- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Romney: Obama casts shame on success

Published: Wed, July 18, 2012 @ 12:00 a.m.

Associated Press


Mitt Romney on Tuesday accused President Barack Obama of believing the government is more vital to a thriving economy than the nation’s workers and dreamers, scrambling to get back on message by declaring of Obama, “I’m convinced he wants Americans to be ashamed of success.”

The new Romney approach came as Democrats pressed for the release of more of Romney’s tax returns and hounded the Republican candidate over discrepancies in when he left his private equity firm. The conservative magazine National Review urged Romney to release more of his tax records.

Obama has been trying to keep Romney focused on matters other than the sluggish economy, even releasing a single-shot TV ad Tuesday that suggests Romney gamed the system so well that he may not have paid any taxes at all for years.

As the campaign’s tenor grew combative, Romney seized on comments Obama uttered while campaigning in Virginia last week. The president, making a point about the supportive role government plays in building the nation, said in part: “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.”

Obama added: “The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.”

The challenger pounced.

“To say that Steve Jobs didn’t build Apple, that Henry Ford didn’t build Ford Motors, that Papa John didn’t build Papa John Pizza ... To say something like that, it’s not just foolishness,” Romney said from a campaign rally outside Pittsburgh. “It’s insulting to every entrepreneur, every innovator in America.”

Romney added: “I tell you this. I’m convinced that he wants Americans to be ashamed of success.”


1300(553 comments)posted 2 years ago

What utter lack of education Mitt has. Truly successful people should realize that it's always a combination of a number of aspects that result in financial, or entrepreneurial, success.

For this theory of "I'm the greatest, I did everything on my own" to work, just ask the question: Could Steve Jobs or the others have done the same if they were living in Cambodia? Or Libya? Of course not, successful entrepreneurs need a stable government (or in Russia's case, a large personal army) to protect what they've built.

It's such a glaring personality flaw to be so insecure that one can't acknowledge that everyone's received benefits from outside sources before they became successful. Also, for some to have to publicly state that they're "successful" really is a sign of a very poor upbringing.

Suggest removal:

2300(553 comments)posted 2 years ago

Not to mention, Apple isn't the best example to illustrate his point. The PC was developed out of previous technology and equipment, all of which was either military or university created.

If the state never built any roads, where exactly would Ford's vehicles have been driven? As far as Papa John's goes, I don't know its history, but I'd be willing to bet that it would turn to the state to enforce its protected image if someone else opened a pizza shop by the same name.

This whole debate, the fact that some need to call themselves "creators" is symptomatic of their personality disorders. He really should've just been happy with his hundreds of millions of dollars, but his insecurities push him to try to get control over others via political routes. Businessmen should typically stay in the business world where there is no democracy, and very little human rights or dignity playing a role. The same way politicians should typically stay in the political world rather than entering private business.

There's nothing wrong with being a businessman, I'm one. But government is about ensuring people's voice, not leveraging a hostile takeover. In other words, businessmen in government should be the exception, not what people should want to have.

Suggest removal:

3furor(7 comments)posted 2 years ago

The shame of success can only be disinfected with high taxation.

Suggest removal:

4gdog4766(1401 comments)posted 2 years ago

Its how he goes about it. If you look at Bain Capitals practices youll see. Not only did Bain bankrupt companies for profit, they then went back and legally ended pensions and healthcare for retirees. Not only that but he wraps himself in the american flag and yet not one of his five sons have been in the military.

Suggest removal:

5walter_sobchak(1847 comments)posted 2 years ago

We are all born equal; after that, the race is on. Equality of outcomes cannot and should not be guaranteed. But, class warfare and hating those that have more is an easy sell, especially to the simple-minded people. Barry Soetoro does not understand that the power rests with the people and govt is to be limited. He believes that everything is in control of the govt and what you get is what they allow you to keep.

Suggest removal:

6300(553 comments)posted 2 years ago

Out of curiosity, Juggie, how many times have you had to go to court for contract enforcement? Over the years, my LLC's have had 20 or so occasions where we've needed to take someone to court. That's government.

I'll also add that nothing differentiates someone from other based on home values. If anything, maybe an upside-down mortgage separates them, but we're all human, and we each get 1 vote when it comes to politics. If you feel the need to pat yourself on the back because you live in a nicer home in Poland, I suppose that's cheaper than seeing shrink. But, I'd point out, there are those who live in much nicer homes than that. Are those people better than you?

Suggest removal:

7sam_carter(87 comments)posted 2 years ago

It seems like the republican rhetoric is all opaque philosophical. A bunch of fancy words that mean nothing practical. Government is bad. Govt limits success. Power to the people. Whats so big and bad about govt? We still need police, fire, teachers, soldiers, the roads fixed and the mail delivered. Do you people not want those services?
Obama has proven to be a man of action. GM Lordstown is still open and pumping money in our local economy. bin laden is dead. We are digging out of the 2008 depression.
Why do you guys still insist on bringing this man down?

Suggest removal:

8cambridge(2965 comments)posted 2 years ago

jojuggie....what is it with you people, no matter how many times someone proves what you are saying is BS you just keep posting it anyway.

Since you seem to cut and paste your comments I went back and found my reply the last time I read that comment, so I'll cut and paste my reply.

jojuggie.....I know exactly how much 25 billion is. It's how much bush spent in Iraq every two months for six and a half years.

The UAW got 17% of GM in lew of benefits. You can read all about it in the link below. You're welcome.


Suggest removal:

9BabaGhanoush(106 comments)posted 2 years ago

Also, i never see an answer to the question. Would you rather that GM Lordstown be closed?"

How about an answer to a real question,
Should the laws be followed or not?

We have two hundred years of Bankruptcy Law.
There are two choices for business: Chap. 7 and Chap. 11.
No one ever suggested that any part of GM be liquidated.
Chap 11 provides for certain procedures that would break all agreements and start from scratch.
All contracts would be subject to be broken.
Secured creditors come before unsecured creditors.

Obama took the law into his own hands and turned the law on its head. The bondholders that held 79% were relegated to the back of the bus with 29%.

There's a right way and there's a democrat way. As long as the means justify the ends.

BTW GM paid back government debt with government funds.

Suggest removal:

10Education_Voter(838 comments)posted 2 years ago

Some ways business was aided by government in the past. I guess we could eliminate research and development in our country -- but other countries are not about to. You can see their programs right on the web.

Funding Railroads: In the late 19th century, the government gave away 131 million acres in federal land grants, at enormous cost to itself, to railroad companies to build their railroads. Four of the five transcontinental railroads were built this way. To help them, Congress authorized loans of $16,000 to $48,000 per mile of railroad (depending on the terrain).

Telephone Infrastructure: The early telephone companies couldn't afford to wire communities for telephone service themselves, so they turned to the government for help -- and government funding wired nearly the entire nation.

Eisenhower's Interstate Highway Program: This massive 1950s program paved an entire continent with highways, bringing undreamed of economic change, and allowing the middle class to resettle from the cities to the suburbs.

Rural Electrification: In 1935, only 13 percent of all farms had electricity, because utility companies found it unprofitable to wire the countryside for service. Roosevelt's Rural Electrification Administration began correcting this market failure; by 1970, more than 95 percent of all farms would have electricity.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (New Version): Once a bureaucratic joke, today FEMA has won widespread praise for its response to natural disasters like earthquakes, hurricanes, floods and tornadoes. No private business could wait the long intervals between disasters like FEMA does, or bring relief to entire cities or states.

Human Genome Project: The government provides the money and the organization for this 20-year project, which will give medical science a road-map of the human genetic code. Researchers have already found genes that contribute to 50 diseases.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: This legendary American organization, popularized by the movie Outbreak, isolates and wipes out entire plagues and diseases that strike anywhere in the world. "The CDC," says Dr. James Le Duc of the World Health Organization, "is the only ballgame in town."

The Internet: In the 1960s, the government created ARPANET, which was used and developed by the Defense Department, public universities and other research organizations. In 1985, the National Science Foundation created various supercomputing centers around the country, linking the five largest together to start the modern Internet we know today.

Bureau of Economic Analysis: This agency provides all the economic statistics that Congress, the executive branch, the Federal Reserve, the stock and bond markets, private industry and the entire economy depend on to make their analysis. Private industry could never do such an enormous job.

Suggest removal:

11Education_Voter(838 comments)posted 2 years ago

Cooperative Extension Service: The CES gives American farmers the latest and best agricultural information and scientific research. Experts credit it for turning them into the most productive farmers in the world.

Federal Aviation Administration: Whatever its shortcomings (which stem from underfunding), the FAA has made our skies far safer than the free market would make them. The FAA not only controls air traffic for safety, but enforces safety regulations (which airliners are constantly trying to skirt to increase profits).

Federal Deposit Insurance Commission: During the Great Depression, a run on banks resulted in 10,000 bankruptcies and over $2 billion in lost deposits. Today, the FDIC insures bank deposits and makes a repeat performance completely impossible.

National Aeronautical Space Administration: A classic example of a long-term research and development program that no business could ever afford. Today we have communications, weather and scientific satellites that have revolutionized our daily lives, all thanks to NASA.

National Academy of Sciences: (1863) Abraham Lincoln approved its Congressional Charter. This is the premier scientific body in the United States, comprised of 1,800 of its best scientists. Membership is one of the highest honors of a scientist's career. The Academy's duty is to advise the government on scientific and technical issues, and to help coordinate scientific research in the U.S. It also commissions review panels on controversial issues and often gets to the bottom of them.

National Weather Service: This agency not only gives you your daily weather reports, but saves the lives and/or livelihoods of pilots, sailors, farmers and those in the paths of destructive storms.

Police and Criminal Justice System: This may seem obvious, but it's also one of the best examples that government plays a vital role in society, one that could never be privatized. This is one of the best counter-arguments against pure anarchy.

Public Libraries: In 1992, America had 15,870 central public libraries and their branches, with nearly 700 million books and serial volumes in circulation. A University of Minnesota/Gallup survey found that 88 percent of all Americans consider public libraries "very important" as an educational support center for students of all ages.

The U.S. Armed Forces: Love 'em or hate 'em, the U.S. Armed Forces have won every war they ever fought. Even in Vietnam, they won the vast majority of their battles.

Suggest removal:

12cambridge(2965 comments)posted 2 years ago

jojuggie....The point is that you post over and over again that the UAW got 17% of GM and you post in a way that says they got it for nothing. That is not the case. They gave up benefits that GM was not in the position to pay at this time so they got stock instead. I doubt that any UAW member would rather give up their benefits. They made a sacrifice so GM and their jobs would carry on. I have no doubt that you would be so much happier if GM went out of business but that didn't happen so you should just get over it.

Now getting back to that 25 billion you're so worried about. Remember, the same amount bush spent in Iraq every two months for six and a half years? You remember bush don't you? He's the one who proposed the auto loans to begin with. He's the guy you voted for twice, right?

Suggest removal:

13300(553 comments)posted 2 years ago

I think this debate boils down to those with a narrow understanding of how the world works vs. those with a broad understanding. No one is saying that individual hard work isn't needed or that the government is the only reason why someone's successful. Absolutely NO ONE is saying that.

What we're saying is that it takes a basket of aspects that leads to success, and government is one of them.

Simple minded rhetoric like "government's not the answer it's the problem" is patently ridiculous. Nobody with an ounce of thought would buy into such a statement. Government plays a role in helping to build the environment which allows a business a strive. It also protects the population from unscrupulous business practices, such as some businessman who keeps all the profits but pollutes the area around him.

If people like Jojuggie can't understand this, then I really don't know how else to phrase it.

Suggest removal:

14300(553 comments)posted 2 years ago

Honestly, you don't understand what I wrote?

I really have to question your intelligence at this point. Not because you might have a different opinion, but because you don't seem to be able to understand a pretty basic sentence.

Back in the 80s and early 90s I voted GOP. I stopped in 1994 when Newt was rising up. My impression was that the GOP had quit being the party which represented the educated and intellectual, and had thrown its support behind the uneducated and anti-intellectual (what was at the time the Democrats in Youngstown).

This justifies my switch. The GOP of today is largely Juggie/Redeye types. When a political party gets the majority of its support from the ignorant, it's time to vote for another party. If what I wrote is "mumbo-jumbo" then I know I'm dealing with someone who isn't educated. Someone who's not educated deserves respect just as much as the next man, but he's certainly not someone with whom it's worth having a conversation.

Suggest removal:

15cambridge(2965 comments)posted 2 years ago

jojuggie....Now that we know what's causing your hallucinations there is a chance of recovery. You should seek counseling.


Suggest removal:

16commoncitizen(961 comments)posted 2 years ago

juggie, your wasting you time responding to 300, he's so "overeducated" (in his mind) that there is no response good enough for him.

Suggest removal:

17Education_Voter(838 comments)posted 2 years ago


Are you really from this area? I was visiting a house near Route 422 in 1985 when a tornado flattened the neighbor.

We went out and walked around afterward, awed at the damage.

Then, no one with a flattened house or business was saying,
"The 9 most terrifing words in the English language are I'm from the Govt & I'm here to help."

In fact, government workers came out an helped from their homes without being asked. Other citizens showed up and started helping with the cleaning and building.

Suggest removal:

18Education_Voter(838 comments)posted 2 years ago

Okay, so you were here in 1985.
"In times of strife, the Gov't doesn't say I'm here to help. They just do it."

Evil government?
But regardless, I was speaking of off-duty police, firemen, and street workers.
Remember also how people came from other communities to help? That was the good part of a bad thing.

Suggest removal:

19TylerDurden(367 comments)posted 2 years ago

"Intelligent, liberal minded thinkers spend more of their time reading and learning from far more substantive, informed sources."

That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. I know many many liberals and they do not read and are devoid of logic. Of course, I know many many republicans and the same goes for them as well, but to truly believe your "party" is vastly superior in the intelligence and education categories really takes any substance away from what you post.

The Tyler

Suggest removal:

20BabaGhanoush(106 comments)posted 1 year, 12 months ago

"Earlier, I clearly stated that I am "a fiscal conservative, who moonlights as a social liberal,"

That would make you a libertarian, wouldn't it?

Suggest removal:

21Education_Voter(838 comments)posted 1 year, 12 months ago

Not really jojuggie: See Ron Paul

Suggest removal:

22GoPens(397 comments)posted 1 year, 12 months ago

There are hundred's of more credible books on Lincoln then O'Reilly's comical attempt. In fact the National Parks Service found so many inaccuracies that they recommended that The Ford's Theater bookstore not even put the book on its shelves

Suggest removal:

23southsidedave(4777 comments)posted 1 year, 12 months ago

Politics as usual...all talk, nothing acomplished

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport