-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Barack Obama stepped in it with his “you didn’t build that” speech, the subject of my column last week. But now people are claiming that he was taken out of context.
One popular reinterpretation is that when Obama says “you didn’t build that” he is not referring to the small business he just talked about but the roads and bridges mentioned in the previous sentence. Far from being the obvious antecedent his supporters insist it is, this version would require him to misspeak. But it was the spoken word, not a carefully finished piece of writing. And it isn’t quite as absurd as entrepreneurship trutherism.
The first problem with this is that it remains an unpersuasive argument. Small business owners pay taxes that help build the roads and bridges just like everyone else. And while everyone benefits from the roads and bridges, not everyone builds small businesses.
The second, larger problem is that there is the rest of the speech. Obama says that if you are wealthy, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there by smarts. You didn’t get there by hard work. You got there because of a surrounding community and, above all, a government that needs to be financed by a higher top marginal tax rate.
As I wrote last week, there is an extent to which all of these statements except for the income tax bit are partially true. No man is an island, communities matter, and yes even government has a role. Some people are lucky, others are unlucky. But none of this really justifies downplaying the role individual merit and effort play in personal success. Nor does any of this have any bearing on whether the top tax rate is 35 percent or 39.6 percent.
Elizabeth Warren gave essentially the same speech arguing that nobody got rich in America on their own. They had help from the roads and the bridges the “rest of us” paid for. Her remarks went viral in the progressive blogosphere. I had a college philosophy professor who argued that the concept of the self-made man was a right-wing myth, because we are all part of a broader community.
Look, Obama probably didn’t mean to say that people didn’t build their small businesses, at least that straightforwardly. But his remarks did portray a mindset about the American dream that is to the left of Bill Clinton’s vision of people who “work hard and play by the rules,” and one that is likely to strike most voters as peculiar. The only way to say the line was taken out of context is to actually ignore the context of the rest of the speech.
View all comments (16) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/07/23/it-depends-on-what-the-meaning
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The (Real) Great Divide
- Sarah Palin’s Rack
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
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.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
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?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
ncatty| 7.23.12 @ 3:29PM
There is plenty of evidence besides this speech that he is a collectivist. What is telling is that his intepreters insist that he didn't mean it. Why? If you believe in collectivism then preach it brother! But I guess they figure the rubes would not like the truth.
AllAmericanAmerican| 7.23.12 @ 3:36PM
I'm sorry, did the guy who built the road not get compensated? How about the guy who built the bridge?
Do the guys who deliver goods to small businesses work for free?
Stop letting Obumbler off the hook. He said what he meant and he meant what he said. Holy cow establishment RINOs trying to excuse this clown is getting OLD!!!!!
W. James Antle III | 7.23.12 @ 3:44PM
"Stop letting Obumbler off the hook. He said what he meant and he meant what he said."
Umm, that was exactly the point I was making.
AllAmericanAmerican| 7.23.12 @ 4:09PM
Then why did you write the following:
"Look, Obama probably didn't mean to say that people didn't build their small businesses, at least that straightforwardly."
W. James Antle III | 7.23.12 @ 4:27PM
Exactly what I said: that he probably didn't mean to give such an obvious quote.
This is the same nitpicking that I am criticizing in the post. Obama gives an entire speech making personal accomplishment collective, his defenders want to argue about the antecedent of one sentence. I write a whole post criticizing Obama's speech, after having already written a column criticizing the speech, and you want to argue about one sentence.
Conservative Bob| 7.23.12 @ 4:36PM
I do not know for certain but the reflexive giving the benefit of the doubt tack is what AAA is referring to and while I did not comment on it I too wodnered at your inclusionofthe quoted sentence.
3.75 years into this nightmare has removed the need for reasonable doubt... Obama may not of meant to so clearly voice his views but at this point that he holds such beliefs is without quetion.
Occam's Tool| 7.23.12 @ 5:09PM
He is a Marxist, Obama is, pure and simple. You know, if it looks like a duck, has feathers, floats on water, hangs around with other ducks, and shits duckshit, chances are very good you're dealing with a duck.
Unfortunately, he's no good for Duck Soup. He's more like Horsefeathers---he likes the wrong Marx.
RJ| 7.23.12 @ 6:42PM
Hi Occam's Tool,
I think you give Obama too much credit. A sincere Marxist would live a more modest lifestyle. Obama has only shown us that he is supremely confident in his superiority and that he should be entitled to exercise power without inhibitions. He shows the arrogance of the dictator, the greatest scourge of the 20th century.
Butch| 7.23.12 @ 5:40PM
A local left-wing columnist immediately tried the "out-of-context" spin (there has been so much of that, the left must consider it quite damning). He printed the entire context, and, sure enough, the statement is in perfect context. The dude is trying to collectivize accomplishment to justify a claim on disproportionate results.
JD| 7.23.12 @ 5:54PM
There is no reason for Obama to even make the speech except to justify redistribution. His point was that people owe other people for everything they do, and that those debts are unpaid and must be paid. How much is owed? An immeasurable amount. But don't worry, the Democrats will tell you when you're done paying!
In reality, as others have said, these societal debts are paid as we go. No outstanding liability exists, except that manufactured by government. For example, people who don't pay taxes owe me for paying their share.
RJ| 7.23.12 @ 6:30PM
Obama and Ms. Warren clearly are denigrating personal achievement while Obama and the Beltway Establishment live luxuriously at public expense.
By his words and by his actions, he believes in the power of government, when it is in his hands, to take whatever it wants from the citizens for government consumption. He promotes legislation that discriminates against some and benefits others. As for laws on the books, his administration chooses not to enforce legislation that it does not like and grants waivers/exemptions to supporters for those laws that it does enforce, albeit, selectively. His administration has taken executive action, which a few years ago, he said would be illegal. Obama is a tyrant and his administration acts like a criminal organization. On November 6, we will have a chance to reclaim our freedom. We must never forget that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Nancy in NC| 7.24.12 @ 9:42AM
The Ruling Elite?
Oldefarte| 7.23.12 @ 10:19PM
Let me attempt to interpret the possible meaning of his words, since I've lived around academic liberals like him for much of my childhood. These individuals THINK [falsely] that they are smarter than everyone else, because they have stupied and can discuss the works of artists, writers, poets, classical musicians, sculpters, etc; whereas the typical business owner cannot [and frankly is too busy building a business to be concerned with this artsy-fartsy material]. They believe that their intellect is of a higher plane and much more refined in status than say a Donald Trump or a Mitt Romney type. Therefore they believe that the artistic world [including them] are the ultimate sources of anything/everything of significance in this world, and without their intellectual input, nothing is possible. Therefore, a wealthy businessman etc did not gain his success without these intellectuals assistance. IOW the Romneys of the world owe their financial success to the poets, writers, university teachers, etc ultimately. TALK ABOUT BS!!!!!!!!!!
spike59| 7.24.12 @ 6:08AM
this is the guy who whined that the SCOTUS had not addressed income distribution...whose mentor was a longtime member of CPUSA, who ran under the socialist New Party banner,who publicly insisted that the government should 'spread the wealth around'...who bragged about hanging with the Marxists in college, who openly told a group with which he was having dinner that the masses would rise up in revolution...how many freaking dots do you need?
Nancy in NC| 7.24.12 @ 9:40AM
What about all the people who benefit from our paid taxes and never contribute a dime? Obama doesn't want to talk about them and how their ranks are climbing everyday...just as he encourages more to jump on the government band wagon.
What this administration is doing to poor people in this country is criminal. I thought slavery was against the law but I see I am mistaken.
Mike G| 7.24.12 @ 10:38AM
Oh no, slavery is still against the law. It's just that this administration doesn't have to follow the law.