Joe the Plumber

[Scott Campbell]

I suppose you favor the trickle up poverty of Obama's plan.

That's both funny, and scary.

[hoosier]

Looks like the Joe the Plumber story has a few, uh, cracks in it. He's a plumber, but...he doens't have a license (required to do plumbing work in Ohio) and he owes back taxes. I bet the back taxes thing will make him even more of a hero on Fox, though.

He doesnt need a license but who cares? Most of us get the point here and he put a face on it. Secondly, the MSM has dug into this guy more in 3 days then they have Barry Whosane in 15 months!!!!

Also, what would we find about you? Or me? I think this scrutiny backfires on them.

Maybe it backfires for people who already think the "MSM" is part of a giant left-wing conspiracy, but for the rest of the country I suspect it's just dotting the i's at the end of a news cycle. On to the next story.

The point actually is that the Plumber and the details of his life really don't matter at all compared to the essence of what made the story a story - the unscripted, unvarnished, true ideology of Barack Obama - to redistribute wealth - spread that wealth around.

Even my own 'Plumber Joe' story looks like it has some cracks in it. My Plumber is a single guy with 6 total employees. He seems to think the Obama taxes will affect his ability to keep his lowest paid technician. I'm not certain - I don't know what the final result will be with tax credits for this and that (where will they come from?) and what the effect will be on his take home pay. I'm not his accountant, so I don't know for sure. I have to take his word for it - or not.

Either way, it doesn't matter. We know Obama wants to raise taxes on producers and give it away as welfare to 33% of people who pay no taxes. Pelosi wants another 300 Billion stimulus to do a lot of the same. We know what Obama believes because he got caught actually saying it, even though he's tried so hard to hide it (like calling it a 'tax cut' for 95% of people - ever hear that one?)

The over arching ideology that he's been so careful to hide (and Pelosi and Reid as well) - is that at his core, he believes in the redistribution of wealth as an end in itself - Redistribution is about 'fairness' not about doing what is best for the country (recall his view on Cap gains taxes that he expressed to Charlie Gibson - he would raise them - even if it reduced tax revenues, because it's 'fair').

So forgive me if I don't care what Plumber Joe had for breakfast, about his back taxes, or how many speeding tickets, etc. he may have had. It's irrelevant to what Barack Obama believes and will do as president.

You're missing the point. Joe the Plumber spoke and continues to speak to the choir, that's clear. And for the same choir it's now clearer than ever that Obama is really a socialist. But, politically speaking, that changes nothing.

What's really important, from a political perspective, is that the story seemed to be acquiring wings for a short time when it also seemed to be able to speak to the unconverted, or the uncommitted voters. But that was contingent on Joe the Plumber's ability to embody virtue, and specifically the kind of virtue that conservatives want to associate with successful entrepreneurial spirit--which Obama, or so the story goes, would end up killing. But now that link--and again, its a link that has to be clear to the uncommmitted--has been broken because it's clear that Joe doesn't embody any sort of virtue.

You sound like Joe Biden, insluting the guy because he doesn't have a license. And I completely disagree with your conclusion. Joe himself doesn't matter - only Obama's positions, revealed in his converation with Joe, matter, since all those people 'with virtue' know that Obama wants to punish them for earning money. That link is now crystal clear.

I don't think it's so clear. If the guy is really netting >250K per year then he's not your typical up and coming entrepreneur, and if he's netting significantly less--like most plumbers--then he wouldn't be subject to a tax increase under Obama's plan. Again, the power of this story hinges on our seeing Joe as virtuous in his averageness. If he ceases to be virtuous or average then I think the story loses some of its political vitality.

On second thought, it occurs to me that maybe your real point is that Obama let slip the words "spread the wealth" and that THAT is where he got himself nailed. If that's your argument I think it's a silly one. "Spread the wealth" may sound socialistic to the Right, but to average Americans in the midst of an economic crisis I think those words either have appeal or, at worst, no negative or postive effect at all.

EDIT: by saying Joe ain't virtuous I'm not insulting him at all, I'm just saying that the idealization of Joe as everyman doesn't hold water. Joe's virtue has to compete with some warts that not everybody would be so willing to dismiss as irrelevant.

[retailguy]

What's really important, from a political perspective, is that the story seemed to be acquiring wings for a short time

Agreed, and at the core, that's why we know about Joe today. Joe's point, (which is not refutable) threatened to hijack the direction of this election.

In this country, that means, discredit the loudmouth. The same way 30 lawyers were dropped into Anchorage, a couple of folks "rounded up" the dirt on Joe, to discredit him, and thusly, his point.

Sad commentary, but that is today's politics. The little guy needs to keep his mouth shut and conform, or else, he will be DESTROYED.

[mraynrand]

"Spread the wealth" may sound socialistic to the Right, but to average Americans in the midst of an economic crisis I think those words either have appeal or, at worst, no negative or postive effect at all.

I saw a poll where about 80+ percent reacted negatively to this phrase. I just disagree with you. People understand what Welfare is and how it works. People understand this phrase as Obama meant it, they understand that it is conceptually similar to other Obama policies (like Cap gains), and they understand Pelosi and Reid are ALREADY preparing legislation for 300 Billion more like it. These moves aren't aimed at improving the economy - they are aimed at an egalitarian 'fairness' a Robin Hood like appropriation and transfer of money to try to even everyone out. People react negatively to it because they understand that some people will be less successful not because of unfairness, but because of choice.

Americans believe in spreading their wealth, if they have it (and even if they have very little) - voluntarily. Americans understand that they must contribute to society, and they are even willing to tolerate a progressive tax because they know some luck is involved in getting wealthy. But they know what Obama means by 'spread the wealth' - and that's a direct transfer of dollars - not a tax cut, not increased opportunity, but Welfare, plain and simple.

[retailguy]

Ayn - That's why they dug the dirt out on Joe. To divert the discussion by discrediting the person who made the point.

Wondering today if it works.

[mraynrand]

Ayn - That's why they dug the dirt out on Joe. To divert the discussion by discrediting the person who made the point.

Wondering today if it works.

I agree. Diversion and personal attacks. Still, Joe the Plumber didn't make any point. He drew out Obama, and Obama revealed himself. That's why I think Joe the Plumber won't go away because people find out what the balance is on his VISA card. Because after Keith Olberman gets out of his colon, and tires of accusing him of masturbating or some other such vulgarity, Obama's words and ideology will remain.

[arcilite]

I thought Wisconsin was a blue state. After reading through this thread and many others here on Packerrats, I feel as if this board is more...conservative. Which is unusual. Usually the liberals are the ones all over the internet.


/just my $.02

[mraynrand]

I thought Wisconsin was a blue state. After reading through this thread and many others here on Packerrats, I feel as if this board is more...conservative. Which is unusual. Usually the liberals are the ones all over the internet.


/just my $.02

I don't live in Wisconsin. I live right next door to Joe the Plumber, Jive Turkey, Dick Tracy, and Mary Poppins.

[hoosier]

"Spread the wealth" may sound socialistic to the Right, but to average Americans in the midst of an economic crisis I think those words either have appeal or, at worst, no negative or postive effect at all.

I saw a poll where about 80+ percent reacted negatively to this phrase. I just disagree with you. People understand what Welfare is and how it works. People understand this phrase as Obama meant it, they understand that it is conceptually similar to other Obama policies (like Cap gains), and they understand Pelosi and Reid are ALREADY preparing legislation for 300 Billion more like it. These moves aren't aimed at improving the economy - they are aimed at an egalitarian 'fairness' a Robin Hood like appropriation and transfer of money to try to even everyone out. People react negatively to it because they understand that some people will be less successful not because of unfairness, but because of choice.

Americans believe in spreading their wealth, if they have it (and even if they have very little) - voluntarily. Americans understand that they must contribute to society, and they are even willing to tolerate a progressive tax because they know some luck is involved in getting wealthy. But they know what Obama means by 'spread the wealth' - and that's a direct transfer of dollars - not a tax cut, not increased opportunity, but Welfare, plain and simple.

You're right, we disagree. I haven't seen any polling of how people heard "spread the wealth" (post it if you have it) but my gut tells me that most who are middle-of-the-road and left heard "progressive taxation" and that most on the right heard "socialism."

[sheepshead]

I thought Wisconsin was a blue state. After reading through this thread and many others here on Packerrats, I feel as if this board is more...conservative. Which is unusual. Usually the liberals are the ones all over the internet.


/just my $.02

15000 vote and 7500 votes. In addition voter fraud convictions in Milwaukee and Racine after each election.

[mraynrand]

You're right, we disagree. I haven't seen any polling of how people heard "spread the wealth" (post it if you have it) but my gut tells me that most who are middle-of-the-road and left heard "progressive taxation" and that most on the right heard "socialism."

I'll post it if I find it. I also doubt that for most middle-of-the-road people "progressive taxation," popped into their head when they heard "Spread the wealth around," especially since the guy across the rope line is not a rich guy sitting on a pile of cash - especially coupled with all the hand outs Barack is promising. But the voters will tell me if I'm wrong. I see this issue as not only the fulcrum of this election, but the fulcrum of our nation to come. Are we to be a 'welfare, spread the wealth around by government' kind of a nation, or are we to be a nation in which the government gets out of the way and works to promote opportunity. I think when Obama says 'spread the wealth around' most middle-of-the-road people are not only clinging to their guns and religion, but are also reflexively clinging to their wallets and purses.

[mraynrand]

Not exactly how I characterized it, but close:

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2107774/posts?page=8

"Americans Oppose Income Redistribution to Fix Economy

by Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist

PRINCETON, NJ -- When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% -- prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

Lack of Support for Wealth Redistribution Spans Political Party, Income Groups

Americans' lack of support for redistributing wealth to fix the economy spans political parties: Republicans (by 90% to 9%) prefer that the government focus on improving the economy, as do independents (by 85% to 13%) and Democrats (by 77% to 19%). This sentiment also extends across income groups: upper-income Americans prefer that the government focus on improving the economy and jobs by 88% to 10%, concurring with middle-income (83% to 16%) and lower-income (78% to 17%) Americans.

(Excerpt) Read more at gallup.com ..."

[Freak Out]

Not exactly how I characterized it, but close:

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2107774/posts?page=8

"Americans Oppose Income Redistribution to Fix Economy

by Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist

PRINCETON, NJ -- When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% -- prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

Lack of Support for Wealth Redistribution Spans Political Party, Income Groups

Americans' lack of support for redistributing wealth to fix the economy spans political parties: Republicans (by 90% to 9%) prefer that the government focus on improving the economy, as do independents (by 85% to 13%) and Democrats (by 77% to 19%). This sentiment also extends across income groups: upper-income Americans prefer that the government focus on improving the economy and jobs by 88% to 10%, concurring with middle-income (83% to 16%) and lower-income (78% to 17%) Americans.

(Excerpt) Read more at gallup.com ..."

This is always a good sign. The Robin hood approach can be very appealing but there are far better ways to "fix the economy".

[retailguy]

The problem is that Robin Hood leads the polls by 4%.....

[LL2]

The problem is that Robin Hood leads the polls by 4%.....

I thought he was up by 6-8% in most polls...is he slipping?