Jump to content

Romney Derangement Syndrome


Shady

Recommended Posts

He's talking about that and the entire system:

"Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive ... you didn't build that [by yourself]."

Didn't you leave out some words in there? Nice editing. Or did the internet make that happen?

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 291
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If you listen to the quote you would get that. BTW Obama isn't the first president or American leader to say something like that. Both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt made the same argument as well as Ben Franklin, Eisenhower made the case when he you know invested huge in the highway system. This idea has been a part of a successful American leadership for a long long time.

So another leader said, if you've got a business, you didn't build that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of deliberate misinterpretation as a political strategy. I think it's working for Romney, judging from the polls. Keep it up!

I don't work for the Romney campaign, so it's not my job.

But you should stick to the topic at hand. What you have just said is not an argument. Calling it a misinterpretation over and over doesn't make it so.

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that."

What is "that"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't work for the Romney campaign, so it's not my job.

But you should stick to the topic at hand. What you have just said is not an argument. Calling it a misinterpretation over and over doesn't make it so.

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that."

What is "that"?

I notice you went back not quoting the sentence before and after because it made you look foolish when in context. When you quote it all it is much harder for you because you want people to believe that out of no where when talking about public infrastructure Obama just slips in a dig at business. He just goes off topic to make sure he gets one in at business. Nope your interpretation makes no sense in context so you take it out of context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice you went back not quoting the sentence before and after because it made you look foolish when in context. When you quote it all it is much harder for you because you want people to believe that out of no where when talking about public infrastructure Obama just slips in a dig at business. He just goes off topic to make sure he gets one in at business. Nope your interpretation makes no sense in context so you take it out of context.

I don't quote the rest, because that sentence on its own is enough. And obviously Bubber has seen the speech. I don't have to quote the whole thing. I am asking what "that" is and I am pointing to the sentence in which the specific "that" I am referring to is situated.

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that."

Now, any reasonable person can surmise from that sentence that "that" refers to the business. It's quite simple. To suggest that he is saying "If you've got a business, you didn't build roads and bridges and the internet" is pretty absurd. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't quote the rest, because that sentence on its own is enough. And obviously Bubber has seen the speech.

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that."

Now, any reasonable person can surmise from that sentence that "that" refers to the business. It's quite simple. To suggest that he is saying "If you've got a business, you didn't build roads and bridges and the internet" is pretty absurd. That makes no sense whatsoever.

However it isn't at all. There is a difference between what you want Obama to say and what he did actually say. In fact it is so unabsurd that the Washington post fact checker happens to agree with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However it isn't at all. There is a difference between what you want Obama to say and what he did actually say. In fact it is so unabsurd that the Washington post fact checker happens to agree with me.

What I want him to say?

He said:

If you've got a business, you didn't build that.

That is what he says. It's not what I want him to say. If "that" doesn't refer to the aforementioned business, the sentence doesn't even make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I want him to say?

He said:

If you've got a business, you didn't build that.

That is what he says. It's not what I want him to say. If "that" doesn't refer to the aforementioned business, the sentence doesn't even make sense.

I agree the sentence is a grammatical nightmare. However I am going to let him make a grammatical mistake. His speech doesn't make sense the way you interpret it though. He is talking about public projects for like 5 minutes however for one sentence he goes off topic (right after he talks about how individuals should be created for their work) just to say F*&k you to businesses? That is what you want me to believe the president did? That makes so much less sense then what I know happened so I can see why you want to quote it out of context.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is talking about public projects for like 5 minutes however for one sentence he goes off topic (right after he talks about how individuals should be created for their work) just to say F*&k you to businesses?

Well, the way I interpret it is the only way it makes sense. And I disagree with your logic here, because if you would be honest about it, I don't really think it amounts to an expletive toward business. To me, the way the speech is put however, reflects a level of leftism that Obama would all of a sudden like to hide from because it did not resonate well with many Americans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the way I interpret it is the only way it makes sense. And I disagree with your logic here, because if you would be honest about it, I don't really think it amounts to an expletive toward business. To me, the way the speech is put however, reflects a level of leftism that Obama would all of a sudden like to hide from because it did not resonate well with many Americans.

Yes I agree when we only quote one sentence it makes perfect sense. However when you use the actual quote the way you interpret it makes no sense what so ever. Which was the conclusion of the Washington Post fact checker as well. No offense the President of the United States isn't some random that posts on a message board. He doesn't jump wildly off message for one sentence in a 10 minute speech to get a dig in at business. If that was his message that would have been the message. NOT that public infrastructure is important.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I agree when we only quote one sentence it makes perfect sense. However when you use the actual quote the way you interpret it makes no sense what so ever. Which was the conclusion of the Washington Post fact checker as well. No offense the President of the United States isn't some random that posts on a message board. He doesn't jump wildly off message for one sentence in a 10 minute speech to get a dig in at business. If that was his message that would have been the message. NOT that public infrastructure is important.

The way I quoted it makes perfect sense. And the way I quoted it is the way he said it. The Washington Post fact checker has no reasonable means to determine something like that. How do you factually determine that he didn't mean his sentence as stated, and that it was a grammatical error (being the only alternative).

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I quoted it makes perfect sense. And the way I quoted it is the way he said it. The Washington Post fact checker has no reasonable means to determine something like that. How do you factually determine that he didn't mean his sentence as stated, and that it was a grammatical error (being the only alternative).

You listen to what he was saying is how you determine what he meant. You listen to the context of his argument. You read the sentence in that context and the way you interpret it makes no sense. Again the President of the United States doesn't go off message to get in a 1 sentence dig then go back to the original message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You listen to what he was saying is how you determine what he meant. You listen to the context of his argument. You read the sentence in that context and the way you interpret it makes no sense. Again the President of the United States doesn't go off message to get in a 1 sentence dig then go back to the original message.

Well, once again, as I said I don't think he considered it a dig. I think the real issue is that it reveals a degree of leftist thinking that he is now trying to back-pedal from.

The alternative you are suggesting is not only that he made a grammatical error (the sentence uttered was grammatically correct) but that he made an error trying to utter a grammatically incorrect sentence.

I saw the speech on CNN and I saw people here talking about it, so I made my comments. I was told to stop watching "faux" news by a bunch of people who try to insist that a man did not say what he said. I do know that there were people on the news doing a lot of explaining for Obama afterward. So, who are the ones taking their talking points from the media?

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real issue is that it reveals a degree of leftist thinking that he is now trying to back-pedal from.

I think the real issue is that it reveals how Republicans have fallen into the trap of exploiting out-of-centext mistinterpretations to fit a prefabricated narrative with the hope that the voting public is too lazy and ignorant to learn the truth. Fortunately, it's not working out for them. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, once again, as I said I don't think he considered it a dig. I think the real issue is that it reveals a degree of leftist thinking that he is now trying to back-pedal from.

What are you talking about. You still haven't put fourth any explanation why Obama would go wildly off topic for one sentence in 15 minutes speech? There is only way to interpret what he said with it making sense in the context of the whole speech. Which is why I can not for the life of me understand why you think he would do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about. You still haven't put fourth any explanation why Obama would go wildly off topic for one sentence in 15 minutes speech? There is only way to interpret what he said with it making sense in the context of the whole speech. Which is why I can not for the life of me understand why you think he would do that.

Personally, I don't think he went "wildly" off-topic. But either way, I don't have to explain his motive for doing so. All I have to explain is that he said "If you've got a business, you didn't build that." And that your interpretation of that sentence makes no sense, whatsoever. Once again, your assertion is that he was attempting to make a grammatically incorrect sentence. Basically that he made a mistake making a mistake.

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real issue is that it reveals how Republicans have fallen into the trap of exploiting out-of-centext mistinterpretations to fit a prefabricated narrative with the hope that the voting public is too lazy and ignorant to learn the truth. Fortunately, it's not working out for them. :lol:

Once again, all you are doing is screaming misinterpretation over and over hoping that makes it so Obama did not say what he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't think he went "wildly" off-topic. But either way, I don't have to explain his motive for doing so. All I have to explain is that he said "If you've got a business, you didn't build that." And that your interpretation of that sentence makes no sense, whatsoever. Once again, your assertion is that he was attempting to make a grammatically incorrect sentence. Basically that he made a mistake making a mistake.

Yeah I agree all you have to do is pretend he didn't say the 1000 words before or the 1000 words after and focus on 7 words. That is your world view. To bad no one who looks at those 2000 words agrees with you though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, all you are doing is screaming misinterpretation over and over hoping that makes it so Obama did not say what he said.

Nope we are just going with the view that is supported by the fact checkers, and you know EVERY nonpartisan opinion on what Obama said. You are the one who is outside the norm here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope we are just going with the view that is supported by the fact checkers, and you know EVERY nonpartisan opinion on what Obama said. You are the one who is outside the norm here.

Now, this course because you can no longer argue what I have said. Makes little difference if the entire world disagrees. Truth is not a matter of democratic consensus. All that matters is the argument.

Either he said what he very plainly said.

Or he made an error while attempting to say a completely different nonsensical sentence.

That's a load, Punked. And you know it.

Edited by jefferiah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, this course because you can no longer argue what I have said. Makes little difference if the entire world disagrees. Truth is not a matter of democratic consensus. All that matters is the argument.

Either he said what he very plainly said.

Or he made an error while attempting to say a completely different nonsensical sentence.

That's a load, Punked. And you know it.

All you have said is you love to take the quote of context and refuse to quote it in context because you know that shows you are wrong. That is it. You are hung up on grammatical correctness instead if intent. Tough for you though because people out there not choosing sides have said your interpretation is a lie. So there we go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All you have said is you love to take the quote of context and refuse to quote it in context because you know that shows you are wrong. That is it. You are hung up on grammatical correctness instead if intent. Tough for you though because people out there not choosing sides have said your interpretation is a lie. So there we go.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, Punked. It's been a pleasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the way I interpret it is the only way it makes sense. And I disagree with your logic here, because if you would be honest about it, I don't really think it amounts to an expletive toward business. To me, the way the speech is put however, reflects a level of leftism that Obama would all of a sudden like to hide from because it did not resonate well with many Americans.

Saying the president said people didn't build their own businesses is as stupid as saying Romney actually thinks Paul Ryan is going to be the next president of the United States. Stop acting like a moron.

"Ladies and gentlemen, the next president of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Romney said that!

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...