama is not simply “We built our businesses” but also “We built the bridges, too.”
To put it another way: You can imagine that in the absence of government involvement, there would still be schools with good teachers (as there are in thousands of private schools today). You can even envision that in the absence of government involvement the private sector would create roads and bridges. But can you conceive of the government doing anything — whether things it should or should not be doing — in the absence of taxpayers? Who really needs whom here?
Sorry, Mr. Obama, but it’s YOU who didn’t build that.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?