Splicetoday

Politics & Media
Aug 09, 2012, 10:06AM

Raise a Glass to the Slandered Entrepreneur

Don’t believe that Obama’s for the “small guy.”

Untitled.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

Teresa Kirby Smith

I’ve recently returned from a brief vacation in Bermuda, where my family was generously put up in the commodious lower floor of my brother’s house in Tucker’s Town. It was Cup Match weekend, an annual holiday that revolves around a cricket match—Somerset took the honors this year—and so it was busy on the island, yet many of the stores in Hamilton were closed. No matter: aside from a ritual visit to Onion Jack’s, a souvenir outpost where my younger son buys a t-shirt and bottle of hot sauce every summer, we were there to visit with my brother and sister-in-law, dodge fairly enormous (to me, at least) waves at the beach, get roasted by the sun, avoid Red Sox scores, play bocce and/or croquet, dine at a few top-notch restaurants and watch movies at night, while the tree frogs created a lovely racket outside.

It was a relaxing several days—highlighted by a visit to the Bermuda National Galley, where my sister-in-law Teresa has three photos displayed for the museum’s Biennial, one of which, “Possessed” is above—yet there was no respite from the nagging insult President Obama had stupidly included in a Roanoke speech in mid-July. You’ve heard it, the Romney campaign (finally flashing at least a glimmer of heat) is exploiting it, and Obama has walked it back, but, as the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan correctly said, it was the President’s worst gaffe of the campaign, at least so far.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. 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. 

I didn’t vote for Obama, won’t this November, but have never bought into all the birther nonsense or absurd demonization of him by right-wing loonies. He’s always struck me as a thoughtful and pleasant man, if aloof, who, however mistakenly, in my opinion, tries his best to govern the country. But the “you didn’t build that” attack—and that’s what it is—on small business owners was the first time I felt a visceral dislike for the man.

This outright dismissal of entrepreneurs—a central part of the American Dream, no?—led me to think of my father, who passed away, suddenly, 40 years ago. In the early 1960s, Dad owned a car wash in the sketchy town of Copiague on the south shore of Long Island, located on busy Sunrise Highway. He never made much money, but it was enough to keep his family of seven in comfort: like most of our neighbors in Huntington, we were on the lowest run of the middle class, and though Mom clipped coupons and bought clothes at rummage sales, my childhood, with the company of four older brothers and lots of friends, was a happy one.

Dad worked seven days a week, leaving before we went to school and getting home around six p.m., and though exhausted, in the summer he’d often take us for a “dip” at one of the public beaches, or maybe even play catch for a half hour. It wasn’t easy work: the car wash wasn’t heated in the winter, his office was cramped and dumpy, but he made ends meet, and employed a dozen or so men to manually scrub down the cars of customers. On occasion, I’d wake up and he’d be gone: “Where’s Dad,” I’d ask my mother, and she’d grimace and say that he was awakened by the cops at three in the morning and went off to bail out one of his workers who was involved in a knife fight or other altercation.

My father was a registered Republican—voted against FDR all four times and so on, until his last vote for Nixon in ‘68—but wouldn’t tolerate discrimination against people who were then called “colored.” (My mother, more of a loose cannon politically, was equally ardent about civil rights: one Sunday morning, on the way to church, I asked her why so many people, including some neighbors, hated blacks, and she simply said, in a sanitized version for a seven-year-old, “They’re just jealous because black people are more attractive than whites.”)

In any case, not only did my Dad “build” his business, he also had it taken away—by the government. At one point, either the county or state officials decided to widen Sunrise Highway, and so businesses along the strip were the victims of eminent domain and the property upon which the car wash was situated was condemned. He received scant compensation, and for some 18 months, while he searched for a replacement location, his income was vastly reduced. I don’t think this procedure was purposely malevolent on the government’s part—it happens all the time—but unlike Obama’s grand paean to the glory of the “unbelievable American system,” the fact was that my Dad got screwed. (A current example: three years ago, during the Eye of the Recession, Baltimore City reassessed the value of my house and—surprise—listed it at 35 percent more than the purchase price in ’03, a naked grab for higher property taxes.)

I hope Obama’s signature quote, “You didn’t build that,” comes back to haunt him. It’s campaign rhetoric, sure, but you get the feeling he really believes it. Bill Clinton, in his ’92 campaign was almost as insulting, when, trying to capitalize on the insider trading cases on Wall Street in the 80s (the men and women whose careers were either ruined or sidetracked by ultimately dismissed indictments never received an apology), spoke about championing those Americans who played “by the rules.” He didn’t mention his wife Hillary’s $100,000 cattle futures windfall that came via an Arkansan businessman trying to curry favor, but hey, maybe she did multiply her $1000 investment 100 times over just by reading the business section of the Wall Street Journal.

A longtime friend of mine, who owns several moderately priced restaurants, wasn’t too thrilled by Obama’s declaration either. Yes, the food he serves is delivered by trucks on government-built highways, but had he not started his business, 90 employees would either be out of work or doing something else. In the current economy, my friend is struggling, like so many in that industry, but he’s stayed afloat by sheer determination, a trait that wasn’t ceded to him by the government.

Anyway, though we had a splendid stay in Bermuda, “the politics of personal destruction,” as Clinton bitterly complained about during his Lewinsky travails, wasn’t far from my mind.   

Discussion
  • I have a suggestion for you, Russ. If you really believe the ONE is a nice guy just trying to do his job, however poorly, then perhaps it would be best for you to stay in Bermuda. The ONE is trying to remake the country in his image which by definition means destroying over 200 years of success. Not my definition of a "nice guy" in over his head. Too bad he had to insult your dad just to get your attention. He should have had it long ago.

    Responses to this comment
  • Hold the phone, buster. As I wrote, I didn't vote for Obama in '08 and won't this year. I don't like his policies (you can click on my byline here to check the archives of my work) and can't stand the liberal media enablers who are, more blatantly than ever before, cheering him on. What I said is that Obama probably is a nice guy (just as rational liberal might admit Bush is a nice guy) who doesn't belong in the presidency, but rather in academia or writing for The New York Times.

    Responses to this comment
  • Russ, great article. Always been a big regret of mine that I didn't know your dad (I think I was 2 when he passed) or really get to know his stories. In fact, I never knew about the eminent domain story and would like to hear more stories next time we meet. My only dissapointment with this article is that you fell hook line and sinker for the republican interprtation of the speech rather than the obvious intent . Clearly what Obama said was poorly worded, and due to his oratorical skills, exagerrated to absurdity, he was clearly trying to make the point that through public education, transportation, etc. that all have benefitted from, the opportunity for a small business exists and is made easier. Stupid point, sure. An attack on small business owners like your father, not even close. I'm no Obama fan since his screwing of senior secured creditors of GM, but am sick of the absurd spin (on both sides but this is an Obama article). The fact that it got you even furthers my fears that people are unaware/uninterested in facts. Please note, I'm certainly not calling you unaware or uninterested and regard your opinion highly, just think you got fooled this time.

    Responses to this comment
  • Russ,I am sorry about your dad. Truly. But your column makes absolutely no sense. What Obama said was just common sense. Work hard, build a factory. If that factory catches fire, a fireman will come and put it out. Have a great idea, work hard on a business plan, and an investor will front you some money. That's all he was saying. It wasn't a gaffe and it wasn't said badly. Where do you get "outright dismissal of entrepreneurs"? The paucity of any real thought or insight by the GOP is evident in its attempt to make this into an issue. It is why Obama will win pulling away. What you wrote makes no sense, which is odd because you seem intelligent. That's not snark. Your post lacks any sort of logical thread. I've been in Copiague, by the way. Bermuda is much nicer. Also, your post breaks two pretty good rules (I'm a journalist): Talking about yourself before introducing your point and referring to Peggy Noonan. The latter was added recently.

    Responses to this comment
  • Sorry Carl, but no amount of "spin" will undo that "you didn't build that!" comment. Other countries have roads, fire departments, and schools ... that doesn't make them unique, or result in the (pre-Obama) productivity the US enjoyed. Obama and Elizabeth Warren firmly believe success is shared, and the results of success should be redistributed.

    Responses to this comment
  • That other countries have fire departments and roads is meaningless to this discussion. Obama and Warren weren't saying that they don't. They believe that success is shared to some extent to the level that they both say: If you are Steve Jobs, you probably had a great design professor, computer science professor and so on. It's so basic and based on common sense that I am a lost to explain why people are raising an issue. They think success should be redistributed to the extent that Romney should pay the same level of income tax that I pay. By the way, the "pre-Obama" productivity in the U.S. wasn't all that swell...unless of course you go back to Bill Clinton.

    Responses to this comment
  • The real issue with Obama's comments is the lack of understanding it portrays for what it takes to build a business. Roads and an education aren't enough. The same roads and lousy public education system puts out alot of criminals also. Should they not be held responsible for their actions because they used public access to commit their crimes. Building a business takes alot more than just roads and an education. It takes a willingness to take a risk with no promise of returns. It takes finding a better location or a cheaper (or better) means to provide the service or product to assure someone buys it. Anyone who has ever built a business remembers the day he broke even. Why? That is the day you knew you were going to make it. The percentage of failed businesses is high for a reason. Using the road or whatever public service does not assure success. Guts and determination assure success.

    Responses to this comment
  • There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the president's or Elizabeth Warren's comments that suggest that they don't understand this. Show it to me in words, not your assumptions about what they mean. The comments simply don't portray the lack of understanding you suggest. You are creating a straw dog (or red herring, I always get the two confused) by reading into the comments things that you want to be his beliefs so that you can knock them down. My god, the guy's personal story would suggest that he understands this better than anyone, and I believe he does. The right would be smart to pursue the real differences it has with the president instead of this nonsense.

    Responses to this comment
  • well said Russ. However, as you live in the land of Mencken as did my family for several generations, you well know his high opinion of the herd's intelligence and blindness. We know how absolutely revealing Obama's statement was, worse than it takes "a village to raise a child" ever was, but the rampaging, propaganda prodded herd soon forgets the slight as yearns to suckle at the breast of the all embracing State!

    Responses to this comment
  • Hey, Carl...Obama said"If you've got a business, you didn't build that." How can you argue about it? I'm a small business owner and I was insulted by his arrogance and ignorance. He is, for all intents and purposes, a Marxist. An intellectual lightweight, he reads well from a teleprompter and will lie even if the truth sounds better. Any business owner who votes for him will deserve the thorough and complete screwing he will get if Barry is reelected.

    Responses to this comment
  • Read the whole quote and watch the video. Any fair reading and listening to the video and to Elizabeth Warren's leads to the conclusion that what he meant was that nobody built anything without the help of others and the societal infrastructure to make his/her dream a reality. Steve Jobs is broke if there aren't intellectual property laws to protect him and scores of other things that society offers to help him make his success. To say he is a Marxist is more nonsense, and your reference to him as "Barry" shows where you are coming from. That's your right, of course. So I am not going to convince you and you certainly won't influence me. But to others reading this string, I ask that you watch the video and read the quote carefully. The interpretation of it that periodoc offers is a fantasy. Purely.

    Responses to this comment
  • Without the help of others" is YOUR interpretation of what they meant. What they SAID was ""nobody made it on their own", and "you didn't build that.

    Responses to this comment
  • I've been harping about this since it happened. The quoted paragraph is below. It's actually WORSE. The last sentence about the Internet is an outright and blatant lie. DARPA built ARPANET to provide secure communications for the military units around the world. It had nothing to do with making money - nor did the government see making money as a use of ARPANET. Even among universities, the Internet didn't become available until Xerox invented the Ethernet protocol (with no help from Uncle Sugar) in the early 1970s. ARPANET was completely shut down in 1990 - FIVE years before Windows95 changed the consumer market for computers forever. Government didn't invent the PC. Government had this vast communications network for 50 YEARS and realized no commercial use or radical change in the lives of humans because of it. Private industry took less than a decade. Government had no clue, much less intent of this when ARPANET was created by DOD. Relevant text from speech (from whitehouse.gov): If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. 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. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

    Responses to this comment
  • This is getting tiresome. You are completely missing the point. You are taking out of context both in terms of the speech and in terms of everything else Obama has ever said. I can't take this any further. To sum up: Nobody succeeds without other people. Nobody succeeds without the structures society has set up. Obama understands that. Elizabeth Warren understands that. They both advocate fair, even playing fields, and if you make a million dollars doing that and pay your share of taxes and do it all legally, they say God bless you. Spinning their position any other way is silly.

    Responses to this comment
  • @Joel0903: This proves my point. The Internet indeed was built by the government directly or indirectly through shcools with some public funding or vendors with government contract. If it wasn't for the government, the owners of Facebook, Google and the rest would not be billionaries. Yes, the president could have made the distinction better--that the intent of building the internet wasn't initially as a commercial venture--but the fact remains that what he said was true: If the Internet billionaires didn't have the Internet to work with--an Internet built by others--they would not be billionaires today. In other words, if he had said it 100% accurately: "THe government directly or indirectly built the Internet for defense and education. A few years later some brilliant people came along and made it into a commercial goldmine and profitted greatly from doing that"--the point would have been just as strong. So his mistatement was meaningless in terms of the government taking the credit. The point he ws making was that the Internet was sitting their waiting for google and apple and the rest.

    Responses to this comment
  • I'm a supporter of neither candidate but I do find the GOP grasping for straws when it comes to Obama's "socialism." How the fuck is this guy a Marxist? The point Carl's trying to make is sound, that staunch individualism doesn't make any sense because we all use services and infrastructure that are government owned and paid for by taxes. To that extent, I think we all need to pay more taxes because our bridges, hiways, and roads are falling apart, and our rail system is decades old compared to the bullet trains of Osaka and Berlin. But, I disagree with the idea that isolated geniuses and visionaries don't exist. It's not necessarily true that Steve Jobs had a great teacher or a great mentor - entrepreneurs are often failed by the schooling system, and to say that their talent or skill is someone else's work is sort of insulting. I do believe in the singular genius, though. BUT, it goes without saying that Jobs/Gates/Zuckerberg couldn't be where they are without the work of the engineers that built the foundation of the internet, their factory workers, and their manpower in their offices. This doesn't make them any less brilliant, and it certainly doesn't mean they should earn the same wage as a person on the floor. BUT, higher taxes? Obviously. It should go without saying. If you're a multi-millionare, you can take the hit on a 30-40% tax. But that money better go to things that we all actually use, like the infrastructure/pub ed, otherwise Obama's point is moot.

    Responses to this comment
  • Eureka, I don't think anyone is saying that isolated geniuses don't exist. They do. But Einstein had Planck (and Newton before him). Louis Armstrong had a family (actually a Jewish family from I believe Lithuania) that saved him from oblivion and gave him his first instrument (a cornet, not a trumpet; Armstrong wore a Star of David in their honor for his entire life). All Obama and Warren are saying is that Michael Jordan needed four other people on the court.

    Responses to this comment
  • Sure, and I think it's obvious in his comments. Perhaps he could have worded it better, but anyone accusing him of being a Marxist because of this is ridiculous.

    Responses to this comment
  • Yes, well said. The problem is that their are two republican parties today. The moderate Rockefeller republicans and the tea party republicans. They ended up with a candidate which is one parading as another. On top of it, he is the Henry Aaron of bad candidates. He invented Obamacare and has questionable finances, to say the least. So two of the biggest topics of the cycle are essentially off the table. Thus, they have to essentially make stuff up. That's what's happening IMO.

    Responses to this comment
  • joel0903: The last line of your quote of what Obama said is inaccurate. The word he used is "then" not "that." Your incorrect version far more strongly implies he was saying that the government invented the internet with the express purpose of creating a commercial entity ("so that"). It implies causality. He said "then" which suggests that the two things -- building the internet and the fact that it has become a commercial success much later -- aren't linked. I am assuming your misquote, which was subtle but significant, was inadvertent.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment