Mark Steyn: Plumber Joe didn't go with the flow

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    No, but when one states he the the politician of change and its a new politics, the people that actually believe that (which is most) are in for a pretty big disappointment.


    Its the same logic when people trash conservatives that hire hookers. Its hypocrisy at its finest.

    Which guy are you talking about?

    They are both saying that stuff.

    That's what gets me. Both guys say the same thing in their own words and they actually manage to get people to line up behind them and believe what they said but simultaneously say the other guy is full of crap for what he said.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    What group of people developed this overwhelming sense of fear you speak of?

    Isn't that a tad bit chicken littleish?

    Were you really that frightened by that whole chain of events?

    I'm not. The way I figure it, If I were in that position I might not want to lie about who I am.
    If I work at the airport, but one day I hope to be the next Fred Smith, I'm hardly going to claim I am an airline pilot, and talk about owning Federal Express like it's actually about to happen.

    It's not like "Joe" just asked a question and thats it. He pretended to be something he wasn't.

    10-1 odds the "investigation" was kickstarted when someone that knew "Joe" pointed out that he was full of crap. He should have known better than to lie.

    Thats the bottom line. Not that he spoke, but that he wasn't truthful, and he (and apparently you) figured the media would just gloss over that.

    It's a story. Someone is going to run it, regardless of their political view. Thats what they get paid for. To beat the competition to the punch.
    You are twisting it up again. Funny that only biased left media did the attacking.... where is the morality in that? God help us if Obama is president... so now we cant question the president without the backlash of MSNBC? Regardless of my background, please tell me that is right.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Which guy are you talking about?

    They are both saying that stuff.

    That's what gets me. Both guys say the same thing in their own words and they actually manage to get people to line up behind them and believe what they said but simultaneously say the other guy is full of crap for what he said.


    You must have arms that are 20ft long....cause I've never seen someone reach that far before.


    Which guy...now THAT is funny.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    You are twisting it up again. Funny that only biased left media did the attacking.... where is the morality in that? God help us if Obama is president... so now we cant question the president without the backlash of MSNBC? Regardless of my background, please tell me that is right.

    Adams


    Well if apparently "all the media is leftist", then it would stand to reason that only biased left media would be doing the reporting, now wouldn't it?

    We're entering tree falling in the forest with noone around territory now.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    You are twisting it up again.
    Well, to justify attacking Joe the Plumber, you sort of need to.


    It really is sad..whether he's a licensed plumber or not.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Well, to justify attacking Joe the Plumber, you sort of need to.


    It really it sad..whether he's a licensed plumber or not.
    Agreed... Plumber or not... I thought he was American and entitled to privacy and his words.

    Learn, Teach, and dont stand up to Obama.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    You must have arms that are 20ft long....cause I've never seen someone reach that far before.


    Which guy...now THAT is funny.
    You must obviously be a magician, since I've never seen that much flash before with no substance to show for it at the end.



    You and I both know McCain is claiming to be the same guy Obama is.

    He's a change agent. He's a Maverick. He's going to unite both parties.

    Same crap. Different guy.

    That should be their respective motto's from here on out.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    Agreed... Plumber or not... I thought he was American and entitled to privacy and his words.


    Adams

    So now the background check was unAmerican? The mere fact that someone was able to pull that check on him and have the freedom to expound on it's contents is America the Free at it's finest.

    It goes with being a public figure. You cats can take the route of an externalist all you want.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    You must obviously be a magician, since I've never seen that much flash before with no substance to show for it at the end.
    Substance? 18 months of campaigning on the same platform? Do you want pictures to understand?

    Whatever substance I could show, you would ignore it anyway so whats the point? Those blinders you have on are squeezing the blood out of your head and into those 20ft long arms!


    You and I both know McCain is claiming to be the same guy Obama is.


    He's a change agent. He's a Maverick. He's going to unite both parties.

    Same crap. Different guy.

    That should be their respective motto's from here on out.
    What is sad is you actually equate about 1 month of campaigning to 18 months of Obama's campaign.

    You might want to take a poll but I have this sneaky feeling that the general public thinks Obama is more of a change than John McCain. Its just a hunch.

    And to repeat my earlier point, if the public actually thinks this guy is a candidate of change (which most do) they are in for the biggest disappointment they've ever had.

    Sheep.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    So now the background check was unAmerican? The mere fact that someone was able to pull that check on him and have the freedom to expound on it's contents is America the Free at it's finest.

    It goes with being a public figure. You cats can take the route of an externalist all you want.
    Really... cause I always believed I had the right to a certain amount of privacy. Its paramount to infringment upon an amendment. Illegal search and seizure my friend.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend

  11. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    So now the background check was unAmerican? The mere fact that someone was able to pull that check on him and have the freedom to expound on it's contents is America the Free at it's finest.

    It goes with being a public figure. You cats can take the route of an externalist all you want.
    Could you please give me your real name so I can do a background check on you?

    Its the American thing to do.


    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    Really... cause I always believed I had the right to a certain amount of privacy. Its paramount to infringment upon an amendment. Illegal search and seizure my friend.

    Adams
    They searched his house?

    That's preposterous!

    Seriously though, any private citizen could have paid for a background check on "Joe the Plumber".

    You know this right?

    Now you're acting like the law was broken or something, with you rhetoric of rights and what not.

    That's twisting words.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Could you please give me your real name so I can do a background check on you?

    Its the American thing to do.


    Ah.......

    But if I did post my real name right now, and someone did the background check, is that anyone's fault but my own?

    Thanks for helping me make my point Kruger.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post

    That's twisting words.
    now THAT is funny.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Substance? 18 months of campaigning on the same platform? Do you want pictures to understand?

    Whatever substance I could show, you would ignore it anyway so whats the point? Those blinders you have on are squeezing the blood out of your head and into those 20ft long arms!
    It's a shame I can't take those jokes to the bank....


    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    What is sad is you actually equate about 1 month of campaigning to 18 months of Obama's campaign.
    So you admit that they are both currently saying the same thing.

    Thank-You

    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    You might want to take a poll but I have this sneaky feeling that the general public thinks Obama is more of a change than John McCain. Its just a hunch.
    So if one huckster is more successful at selling his snakeoil that makes the other guy not a huckster by proxy?

    I'm just trying to get your rationale sorted out here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    And to repeat my earlier point, if the public actually thinks this guy is a candidate of change (which most do) they are in for the biggest disappointment they've ever had.
    I agree with that.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Ah.......

    But if I did post my real name right now, and someone did the background check, is that anyone's fault but my own?

    Thanks for helping me make my point Kruger.
    Oh I thought you made your point quite nicely before.

    Its not really a legal one in my eyes..its how far should a campaign or media outlet go...and I think you made that quite clear.


    Politics of change.

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    It's a shame I can't take those jokes to the bank....

    You would have to be taxed.




    So you admit that they are both currently saying the same thing.

    Thank-You
    Not really. McCain is pushing reform more.

    Obama pushes a candidate of change and someone who is going to usher in "new poltics".

    There are differences. Its those pesky details you might want to look at.

    So if one huckster is more successful at selling his snakeoil that makes the other guy not a huckster by proxy?

    I'm just trying to get your rationale sorted out here.


    I agree with that.
    So Obama is a "huckster"?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    now THAT is funny.

    It really is.

    People are fond of taking extremely linear approaches to understanding situations, and anything outside their realm of acceptance is dubbed "twisting words".

    Is it not possible that something can be one thing, yet be the other at the same time?

    There is such a thing as another perspective, no matter what the situation is.

    I find it hilarious when people try to put themselves and other people into far ends of spectra, be it social, political, economic, you name it.

    In reality the extreme end of the spectrum is never seen, and people fail to realize how close to the middle they all are while they clamor to spot differences in lieu of similarities.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    It really is.

    Especially when you accuse another person! Its a riot Alice!

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    You would have to be taxed.
    I'm used to that.




    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    Not really. McCain is pushing reform more.

    Obama pushes a candidate of change and someone who is going to usher in "new poltics".

    There are differences. Its those pesky details you might want to look at.
    Reform- to change to a better state, form, etc.; improve by alteration, substitution, abolition, etc.

    Oh no. He used a different word, regardless of the fact that the word Obama is using is in the definition of the word McCain is using, there must be a difference!

    All this talk of word twisting and then you lay this stuff on me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    So Obama is a "huckster"?
    Aren't they both?

    Huckster- a person who employs showy methods to effect a sale, win votes, etc.: the crass methods of political hucksters.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Especially when you accuse another person! Its a riot Alice!

    Well you could start the power point presentation illustrating where you claim I am twisting words, and then I can explain my rationale illustrating the areas in which I draw direct correlation to grey areas at the very least, in which your claim of absolutes is completely and totally invalid.

    Or you could just keep resorting to humor and the "gosh darn gum...he's twistin' words!"

    That's ridiculous.

    Ask for clarification if you don't understand, rather than accusing someone of being overtly disingenuous.

  22. Reform- to change to a better state, form, etc.; improve by alteration, substitution, abolition, etc.

    Oh no. He used a different word, regardless of the fact that the word Obama is using is in the definition of the word McCain is using, there must be a difference!

    All this talk of word twisting and then you lay this stuff on me.
    Well now....that clears it all up.

    For a minute there I thought the candidates actually meant a change other than the literal meaning.

    Who knew that you could rally a crowd of 100k in St. Louis by simply running a campaign on:

    "to change to a better state, form, etc.; improve by alteration, substitution, abolition, etc."

    I mean I'm sure both campaigns are using the exact same versaion of interpretation of the word!






    Huckster- a person who employs showy methods to effect a sale, win votes, etc.: the crass methods of political hucksters.
    So being a Huckster is the "politics of change" and can attract 100k people in St. Louis?

    You really are making this a bit too easy
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Well you could start the power point presentation illustrating where you claim I am twisting words, and then I can explain my rationale illustrating the areas in which I draw direct correlation to grey areas at the very least, in which your claim of absolutes is completely and totally invalid.

    Or you could just keep resorting to humor and the "gosh darn gum...he's twistin' words!"

    That's ridiculous.

    Ask for clarification if you don't understand, rather than accusing someone of being overtly disingenuous.
    Actually Rob stated it. Then you accused him. So I think the problem lies between you two. I just happened to agree with him and thought it was humorous.




    See?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Actually Rob stated it. Then you accused him. So I think the problem lies between you two. I just happened to agree with him and thought it was humorous.




    See?
    Not really. You established that point of view as well, so the onus would be on you as well when asked to validate your position.

    Just because you aren't the originator of an idea doesn't mean you can agree with it and be free from the burden of rationalizing it.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Well now....that clears it all up.

    For a minute there I thought the candidates actually meant a change other than the literal meaning.

    Who knew that you could rally a crowd of 100k in St. Louis by simply running a campaign on:

    "to change to a better state, form, etc.; improve by alteration, substitution, abolition, etc."

    I mean I'm sure both campaigns are using the exact same versaion of interpretation of the word!


    The fault is not mine that you chose to differentiate between both candidates by using two synonymous words.








    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    So being a Huckster is the "politics of change" and can attract 100k people in St. Louis?

    You really are making this a bit too easy
    I'm uncertain of what you think I am apparently making "easy".



    All this stuff-
    "politics of change" and can attract 100k people in St. Louis?
    Your words, not mine. I laid out a standard definition of the word "huckster", which is certainly applicable to both candidates.

    All that other stuff is apparently an attempt on your part to obfuscate or an inability to be succinct.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Not really.
    <----me finding it funny. See now?

    You established that point of view as well, so the onus would be on you as well when asked to validate your position.
    I didn't really establish it at all. I simply agreed with a statement that already established it. I'm sorry if you aren't getting your validation though.


    Just because you aren't the originator of an idea doesn't mean you can agree with it and be free from the burden of rationalizing it.
    Sure I can. If you believe I twist words, that's your right. I could care less why you believe it nor do I need a statement of validation from you....the feeling won't change either way. Maybe Rob can valdiate it...if he feels like it.

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  27. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    The fault is not mine that you chose to differentiate between both candidates by using two synonymous words.

    Did I blame you? I simply threw out the option that both used the term in a different manner? I'm glad you were here to tell us all they were not






    I'm uncertain of what you think I am apparently making "easy".
    Establishing that people are falling for a "huckster"?

    Given the demographic of voters and public opinion, that would mean Obama is a better "huckster" than McCain.

    Is that succinct enough for you?






    Your words, not mine. I laid out a standard definition of the word "huckster", which is certainly applicable to both candidates.

    If its applicable to both candidates, then it would certainly be a factor in drawing such a crowd. The better the "huckster" the more people you can convince.

    All that other stuff is apparently an attempt on your part to obfuscate or an inability to be succinct.
    What other stuff?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    <----me finding it funny. See now?



    I didn't really establish it all. I simply agreed with a statement that already established it. I'm sorry if you aren't getting your validation though.
    ergo you established your position, or point of view, concerning that subject.




    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post


    Sure I can. If you believe I twist words, that's your right. I could care less why you believe it nor do I need a statement of validation from you....the feeling won't change either way. Maybe Rob can valdiate it...if he feels like it.


    In the long run you have to be true to yourself.

    Whether you share it with others or not has no bearing on it's place as a cognitive function. It's still happening, exactly as I stated.

    I am more than willing to explain my rationale and clarify my point of view.

    I will concede that you are free not to. IMO, however, your refusal to do it now when you are more than willing to do so in situations where you are both knowledgeable and right, further supports my impression that we both know you don't really have a valid point at all.

  29. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Did I blame you? I simply threw out the option that both used the term in a different manner? I'm glad you were here to tell us all they were not
    Actually you used both words in an attempt to differentiate between the two candidates.

    Forget that already?








    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Establishing that people are falling for a "huckster"?

    Given the demographic of voters and public opinion, that would mean Obama is a better "huckster" than McCain.

    Is that succinct enough for you?

    Not really. I established that I felt both candidates were hucksters with my first post.

    For some reason you felt the need to ask the question again, but excluding one guy. I conceded that that guy would definitely fall under the definition of huckster, to which I got this nonsense.
    So being a Huckster is the "politics of change" and can attract 100k people in St. Louis?
    Say what?

    I already made it clear how I felt. Both guys are the same in my book. You keep harking back to this despite getting a direct answer from me.

    That is obfuscation- to make obscure or unclear: to obfuscate a problem with extraneous information. Which is exactly what you did, over and over again, with needless repeated "100k in St Louis" nonsense.




    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    What other stuff?
    This-
    So being a Huckster is the "politics of change" and can attract 100k people in St. Louis?
    and this
    Who knew that you could rally a crowd of 100k in St. Louis
    Which for some reason known only to you served as a direct response to me clarifying my use of a word with it's definition.

    Obfuscation.

    Have a nice day.

  30. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    If your net profit is only 40k after 250k, you are looking at alot of business expenses.

    There are plenty of ways for that guy to get well under the 250k bracket of taxable income.
    Actually with a profit rate of 10% 250K invested capital will return only 25K annually. Push that rate to 40%, which is high, you're still just breaking 60K return.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Mark Steyn A+++
    By dave12 in forum Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-28-2010, 02:24 AM
  2. Getting back into the flow
    By Malarky89 in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-13-2009, 11:26 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-01-2008, 11:20 AM
  4. Joe the Plumber = Joe the idiot
    By bigcuz in forum Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-22-2008, 05:25 PM
  5. Plumber's Crack
    By Jayhawkk in forum General Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-18-2006, 04:41 AM
Log in
Log in