Bring It On!

The “Other” Joe the Plumber

October 16th, 2008 | by Tom Harper |

Separated at birth: Joe the Plumber and Vic Mackey from The Shield.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • e-mail
  • YahooMyWeb
Sphere: Related Content

  1. 5 Responses to “The “Other” Joe the Plumber”

  2. By Craig R. Harmon on Oct 16, 2008 | Reply

    Joe asked a question. Obama’s answer revealed him to be a rank redistributionist: following Hillary’s stance, he’ll take from them that’s got and give to them that’s not. Everything else is noise to cover for Obama’s knee-jerk leftist tendencies as far as I’m concerned.

    Not that there was any doubt about Obama’s redistributionist intentions. When asked at a debate why he would raise the cap-gains tax rate in spite of the fact that doing so would lower, not raise the amount of tax raised thereby, he responded that it was about fairness. It is, apparently, just unfair that people who have made lots and lots of money should keep it. What is fair, it seems, is that Uncle Sam should rob Joe Plumber and for no other purpose than to give to others.

    That’s hopey-changey fairness, perhaps, in some people’s dictionary; in mine it’s called legalized theft.

    “The power to tax is the power to destroy.” — Daniel Webster.

  3. By Craig R. Harmon on Oct 17, 2008 | Reply

    On the other hand, there doesn’t appear to be a spits worth of difference between the two Parties concerning overweaning governmental power:

    WASHINGTON — The chief executives of the nine largest banks in the United States trooped into a gilded conference room at the Treasury Department at 3 p.m. Monday. To their astonishment, they were each handed a one-page document that said they agreed to sell shares to the government, then Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. said they must sign it before they left.

    Puts me in mind of the Godfather: the full power of the federal government was brought to bear to make them an offer they couldn’t refuse. The differences between the federal government and organized crime are becoming smaller and smaller. Soon they will be indistinguishable.

  4. By manapp99 on Oct 17, 2008 | Reply

    Hey Craig, long time no type. Good to hear from you.

    First, the left is now engaging in what it does best, the politics of personal destruction. When Sarah emerged they tried to destroy her personally now it is Joe the plumber. I can tell you one thing, Joe the plumber is more of a real plumber than Mickey Mouse is a real voter.

    http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/article852295.ece

    And more important his question is relevent to many Americans and relevent to Obama’s socialist leanings. It is a clear difference between traditional Democrat vs. GOP beliefs. Even though the GOP has strayed too far into the bigger government arena they are still a better choice (lesser of two evils) for those that believe govenment is not the best choice to deliver services.

    Second. I agree with the analogy of government to the mob with this caveat. The mob at least has rivals. When a government has too much power and goes bad there is no choice.

    No disrespect to Italians intended but perhaps we should now call the government Uncle Sambino.

  5. By Craig R. Harmon on Oct 17, 2008 | Reply

    There’s always an alternative:

    1. Vote the bums out;

    2. Constitutional convention to prevent the offending behavior;

    If all else fails,

    3. Revolution.

  6. By Craig R. Harmon on Oct 17, 2008 | Reply

    Of course, there’s always the possibility that Americans WANT a Godfather/nanny government in which case, there really IS no alternative. Any of the above options require at least a majority of Americans to pull off. It may be that we are inevitably bound to become France, metaphorically, economically, and spiritually speaking. In which case, “Mon dieu!”

Post a Comment

Fish.Travel