Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Richie Allen]

My problem is not with Joe the Plumber, it's with John McCain.

Joe the Plumber basically told a flat out lie in his attempt to show up Obama. Fine. He's entitled to do that if he chooses. But unbeknownst to McCain, Joe the Plumber was not the face of a small business owner. So he used his little exchange with Obama to highlight the plight of the small business owner who will be punished by Obama's tax plan. Then some people in the media (and maybe even in Obama's campaign) stopped and thought about it for a second and said, "Wait a minute... The vast majority of small business owners make far less than $250,000, so does it make sense that this guy living on this street, in that house, has the resources to purchase a plumbing company that profits $278,000 a year?"

So they do a little investigating and find out that he isn't about to buy said plumbing business. In fact, he has nowhere near the resources to do so. In other words, he lied.

But that's not the part that bothers me. The part that bothers me is that McCain and Palin continue to use Joe the Plumber's plight as an excuse to attack Obama's plan... as if McCain's economic and tax policies are looking out for or are beneficial to people like Joe the Plumber. And it bothers me that there are actually people who buy this fish story that McCain's selling them.

Joe the Plumber has effectively become Sarah Palin v.2.0. He's another intellectual antithesis that energizes the base of working class Republicans who for whatever reason fall for this snow job that McCain is giving them, while simultaneously equally energizing Obama's supporters as well as turning off independents who see through disingenuousness in McCain's exploitation of the Joe the Plumber story.

The reason I love this site is because you guys save me so much typing.

[Popeye_Card]

is resorting to McCarthyism the last hope of the GOP's campaign?

They've always heavily relied on slippery slope arguments. "Spreading the wealth" is only a small slip away from being communist Russia, you know. Nevermind that we already do it.

[PujolJunkie]

Obama loses Amanda Knox's vote in Washington

Seattle native and murder suspect supports Barack Obama

Knox, 21, who styled herself Foxy Knoxy, revealed her political allegiances after being visited by Italian MP Enrico Gasbarra.

She told him: 'I wanted to go home so that I could vote for Obama. I think I hoped too much. I really thought I would be getting out of here.'

Barack Obama pals around with murderers.

[Arthur Dent]

They've always heavily relied on slippery slope arguments.

[Hungary Jack]

Obviously he isn't good at math or he'd be able to allocate his resources to where he wouldn't be $1200.00 in debt with his taxes.

Yeah, that's the most important thing about his question. Clearly.

That's my point.

Did you not see where I said I had nothing wrong his question?

Clearly.

Why is this an issue? Seriously. I'd like to understand why the left is doing all they can to discredit this guy. Both sides do it, don't get me wrong, but the level of this is ridiculous.

Well, his story about being a small (prospective) business owner who is worried about paying increased taxes under Obama does not add up. His numbers fail the sniff test, he clearly doesn't know enough about taxation to take care of his personal situation, and now he's being trotted around by the GOP like a celebrity. I'd be skeptical too.

[PujolJunkie]

I swear, people like Chuck Todd and John King kill me with their political maps. Marist shows a 4 point lead in VA and this schmuck on MSNBC says "Pretty consistent with everything else we've seen."

6 out of the past 20 polls, I believe, have shown Obama ahead by anywhere from 6 to 11 points. Until this week, nobody had it as close as 4 since Mason Dixon last week and before that, Winthrop a week prior, which had extremely screwy internals.

They'll do anything to keep it close.

[KyCardinalFan]

I love how someone can ask a presidential candidate a question on the campaign trail and have themselves dragged through the mud by the media. The scrutiny of Joe is beyond the ridiculous level.

I think people are just annoyed by his self-promotion and obvious grabbing of his 15 minutes of fame.

I will freely admit that I don't like it that news outlets immediately investigate these instant celebrities within minutes. I'm sure he's just an average Joe. It's the Republicans who made him a huge story, when there's not all that much particularly interesting about his situation.

The scrutiny took place immediately...digging into his past, looking for ways to put him down. And it wasn't just the news outlets.

Did the Republicans make him a huge story? Yeah, I guess. But it was because of the answer that Obama gave that set them off. "Spread the wealth". That's what started it all. And now, the best way to get people to ignore that is to paint Joe in a bad light.

Disgusting.

That is simply, unequivocally, undeniably, emphatically untrue. Obama spoke to Joe the Plumber on Sunday, October 12. Every dateline of every story about Joe the Plumber starts the evening of the debate, Oct. 15 because McCain mentioned him 20+ times. McCain first brought him up to the country. The stories that delve into Joe's history - lack of a license, owes taxes, etc. - the ones that you find disgusting, are usually dated at the earliest October 16. October 16. Which is four days after Obama talked to him, one day after McCain dragged him out for all of America to endure. Of course that didn't stop McCain from complaining a day or two later that the Obama campaign had ruined this poor guy's life. Which is probably the 'report' that you are basing this mistaken opinion on, I can only guess.

Provide a credible news source that has a dateline before October 15 that 'smears' Joe the Plumber and I will apologize profusely.

At least four background checks on Joe by Ohio state employees on state of Ohio computers in the databases searching for information about Joe. The woman who heads up the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services acknowledged the checks...more than was initially reported. The woman is a supporter of Obama (donating the maximum she could to him). I'm not saying she did this or authorized this with political motivations, but it does seem odd to me that she openly supports Obama, wasn't truthful at first, had those in her office (if not her) check into child support payments or welfare payments or unemployment compensation.

It could all be legit checks, but excuse me if I have my doubts.

Also, why does it still give the right for the left to blast him like they have?

Obama's answer is what bothered me and most people on the right. I don't care if someone that asked it was a child molester, doesn't have a plumbing license (heaven forbid!!!!) or is as clean as a whistle. That person, while clearly not ready for office, isn't the one that answered (who also is clearly not ready for office).

I didn't say the left had the right to blast him.

Your original post about this, the first in all these quotes, said that the media dragged Joe through the mud because he asked a presidential candidate a question. You said the scrutiny took place immediately. Those remarks are simply not true. The media camped out on his lawn because McCain gave him his Warhol moment at the debate. He would've remained merely a YouTube moment if McCain hadn't made him the centerpiece of his campaign. You're implying that it was Obama's campaign that invited all this scrutiny to Joe, yet McCain started it.

[InvincibleCakeEater]

I love how someone can ask a presidential candidate a question on the campaign trail and have themselves dragged through the mud by the media. The scrutiny of Joe is beyond the ridiculous level.

I think people are just annoyed by his self-promotion and obvious grabbing of his 15 minutes of fame.

I will freely admit that I don't like it that news outlets immediately investigate these instant celebrities within minutes. I'm sure he's just an average Joe. It's the Republicans who made him a huge story, when there's not all that much particularly interesting about his situation.

The scrutiny took place immediately...digging into his past, looking for ways to put him down. And it wasn't just the news outlets.

Did the Republicans make him a huge story? Yeah, I guess. But it was because of the answer that Obama gave that set them off. "Spread the wealth". That's what started it all. And now, the best way to get people to ignore that is to paint Joe in a bad light.

Disgusting.

That is simply, unequivocally, undeniably, emphatically untrue. Obama spoke to Joe the Plumber on Sunday, October 12. Every dateline of every story about Joe the Plumber starts the evening of the debate, Oct. 15 because McCain mentioned him 20+ times. McCain first brought him up to the country. The stories that delve into Joe's history - lack of a license, owes taxes, etc. - the ones that you find disgusting, are usually dated at the earliest October 16. October 16. Which is four days after Obama talked to him, one day after McCain dragged him out for all of America to endure. Of course that didn't stop McCain from complaining a day or two later that the Obama campaign had ruined this poor guy's life. Which is probably the 'report' that you are basing this mistaken opinion on, I can only guess.

Provide a credible news source that has a dateline before October 15 that 'smears' Joe the Plumber and I will apologize profusely.

At least four background checks on Joe by Ohio state employees on state of Ohio computers in the databases searching for information about Joe. The woman who heads up the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services acknowledged the checks...more than was initially reported. The woman is a supporter of Obama (donating the maximum she could to him). I'm not saying she did this or authorized this with political motivations, but it does seem odd to me that she openly supports Obama, wasn't truthful at first, had those in her office (if not her) check into child support payments or welfare payments or unemployment compensation.

It could all be legit checks, but excuse me if I have my doubts.

Also, why does it still give the right for the left to blast him like they have?

Obama's answer is what bothered me and most people on the right. I don't care if someone that asked it was a child molester, doesn't have a plumbing license (heaven forbid!!!!) or is as clean as a whistle. That person, while clearly not ready for office, isn't the one that answered (who also is clearly not ready for office).

I didn't say the left had the right to blast him.

Your original post about this, the first in all these quotes, said that the media dragged Joe through the mud because he asked a presidential candidate a question. You said the scrutiny took place immediately. Those remarks are simply not true. The media camped out on his lawn because McCain gave him his Warhol moment at the debate. He would've remained merely a YouTube moment if McCain hadn't made him the centerpiece of his campaign. You're implying that it was Obama's campaign that invited all this scrutiny to Joe, yet McCain started it.

You're forgetting the biggest point of his argument.

McCain is supporting him, so he's a good guy who is being dragged through the mud by the leftist media. It is impossible for it to be any other way, because that's what the GOP says.

[GatewaySnayke]

We'll just all agree to disagree on this, too.

I'm waiting on the discrediting of the anchor who asked Biden about Marxism.

I'm waiting on the right's explaination for why Marxism is the worst thing ever.

There's no good answer to this question, especially when conservatives rallied the PATRIOT ACt.

[cpebbles]

Nobody's bothered to go after that anchor too much because she discredited herself by asking questions that will shortly be appearing in textbook chapters on "loaded questions."