Turns out Joe the Plumber was on Welfare TWICE

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from traderNik:

I have this member on ignore but I saw this quoted in another post. Is this supposed to be a joke or a serious question?

The Republican party made this guy a part of the campaign. They made him an official part of their rallies. He was commenting on the Republican foreign policy platform from a Republican podium at an official event!!

If you don't understand why the sordid details of his personal and 'professional' life (which clearly undermine him as a valid commentator and representative of the party) are relevant in the analysis of what went wrong for the Republicans, you're either stoned or stupid. Not sure which it is in this case.

So a guy who asked a question that embarrassed obama puts his whole life in play as fair game, but it is somehow outrageous to comment on the fact that the actual candidate attended a racist church with a crazy racist pastor, that he was friends with terrorists and his chief financial supporter was a crooked influence peddler?

Thanks to you and the other moron for clearing that up for me.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

So a guy who asked a question that [attempted to embarrass] Obama puts his whole life in play as fair game,

Yes. Duh.

Joe the Fake Plumber is a complete fraud. If the question was so damn important, why couldn't you find a REAL plumber (or other REAL professional) with a REAL savings account capable of buying his boss's business to ask the question? You had to find another plant like Jeff Gannon pretending to be somebody he wasn't, because the question was just a lame-ass excuse to claim Obama was a socialist.

News flash: every tax, including the current one, is a redistribution of wealth. Obama didn't invent taxes, and your stupid attempt to pretend like he did turned most voters off. They believe that he intends to go back to the Clinton taxes, where most people prospered, not just the rich.

Obama got 52% of the vote in the >$200K income group. Why do you think that is, AAA?

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from kut2k2:

Yes. Duh.

Joe the Fake Plumber is a complete fraud. If the question was so damn important, why couldn't you find a REAL plumber (or other REAL professional) with a REAL savings account capable of buying his boss's business to ask the question? You had to find another plant like Jeff Gannon pretending to be somebody he wasn't, because the question was just a lame-ass excuse to claim Obama was a socialist.

News flash: every tax, including the current one, is a redistribution of wealth. Obama didn't invent taxes, and your stupid attempt to pretend like he did turned most voters off. They believe that he intends to go back to the Clinton taxes, where most people prospered, not just the rich.

Obama got 52% of the vote in the >$200K income group. Why do you think that is, AAA?

It's no secret that he ran well in urban areas on both coasts where higher incomes are common. I doubt it had anything to do with his economic policies.

You just assume without any proof that Joe was a republican plant. As I understand it, the guy was standing in front of his own house when obama came by chatting people up.

If he had said how much he loved obama, no controversy. But the fact that he voiced mild skepticism and Obama's off the cuff answer sent shivers through thoughtful people made it an imperative to destroy the man, by any means possible. those means included using media allies, misusing government records and apparently dispatching an army of internet drones.

We saw this tactic of personal destruction of critics during the Clinton administration. Apparently it's back, bigger and meaner than ever. Don't you just love change?

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

You just assume without any proof that Joe was a republican plant. As I understand it, the guy was standing in front of his own house when obama came by chatting people up.

You understand it wrong. I saw the tape. There was a crowd of people around Obama and Joe came to him, not vice versa. This rightwing fairytale that Obama was going door to door like some vacuum cleaner salesman is ridiculous.

We saw this tactic of personal destruction of critics during the Clinton administration. Apparently it's back, bigger and meaner than ever.

Back? When did it ever leave? Your side plays that card more than anybody.

 

[runningman]

Quote from cuz69:

Depends on your views. If you think Bigger govt. and tax and spend policies are ok, than your guy is better(and noticed I emphasized your guy)

Just because he has won, does not mean I have to support him.

How does this differ from the last 8 years?
Bigger Gov't? Check
Tax and Spend? Check

Bush spent more of our money than all the presidents in history *COMBINED* Even worse, he put our kids very far in the hole. We now have a TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT. Please defend the Bush policies that got us here.

 

[bigarrow]

News flash to the republicans. An unfunded tax cut is a redistribution of wealth. It plays out in a couple of ways, 1st through inflation, reduced value of the dollar. This is worse than a tax hike, a tax hike is honest, we know we're getting our money taken away from us. The inflation is like the boiling a frog story, it hits us gradually so we are more likely to accept the results. The second way an unfunded tax cut is a redistribution of wealth is that it takes wealth from the future to pay the recipients today, who are mostly the wealthy or corporations. The republican argument is totally dishonest unless they also point out their own parties dishonesty and socialist tendencies. Most all the republican arguments are baseless. Small government, give me a break the republicans are the champions of large government. And for the record for a country as large and complex as ours, we will never have a small government. The argument should be on how to run the government efficiently. Right to bear arms, another newsflash, EVERYONE IS FOR ARMS CONTROL!! Arms includes grenades, rocket launchers, cannons, tanks and even jet fighters. A strict constitutionalists would argue for allowing possession of these arms of war. We all are for Arms control and restrictions. A logical assumption would be if the founding fathers would of known about these weapons they would of worded the constitution differently. And also another logical assumption would be the founding fathers would never restrict the rights of a citizen to own guns to protect himself, which is totally different than what the 2nd amendment is about. In this regard we are all for interpreting the constitution instead of a strict reading. The list goes on and on.
We need a strong two party system but the republican party and followers are brainwashed at the present time, blinded by slogans and symbols and a "you're either with us or against us" mentality which drives away the moderate majority. You criticize Obama voters for being fools, but many of the same people who voted Republican in the past are voting Democrat today. Wake up republicans, your party needs a fundamental change.