BET Founder: Stop Attacking The Wealthy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Maverick74, Oct 3, 2011.

  1. Maverick74


    BET's Robert Johnson To Obama: Stop Attacking The Wealthy

    BET founder Robert Johnson on the "FOX News Sunday" program: "Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don't get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I've earned my success. I've earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.

    "And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old -- I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I've tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn't mean that I am a bad guy.

    "I didn't go in to business to create a public policy success for either party, Republican or Democrat. I went in business to create jobs and opportunity, create opportunity, create value for myself and my investors. And that's what the president should be praising, not demagoguing us simply because Warren Buffet says he pays more than his secretary. He should pay the secretary more and she will pay more."
  2. Let's be realistic here, Obama is not actually attacking the wealthy, he is simply pandering to his base. Obama raises plenty from Wall Street and he knows that for him to have any shot at getting re elected he will need those deep pocketed donors again.

    University of California $1,648,685
    Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
    Harvard University $864,654
    Microsoft Corp $852,167
    Google Inc $814,540
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
    Citigroup Inc $736,771
    Time Warner $624,618
    Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
    Stanford University $595,716
    National Amusements Inc $563,798
    Wilmerhale Llp $550,168
    Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
    Columbia University $541,002
    UBS AG $532,674
    IBM Corp $532,372
    General Electric $529,855
    US Government $517,908
    Morgan Stanley $512,232
    Latham & Watkins $503,295
  3. Maverick74


    I would say he is attacking the wealthy, but pandering to the super wealthy socialists.
  4. He's causing no harm, hence, I cannot call it an attack. It's tantamount to smack talking during a basketball game. His rhetoric is empty. He knows it. you know it. I know it. The only people that don't know it are his dearly devoted base.
  5. Maverick74


    I disagree. Class warfare always has casualties. Whether it's done by the right or the left. It divides this country. We are more divided now then during the Vietnam war or even the Bush years. It's getting really bad. Obama is pouring fuel all over the fire when he should be trying to put it out. Class warfare is probably the most destructive thing a politician can engage in.
  6. Let's be realistic again, class warfare is always going on and the country is already divided. However, class warfare is simply a buzzword that has no measurable impact. It is an attempt to explain why some do well while others do not. Who do you imagine has been injured by Obama's empty rhetoric?

  7. Mavie justs likes to be the prom queen.
  8. Maverick74


    This is a really silly argument. Let me ask you a question. Do you think during the Bush years when that administration adopted the "you are either with us or against us" slogan, do you think that helped in furthering the debate on the Iraq war?
  9. pspr


    You're absolutely correct. Obama has been attacking wealthy and successful business men and women for some time. To call it anything less is absurd.
  10. I'll bet you are a pretty good dancer because you sidestepped that adroitly. However, I will have to ask again, what actual, measurable harm has been caused by Oabama's rhetoric?
    #10     Oct 3, 2011