No freakin way! Joe The Plumber takes a UNION JOB!

[Jarlaxle]

Obama had spent a decade as a state legislator and a Senator for one of the most populus states in the union.

Palin governed a state that has less people in it than some suburbs of Chicago. And she didn't even finish out her term.

Again, you had vastly more qualified people McCain could have chosen, he picked Palin because he thought she had street cred with the crazy faction of your party. And then people saw how stone dead ignorant the woman was, and didn't want her to be one 72 year old heartbeat away from the presidency.

In 2008, Sarah Palin had more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined!

Well no. She didn't.

Alaska..although it is a "state", has less people in it than a Illinois burb.

It's a fly over with lotsa oil.

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Again, no one making $40K is buying a $280K business. We know he didn't buy the business and it later came out that it was actually many years earlier when he discussed buying the business. So he wasn't "getting ready to buy" shit.

As far as the part in your link where he changed his story ... he went from saying ...

"I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes about $250,000 … $270-$280,000 a year. Your new tax plan's going tax me more, isn't it?"

... to ...

Wurzelbacher conceded today that he is not in danger of being hit with the higher tax rate. He acknowledged that he wants to buy a plumbing company for $250,000 to $280,000. That wouldn't be how much profit he would make from the firm.

You can call that splitting hairs if you really need to defend his lies that badly -- but they remain lies nonetheless.

Oh please, the reporter interviewed Joe and explained Obama's stated policy on tax point by point and then asked Joe if it would impact the business, because Joe said the company was making around 250 a year. The reporter said he needed to make 250 a year in profit at least for Obama policy to become an issue. And then Joe said he guessed it would not impact the business if he needed to make 250 a year in profit. More hair splitting.

You have no clue about family helping or not with funds, or any plans made with the business owner. You make these claims and say it's lies. But the fact of the matter is, it was Obama's answer about "spreading the wealth around" through taxes is what got this rolling.

Instead of dealing with the politicians answer and or defending, accepting or supporting his stance, Joe the Plumber was attacked. How flippin crazy is that?

What's crazy is the lengths you go to in order defend Joe the Liar. The guy clearly framed his question as though he was going to have to pay more in taxes because of Obama's proposed tax hike on the top bracket when the truth was he earned nowhere near enough to be affected.

I guess you have missed everything I was saying. Let's pretend I agree with you, Joe the plumber was not a plumber, he was never going to buy a business, he lied about his name.

How does that affect you, me, the media, or Obama's answer?

Would it have affected the outcome of the question if Joe was a licensed plumber, and he eventually bought the business? If so tell me why?

A question was posed to a political contender, period. The person had no bearing in what happened after he asked his question at all. The response by the political contender should be all that matters. Another politician used that interview and Obama's answer to advance his cause and the person who asked the question was ripped to shreds. That is what bothers me. Any side of the aisle, left, right or middle.

Explain to me why it matters, what if it were a woman who asked the same damn question and she was a prostitute in her past life, or a man who once committed manslaughter and was a drug dealer or a minority with a checkered past even juicer than someone not being a licensed plumber.

Should the media scrutinize the politician's answer or the person who asked it and or the person who used it to their advantage, in this case McCain?

My issue with Joe is every detail of his life was scrutinized so much so that facts were twisted, he was lied about in order paint him in a poor light. Why does his past, present or future, affect the outcome of the question? And why lie or twist facts about someone who asked a flippin question?

 

[Faun]

Oh please, the reporter interviewed Joe and explained Obama's stated policy on tax point by point and then asked Joe if it would impact the business, because Joe said the company was making around 250 a year. The reporter said he needed to make 250 a year in profit at least for Obama policy to become an issue. And then Joe said he guessed it would not impact the business if he needed to make 250 a year in profit. More hair splitting.

You have no clue about family helping or not with funds, or any plans made with the business owner. You make these claims and say it's lies. But the fact of the matter is, it was Obama's answer about "spreading the wealth around" through taxes is what got this rolling.

Instead of dealing with the politicians answer and or defending, accepting or supporting his stance, Joe the Plumber was attacked. How flippin crazy is that?

What's crazy is the lengths you go to in order defend Joe the Liar. The guy clearly framed his question as though he was going to have to pay more in taxes because of Obama's proposed tax hike on the top bracket when the truth was he earned nowhere near enough to be affected.

I guess you have missed everything I was saying. Let's pretend I agree with you, Joe the plumber was not a plumber, he was never going to buy a business, he lied about his name.

How does that affect you, me, the media, or Obama's answer?

Would it have affected the outcome of the question if Joe was a licensed plumber, and he eventually bought the business? If so tell me why?

A question was posed to a political contender, period. The person had no bearing in what happened after he asked his question at all. The response by the political contender should be all that matters. Another politician used that interview and Obama's answer to advance his cause and the person who asked the question was ripped to shreds. That is what bothers me. Any side of the aisle, left, right or middle.

Explain to me why it matters, what if it were a woman who asked the same damn question and she was a prostitute in her past life, or a man who once committed manslaughter and was a drug dealer or a minority with a checkered past even juicer than someone not being a licensed plumber.

Should the media scrutinize the politician's answer or the person who asked it and or the person who used it to their advantage, in this case McCain?

My issue with Joe is every detail of his life was scrutinized so much so that facts were twisted, he was lied about in order paint him in a poor light. Why does his past, present or future, affect the outcome of the question? And why lie or twist facts about someone who asked a flippin question?

I agree with you on the point that his life should not have been dissected the way it was and someone lost their job over it as I recall. However, the guy lied to Obama in order to make the point that his taxes were going up because of Obama, when in fact, they weren't. The guy was in no position to ask that question so he lied to put himself into position. McCain, meanwhile, made a complete fool of himself when he used Joe the Liar as a prop in the debates.

 

[Faun]

In 2008, Sarah Palin had more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined!

Well no. She didn't.

Alaska..although it is a "state", has less people in it than a Illinois burb.

It's a fly over with lotsa oil.

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

Why does executive experience matter?

 

[Avatar4321]

Im sorry he had to take a union job. Sounds like he is too.

 

[Avatar4321]

Well no. She didn't.

Alaska..although it is a "state", has less people in it than a Illinois burb.

It's a fly over with lotsa oil.

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

Why does executive experience matter?

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

 

[Synthaholic]

Once more, for the slow kid... I can belong to the union, or I can pay a "fee" that is--SURPRISE!--exactly equal to the regular dues, to the penny! Same shit, different septic tank.

Looks like you're the slow kid - from that same Right-Wing source:

The Supreme Court, in Communication Workers v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), a lawsuit that was supported by the Foundation, ruled that objecting nonmembers cannot be required to pay union dues. The most that nonmembers can be required to pay is an agency fee that equals their share of what the union can prove is its costs of collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment with their employer.


Except in extraordinary cases, the union's costs of collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment do not equal the dues amount.
​

Since you're a wingnut, I don't expect you to acknowledge this, or admit you were wrong.

 

[Synthaholic]

[

Here is what Joe said about public Unions:

I have never made it a secret that I do not like public unions because taxpayers are never properly represented at the bargaining table. People need to be educated that, in fact, it was President Jimmy Carter who ended collective bargaining rights for Federal workers because of this very fact. President Carter knew it was not in the best interest of America or Americans and he is an icon of the left.

Was he wrong?

Joe uses his middle name as many others do. Who knows if his parents gave him that nick name or if he preferred to be called Joe over Sam as he grew into adulthood. It does not make him a liar anymore than you introducing yourself as Joe over Joseph or Obama introducing himself as Barry over Barack.

Sam the Scab called himself "joe the plumber' when he was nothing of the sort.

But never mind that, the union statement is interesting.

First, few on the left really consider Jimy Carter an "icon". He's just a nice man who builds houses and was a weak president who couldn't get things done. In fact, if you were around in 1980, you'd know a lot of Democrats wanted to get behind Ted Kennedy and get rid of Carter.

I guess the Koch brothers are going to have to find themselves another useless tool.

True, and I blame Ted Kennedy for enabling the Reagan disaster upon America, by dividing the Democrats.

It's a lesson that today's Regressive Party didn't learn, obviously.

 

[Faun]

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

Why does executive experience matter?

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

How much executive experience did Bush have before becoming president?

 

[Synthaholic]

In 2008, Sarah Palin had more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined!

Well no. She didn't.

Alaska..although it is a "state", has less people in it than a Illinois burb.

It's a fly over with lotsa oil.

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

The same amount that Reagan had when he became Governor of one of the world's largest economies, in California.

The same amount that Poor Sarah had when she served only half a term as Governor of Alaska.

The same amount as the man you voted for and your Party nominated in 2008, John McCain. (Why was that OK?)

The same amount that Richard Nixon had when he was elected President.

Same for Lyndon Johnson, JFK, Harry Truman, FDR - all considered great presidents.

 

[Synthaholic]

Well no. She didn't.

Alaska..although it is a "state", has less people in it than a Illinois burb.

It's a fly over with lotsa oil.

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

Why does executive experience matter?

It doesn't.

At least when it's a Republican with no executive experience, apparently.

But, as I just listed, some great POTUS have had none upon entering the Oval Office.

 

[Synthaholic]

What executive experience did Obama and Biden have in 2008? Be specific.

Why does executive experience matter?

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

How much did Mark Zuckerberg have before he started Facebook?

Better question:

How did executive experience factor into Dubya becoming one of America's worst presidents?

This was a guy who delegated responsibility to people around him, leaving them to enact policy that they wouldn't have been able to be elected on, effectively thwarting the will of the American voters.

For example: Do you think Cheney would have been able to be elected on a platform of advocating torture? Not a chance in hell.

 

[Synthaholic]

Why does executive experience matter?

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

How much executive experience did Bush have before becoming president?

He served as governor of Texas - THE LEAST POWERFUL GOVERNORSHIP IN AMERICA.

That's a fact.

(Conversely, Chris Christie is the most powerful governor in America - the position of Governor is the ONLY statewide election. The people of New Jersey do not vote for any other statewide position - they are all appointed by the governor.)

 

[Papageorgio]

Why does executive experience matter?

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

How much executive experience did Bush have before becoming president?

Wow, are you really that stupid?

 

[Faun]

Well, you want a high level executive position, it helps to have some experience running something.

How much executive experience did Bush have before becoming president?

Wow, are you really that stupid?

For asking folks here how much executive experience Bush had??

You sound like an overly sensitive rightwinger.

 

[CaféAuLait]

What's crazy is the lengths you go to in order defend Joe the Liar. The guy clearly framed his question as though he was going to have to pay more in taxes because of Obama's proposed tax hike on the top bracket when the truth was he earned nowhere near enough to be affected.

I guess you have missed everything I was saying. Let's pretend I agree with you, Joe the plumber was not a plumber, he was never going to buy a business, he lied about his name.

How does that affect you, me, the media, or Obama's answer?

Would it have affected the outcome of the question if Joe was a licensed plumber, and he eventually bought the business? If so tell me why?

A question was posed to a political contender, period. The person had no bearing in what happened after he asked his question at all. The response by the political contender should be all that matters. Another politician used that interview and Obama's answer to advance his cause and the person who asked the question was ripped to shreds. That is what bothers me. Any side of the aisle, left, right or middle.

Explain to me why it matters, what if it were a woman who asked the same damn question and she was a prostitute in her past life, or a man who once committed manslaughter and was a drug dealer or a minority with a checkered past even juicer than someone not being a licensed plumber.

Should the media scrutinize the politician's answer or the person who asked it and or the person who used it to their advantage, in this case McCain?

My issue with Joe is every detail of his life was scrutinized so much so that facts were twisted, he was lied about in order paint him in a poor light. Why does his past, present or future, affect the outcome of the question? And why lie or twist facts about someone who asked a flippin question?

I agree with you on the point that his life should not have been dissected the way it was and someone lost their job over it as I recall. However, the guy lied to Obama in order to make the point that his taxes were going up because of Obama, when in fact, they weren't. The guy was in no position to ask that question so he lied to put himself into position. McCain, meanwhile, made a complete fool of himself when he used Joe the Liar as a prop in the debates.

Actually three people lost their job over it then the county had to fight a lawsuit because of it as well. I blame that on the media mob mentality and to be quite honest a lot of left wing blogs. Why? Because they were seeking anything to burn Joe with.

Here's the rub with your post above, if the media had not torn his life apart you would most likely not say he 'lied" because you would not have known he only made 40-50k a year and may not be able to afford to purchase that business outright. We have no clue how that was to transpire either way though.

A question for you.

Don't you think IF Joe had said "IF" I buy a business making 250,000-300,000 a year and said that was his "American Dream" and he was "working hard as a plumber" to attain such and therefore would be taxed more by Obama, etc., Obama still would have said the same things, don't you think? And McCain still would have used it. It would have presented the same scenario.

I don't think anyone set out to 'lie' or pull the wool over anyone eyes. It was the way the media presented it.

This has always been something that bothered me, It would have bothered me if the same had happened if it were McCain taking a question. That could have been anyone and that person, even with the best intentions could have had their life ruined because they asked a question. And I do not find that right at all.

 

[Faun]

I guess you have missed everything I was saying. Let's pretend I agree with you, Joe the plumber was not a plumber, he was never going to buy a business, he lied about his name.

How does that affect you, me, the media, or Obama's answer?

Would it have affected the outcome of the question if Joe was a licensed plumber, and he eventually bought the business? If so tell me why?

A question was posed to a political contender, period. The person had no bearing in what happened after he asked his question at all. The response by the political contender should be all that matters. Another politician used that interview and Obama's answer to advance his cause and the person who asked the question was ripped to shreds. That is what bothers me. Any side of the aisle, left, right or middle.

Explain to me why it matters, what if it were a woman who asked the same damn question and she was a prostitute in her past life, or a man who once committed manslaughter and was a drug dealer or a minority with a checkered past even juicer than someone not being a licensed plumber.

Should the media scrutinize the politician's answer or the person who asked it and or the person who used it to their advantage, in this case McCain?

My issue with Joe is every detail of his life was scrutinized so much so that facts were twisted, he was lied about in order paint him in a poor light. Why does his past, present or future, affect the outcome of the question? And why lie or twist facts about someone who asked a flippin question?

I agree with you on the point that his life should not have been dissected the way it was and someone lost their job over it as I recall. However, the guy lied to Obama in order to make the point that his taxes were going up because of Obama, when in fact, they weren't. The guy was in no position to ask that question so he lied to put himself into position. McCain, meanwhile, made a complete fool of himself when he used Joe the Liar as a prop in the debates.

Actually three people lost their job over it then the county had to fight a lawsuit because of it as well. I blame that on the media mob mentality and to be quite honest a lot of left wing blogs. Why? Because they were seeking anything to burn Joe with.

Here's the rub with your post above, if the media had not torn his life apart you would most likely not say he 'lied" because you would not have known he only made 40-50k a year and may not be able to afford to purchase that business outright. We have no clue how that was to transpire either way though.

A question for you.

Don't you think IF Joe had said "IF" I buy a business making 250,000-300,000 a year and said that was his "American Dream" and he was "working hard as a plumber" to attain such and therefore would be taxed more by Obama, etc., Obama still would have said the same things, don't you think? And McCain still would have used it. It would have presented the same scenario.

I don't think anyone set out to 'lie' or pull the wool over anyone eyes. It was the way the media presented it.

This has always been something that bothered me, It would have bothered me if the same had happened if it were McCain taking a question. That could have been anyone and that person, even with the best intentions could have had their life ruined because they asked a question. And I do not find that right at all.

For right or wrong, the media uncovered his salary; exposing he was lying. And of course he set out to lie. He knew when he positioned himself in front of Obama as someone who would be affected by the higher tax rate that in fact, he would not be. As far as Obama's response ... since Obama couldn't know Joe the Liar was lying to his face, I don't see how his answer would have been any different had Joe Wurzelburger been telling the truth.

 

[CaféAuLait]

I agree with you on the point that his life should not have been dissected the way it was and someone lost their job over it as I recall. However, the guy lied to Obama in order to make the point that his taxes were going up because of Obama, when in fact, they weren't. The guy was in no position to ask that question so he lied to put himself into position. McCain, meanwhile, made a complete fool of himself when he used Joe the Liar as a prop in the debates.

Actually three people lost their job over it then the county had to fight a lawsuit because of it as well. I blame that on the media mob mentality and to be quite honest a lot of left wing blogs. Why? Because they were seeking anything to burn Joe with.

Here's the rub with your post above, if the media had not torn his life apart you would most likely not say he 'lied" because you would not have known he only made 40-50k a year and may not be able to afford to purchase that business outright. We have no clue how that was to transpire either way though.

A question for you.

Don't you think IF Joe had said "IF" I buy a business making 250,000-300,000 a year and said that was his "American Dream" and he was "working hard as a plumber" to attain such and therefore would be taxed more by Obama, etc., Obama still would have said the same things, don't you think? And McCain still would have used it. It would have presented the same scenario.

I don't think anyone set out to 'lie' or pull the wool over anyone eyes. It was the way the media presented it.

This has always been something that bothered me, It would have bothered me if the same had happened if it were McCain taking a question. That could have been anyone and that person, even with the best intentions could have had their life ruined because they asked a question. And I do not find that right at all.

For right or wrong, the media uncovered his salary; exposing he was lying. And of course he set out to lie. He knew when he positioned himself in front of Obama as someone who would be affected by the higher tax rate that in fact, he would not be. As far as Obama's response ... since Obama couldn't know Joe the Liar was lying to his face, I don't see how his answer would have been any different had Joe Wurzelburger been telling the truth.

Well we obviously differ on that point of contention re: lying about buying a business.

He was publically flogged and nearly vetted because of a question, which Obama would have answered the same way even if Joe had posed it as I did above, "if I were to buy a business..." And it stinks for anyone, left, right, middle, or what have you.

 

[thanatos144]

How much executive experience did Bush have before becoming president?

Wow, are you really that stupid?

For asking folks here how much executive experience Bush had??

You sound like an overly sensitive rightwinger.

He is right you are a idiot. You do know that Bush served two terms as the governor of Texas right? Which is a damn sight more executive experience then Obama had

tapatalk post

 

[JoeB131]

[

First, it's not clear to me how it's deceptive to call yourself a plumber when you do plumbing work for a licensed plumbing company, even if you are not the owner of said company. Maybe that's not good enough for you and the plumbers union to consider you a plumber, but for 95 percent of people, that job description sounds like "plumber."

You are so blinded by your hate for Joe ( which stumps me TBH) you still fail to see he could no more predict Obama's answer and or the press/McCain jumping all over it than he could the lotto numbers. I couldn't give a shit less about Obama's answer but you keep trying to insist I do for whatever reason.

The issue for me is how he was treated by the media, and pubic servants trying to embarrass him because he asked a question. That crap should have never happened.

BTW are you aware He was not happy about McCain using him, in fact he said "McCain was trying to use him" and he also said he felt Obama was a more HONEST politician, even though he disagreed with him, shortly after the whole mess started.

I'll ask you one more time why not examine or support the politicians ( ANY POLITICAN) answer and or instead of attacking the person who asked a question?

You know what, Sam the Scab is still doing the work of the Goons of Plutocracy rather than thinking for himself. Honestly, he reminds me a lot of guys I grew up with, union guys who just fucking hate Obama (because he's black) but are perfectly willing to slit their own throats and support the abomination the GOP has become.

So I honestly hope this guy's life is as miserable as possible. I hope small children laugh at him and call him "Sam the Scab" for the rest of his life. I hope he has to share a flat with Zimmerman where they are both peeking out the windows hoping no one recognizes them.

Point was, he presented himself as this "Plucky Entrepenuer", when in fact, he was just some scab doing illegal plumbing work. Really, really can't get worked up because people pointed it out.