Joe the Plumber

[MJZiggy]

And so, the mis-information starts. Joe is unlicensed because he doesn't need a license, because he works with and for a licensed plumber. That is legal in Ohio.

The fact that Joe "supposedly" isn't affected by this tax increase is not relevant. The fact that his brain sees through the sham, IS relevant. The fact that it is relevant is why we know that Joe is "unlicensed" and hasn't paid his property taxes. If that isn't enough to get "society" talking about something else, we'll find out that Joe doesn't like cats or did something stupid when he was drunk and 16.

Oh, and Ziggy, do you remember a guy by the name of Bill Clinton. Yes, you must, but, way far back in 1992, he "tried as hard as he could" but he just had to raise the middle class taxes, with the single largest increase in history....

It remains to be seen, just "how hard" Barack will work to keep his word.

McCain? Barack lite. It'd be "better" but still not great. McCain is the "lesser of two evils".

Is the fact that Joe didn't even know that the tax rate didn't affect him in any way important to whether we feel he has an understanding of Obama's plan? I really don't give a shit what he did when he was 17 and if him being unlicensed is fine, then bully for him, but you also have to consider that his missing license is far more of an impediment to his dream of starting a business than Obama's tax plan.

I do remember President Clinton. He ran on the platform of "it's the economy, stupid" and went on a mission to fix it (he ended his term with a surplus). I also remember another president who ran under the slogan "No New Taxes. It seems politicians are politicians, but I don't see Obama claiming a spending freeze then in the next breath talking about government buying private mortgages. I ended up paying more because I insisted on a fixed rate mortgage. You mean I could have just taken the cheap one and let McCain buy it for me when the price went up?

McCain might have at one time been the lesser of two evils, but he did 2 things. First he did a lot of bipartisan work which was pretty good from what I can tell and then turned his back on his own work to pander to the Republican base. And second, he brought Sarah onto the ticket. He pacified the base, but lost a lot of other votes in the process (including EVERY woman I've spoken politics with since she was brought on the ticket whether I knew their politics going into the conversation or not--Palin is NOT the one that's going to get the women that would have voted for Hillary.)

[retailguy]

You keep claiming that he brought Sarah on the ticket to pander to the Hillary vote, but still today, there is no proof of that.

We've been through this before.

Yes, there were other choices, but really, she fits his profile. McCain decided (probably incorrectly) that he was running on the "maverick" ticket. She fits that bill.

Romney doesn't. Huckabee "might". Rudy DOESN'T. The Gov of Minnesota isn't as well known and no more experienced.

I recognize you don't think Sarah is "qualified". I maintain that shes MORE qualified than Obama, and running for a "lower" position.

As to Joe's understanding of the plan, I'd say he "got" the essence of it. Barack is going to take money from one class of people and give to another. Whether Joe is giving or receiving, it is not relevant to his understanding of the plan.

Finally, if you'd just admit that McCain has the wrong initial next to his name and you won't vote for him, you could abandon all these "silly" reasons you have to keep coming up with to justify your support for Obama. Just admit it. It'd be like buying a rainbow bumper sticker for your car, if you were gay. Do it, you'll feel LIBERATED!

[MJZiggy]

Colin Powell could endorse Obama??

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/10/why_the_powell_endorsement_cou.html?hpid=topnews?hpid=topnews

[hoosier]

The fact that Joe "supposedly" isn't affected by this tax increase is not relevant. The fact that his brain sees through the sham, IS relevant. The fact that it is relevant is why we know that Joe is "unlicensed" and hasn't paid his property taxes. If that isn't enough to get "society" talking about something else, we'll find out that Joe doesn't like cats or did something stupid when he was drunk and 16.

The sham that Joe's brain "sees through" is the progressive tax structure, which both liberals and conservatives have accepted in this country for a long time now. Joe's not a plumber but he is a wing nut on taxes.

[digitaldean]

Looking at either of these two candidates and I have to say "Oh, brother". Neither one is my idea of a leader. McCain appears as a democrat-lite. Obama's wealth redistribution scheme is scary to say the least. Suffice it to say, I am disenchanted with a campaign that is too long, too money-driven and is narrowed to just the donkeys and the elephants.

Taxation: The idea of "soaking the rich" does not work.

Don't get me wrong, I'm for being able to get a tax break. But to get it at the expense of someone who's earned their own money and having the gov't play Robin Hood is distasteful and flat out wrong.

We need to have fiscal RESTRAINT in Washington. All these new programs aren't going to help the deficit. And extra taxation, no matter to what class, during a recession is stupidity. Start with an across the board spending cuts, not freezes. If the public has to endure pay freezes/cuts then the gov't workers will have to endure the same.

You want to help re-work the infrastructure and help the economy? Fine. Start public works projects on renovating the bridges, sewer systems, etc. That will help long term. The money not spent from the usual departmental budgetary increases can assist in initially funding this.

Short term??...I know of no meaningful short-term solution that doesn't resemble a band-aid when a tourniquet is needed. This didn't happen overnight.

The binge lifestyle of living on credit instead of within one's means got us here. Having the gov't. forcing mortgages on banks to those who don't have the financial means to own a home got us here. Out of control deficit spending in both Democrat and Republican congresses (which both raided the SS gen. fund) got us here. A President who must have thrown away his veto stamp when he had the chance to veto a lot of the earmarks coming across his desk got us here. Having no coherent energy policy for the past few decades got us here. Forcing part of our corn/soybean crops to go towards idiotic ethanol production (thus jacking up the cost of food worldwide) got us here. Not significantly incentivizing alternative energy while pushing for more drilling in our own country got us here.

McCain's ideas of gov't buying mortgages (aka MORE welfare) is laughable. I moonlighted bartending so I can support my family when the reg. job fell short to pay the mortgage. There is NO stigma attached anymore to govt handouts, NONE. And we as a nation better look in the mirror to see who is to blame because we the people let it happen.

Worst of all, political parties that fight for their own glorification more than what's good for the country got us here.

I do find it laughable the bile that is spewn about Gov. Palin. She is probably the most common of all four of these lunkheads. But she is the one who is getting the most ridicule, scorn and mud slung at her. She's far from perfect, but she has done a lot at the local and state level and fought against her own party to clear out corruption. She is the TRUE outside the beltway person that is needed. Obama has spent half of his Senate career campaigning for POTUS. McCain has been in Washington for a long time. That doesn't equate to results. Same goes for the VP botox king, chia-pet Joe Biden.

I love the libs... a guy offers a legitimate question about Obama's tax plan. Obama gets nailed over his own words on wealth redistribution in the debate (and sees the poll numbers narrow a bit) and what do they do? The MSM and the Obama campaign does their best to smear the questioner. Say whatever you want on the guy, but this is just a frickin' smear campaign on someone who dares question the "Chosen One". Where were they when questions are still being raised about ACORN and other issues?

If Obama's elected, I'll do what I can at the grassroots to support his policies I see as right and fight those that are wrong. The same would go for McCain.

If we as a country got off our collective arses and did the same instead of just bitching about stuff, elected officials might actually feel accountable for their votes.

Look at Canada, they complained about low voter turn out...which was approx. 60%. If we had 60% voter turnout nationwide, our pollworkers would be inundated.

Woody, I salute your fellow Canucks. At least they put their money where their mouth is more than us.

[texaspackerbacker]

Colin Powell could endorse Obama??

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...s?hpid=topnews

He's gonna be on Meet the Depressed Sunday morning, and there's speculaton he'll endorse somebody. The guy on Fox was guessing Obama.

How about THAT for a sterling example of RACISM as discussed in the other thread? Never mind that one guy is like-minded on virtually every issue and the other is radically different on virtually every issue. Just go ahead and overlook everything else and endorse the black candidate.

Do you suppose maybe some people will see this situation for what it is, and have a little backlash against it? And leftists whine about the reasons why there is still racism. Sheesh!

But wait, Ol' Colin hasn't officially announced his decision yet.

[Joemailman]

What issues you talking about Tex? Surely you must know that Powell is pro-choice and pro-affirmative action.

[texaspackerbacker]

What issues you talking about Tex? Surely you must know that Powell is pro-choice and pro-affirmative action.

How about the whole realm of security/defense and foreign policy? How about the whole realm of economic policy?

You are right that Powell wasn't much of a social conservative, but that's the salad. On the meat and potatoes stuff, he's a long term mainstream Republican, if not outright conservative--but then McCain would hardly be called a prototype conservative either.

[mraynrand]

If Colin Powell endorses Obama, he'll seal up that .002% of blacks who were undecided for sure.

[Partial]

And so, the mis-information starts. Joe is unlicensed because he doesn't need a license, because he works with and for a licensed plumber. That is legal in Ohio.

The fact that Joe "supposedly" isn't affected by this tax increase is not relevant. The fact that his brain sees through the sham, IS relevant. The fact that it is relevant is why we know that Joe is "unlicensed" and hasn't paid his property taxes. If that isn't enough to get "society" talking about something else, we'll find out that Joe doesn't like cats or did something stupid when he was drunk and 16.

Oh, and Ziggy, do you remember a guy by the name of Bill Clinton. Yes, you must, but, way far back in 1992, he "tried as hard as he could" but he just had to raise the middle class taxes, with the single largest increase in history....

It remains to be seen, just "how hard" Barack will work to keep his word.

McCain? Barack lite. It'd be "better" but still not great. McCain is the "lesser of two evils".

Agreed. There is not a doubt in my mind that Barack's tax plan will have an increase on anyone earning over 50 grand, and a bigger handout to those who earn less.

[mraynrand]

The fact that Joe "supposedly" isn't affected by this tax increase is not relevant. The fact that his brain sees through the sham, IS relevant. The fact that it is relevant is why we know that Joe is "unlicensed" and hasn't paid his property taxes. If that isn't enough to get "society" talking about something else, we'll find out that Joe doesn't like cats or did something stupid when he was drunk and 16.

The sham that Joe's brain "sees through" is the progressive tax structure, which both liberals and conservatives have accepted in this country for a long time now. Joe's not a plumber but he is a wing nut on taxes.

Nope. Joe just knows what handouts and welfare are. We get progressive taxes. What we don't get is having to pay for a 'tax cut' that turns into another check to someone who doesn't pay any taxes. We've blown 170 billion on Katrina (most lost in the corruption of LA), 160 billion on the first stimulus and Pelosi wants 300 billion next January. That's almost the cost of the entire Iraq war and Obama wants money to go directly from the businesses (the 5% of small businesses that produce 50% of small business wealth - that is businesses between 100 and 500 employees) into someone's pocket. For what?

Again, JOE DOESN'T MATTER anywhere NEAR as much as what Obama revealed. Obama believes in redistribution of wealth, EVEN IF IT HURTS THE COUNTRY'S ECONOMY (HE SAID SO), because he thinks it is 'fair' (He can't define 'fair' any more than ANY OF THE LEFTIES here can). HE believes all this whereas the VAST MAJORITY of the country - all ages, all income levels, and all political stripes are COMPLETELY AND OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED TO IT.

[MJZiggy]

If Colin Powell endorses Obama, he'll seal up that .002% of blacks who were undecided for sure.

Actually, Powell's popularity ranking is pretty much the only one that survived the Bush administration. If it were Powell on the ticket I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.

And RG, it's not that Palin is inexperienced that I'd hesitate to vote for her; it's because I think she's an idiot. Subtle difference there.

[mraynrand]

And RG, it's not that Palin is inexperienced that I'd hesitate to vote for her; it's because I think she's an idiot. Subtle difference there.

Doesn't it bother you even a little bit that you're probably making this estimation based on totally biased coverage of the woman - coverage that would make Goebbels proud. Or that you just go along with Keith Olberman like a Pavlovian dog. You'd look like a moron too, if we just ran on an endless loop the worst shit you ever posted on here.

[texaspackerbacker]

I give you all this riddle.

How is Barak Obama EXACTLY like Howard, Aynrand, and a couple of other generally decent conservatives in this forum when it comes to taxes?

Answer: They ALL seem to think SOMEBODY has to pay for tax cuts.

It's a damned shame that Obama doesn't realize that he could easily have the low end of his redistribution scheme WITHOUT as Aynrand said, "we ..... have to pay for it".

TAX CUTS GENERATE GROWTH--GEOMETRICALLY ENHANCED INCOME--HENCE DEMAND--HENCE PRODUCTION/SALES--HENCE MORE INCOME--ON AND ON, AND ALL THAT ENHANCED INCOME GENERATES ENHANCED TAX REVENUE TO THE GOVERNMENT, DESPITE THE LOWER TAX RATES. Why is that so hard to understand?

Could it possibly be that Obama DOES understand, but that he is a true believer in his own class warfare rhetoric--that he hates anybody he perceives as rich that he wants to put a punitive tax on them?

Could it possibly be that Obama is so enamored with socialism and therefore, HATE of free enterprise capitalism, that he does NOT WANT to see the rising tide of tax cuts float all boats--that he merely is demagoguing his "tax cuts for everybody under $250,000 income" (which I still don't believe) to get elected, but is truly dedicated to pushing the country to such an economic situation that people will accept socialism--we see a little bit of that already with the bail out and now the proposed buying into banks?

And all my fellow conservatives can do is whine, "it ain't fair" that WE have to pay for tax cuts to lower income groups. And hell yes, I know it's more than just cuts. Obama proposes to have more of what Nixon once called a "negative income tax"--either increasing Earned Income Credit or whatever. So what! This just injects money into the economy, creating the same beautiful scenario described above with tax cuts that don't have to be paid for.

Yeah, I know. It just ain't fair. BFD.

[mraynrand]

How did that 170 billion dollar stimulus plan work tex?