Nothing was taken out of context kimikaw. Grammatically, roads and bridges are plural and are referred to as "those" not "that". In addition, the pronoun "that" refers to the last noun used, in this case "a business". Finally, the sentence is so poorly worded and confusion that the only logical conclusion is that Barack Hussein Obama is setting the ground game for a major redistribution of wealth.

Reading the entire quote only makes it worse. One great example:
"Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. "
Wrong. The internet started as a rapid means to allow researchers and military personnel to communicate with each other. Tim Berners-Lee then developed HTML and the World Wide Web to allow better dissemination of information.

It was the business community that came up with ways to make money. Most of the money put into the internet since it's inception has come from private businesses.

It is time to wake up and smell the coffee. Barack Hussein Obama's only true goal is take from those that have achieved, and give to those that haven't even tried!

kimikaw: Are you new to Patch?
Just three days ago there was a story that covered Oblaba's speach, and his dig at small businesses.
http://menomoneefalls.patch.com/articles/sen-alberta-darling-smal-business-owners-blast-obama

Anti ; As usual, off in La, La land once again. What the president was eluding to; That the infrastructure of the nation is what produced the soil that various cronies acquired their wealth. Their education, talents, Highways’ and by ways, airports and so and so on and so on and so on. Was produced by the laborer’s abilities and their productions. All of us in a united effort. The dispersal of the wealth that is produced by the productivity of the laborer’s requires an intelligent dispersal and investment back to the laborer’s. This would keep the system in continuous replenishment to advance our abilities to progress and compete on the Liberal Free Trade Markets of the world.
Now all of these establishments used our democracy’s infrastructures to achieve those discoveries. Anti, You REALLY need to get some education!


Now why can I not know who paid for this carnage of democracy?
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy! Winston Churchill

Greg: your source is less than a creditable intelligent article. Obama has led the initiatives for small businesses from day one. As your PARTY FIRST of no, no, no leadership sought to destroy them. No Jobs Bill from your Republican House after two years unless you want to count the recent window dressing of their 33 bills on recall health care and 30 jobs bill that is not jobs at all.!Just window dressing for small minded idiots like you. Small buisnesses are growing in spite of all the republican obstructions. Your so called desire for president, Mittens, is not even in favor with his owb party.

Mr. Kissinger, a former Republican secretary of state, remains on the sidelines. The reason, according to several Republicans familiar with the matter: concerns about Mr. Romney’s aggressive statements on trade policy toward China, a keen issue for Mr. Kissinger, who helped reopen relations with China and who later, as a consultant, has had clients with significant interests there.
As Republican leaders fell in behind Mr. Romney this spring, many members of the party’s foreign policy establishment have been more muted. Reluctance by this group to come forward for Mr. Romney more quickly reflects an unease over some of his positions, including his hard line on Russia and opposition to a new missile treaty.

http://youtu.be/ceTWKfnjeSs Republicans calling for Romney’s tax returns

Bernie, you are just repeating the Obama talking points again.

ANY way you read it, Obama is trying to take credit away from people who worked hard to build a successful business, and giving it to the government. He is just setting the stage for a HUGE tax increase on the rich. I feel the rich need to pay their fair share, but believe they already do for the most part. WE NEED TO STOP SPENDING SO MUCH.

.
.
.
.
The first thing you need to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging!

ANTI; Where were you when the real abusive spending was going on? $Trillions upon $Trillions for the republican 2 nine year wars they shoved down our throats and not to mention the Billions and Billions on bail out their buddies on Wall Street at the cost of Main Street real estate. 750,000 per month of increase to unemployment, 9% retraction to GDP. Where were you? Now that we have Obama who has had the slowest growth in spending of any President in the past 60 years: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/ You need to get out of your foxy den and observe reality for a change. Want to Know one of the leaks still going on that the republicans and 4 democrats just filibustered to have us continue to provide welfare to the cronyism of our nation. Record producing profiting oil companies that paid no taxes, received $ Millions in tax returns each and Demand subsides [welfare] into the $ billions. Vote was 57 to cut welfare 41 to keep welfare! Your Senator voted to keep welfare just as he votes to not tax the elite.
You feel sorry for poor little rich boy? At last count they have outsourced in their financing , a total of $ 23 trillion. No taxes on that. Mitt only pays taxes on his capital gains which is at 14%. 2010 he paid 13.9% while Main Street is at 30% Keep in mind Mittens paid only on the monies he could not hide from the IRS. WAKE UP LADDIE!

Bernie, you have stayed off topic. Why are you equating the Bush deficits (during a time of war) with Barack Hussein Obama's obvious attempt to take Trillions more away from hard working American taxpayers? The Bush excuse is getting old. He has not been in office for 3 1/2 years (notice the proper use of a pronoun, not only by referring to the last noun used, but using the correct one as well).

Bush s gone. Barack Hussein Obama has to stand on his own record, and it is a pretty poor one at that!

ANTI: It is clear you are not reading the comments you are replying to. Greatest expenditures’ to GDP has, since 1970 been to the republican party. Your accusations that Obama is a spending us into debt is absurd as your inability to seeing the republicans obstructing every effort that Obama has made to reignite a dead economy that the republicans handed him.
Obama has done well with the LITTLE that he had to work with. Saving thousands of manufacturing jobs. That the republicans were trying to shove them under the bus from day one. Notice Obama did not give them money. A loan that has already been paid with interest as well as saving our auto industries and the supporting orbiting manufacturers.
Now observe republican Eric Cantor has a tea party and raises $300 Million and GIVES it to the Avondale shipyards to SHUT DOWN and fire 5,000 employees in Avondale Alabama. Now how would you define expenditures’ in this scenario. Now all manufacturing jobs and supporting manufacturers out to unemployment. Who pays for that tab? Keep in mind the foreclosures’ to follow and lost credits and families and communities. Who pays for that!?!?!
You actually think people are going to buy the idea that Millioniares that pay 14% on their taxes is suffucent as Main Street pays 30%?? Give me a break you can't be that naieve.

Bernie, I'm reading all your comments, I'm just not responding to the inaccurate an inane ones. For example:
"Greatest expenditures’ to GDP has, since 1970 been to the republican party..." This sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Everyone contributes to the Gross Domestic Product, you, me, Hoffa and even $$andNonsense. Perhaps you are referring to the national debt. If so, how do you lay the blame on Republican's when they only controlled both houses of Congress and the White House in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006? During that same period you referenced (1970 to present), the Democrats controlled the same three 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1993, 1994, 2009 and 2010. Clearly plenty of blame can be laid on the Democrats doorstep.

"Your accusations that Obama is a spending us into debt is absurd ..." National debt the day Bush left office: $10.626 trillion, As of midnight last night: $15.938 trillion. An increase of $5.312 trillion, or 49%. And that's just 3 1/2 years of Barrack Hussein Obama, while we had 8 years of Bush, during wartime.

..."Saving thousands of manufacturing jobs..." Current unemployment rate: 8.3%. And that's not counting workers that have left the workforce. True unemployment is 11%+, depending on the sorce.

"Now observe republican Eric Cantor ... raises $300 Million and GIVES it ... to SHUT DOWN and fire 5,000 employees in Avondale Alabama." Not sure what to say about this one. Can you provide your DailyKos link?

"... Millioniares that pay 14% on their taxes is suffucent as Main Street pays 30%..." again, no idea where you pulled this from. To get into the 28% tax rate, you would currently need to make $85,000 to $217,450, depending on your filing status. The top rate is 35%. How some people pay only 14% depends on what they have invested in (ie. tax free municipal bonds).

Bernie, quit with the Liberal talking points. They haven't worked for years and they are getting worse!

From Bernie:
"That the infrastructure of the nation is what produced the soil that various cronies acquired their wealth. Their education, talents, Highways’ and by ways, airports and so and so on and so on and so on. Was produced by the laborer’s abilities and their productions. All of us in a united effort. The dispersal of the wealth that is produced by the productivity of the laborer’s requires an intelligent dispersal and investment back to the laborer’s."
Had you not placed your Socialist spin on it, that statement would have been fairly accurate. Indeed, it is business and that benefits the most from our publicly funded infra-structure, but it is also business that has paid the most to build that infra-structure. Ever been through the Illinois Tollway? Have you noticed that Semis pay more to pass through the tollbooth? That is because they put more wear and tear on the road. The higher toll is their portion to build and maintain the highway system. Here in Wisconsin, we do it through a gasoline sales tax, one of the highest in the nation.

Do you use the sewer system? We pay for that through municipal fees.
Like Police and Fire protection? We pay for that through property taxes.
Like electricity? We pay for that with ...Oh wait, that's another business.

The point Bernie, is that business did indeed help create our infrastructure, through taxes and fees.

ANTI; Once again you twist a squirm. Deliberately avoiding the issue. You failed to answer the portions of laborers productivity that generate the wealth that the 20% of our populace enjoyed in its harvesting of that discrepancy amounts to since 1970 laborer’s in the sharing of that increase has remained flat as to the elitist they harvested over 200% increase in their wealth. Returns on laborers productivity has not been returned into the industries of its laborers proportionally. Contributing to the decline in consumers and the falling of the markets as there is less laborers/consumers to purchase products.
I’ll try to simplify for you. 2 guys buy a truck to service their businesses. Owner [A] 10% of the time and wear and tear. [B] has it 90% of time and wear and time. Now time to pay. [A] says debt is 10% of the total cost of trucks operation. [B] disagrees and says that 85% is what [A] owes to the vehicle. [B] maintains his 15% is a far greater contribution in wealth than [A’s] contribution of 10% … Now would you buy that and believe what [B] is trying to cheat you out of?? If you do OH Baby have I got a deal for you…

Bernie, could you repeat that in English? And before you hit the bottle. You made NO sense at all.

You try to point to labor as the source of wealth creation. That would be true if the laborers commissioned the job that created the wealth. For example, a bricklayer finishes a job for a builder. The bricklayer has added value to that home. The question is, would that exterior been built if the builder wasn't willing to pay the brick layer. Of course not, therefore, while the bricklayer provided the labor, it was the builder that created the wealth.

Your example a business buying a truck is feeble at best. Where in the real world would you come up with an example like that? Stop the phony intellectualism, it isn't working for you.

Bernie, glad you slept it off. Your sentences are more coherent, though the ramblings are still chaotic.

Not missing the point Bernie, just responding to your refusal to acknowledge the part of business and commerce in building the infrastructure of this country.

Using your "Movie Stars, Baseball players, Singers, and so forth" example, They are still getting paid right??? And, if management increases their pay they will simply pull the money from their own pockets right???

Wrong again Bernie. Management will simply increase the ticket or CD price and pass the cost along to the consumer. I'm not saying we shouldn't pay laborers a fair price, but don't kid yourself for one second that this scenario would be a true redistribution of wealth.

Your comment was "Greatest expenditures’ to GDP..." What the hell type of statement is that? What you are referring to is the debt ratio to GDP, which incidentally was at it's height under FDR, another war time president. Now, thanks to Barack Hussein Obama, it is back over 100%.

And what is with the paying 85% for 10% usage of a truck? If someone is willing to do that, that's there problem. I have no idea what you are babbling about here.

You really need to work on your English. If you are going to try to pass yourself off as an intellectual, at least get your message across in a meaningful fashion.

Bernie, wasn't the GOP refusal to end the filibuster because Harry Reid refused to bring ANY of the Republican amendment's to the floor?

And you really didn't answer the tax rate question, just tried to dodge it with the same old rhetoric.

To extend the previous example, lets say a billionaire decides to diversify his investments. He decides to put much of it into TAX FREE Municipal bonds, the rest in a variety of bonds and stocks. At the end of the year he made 100 million on the TAX FREE bonds, and 100 million on the rest. He pays nothing on the TAX FREE bonds, and 35 million on the rest. His effective tax rate is 17 1/2 %.

That's just a very simple example, but it illustrates the point. Income tax is more than just what did you make, send this percent in. If you feel some or all of these write-offs are inappropriate, then address those issues, not the "tax rate is not high enough" crap.

Your statement "Millionaires themselves agree that they need to pay more taxes". Is blatantly false. You may be able to name a few, like Warren Buffet. And if 'ol Warren want's to pay more to the government, there is nothing stopping him from doing that.