On Oct 17, 7:30*am, wrote:

and the whole thing was a setup
engineered by the Republicons.

Let's assume that was true for the sake of argument. How would that
change the fact that Obama said it was better for everyone if you
"spread the wealth around"? That's the real point here, and levelling
the politics of personal destruction at a voter who dared to ask a
question should not take away from the revealing nature of the reply.

On Oct 17, 9:38*am, Mike Granby wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:30*am, wrote:

and the whole thing was a setup
engineered by the Republicons.

Let's assume that was true for the sake of argument. How would that
change the fact that Obama said it was better for everyone if you
"spread the wealth around"? That's the real point here, and levelling
the politics of personal destruction at a voter who dared to ask a
question should not take away from the revealing nature of the reply.

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Josh Rosenbluth

wrote:

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 05:22:14 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:



Mc Cain has BIG PLANS if elected. Joe the plumber will head up his new
cabinet plumbing position. To assure white house toilets dont get
clogged by all the crap another republican adminstration would
bring..........



The last white house plumbers worked for the Nixon Administration.
They almost managed to flush the U.S. Constitution.



We can also thank them for alleged bomber Ayers going free due to
illegal wiretaps. Ah, the
familiar stench of gov't. gone bad ..... Republican administration lying
about a war?

willshak wrote in
:

on 10/16/2008 8:30 PM alarman said the following:
wrote:


'Joe the plumber' isn't licensed


In CA, tradespeople who work for a company are not licensed. The
licence is issued to the contractor, (the boss, owner, partnership,
LLC, or corporation that runs the business. Most plumbers are
employees of contractors. I think is works the same way in OH.


In the NY county I live in, employees of plumbing contractors are not
required to be licensed and can work throughout the county on the
contractor's license, except in the major cities.
In the NY county I used to live in (which is the abutting county), all
employees must be individually licensed.
Furthermore, in that other county, homeowners wishing to do their own
work must get a temporary license.
In all cases here and in the other county, all work must be inspected
by the county building inspectors.
Just pointing out that some counties may have more stringent, or
relaxed, rules than other other counties within the same state.


many of the leftists also missed the part about Joe The Plumber -
considering- buying a company making $250K/yr,instead believing Joe said
he -made- $250K per year,and then claimed he's a liar.

No wonder they're for Obama the communist. "spread the wealth" by taking
from you and giving it to those they like; =communism.

check out Obama's Global Poverty Initiative;same thing,except he's giving
our money(2%+ of US-GNP!!) to the UN for THEM to dole out to their
folk.(along with siphoning some off for themselves...)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Oct 17, 8:38*am, Mike Granby wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:30*am, wrote:

and the whole thing was a setup
engineered by the Republicons.

Let's assume that was true for the sake of argument. How would that
change the fact that Obama said it was better for everyone if you
"spread the wealth around"? That's the real point here, and levelling
the politics of personal destruction at a voter who dared to ask a
question should not take away from the revealing nature of the reply.

It is called a smoke screen. When you can't honestly answer the
question then throw doubt on the one asking the question. Joe never
said anything except that he didn't believe that he should be
penalized if he somehow managed to buy the business he worked for and
made more that some amount that Obama finds to be the magic point of
added taxes.

What I want to know is what income level will Obama lower his
projection to when he finds that just adding taxes to those who make
over $250 k per year is not nearly enough to begin to pay for all the
additional spending he is proposing? What will he do when those small
businessmen being hit with higher taxes and increased burdens for his
healthcare benefits program start laying off 10-20% of the workforce?
I may want to believe all the outlandish promises he has made but I
also know there will be unintended consequences that he hasn't even
begun to think about. Just remember, you DON"T decrease the
outsourcing of jobs by increasing the costs of employing people at
home.

On Oct 17, 9:35*am, Jim Yanik wrote:
willshak wrote :





on 10/16/2008 8:30 PM alarman said the following:
wrote:

'Joe the plumber' isn't licensed

In CA, tradespeople who work for a company are not licensed. The
licence is issued to the contractor, (the boss, owner, partnership,
LLC, or corporation that runs the business. Most plumbers are
employees of contractors. I think is works the same way in OH.

In the NY county I live in, employees of plumbing contractors are not
required to be licensed and can work throughout the county on the
contractor's license, except in the major cities.
In the NY county I used to live in (which is the abutting county), all
employees must be individually licensed.
Furthermore, in that other county, homeowners wishing to do their own
work must get a temporary license.
In all cases here and in the other county, all work must be inspected
by the county building inspectors.
Just pointing out that some counties may have more stringent, or
relaxed, *rules than other other counties within the same state.

many of the leftists also missed the part about Joe The Plumber -
considering- buying a company making $250K/yr,instead believing Joe said
he -made- $250K per year,and then claimed he's a liar.

No wonder they're for Obama the communist. "spread the wealth" by taking
from you and giving it to those they like; =communism.

check out Obama's Global Poverty Initiative;same thing,except he's giving
our money(2%+ of US-GNP!!) to the UN for THEM to dole out to their
folk.(along with siphoning some off for themselves...)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim,

You clearly don't understand the mindset at work here. The leftist
mindset is to make assumptions about what was actually said and then
call the person a liar when their assumptions don't turn out to be the
case. I saw several of the interviews with "Joe" and not once did he
say or even imply anything that has been disproven. It is the media
and the liberal nut jobs who have assumed and implied that he was
something other than he said.

Norminn wrote:

We can also thank them for alleged bomber Ayers going free due to
illegal wiretaps. Ah, the
familiar stench of gov't. gone bad ..... Republican administration
lying about a war?

Well, I, uh, don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because
of a single slip-up, sir.

Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.



Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

SteveB wrote:

Still, he is a smart enough man to see through the blanket Obama was
trying to throw over him. "Spread the wealth?" I don't think so,
Tim.
I think some bigshot is going to approach Joe and open a nationwide
franchise with Joe as the pitchman. Joe Everyman. He looks a hell
of a lot more like a plumber than Obama looks like a president. Those big
ears and purple lips just don't get my vote.


Good idea! Joe does kinda resemble the iconic "Mr. Clean."

Needs an earring, though.

On Oct 17, 9:17*am, BikeFan wrote:
wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:30 am, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 03:47:42 -0700 (PDT), JCE
wrote:

On 17 oct, 12:13, BikeFan wrote:
Claude Hopper wrote:
wrote:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...0081016/NEWS09...
'Joetheplumber' isn’tlicensed
Local man focus of presidential debate
By LARRY VELLEQUETTE and TOM TROY
BLADESTAFF WRITERS
I got the impression he is a plumbing contractor in which case he has
licensedplumbers working for him and he doesnotneed a license. I also
got the impression, with his chat with Obama, that hemadeOVER $250,000
a year and was going to get hit with Obama's tax increase for the wealthy.
Hardly ANY parts of the story was true.
He had plans, ambitions to take over his bosses' business. He tax
burden was much lower with an actual income of $40,000.
Yes, he will actually benefit nicely from Obama's plan.

BTW - He's related to Charles Keating, and the whole thing was a setup
engineered by the Republicons.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The clear bias of the mainstream media is once again very apparent
here. * In nanoseconds they went out of their way to do everything
possible to discredit Joe the plumber. * *After all, he's a guy that
aspires to the American dream, plans to buy his boss's plumbing
business and worries that he could have an income over $200K and be
hit with Obama's tax increases.

All complete fantasy apparently. Based on his current profile and income
*it's the same as the local shelf packer at the supermarket suggesting
he's going to buy the entire chain.

* * So, he was fully investigated to

find out everything possible and within hours trucks and camera crews
from all the networks were on his front lawn.

Why are there no camera crews on the front lawn of William Ayers, the
terrorist? * The media gave Joe the plumber more scrutiny than they
gave Obama himself for that matter.

I wonder if we investigated your family and remote connections what we'd
find in your closets.

--
BikeFan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Excuse me, but I'm not running for president. And if I was, I would
expect it to be fair for anyone to investigate who my friends are,
what goes on in the church I attend, who helped launch me into
politics, etc.

The fact that the media went all out on Joe the plumber, who had the
audacity to ask a simply question of Obama, while turning a realtively
blind eye toward William Ayers, is OK with you? Here's another
interesting fact. A few days ago, I happened to be listening to
America's Most Wanted on the radio. They were looking for a 70's era
radical, wanted on felony charges, that has never been brough to
justice. Now, how is it that this guy is still on the most wanted
list, while Ayers, who got off on a technicality due to evidence
rules, goes around saying he thinks they should have bombed more and
has a friendly relationship with a candidate for the presidency?

wrote in message
...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...WS09/810160418

'Joe the plumber' isn’t licensed
Local man focus of presidential debate
By LARRY VELLEQUETTE and TOM TROY
BLADE STAFF WRITERS

"Joe the Plumber" isn’t a plumber — at least not a licensed one, or a
registered one.

Still, he is a smart enough man to see through the blanket Obama was trying
to throw over him. "Spread the wealth?" I don't think so, Tim.

I think some bigshot is going to approach Joe and open a nationwide
franchise with Joe as the pitchman. Joe Everyman. He looks a hell of a lot
more like a plumber than Obama looks like a president. Those big ears and
purple lips just don't get my vote.

Steve

"retired54" wrote This is another example of McCain's bad
luck and bad research.

olddog


I'm sorry, wasn't it Ole big eared purple lipped Obama who started the
discussion with Joe?

Steve

On Oct 17, 1:26*pm, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
wrote in message

...http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...0081016/NEWS09...

'Joe the plumber' isn’t licensed
Local man focus of presidential debate
By LARRY VELLEQUETTE and TOM TROY
BLADE STAFF WRITERS

"Joe the Plumber" isn’t a plumber — at least not a licensed one, or a
registered one.

Still, he is a smart enough man to see through the blanket Obama was trying
to throw over him. *"Spread the wealth?" *I don't think so, Tim.

I think some bigshot is going to approach Joe and open a nationwide
franchise with Joe as the pitchman. *Joe Everyman. *He looks a hell of a lot
more like a plumber than Obama looks like a president. *Those big ears and
purple lips just don't get my vote.

Steve

Those big ears and purple lips just don't get my vote.

I'm with you, man. Couldn't *ever* vote for an ugly candidate.

I'm voting for McCain...he's HOT!

On Oct 17, 11:20*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. *To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You can't buy votes by making that promise! Get real.

On Oct 17, 12:20*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. *To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

You missed the point, namely that Obama's "spread the wealth" line was
not linked to his support for raising taxes on the rich. Thus, your
characterization is off base.

Obama merely observed (much lke Henry Ford's approach to wages), if
the middle class can't afford to buy cars, we *all* (which happens to
include the rich) are screwed.

Josh Rosenbluth

Those big ears and purple lips just don't get my vote.

I'm with you, man. Couldn't *ever* vote for an ugly candidate.

I'm voting for McCain...he's HOT!


Come on, be honest. It's Palin we got the hots for...that is why I'm voting
for McCain

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Oct 17, 1:26 pm, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
wrote in message

...http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...0081016/NEWS09...

'Joe the plumber' isn’t licensed
Local man focus of presidential debate
By LARRY VELLEQUETTE and TOM TROY
BLADE STAFF WRITERS

"Joe the Plumber" isn’t a plumber — at least not a licensed one, or a
registered one.

Still, he is a smart enough man to see through the blanket Obama was
trying
to throw over him. "Spread the wealth?" I don't think so, Tim.

I think some bigshot is going to approach Joe and open a nationwide
franchise with Joe as the pitchman. Joe Everyman. He looks a hell of a lot
more like a plumber than Obama looks like a president. Those big ears and
purple lips just don't get my vote.

Steve

Those big ears and purple lips just don't get my vote.

I'm with you, man. Couldn't *ever* vote for an ugly candidate.

I'm voting for McCain...he's HOT!

================================================== ===

LOL

Do you have a melanoma fetish?

olddog

"Josh Rosenbluth" wrote in message
...
On Oct 17, 12:20 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

You missed the point, namely that Obama's "spread the wealth" line was
not linked to his support for raising taxes on the rich. Thus, your
characterization is off base.

Obama merely observed (much lke Henry Ford's approach to wages), if
the middle class can't afford to buy cars, we *all* (which happens to
include the rich) are screwed.

Josh Rosenbluth

================================================== ==

Maybe a caste system similar to Mexico would make the republicans happy.

olddog
--
There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.

On Oct 17, 2:29*pm, "Zoot" wrote:
Those big ears and purple lips just don't get my vote.

I'm with you, man. Couldn't *ever* vote for an ugly candidate.

I'm voting for McCain...he's HOT!

Come on, be honest. It's Palin we got the hots for...that is why I'm voting
for McCain

The scary part is that "looks" will actually enter into the thought
process for some (SteveB?) voters.

Ideology, morals and policies will take a back seat to physical
appearances.

For example...look at this guy. He can't be good for anything...just
*look* at him.

http://astro.schoolnet.ir/astro%20pe...awking%201.jpg

Poor folk are doing great....think about this.
If you are on welfare you are on a fixed income. Not great of course but
you have income.
You pay little if any taxes.
you don't have to worry about your hours being cut, losing your job
therefore lowering your income.
Retail prices go down so now your fixed dollar buys more.
Hmmmmm.......
Later
Terry the musiician



So what do you call a musician without a girlfriend?
Homeless

On Oct 17, 1:28*pm, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Oct 17, 12:20*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:





Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. *To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

You missed the point, namely that Obama's "spread the wealth" line was
not linked to his support for raising taxes on the rich. *Thus, your
characterization is off base.

Obama merely observed (much lke Henry Ford's approach to wages), if
the middle class can't afford to buy cars, we *all* (which happens to
include the rich) are screwed.

Josh Rosenbluth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, you are the one who missed the point. Obama's entire campain is
based around the concept of hitting the rich with more taxes and
giving it to the "middle class" by reducing their taxes. For those
not in the "middle class" he would give them funds outright in order
to "spread the wealth". That concept for "spreading the wealth" has
never worked and will not work under Obama. Robin Hood was no hero,
he was and will always remain a thief.

On Oct 17, 3:18*pm, BobR wrote:
On Oct 17, 1:28*pm, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:





On Oct 17, 12:20*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. *To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers..

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

You missed the point, namely that Obama's "spread the wealth" line was
not linked to his support for raising taxes on the rich. *Thus, your
characterization is off base.

Obama merely observed (much lke Henry Ford's approach to wages), if
the middle class can't afford to buy cars, we *all* (which happens to
include the rich) are screwed.


No, you are the one who missed the point. *Obama's entire campain is
based around the concept of hitting the rich with more taxes and
giving it to the "middle class" by reducing their taxes.

True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was not related to
raising taxes on the rich.

Josh Rosenbluth

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:35:34 GMT, "retired54" wrote:



He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means he's
not a plumber."



olddog


How do you get the experience to pass the plumbers test if you are not
allowed to do plumbing work to get the experience to pass the plumbers
test if.....

All we know is he works for a plumbing company. He may be the
warehouse man or a ditch digger.

True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.

Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

In article
,
Mike Granby wrote:

True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.

Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Since the news has been full of the top half percent of the population being
the beneficiaries of Bush tax and fiscal policy, and it added up to no money on
Main Street, change is in order.

--
Debate fun http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids...1772410910.jpg
http://www.fightthesmears.com/ http://www.palinaspresident.us/
http://www.torturingdemocracy.org/ http://www.backyardnature.net/rabbits.htm
Joe ain't so: http://cqchammer.blogspot.com/2008/1...g-plumber.html

Boden wrote:
nospam wrote:

wrote in message
...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...WS09/810160418



He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means
he’s not a plumber.



No, it means he's an unlicensed plumber.

You think Dr. Pepper is board certified?


Take a look at the Illinois Attorney Registrations. Neither Barack or
his wife are currently licensed to practice law. That doesn't stop them
from saying that they're attorneys.


https://www.iardc.org/lawyersearch.asp

They're both listed as admitted but inactive.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form .

Mike Granby wrote:
True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.


Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Fair enough. But, folks have been using his "spread the wealth" comment
to argue he's a socialist who wants to punish the rich. That's
bull****. He supports progressive taxation because he shares the same
philosophy about the importance of the middle class as Henry Ford did.

Josh Rosenbluth

Mike Granby wrote:
True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.


Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Fair enough. But, folks have been using his "spread the wealth" comment
to argue he's a socialist who wants to punish the rich. That's
bull****. He supports progressive taxation because he shares the same
philosophy about the importance of the middle class as Henry Ford did.

Josh Rosenbluth

Mike Granby wrote:

True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.


Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Fair enough. But, folks have been using his "spread the wealth" comment
to argue he's a socialist who wants to punish the rich. That's
bull****. He supports progressive taxation because he shares the same
philosophy about the importance of the middle class as Henry Ford did.

Josh Rosenbluth

On Oct 17, 4:13*pm, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:18*pm, BobR wrote:





On Oct 17, 1:28*pm, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

On Oct 17, 12:20*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Let's take a look at Obama's full quote:

"My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom
up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing
business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if
you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and
right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody
and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for
everybody."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html

He wasn't arguing for higher rates on the rich to redistribute
income. *To the contrary, he is arguing that lower rates on the middle
class will "spread the wealth" to everyone including upper income
folks who rely on the middle class as their employees and consumers.

Nice try at a save. Really nice try.

Like Murtha's attempt yesterday when he said constituents weren't really
'racist' racists - they were just slow to accept change.

Take from the rich, give it to the poor, so they can give it back to the
rich. Why not just let the rich keep their wealth and eliminate the
middle-man?

You missed the point, namely that Obama's "spread the wealth" line was
not linked to his support for raising taxes on the rich. *Thus, your
characterization is off base.

Obama merely observed (much lke Henry Ford's approach to wages), if
the middle class can't afford to buy cars, we *all* (which happens to
include the rich) are screwed.

No, you are the one who missed the point. *Obama's entire campain is
based around the concept of hitting the rich with more taxes and
giving it to the "middle class" by reducing their taxes.

True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was not related to
raising taxes on the rich.

Josh Rosenbluth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


BS. Everyone knows perfectly well what Obama meant. The whole GD
discussion was about TAXES. That is the exact topic that he was
talking to Joe the Plumber about. So, try to spin it all you want.
You may as well consult with Clinton about what the meaning of "is" is
to try to parse it some other way.

BikeFan wrote:
nospam wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...WS09/810160418

He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which
means he's not a plumber.


No, it means he's an unlicensed plumber.

Aren't we all just unregistered professionals at something?

Nope, most are very unprofessional at everything.

"Andy Asberry" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:35:34 GMT, "retired54" wrote:



He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means
he's
not a plumber."



olddog


How do you get the experience to pass the plumbers test if you are not
allowed to do plumbing work to get the experience to pass the plumbers
test if.....


Well...nurses and doctors go to school and do an internship...etc, etc, etc,

I went to business school and got a BBA. When I went to work in an
accounting department I didn't magically become an "accoutant". I'd have to
of majored in accounting to get that right. I could tell people I was an
"accountant" but that would be fraud. Fraud is like porn; you know it when
you see it.

All we know is he works for a plumbing company. He may be the
warehouse man or a ditch digger.

Which very well be the case, but he lied and said he was a plumber.

Personally I think it's a lie and so does the Association of Plumbers,
Steamfitters and Service Mechanics

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCan...39355520081016

olddog

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
BikeFan wrote:
nospam wrote:
wrote in message
...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...WS09/810160418

He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which
means he's not a plumber.


No, it means he's an unlicensed plumber.

Aren't we all just unregistered professionals at something?

Nope, most are very unprofessional at everything.

I live in central Texas and that seems to be the norm here. People
misrepresenting themselves is more common than not and as a result their
work is shoddy.

This "Joe the pretend plumber" thing has exposed something that is wrong in
more ways then one.

It means something to call yourself an: Accountant, Plumber, Electrician,
Doctor, Nurse etc etc... and unfortunately it means very little to some.

olddog

In article
,
BobR wrote:

You can't buy votes by making that promise! Get real.

Maybe not, but lobbyists sure can buy Republican politicians, thanks to
those who have 'way too much money.

In article
,
wrote:

Excuse me, but I'm not running for president. And if I was, I would
expect it to be fair for anyone to investigate who my friends are,
what goes on in the church I attend, who helped launch me into
politics, etc.

Sure you would. Especially when they found out you palled around with
child molesters.

In article ,
"AllEmailDeletedImmediately" wrote:

of course they have. the unions only back communists, their comrades.

I dropped the soap. Bend over and pick it up for me, wouldya sweetie?

"Josh Rosenbluth" wrote in message
...
Mike Granby wrote:
True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.


Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Fair enough. But, folks have been using his "spread the wealth" comment
to argue he's a socialist who wants to punish the rich. That's bull****.
He supports progressive taxation because he shares the same philosophy
about the importance of the middle class as Henry Ford did.

Josh Rosenbluth

It was an unfortunate choice of words. With as much speaking a presidential
candidate does it's bound to happen. It's nothing compared to "Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" but McCain is going to ride this thing until the
election because he doesn't have anything else.

olddog

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:54:16 -0700, nospam wrote:

wrote in message
...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...WS09/810160418

He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means
heÂ’s not a plumber.


No, it means he's an unlicensed plumber.

In Ohio it makes him a "labourer", Or "plumbers helper" at best, not a
"Plumber". There are license restrictions on trades that effect health and
safety.

Just because you can replace a light switch doesn't qualify you as
an electrician, thankfully.


You think Dr. Pepper is board certified?

With or without a "Moon Pie"?

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:26:46 -0500, Andy Asberry wrote:

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:35:34 GMT, "retired54" wrote:



He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means
he's not a plumber."



olddog


How do you get the experience to pass the plumbers test if you are not
allowed to do plumbing work to get the experience to pass the plumbers
test if.....

Carry a lot of pipe, pipe fittings, pick up tools, and more tools. Years
of go-fer work. Purchase your own tools of the trade. Tradesmen don't lend
tools. Next time he needs it, it's not there. Takes time to hunt lazy ass
helpers to get tools returned. You have possibly heard time ='s money.


All we know is he works for a plumbing company. He may be the warehouse
man or a ditch digger.

Ditch digging is the foremost at teaching the plumbing trade. Breaking out
clogged pipes and cleaning up "waste" is also helpful and builds
character. Tests your ability to follow orders. Clean up after yourself
when you have to, also helps.

Not meant to be easy or everyone would want to be one.

I'm glad I didn't personally chose this occupation but know those that
did. They are not rich by mine or their standards but proud of what they
do. They are within Obama's criteria for tax breaks though.

So much for "Joe the labourer".

In article ,
"retired54" wrote:

"Josh Rosenbluth" wrote in message
...
Mike Granby wrote:
True or not, his use of "spreading the wealth" was
not related to raising taxes on the rich.


Rubbish! He was answering a question about raising taxes on people
earning over $250k. He said that it wasn't that he wanted to punish
anyone's sucess (ie. by raising taxes) and then he want on to explain
his trickle-up theory. You simply can't rewrite history and claim that
this was somehow not related to the taxation discussion.

Fair enough. But, folks have been using his "spread the wealth" comment
to argue he's a socialist who wants to punish the rich. That's bull****.
He supports progressive taxation because he shares the same philosophy
about the importance of the middle class as Henry Ford did.

Josh Rosenbluth

It was an unfortunate choice of words. With as much speaking a presidential
candidate does it's bound to happen. It's nothing compared to "Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" but McCain is going to ride this thing until the
election because he doesn't have anything else.

I voted for McCain against Bush. Like many other ethical Republicans,
when Bush won the primary, I switched parties. But I've since seen only
rare glimpses of the gracious, upbeat, positive straight-talker McCain
was back then. Mostly all I've seen of McCain in this campaign is the
ugly, stupid sideshow put on by his politically-deformed Republican
campaign managers, many drivers of whom make their clueless, scummy,
racist appearance here on Usenet.

As a party, Republicans of conscience should be ashamed of the means
they employ to win at any cost. The shameless among them should be
fought to a decisive, bloody end. The Democrats are bad enough, but the
contemporary Republican party has become a sickening, traitorous,
repulsively ignorant mob, well worthy of losing every "gain" they think
they have made over the last ten years. They put pimps and procurers in
the DHS, torturers in charge of the military and intelligence
departments, and criminal plotters in the DoJ. They hold drunken and
drugged orgies in the Interior Dept., they elect child molesters to the
House of Representatives and hypocritical, self-hating closet queers &
tax evaders to the Senate.

They piously want to outlaw abortion for poor women everywhere, while
the wealthy maintain their right to choose through their ability to pay
their pregnant daughters' fare to places where abortions are legal and
safe.

The filth and gutter minds backing the Republican party these days form
the cutting edge of this nation's disintegration. It's too bad we
couldn't have locked them all in open-air, Guantanamo Bay-like cages on
the lowest point of Galveston Island to meet Ike when he swept ashore.
They are hicks, thieves, gouging carpetbaggers, feckless reprobates and
utterly irredeemable. They have fully earned their discredited right to
be excluded from any significant governance function or even public
discourse for generations.