Go on, keep beating your wife. We all know it works.
Do you contend that small business owners build roads? If not, you agree with Obama, as is made clear when one reads the sentences around the snipped sentence.
X pages in and you don’t get that? You’re being willfully obtuse.
What kind of person would claim that Olympians didn’t achieve their excellence on their own?
BWAHAHAHAHA! That’s hilarious! I can’t wait to hear how he didn’t really mean what the words he said mean! 'Splain that!
As a small business owner, I have yet to hear any bad-mouthing from Obama.
Man oh man. If I were Romney’s campaign manager I’d just start drinking heavily. It’s on video!!
Here’s the full quote, for those who don’t want to follow the link:
Do you men like the tax policy implications I’ve mentioned more than once? Sigh.
You know, there is a way to characterize this post, but it’s off limits outside of the pit. Even there I use it exceedingly seldom and cautiously. But I dare say I think this post of yours might qualify. As it stands, I’ll just have to ask you to not post blatant untruths about would I’ve answered and not answered.
Please. As I’ve mentioned earlier, it’s one thing when someone who is having praise heaped on him seeks to deflect some of the limelight and share the accolades with others. It’s quite another for that decision to be taken out of his hands. We like people who recognize someone’s accomplishments and praise them. We also like people who, when they are showered with praise, show humility and try to minimize it and/or share it. We tend to not like people who do the opposite of those two things.
Which is why I’m outraged (try that again, OUTRAGED!!) at what Mitt said about the Olympians.
Nope. You seem to be having a rough time with reading comprehension.
Let’s look at your comment again:
All that is necessary to disprove that statement (even with the generous interpretation of hyperbole), is to demonstrate that while their market share is impressive, it is by no means saturated. Steve Jobs did not develop the mp3 player, he ordered it developed. Prescient of him, but the iPod was by no means the first mp3 player. The Moving Picture Expert Group received plenty of public funding.
Give me your best shot. If the charge is mischaracterizing what other posters say, I don’t think you have a leg to stand on.
Would anyone else care to help me look through this thread for an answer? Why did magellan01 bring up Phelps in the first place?
As even the supposed “Oooooo-Gothcha!” link :rolleyes: pointed out,
(emphasis mine)
So imagine that, at an Opening Ceremony he sought to be inclusive to everyone who would watching the games. Unbelievable, I say. Unbelievable!!
You might not be aware of this, bout it’s try, I swear: at the very same games he headed up, at the conclusion of each competition, Gold Medals went to the participants. Somehow he overlooked the guy who cleaned the pool and swept the gym. really, you could look it up.
What? I said there were other MP3 players. I even stated that I had a tiny portable one made by Creative Media before the iPod came out. The differences is that very, very few people wanted one. The problem was that it really didn’t hold enough to be useful. and the ones that held more weren’t portable. Plus the was the technology hurdle. The other stuff was geeky to use. The iPod was super intuitive to both interact with and get music on it. So, my statement is true. Unless you want to quibble over it being an MP3 player “everyone” wanted. If so, guess you got me.
(Note to mods, can we get a “roll eyes” emoticon the size of the sun as an option?)
I’m a bit confused. Are you implying that by adding that bit at the end it clarifies the intent of the bit before it? I don’t see how that makes any sense at all; do you?
Asking for help, mags? I’m surprised at you. Be like Steve Jobs, create your own emoticon!
Well, apparently, having someone else do something for you is the exact same thing as doing it yourself (in magellan’s world).
Yes. That was quoted already in the thread, in context. Both Obama and Romney can accurately be summarized thusly: “The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.”
No. You seem to be King. And a brazen one at that. You’ve claimed repeatedly in this thread, that you looked at my original post about Phelps that there was no “like” there to help explain why I brought him up. Well, you either have very poor reading ability or very poor truth telling ability. In Post 278 you, amazingly, asked why I brought up Phelps:
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
So, what exactly was your point in bringing up Phelps?
[/QUOTE]
In Post 281 I responded:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
From Post 228 (emphasis mine):
[QUOTE=magellan01]
So, in the spirit of being “fair”(?), “helpful”(?), or God know’s what, you seek to employ some three-card monty sleight-of-hand and take some of the credit away from the individual. It’s like taking a successful ski racer and giving credit to the mountain, gravity, or snow. Or saying that michael Phelps should be sharing his success with the properties of water.
And them someone commented with something along the lines of, “Yeah, but someone had to build the pool.” For which the world does not have enough roll-eyes.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Astonishingly, you respond in Post 282:
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
I’ve got one of those fancy computers that lets me go back and re-read what people have written, so it’s not particularly useful to just quote yourself. I’m asking why you brought up Phelps in the first place. What point were you trying to make?
[/QUOTE]
It’s astonishing because it is so patently obvious from the post itself. I assumed you forgot it or missed it or something, so I had supplied it again. And when it is in front of your face again, you feign (I hope) that you cannot glean the meaning. Are you new to the English language? Are phrases such as “It’s like…”, “It’s as if…” “It’s similar to…”, “Here, let me give you an analogy…” foreign to to you? How about common comparisons people use every day? If someone says, “Oh my boss yelled at me, but I’m so used to it it’s like water off a duck’s back”, do you ask him why he’s bringing up ducks? If someone I gotta tell ya, I’m really hoping for a “yes” here. For your sake. But let’s continue, shall we?
Me, from Post 296, directing you again to the original post and the crux of the reason I brought up Phelps. And skiing even:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
You’ve got to be kidding. Here, I’ll give you a hint: the reason I brought him up, and skiing, revolves around the word “like”. If you can’t figure it out from there, you may want to go ask an English teacher. Or one of his or her students. It’s really that basic.
[/QUOTE]
You then given an indication that you did see the post and the word “like” Post 298:
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
So you think teachers and bridges are “like” gravity and water, and that Michael Phelps becoming wet was somehow illustrative of this similarity.
My mistake. I thought there was some subtlety I was missing. Instead, you’re just wrong.
[/QUOTE]
My response, Post 299, explains it yet more fully:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
Uh, no. Especially since you’ve offered no rationale. The bottom line is that people who start businesses and succeed deserve the credit for doing so. They’ve played on the same play field as everyone else, yet they suited up and did what was necessary. Milions of people drive on the same roads they do and didn’t take advantage of the infrastructure and do all the other things to open the doors and make their businesses succeed. The Steve Jobses, Michael Phelpses, and Martha Stewarts of the world deserve the credit. Not the computer chip, swimming pool manufacturers or arts and crafts stores.
Most important, we should be presenting the narrative to the world that yes, it was the individual who made his success happen. THAT is how you encourage other individuals to do the same.
[/QUOTE]
Yet, here you are in Post 304, minus the initial line of snark (which was a bafflement anyway):
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
I don’t see the word “like” in there anywhere. Last we heard from you, that was the linchpin of your whole argument. “…revolves around the word ‘like’”, you said.
So, c’mon, help us out here. What thing is “like” another thing?
[/QUOTE]
And this is where you start you string of untruths claiming that the word “like” I pointed you to several times—and you seemed to digest once and respond to (your Post 298), didn’t exist. I point out the error of your ways again in Post 317, but then like some offspring of the Energizer Bunny and John Lovitz you respond in Post 392 with this:
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
The first person to bring up Michael Phelps in the thread was you, as an example of…
Well, you never really were able to answer that.
[/QUOTE]
The first line is correct, but your second one is a blatant fabrication. Fuck. It should have need any explanation, but you asked and I gave it to you—more than once. But now that we’re here and you can see that 1) I did explain why I brought up Phelps, 2) my bringing of Phelps shouldn’t have required any explanation whatsoever, and 3) the word “like” was there all the time, I’m sure you’ll do the right thing here and apologize for the untruths you’ve put forth, right? Right?!
And just in case you missed it, from waaay back in Post 228, but this time with gusto:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
So, in the spirit of being “fair”(?), “helpful”(?), or God know’s what, you seek to employ some three-card monty sleight-of-hand and take some of the credit away from the individual.** It’s like taking a successful ski racer and giving credit to the mountain, gravity, or snow. Or saying that michael Phelps should be sharing his success with the properties of water.**
[/QUOTE]
Missing the “like” in that is like missing the pyramids while standing 10 feet away from them.
Now the only thing left for you to do is apologize. Or, given your tendency thus far, you might take the more expected route and start asking me, "Why are you bringing up the pyramids.?!?!?!
:mad:
Oh, almost forgot: :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
No, don’t thank me. You’ve earned them—all by yourself.
Yet, they give only one Gold Medal per event. You’re peddling the same it-takes-a-village/Kumbaya pablum Obama was spewing. Keep in mind the venue Romney was in. He was trying to have people feel more connected to being viewers and fans. And this was after he spoke of the athletes themselves.
I really don’t get why Obama supporters feel to muddle a what is a stark contrast in ideology. He’s a collectivist, s statist, a socialist (small “s”) at heart. If you believe in that nonsense the least you could do is own it, like Bernie Sanders. Why not put forth that position and let it contrast sharply with a more conservative belief system? What are you guys so afraid of?