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

Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last

  1. 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.


  2. 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.
    •   
       


  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.
    •   
       


  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    ergo you established your position, or point of view, concerning that subject.
    To an already established position...So its not really a reach






    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.

    This really isn't a situation about facts or philosophy, its a personal belief on how I see you express yourself at times so therefore to associate this type of conversation to say one of economics or an area of knowledge, is another example of an extreme reach. Its imply a personal opinion based on reactions to points of view. Never did I state your point of view was right/wrong or factually incorrect. The art of politics is the art of twisting words so to represent yourself as one who does not take part in this would be rather....disingenuous.

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

    So true.

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

  12. Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    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.
    We're not talking about invested capital, we're talking about an independent businessman in the 250k tax bracket not knowing how to write off his overhead.

  13. The story of Joe the unlicensed plumber is actually sad. He was already going on right wing radio discussing his view on Obama's tax plan. There the audience he had, had no reason to challenge him, because they all shared the same view. But once he and John Mccain decided to go public with his fairy tale, he soon had to realize, that all the America people aren't just going to buy his story without fact checking. And as with any celebrity which he is, an unlicensed plumber/ celebrity, when your in the public eye, people tend to want to know more about you. Did he really think that he could pretend to make 250k, pretend to be licensed, and that nobody would find out that he really makes about 40k and owes back taxes. Mr im the average American, No JOE YOUR NOT THE AVERAGE AMERICAN, THE AVERAGE AMERICAN PAYS THERE ****ING TAXES.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Never did I state your point of view was right/wrong or factually incorrect.


    But that is what we're talking about, isn't it?

    To posit a purely theoretical analogy here-

    A guy picked up a snake and got bitten, so now everyone is trying to blame the snake.

    I'm saying that a snake is a snake, and the guy should have known he might get bitten. Don't blame the snake for doing what comes natural to it.

    It makes no sense to claim any sort of agenda either. The snake is doing what is does. End of story.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post


    This really isn't a situation about facts or philosophy, its a personal belief on how I see you express yourself at times so therefore to associate this type of conversation to say one of economics or an area of knowledge, is another example of an extreme reach.

    At times? This isn't an implication that you are beyond repute is it?

    I can't say I am on the same level as you when it comes to passing off one of many biomechanical or biochemical opinions and theories as cold hard engraved in stone fact.

    If anything I push possibilities and discount claims of absolutes. Unless someone is being misquoted or attributed to something they didn't do.

    I will concede that I might adopt your style if I ran my own board, but I doubt it.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Actually you used both words in an attempt to differentiate between the two candidates.

    Forget that already?

    As I stated before, you clearly showed that both candidates were using the term as one in the same. Or did you forget that?

    You're right. They simply don't use the term in a different manner. I know you fully believe that!






    Not really. I established that I felt both candidates were hucksters with my first post.
    Actually, your first post says nothing of the sort.

    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.
    Ah..yes. Nonsense.

    "It's okay to come down off the horse mmorpheuss. You're getting pretty agitated up there. "


    And your answer validated my point.


    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.

    Actually it was attempt to clarify your position. For us who have the inability to be succinct and obfuscate at times, we just wanted a simple yes or no answer....a succinct one.







    Have a nice day.

    Already having it!!

    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
    But that is what we're talking about, isn't it?

    I'm not. Maybe that's your problem
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    At times? This isn't an implication that you are beyond repute is it?
    Of course it is! How could you possibly think otherwise?!?!?



    I can't say I am on the same level as you when it comes to passing off one of many biomechanical or biochemical opinions and theories as cold hard engraved in stone fact.
    Well I have so many of them..its tough to tell which ones are and are not fact.

    But I am in 2008...I can't really remember the last time I passed off one of my facts...but I'm glad you remember!!!!

    If anything I push possibilities and discount claims of absolutes.

    I will concede that I might adopt your style if I ran my own board, but I doubt it.

    It's okay to come down off the horse mmorpheuss. You're getting pretty agitated up there.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  19. [nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5gMeXz2YMw"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/nomedia]
    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
    As I stated before, you clearly showed that both candidates were using the term as one in the same. Or did you forget that?

    You're right. They simply don't use the term in a different manner. I know you fully believe that!
    Nice roundabout to nothing.

    I think once you eliminate all of your needless segues and get right back to me defining two words you attempted to use to illustrate a difference, you'll understand the point I made.




    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    Actually, your first post says nothing of the sort.
    My first post that uses the word "huckster" makes it perfectly clear that the word pertained to both individuals in question.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post
    Ah..yes. Nonsense.

    "It's okay to come down off the horse mmorpheuss. You're getting pretty agitated up there. "
    Not likely.

    I'm not preaching from a moral highground. Don't mistake my use of the word nonsense as agitation. It happens to be, if only because of your refusal to explain why, the only word I have to describe your repeated allusions to this deal about 100k people in St Louis.

    I'm assuming you're talking about Obama. I really don't know. That's how much I care. Its hard to get agitated when you really don't care Kruger.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kruger View Post

    Actually it was attempt to clarify your position.
    Wow. What a doozy!
    I had already clarified it, before you ever started in with your 100k St Louis mumbo jumbo.

    Nice try.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    Nice roundabout to nothing.
    We've been doing that for a page and half...you just noticing now?

    I think you eliminate all of your needless segues and get right back to me defining two words you attempted to use to illustrate a difference, you'll understand the point I made.
    In terms of politics, there is sort of a difference. But alas, you were right in that they were using the literal definition.





    My first post that uses the word "huckster" makes it perfectly clear that the word pertained to both individuals in question.
    Thanks for clarifying that. See, its those pesky details again.

    Not likely.

    I'm not preaching from a moral highground. Don't mistake my use of the word nonsense as agitation.
    Never would I do such a thing. I wouldn't want you to bring up those facts I was pushing on people 5 years ago...



    It happens to be, if only because of your refusal to explain why, the only word I have to describe your repeated allusions to this deal about 100k people in St Louis.

    I'm assuming you're talking about Obama.
    Well, we are in the politics forum during an election.


    really don't know. That's how much I care.
    Yet Joe the Plumber gets your attention.

    Its hard to get agitated when you really don't care Kruger.
    Glad you joined me. It only took 30 minutes.


    Wow. What a doozy!
    I had already clarified it, before you ever started in with your 100k St Louis mumbo jumbo.

    Nice try.


    Actually I assumed you knew Obama drew 100k in St. Louis. Next time, I will assume you do not know of such things.


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

  22. Quote Originally Posted by mmorpheuss View Post
    We're not talking about invested capital, we're talking about an independent businessman in the 250k tax bracket not knowing how to write off his overhead.
    Actually we are. Labor, equipment, etc. Anyway my point was a 40K return with 250K of expenses in terms of the business is not unheard of or unreasonable.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    Agreed... Plumber or not... I thought he was American and entitled to privacy and his words.
    Licensing, and tax liens are public record.

    Thanks for playing.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    Licensing, and tax liens are public record.

    Thanks for playing.
    Oh bull****. If some Democrat had asked John McCaine an equally provocative question and gotten a **** answer and Fox News dug into the questioner's background, public or private, the lefties would be screaming FEAR STATE and POLICE STATE and FIRST AMMENDMENT at the top of their lungs. The bottom line is, be it be public or private records, no one should have to worry about being 'investigated' for asking a legitimate question of someone running for office, and I don't give a **** what the questioner's or the pol's ideology is. The press really ****ed the dog on this one.

    As a side note, I love how Joe's actual skill set viz a vi plumbing is irrelevant to all the libs out there, but the license is key. "Ah yeah, maybe he is skilled enough to do all the work, but has the state approved him?!?!?" Really demonstrative of some of the underlying issues that separate liberals and (some) conservatives.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Oh bull****. If some Democrat had asked John McCaine an equally provocative question and gotten a **** answer and Fox News dug into the questioner's background, public or private, the lefties would be screaming FEAR STATE and POLICE STATE and FIRST AMMENDMENT at the top of their lungs. The bottom line is, be it be public or private records, no one should have to worry about being 'investigated' for asking a legitimate question of someone running for office, and I don't give a **** what the questioner's or the pol's ideology is. The press really ****ed the dog on this one.

    As a side note, I love how Joe's actual skill set viz a vi plumbing is irrelevant to all the libs out there, but the license is key. "Ah yeah, maybe he is skilled enough to do all the work, but has the state approved him?!?!?" Really demonstrative of some of the underlying issues that separate liberals and (some) conservatives.

    It's public record and speaks to his character.

    Nobody broke down his door and asked him to speak -- HE HELD A PRESS CONFERENCE.

    You're a public figure when that happens, and it's open season on everything you've done.

    The fact that the media checked out his story surprises you?
    How often do we hear about planted stories in the news? It's their job to investigate things, which is how we found out about the above facts, and that he'd benefit from Obama's tax plan.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Whats going on with the MR site?
    By Grant in forum IGF-1/GH
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-12-2004, 07:29 PM
  2. whats going on with the prohormone ban
    By bigrich954rr in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-03-2004, 09:37 PM
  3. How high of a concentration can you go with...
    By FrTimothy in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-08-2004, 11:36 AM
  4. Help with what dog breed to go with
    By Jstrong20 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 01-28-2004, 07:03 PM
  5. Going with the extreme dose
    By Aneas in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-14-2002, 10:17 PM
Log in
Log in