But you are right. We fundamentally disagree and may never see this the same. I don’t think Obama was ridiculing Joe as much as he was McCain who was using Joe to make a point. A point which did not stand on it’s face. Joe did not at the time – nor anytime in the near future – make $250,000. He even admitted to a reporter later – sheepishly – that he’d actually get a TAX CUT under the Obama plan.

He is a fraud because, again, the premise upon which his question rested was a LIE. He WAS NOT getting ready to buy a business. The business more than likely DID NOT profit more than $250,000. It is a two man plumbing operation according to reports.

He did not base the question on a hypothetical. That’s the difference. However, Obama answered it and I don’t see it as fundamentally an unfair question on face. But when you begin to hear Joe talk of “tripping him up” and then realize he was not shooting straight – this is when I begin to call him a fraud.

Again, the media took him to task because they got duped into calling him an “undecided voter”, which he most certainly was not. They got duped into buying this line of him buying a business and getting his taxes raised.

The man to put squarely in your path of blame for making Joe a target is John McCain. Nobody would have ever known this guy’s name if John hadn’t tried to leverage him in a debate – and afterwards. Don’t blame Obama for simply having a 6 minute conversation with a voter who was never going to support him. This speaks to the difference between the two candidates more than I could.

Thanks for stopping by and for engaging. I appreciate your thoughts, but do fundamentally disagree with you concerning this “Joe the Plumber” thing.

I guess it is a warning to people not to let John McCain use your name during a nationally televised debate viewed by almost 60 million people.

I have seen many examples of him being ridiculed. And to call him a fraud really needs backing up. What if his question was based upon his dream to buy the business? Is the question really out of line?
It was a fair question.

I do not believe that there has been any evidence that he was a fraud or a plant. The media tried to paint him a fraud to weaken the strength of his question. To divert from Obama’s words.

None the less, I can’t ever recall a private citizen taken to task and treated the way he was by the media or even a candidate.

What message does that send any private citizen that wants to confront a politician?

As far as Huckabee, this guy has been thrust into the limelight and has been smeared. I’d tend to the same thing. Actually, I’d do a lot more. I’d be very angry for eing treated that way by a public servant.

Thanks again Eric. Looks like we fundamentally disagree and will not change each others points of view.

You can make just as good an argument that he isn’t a coordinated plant as you can he is.

The main thrust of my argument is that there was something odd about the guy. Something didn’t add up.

Turns out I was right. He may not be a coordinated plant, but he is a fraud. The premise of his question to Obama was a LIE. He was not “getting ready to buy a business”, nor would he be making over $250,000 and see at tax increase. All things he’s now admitted.

He hasn’t been attacked and maligned as much as exposed. The media was all over this guy loving him at first. Calling him an “undecided voter” even. They got duped and the media no likey being duped. So they fire back. Samuel Joseph created all his own problems. If he would have been authentic he probably would not have been taken apart as much as he was.

You can also place blame for the media taking him apart to John McCain. If John doesn’t use him as a prop, then dude is probably seen a few times on YouTube and that’s it. John made him a celebrity and part of the campaign by mentioning him in a nationally televised debate.

So again, it was not a straight forward question. It was meant to “trip him up” as Joe has said. I agree Obama did not struggle answering it and as you’ll notice I posted about the interaction here and that I thought Obama was very impressive doing so.

Obama answered the question very well and if you listen to the entire answer and not take “spread the wealth” out of context and turn it into some specter of an imminent Socialist takeover of the United States, you’d get a Presidential candidate articulating pretty well why he is doing what he’s doing. His willingness to talk to someone obviously opposing his candidacy is something you simply won’t see form McCain.

Obama doesn’t want to “redistribute wealth” any more than Bush did or McCain does when they cut top line tax rates for the rich.

So that’s why I disagree with you. It’s not sick at all that the media look into someone trying to trip up a Presidential candidate based upon false pretenses. It’s also fair that since Joe’s arguments are based on paying higher taxes that we expose he can’t even seem to pay the taxes he owes now.

Wurzelbacher is a fraud and has been exposed as such. If you are gonna step up and inject yourself into Presidential politics, you better be ready to play the game. In this case, Joe could argue that McCain put him in this position. It’s odd I’m not hearing this argument though.

Maybe he is a plant? Didn’t I see him on TV with Huckabee? Odd way to react if you just are some regular guy who wants to ask an innocent question and be left alone.

What is sick and pretty darn scary as well is how he’s been attacked and maligned by the media, the democrats, even Obama and Biden themselves. For what? For asking a question?

Okay, just for arguments sake, let’s say that he is a plant, a republican operative, whatever you want. Please tell me why this reaction to a straight forward question? It was not a trick question. Obama did not struggle with answering it.

Isn’t the hub bub about Obama’s answer? Of course it is. Obama’s answer revealed something that could be pretty unpopular. The Smear of ol’ Joe was simply to divert attention away from Obama’s straight forward answer. He wants to redistribute wealth.

Please respond. I’d love a civil discussion about why you disagree with me.