RNC Primetime Speaker Gave Extensive PowerPoint on How to Build Your Business With Government Money

Pages

RNC Primetime Speaker Gave Extensive PowerPoint on How to Build Your Business With Government Money

By The Spite House

Politics • August 2012 • Views: 2,431

They should change their slogan to “I Built This with Your Money!”

buzzfeed.com

Small business woman Sher Valenzuela, who is running for Lt. Governor in Delaware, is giving a primetime speech tonight at the ‘We Build It’ themed day of the Republican convention. Valenzuela gave a PowerPoint-presentation to the Wilmington Women In Business forum in April entirely focused on working with the government to get government grants and contracts to build your business.

A very clever Redditor picked up the url that she should have grabbed and did something despicable by telling the truth about her.

firststatemanufacturing.com

Recent Pages by JasonA (The Spite House):
Georgia Man Shoots and Kills Young Latino Who Accidentally Pulled Into His Driveway, Police Say Connecticut School Shooting: Westboro Baptist Church Planning to Picket - Oklahoma City Top News 'I don't want to publish reviews of films where women are alpha and men are beta.' The Most Irresponsible Thing Apple Has Done Bruce Willis to Take on Apple Over iTunes Inheritance

Jump to bottom

9 comments

researchok Tue, Aug 28, 2012 2:21:12pm

People will stick to a diet when they are spending their own money.

That said, very few people- even dieters- will turn down free cupcakes and the opportunity for more free cupcakes.

This is not an opinion.

There are very few Democrats and Republicans who put their money where their mouth is and reject Congressional pork.

Four More Tears Tue, Aug 28, 2012 2:24:02pm

re: #1 researchok

People will stick to a diet when they are spending their own money.

That said, very few people- even dieters- will turn down free cupcakes and the opportunity for more free cupcakes.

This is not an opinion.

There are very few Democrats and Republicans who put their money where their mouth is and reject Congressional pork.

Uh huh. It does detract from the "I Built This" narrative, does it not?

researchok Tue, Aug 28, 2012 2:36:42pm

re: #2 Mocking Jay

That's somewhat of an apples and oranges argument, though admittedly, at best the discussion is and always will be, murky.

I'm of two opinions- one, the guy who built the business built the business.

The roads and infrastructure were there long before he was on his own and in fact, he helped pay for it via his- and everybody else who paid taxes.

The infrastructure was not built for the entrepreneur only- it was in fact built for the benefit of the citizens, mostly. It's nice to have roads to go to store so we can have a cornucopia of products to choose from.

Infrastructure provides equal opportunity- not equal outcome.

Obdicut Tue, Aug 28, 2012 4:46:23pm

re: #3 researchok

Infrastructure provides equal opportunity- not equal outcome.

But it doesn't, obviously, since:

A) Infrastructure is not equal everywhere
B) Infrastructure benefits those with the capital to use the infrastructure more than it benefits those without it and
C) Even if all infrastructure everywhere was equal, it doesn't provide equal opportunity; some businesses make greater or lesser use of it.

HappyWarrior Tue, Aug 28, 2012 9:33:32pm

So, the GOP has another hypocritical candidate who thinks they built everything themselves. Shocker.

Curt Wed, Aug 29, 2012 4:11:15am

re: #5 HappyWarrior

So, the GOP has another hypocritical candidate who thinks they built everything themselves. Shocker.

So there should be a test of how you vote to use a government program?

The more realistic look at this is as researchok mentions: It's taxpayer money. Government is merely the project manager of things the voters ask to make available. It is not money generated from government, but money the taxpayers allow the government to acquire via the tax code.

At the end of the argument, the President's famous comment wasn't right: The taxpayers built the things for the taxpayers to use, with a layer of "middle management" called government workers facilitating that.

Sure would be nice to acknowledge the taxpayer as the source, because, take them out of the equation and the government has not one penny to spend.

Charleston Chew Wed, Aug 29, 2012 4:27:34am

re: #3 researchok

That's somewhat of an apples and oranges argument, though admittedly, at best the discussion is and always will be, murky.

I'm of two opinions- one, the guy who built the business built the business.

The roads and infrastructure were there long before he was on his own and in fact, he helped pay for it via his- and everybody else who paid taxes.

The infrastructure was not built for the entrepreneur only- it was in fact built for the benefit of the citizens, mostly. It's nice to have roads to go to store so we can have a cornucopia of products to choose from.

Infrastructure provides equal opportunity- not equal outcome.

Imagine a conservative in a boat with someone else. The conservative says, "This half of the boat is mine. That half is yours."

The other person says, "But my half has a hole in it and we're taking on water."

The conservative says, "You mean you're taking on water. My half doesn't have a hole."

"Can't you at least give me that cork to stop up the hole?"

"This is my cork. I worked hard for this cork. Get your own damn cork!"

The boat fills with water. They both drown.

Curt Thu, Aug 30, 2012 5:20:52am

re: #7 Charleston Chew

Imagine a conservative in a boat with someone else. The conservative says, "This half of the boat is mine. That half is yours."

The other person says, "But my half has a hole in it and we're taking on water."

The conservative says, "You mean you're taking on water. My half doesn't have a hole."

"Can't you at least give me that cork to stop up the hole?"

"This is my cork. I worked hard for this cork. Get your own damn cork!"

The boat fills with water. They both drown.

In an absolutist view of the discussion at hand, that would be the case, but it's not. The premise of the post is Republicans talk about using Government money to build business, but they shouldn't take the money, because they disagree with the President's statement that Government built businesses.

Your comment assumes Republicans, in order to hopefully put the Democrat's panties in a wad, would get into the White House and Senate and immediately cut all all Government funding for any program that supports building business. You know that's not the case.

Bogey men and scary shadows....can we grow up and have a dialogue?

Decatur Deb Thu, Aug 30, 2012 5:35:47am

re: #8 Curt

In an absolutist view of the discussion at hand, that would be the case, but it's not. The premise of the post is Republicans talk about using Government money to build business, but they shouldn't take the money, because they disagree with the President's statement that Government built businesses.

Your comment assumes Republicans, in order to hopefully put the Democrat's panties in a wad, would get into the White House and Senate and immediately cut all all Government funding for any program that supports building business. You know that's not the case.

Bogey men and scary shadows....can we grow up and have a dialogue?

So we're supposed to place our confidence in the fact that the TPGOP is lying to the country about its governing philosophy?

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!