Retired Proctor and Gamble official s...

Retired Proctor and Gamble official sends an open letter to President Obama

Posted in the Florissant Forum

Have you seen this

Florissant, MO

#1 Jun 9, 2009
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

By Lou Pritchett



Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Note: Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.

Mr. Pritchett confirmed that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated "open letter." ďI did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the Ďexpertsí has had over 500,000 hits.



http://www.afa.net/youscareme.asp
Have you seen this

Florissant, MO

#2 Jun 9, 2009
Retired Proctor and Gamble official sends an open letter to President Obama

Read the Open Letter the New York Times refused to print

June 9, 2009

Dear Mary,

Lou Pritchet is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.

Mr. Pritchett confirmed that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated "open letter." ďI did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the Ďexpertsí has had over 500,000 hits.
Bill L

Florissant, MO

#3 Jun 9, 2009
First let me say that I am all for Boeing and the military getting the aircraft that they need and that these programs should NOT be cut.
But I found it interesting that the Mayor had a proclamation (at the June 6 meeting) imploring the President and Congress not to cut the military aircraft from Boeing. Yet Mayor Lowery was a BIG supporter of Mr Obama and the Democrats. Cutting military spending was in Mr Obama's and the Democrats platform and he is doing exactly what he said he would do.
Last fall Mayor Lowery said that the Country was going in the wrong direction and that Obama was the change we needed. Well you wanted change and now you got it.
For all the Mac/Boeing employees at Lambert I pray you get to keep your jobs.
Have you seen this

Florissant, MO

#4 Jun 9, 2009
I see Clair McCaskill on the news at the Boeing rallies. How can she be on both sides? I despise that woman.
Bubba

Florissant, MO

#5 Jun 9, 2009
Have you seen this wrote:
I see Clair McCaskill on the news at the Boeing rallies. How can she be on both sides? I despise that woman.
Sounds like Lowery!
Holy Cow

Saint Louis, MO

#6 Jun 9, 2009
Lou Pritchett was a CEO?
No wonder American businesses are struggling...the guy is an idiot. Does he even know how to read?
The answers to most of his questions are readily available with a little research.
So Sad

Chesterfield, MO

#7 Jun 9, 2009
Bill L wrote:
First let me say that I am all for Boeing and the military getting the aircraft that they need and that these programs should NOT be cut.
But I found it interesting that the Mayor had a proclamation (at the June 6 meeting) imploring the President and Congress not to cut the military aircraft from Boeing. Yet Mayor Lowery was a BIG supporter of Mr Obama and the Democrats. Cutting military spending was in Mr Obama's and the Democrats platform and he is doing exactly what he said he would do.
Last fall Mayor Lowery said that the Country was going in the wrong direction and that Obama was the change we needed. Well you wanted change and now you got it.
For all the Mac/Boeing employees at Lambert I pray you get to keep your jobs.
Bill,

Are you familiar with the programs being cut?

The defense department is wisely appropriating money on the types of equipment and weapon systems needed in the ongoing wars we are currently fighting. It just so happens that Boeing is making stuff we just don't need or have enough of right now. Besides the government has a history of rewarding contracts to major defense contractors who get the short end of the stick to keep them viable and happy. Itís possible the St. Louis operations of Boeing may not even feel the pinch.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...

Also, keep in mind that NASA just got a big shot in the arm and also awards contracts to Boeing.
Bubba

Florissant, MO

#8 Jun 9, 2009
So Sad wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill,
Are you familiar with the programs being cut?
The defense department is wisely appropriating money on the types of equipment and weapon systems needed in the ongoing wars we are currently fighting. It just so happens that Boeing is making stuff we just don't need or have enough of right now. Besides the government has a history of rewarding contracts to major defense contractors who get the short end of the stick to keep them viable and happy. Itís possible the St. Louis operations of Boeing may not even feel the pinch.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...
Also, keep in mind that NASA just got a big shot in the arm and also awards contracts to Boeing.
If St Louis Boeing is so safe then why are all the local politicians so worried that St Louis Boeing going to lose jobs?? So I guess we didn't the proclamation!
Bill L

Florissant, MO

#9 Jun 9, 2009
So Sad wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill,
Are you familiar with the programs being cut?
The defense department is wisely appropriating money on the types of equipment and weapon systems needed in the ongoing wars we are currently fighting. It just so happens that Boeing is making stuff we just don't need or have enough of right now. Besides the government has a history of rewarding contracts to major defense contractors who get the short end of the stick to keep them viable and happy. Itís possible the St. Louis operations of Boeing may not even feel the pinch.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...
Also, keep in mind that NASA just got a big shot in the arm and also awards contracts to Boeing.
I try and stay informed and I hope you are right.
So Sad

Chesterfield, MO

#10 Jun 9, 2009
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>
If St Louis Boeing is so safe then why are all the local politicians so worried that St Louis Boeing going to lose jobs?? So I guess we didn't the proclamation!
They are playing the game of politics. The squeaky wheel always gets the oil. As an employee of Boeing, I would be concerned in the near term as well. No one likes disruptions or uncertainties on the job or in life.
So Sad

Chesterfield, MO

#11 Jun 9, 2009
Bill L wrote:
<quoted text>
I try and stay informed and I hope you are right.
Me too.

Lowery was a Clinton delegate. He did not initially support Obama. The look on Lowery's face at the convention should tell it.

Before the grammar police catch me, I meant to write award. I will blame it on multitasking.
highplainsdrifte r

Nashville, TN

#12 Aug 11, 2009
Lou,
As I read your letter, I was listening and considering each point with an open mind. Until you mentioned Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly. Don't you know that no matter what, as soon as you mention those names in your argument that all your credibility goes out the window? I'm just trying to help you. You're from an older generation than mine so you probably don't know that to most people 40 and under, those names are synonymous with Hitler. By mentioning those names, all your other points lost instant credibility. I was proud to read that you served in our U.S. armed forces. But as soon as you mention the extremest right wing that we have, you are either brave enough to do so, which still ruins your credibility, or you are stupid enough to do so, which ruins your credibility even more. You should have stuck to logic only, without the hate. Then your letter wouldn't have been a complete waste of your time as it now is.
GAD

Saint Louis, MO

#13 Aug 12, 2009
Don't want you to get all pissy with me,however. Look up the word, rhetorical,it applys to Mr Pritchetts commentary. The man is right on point. Later.
Holy Cow wrote:
Lou Pritchett was a CEO?
No wonder American businesses are struggling...the guy is an idiot. Does he even know how to read?
The answers to most of his questions are readily available with a little research.
GAD

Saint Louis, MO

#14 Aug 12, 2009
I don't think he was implying that he's in bed with Limbaugh,et al,think he was going for the idea that if we quash these guys,whos next? I don't hang my hat on most anything a politician/rich guy/talk show host says, as most are very despotic. The creator gave all of us a brain,it's just too bad many send their,s on hiatus. Later.
highplainsdrifter wrote:
Lou,
As I read your letter, I was listening and considering each point with an open mind. Until you mentioned Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly. Don't you know that no matter what, as soon as you mention those names in your argument that all your credibility goes out the window? I'm just trying to help you. You're from an older generation than mine so you probably don't know that to most people 40 and under, those names are synonymous with Hitler. By mentioning those names, all your other points lost instant credibility. I was proud to read that you served in our U.S. armed forces. But as soon as you mention the extremest right wing that we have, you are either brave enough to do so, which still ruins your credibility, or you are stupid enough to do so, which ruins your credibility even more. You should have stuck to logic only, without the hate. Then your letter wouldn't have been a complete waste of your time as it now is.
Holy Cow

Saint Louis, MO

#15 Aug 12, 2009
GAD wrote:
Don't want you to get all pissy with me,however. Look up the word, rhetorical,it applys to Mr Pritchetts commentary. The man is right on point. Later. <quoted text>
I rarely get "pissy" unless the person with whom I am discussing matters seems to understand no other form of discussion.

So I won't get "pissy" with you but I will take on your comment.

I know the meaning of the term rhetoric and can tell when it is being employed.(Too bad everyone does not have that ability. They have college level classes in such subjects.)

If Mr. Pritchett was merely trying to persuade or impress with an "over-the-top" commentary in order to make a statement rather than to provide or elicit information. That would clearly be rhetoric.

But there are numerous incorrect statements in his commentary. When someone places misinformation into the mix they are not being rhetorical, they are either ignorant or being deceptive.

I am not sure whether ignorance or deception is the case in every instance of misinformation within Mr. Pritchett's opinions.

It is difficult to debate someone who is ignorant of the facts. People as far back as Columbus and Galileo, or even farther, found out the results that often come with debating people who are ignorant of the facts and unwilling to let go of dogmatic ideas or ideals which have a great emotional connection for them.

Often those debating from a position of ignorance hear the frailty of their position in light of the facts and respond by using rhetoric and other such tactics to make their position sound stronger or maybe even plausible.

It is not uncommon for people, like Mr. Pritchett, who have been living in the rarefied air of enormous wealth and power to lose sight of the realities of life especially as they relate to the lives of people at the middle or the bottom of the social hierarchy.

What "scares" me is people like Mr. Prichett who demonize those who disagree with their "world view" with words that could incite emotions and which might provoke an escalation among those who lack his wealth and possibly his ability to rationalize.

In all of the eight year barrage of attacks from the left against Mr. Bush and his policies, I saw very little in the way of inciting violence against him or our government. That is clearly not the case with the opposition we are now seeing from the right.

A final note.
I hear a lot of commentary from the right about the lack of agreement among Democrats which prevents them from "running through" any legislation. I think that lack of agreement that prevents them forcing a liberal agenda is a good thing.

In contrast, there was little discussion among Republicans when they had the majority. Members of the GOP were expected to march in step and tow the party line. That does not sound like good government to me.
I will let other draw the "rhetorical comparisons" of past governments that acted in such a way.
ratwinger

Saint Peters, MO

#16 Aug 12, 2009
So Sad wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill,
Are you familiar with the programs being cut?
The defense department is wisely appropriating money on the types of equipment and weapon systems needed in the ongoing wars we are currently fighting. It just so happens that Boeing is making stuff we just don't need or have enough of right now. Besides the government has a history of rewarding contracts to major defense contractors who get the short end of the stick to keep them viable and happy. Itís possible the St. Louis operations of Boeing may not even feel the pinch.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...
Also, keep in mind that NASA just got a big shot in the arm and also awards contracts to Boeing.
workers at BOEING SAFE?!?!?!?!
why did the lay off notice go back 20 years for my job classification when I was let go ten years ago?
none of the people who were in my classification were called back that I know of
So Sad

Saint Louis, MO

#17 Aug 12, 2009
ratwinger wrote:
<quoted text>
workers at BOEING SAFE?!?!?!?!
why did the lay off notice go back 20 years for my job classification when I was let go ten years ago?
none of the people who were in my classification were called back that I know of
Come again? I never said anyone was safe.
Your job outlook at Boeing depends on which program you are assigned to.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Florissant Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atomic HomeFront movie 8 hr Hardhead 34
Best fish fry 11 hr In the know 28
Quote Of The Week (Mar '15) Wed Enter Username 264
Criminally Charge Hillary Wed Marcus Welby 3
Cross keys Schnucks Wed Hardhead 42
Chic fil a coming to Florissant Feb 20 White Chick 61
Spinning wheels Feb 20 Hardhead 9

Florissant Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Florissant Mortgages