Despite the Obama campaign’s and media’s attempt to discredit ‘Joe the Plumber’, a fellow who simply asked Senator Obama a question at a campaign event, his question remains valid, and Obama’s response proves insightful. Obama’s $250,000 a year tax increase provides a barrier to success for the middle class, particularly for entrepreneurs and small business owners. For these people on the bubble there is a penalty for growth. Consequently, this puts the brakes on the growth of many small businesses, which are responsible for a large percentage of new jobs. Raising taxes in a struggling economy on any economic bracket is a terrible idea. Tax increases slow economic growth, and that hurts people across the board. If jobs dry up, it’s not the $250,000 plus crowd that will be hurt the most, it will be the middle class.
Senator Obama’s response to Joe is interesting. ‘Spreading the wealth’ is a principle of socialism. This combined with Senator Obama’s plan to reduce taxes for 95% of the people, when 30-40% of the people don’t pay federal income tax has all the hallmarks of a socialist policy. Senator Obama has never addressed whether people who don’t pay taxes would receive a government check. Either his numbers are off or he is creating a welfare class is his plan. Subsidizing low income is the perfect way of encouraging people not to achieve. Why work harder if the government will pay you not to. Why start a new business if the government will penalize you for your success. This is the perfect plan to deaden the economy; penalize success, reward mediocrity, and limit the growth of new/small businesses.
It would be better if you put up the whole video of the conversation that Obama and Joe/ Samuel had instead of the Fox edited video. They actually had a pretty long conversation on the issue almost 6 minutes worth.
I think the people that is criticizing Joe is mad because of the things he said about Obama. Like when Joe said that Obama tap danced around the issue like Sammy Davis Jr.
WTF! Sammy Davis Jr?
But anyways if you watch the REAL whole video of them talking to each other you notice that is far from the truth.
Also Joe represented himself falsely to Obama (which is funny because some people are saying that Obama is not telling the truth about himself *roll eyes*). Another funny thing is that Joe would actually benefit under Obama’s economy plan more than McCain’s plan (from info that is coming from experts in economy).
Also I would like to point out that Joe said during an interview that HE was the one to walk up to Obama and ask his question because he felt that his neighbors’ questions weren’t tough enough.
By: Heavenly on October 17, 2008
at 3:18 pm
A video where Joe agrees that he WILL receive a tax cuts under Obama’s plan.
By: Heavenly on October 17, 2008
at 6:09 pm
How many people would be happy if their child had a teacher who lowered their child’s grade for no reason and gave their points to another student so they could pass? Let’s say they have a teacher named Mr. Obama who lowered their child’s A+ to a B- and then raised another child’s grade from a D- to a C+. Would that be fair even if the D- child worked harder than the A+ child?
http://preservetherepublic.wordpress.com/
By: preservetherepublic on October 17, 2008
at 8:03 pm
It doesn’t matter even if Joe turned out to be a McCain plant, Heavenly. The point was the question and the answer. Joe exposed Obama’s agenda as Marxist.
By: preservetherepublic on October 17, 2008
at 8:05 pm
First of all I didn’t say that Joe was a McCain plant. Don’t try to associate those words with me.
Maybe you should take that advise also when trying to compare Obama economy plan with school grading (which that type of grading doesn’t exist).
The thing that does matter is that people are so stuck on Obama saying “Spreading the wealth” than actually looking at his plan or listening to what he said to Joe (and I mean the whole conversation not just a snipped that Fox put together).
Also look at the last 7 to 8 years and tell me that middle class are better nowadays. I think NOT!
The method that McCain want’s to follow is not working. The rich is getting richer and the middle class is getting poorer.
By: Heavenly on October 17, 2008
at 8:18 pm
What Joe said is immaterial…….Obama screwed up and announced his real intent….SPREADING THE WEALTH is the key words in the conversations…..This means taking money from people who work 70 hrs a week and give it too people who work 20 hrs or don’t work at all……You could call it a form or reparation.
By: Ken on October 17, 2008
at 8:47 pm
Heavenly, I did not say that you said he was a plant. I didn’t say that there was that type of grading system existed either. I used it as an analogy. I heard the entire conversation and Obama lied to Joe about the Fair Tax figures as well. I used the grading analogy to show how ridiculous Obama’s plan was. Now, according to the IRS the middle class getting poorer is a myth too. Actually the top tier lost income and so did the second. The bottom two tiers actually gained income. Even if they were losing income and getting “poorer”, it would not justify stealing. I have a radical idea of my own. Instead of villifying the rich, maybe we should try to inspire them to share their knowledge with people (as many of them are willing to do) instead of taking their wealth.
By: preservetherepublic on October 17, 2008
at 8:53 pm
Joe could be Rush Limbaugh in a mask. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that SOMEONE asked Obama about his plan and Obama said it is to “spread the wealth around”.
Obama’s plan is socialism.
No matter which way Obama supporters try to spin it or to attack the guy who asked the question, the ANSWER was purely Obama’s and there is no way to cover it up.
The Obama campaign can smear Joe to high heaven, and every one of us who were wondering the same thing about Obama’s plan will feel it just like he is attacking us personally. Because he IS.
By: Ace on October 17, 2008
at 9:35 pm
I love the comparison to grades. What if your child struggles to bring home good grades. What if he or she spends every night doing homework and is very proud of his or her accomplishments. Another child in the class doesn’t spend much time on homework, but prefer to watch TV and play PS3. So, when the grades are handed out, your child actually has an A and the other child gets a D. But, the teacher, being a good Obama follower, decides that these children should “share the wealth”–or grades in this situation. So, the treacher gives both children a C (after all, being average is okay). So parents, how many of you would expect your child to continue working so hard to get good grades? And, how many of you would encourage your child to keep doing his or her best to get good grades? BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF! What incentive does either child have to work for anything? The child who works hard is penalized and the child who does not work is rewarded. This is a very important election and everyone should walk into that voting booth with eyes wide open.
By: KGDN on October 17, 2008
at 10:03 pm
Thanks KGDN. I actually went into a lot of detail on my blog with this analogy. I elaborated more on how “Mr. Obama’s” class all failed in the end and how he promised only to take points from the A students in the beginning, but had to go after the points of the B and C students eventually. Anyway, I would love for you to read the post and comment on it at http://preservetherepublic.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/an-analogy-to-why-obamas-plan-to-spread-the-wealth-is-wrong/.
By: preservetherepublic on October 17, 2008
at 11:00 pm
The Grade comparison is outstanding. Someone should right the RNC and suggest it as a commercial.
By: Just a Voter on October 17, 2008
at 11:08 pm
“Either his (Obama’s) numbers are off or he is creating a welfare class is his plan.”
The consensus is that Obama is going to write checks to lower income citizens. How else is he going to “reduce taxes” for the 40% of people who do not pay taxes?
But wait! We have already done that. LBJ’s War on Poverty wrote $6 trillion in checks over a thirty year period, and it was an unmitigated disaster, substantially destroying poor families and family values, particularly Black families. $6 trillion is roughly $100,000 for all people in poverty. Does anyone now claim they got $100,000 worth of benefit from the WoP? Naaa, the money was just wasted, and it is a substantial chunk of the national debt.
I don’t give much credit to Bill Clinton for anything, but he called for, and got, an end to LBJ’s WoP with the help of Republicans and over the opposition of many Democrats.
Now Obama wants to reintroduce the failed program, and wants all us Joes to pay for it. Never hatchee, MF.
By: Iago on October 18, 2008
at 12:17 am
preservetherepublic, your statement that the top tier lost money is completely false; wages for the top 1% have been growing exponentially larger each year. to say that they have been losing money is just rediculous – it’s been so long since we’ve seen this type of wage disparity between the classes. Wages are growing yes, but they aren’t keeping up with inflation! But it’s not only blue collar workers who are feeling the squeeze, it’s the middle class too. Right now, especially in the northeast, it’s tough to get by even if you’re making 110K, 120K a year, which is why Obama wants to change the tax code – to help alleviate the squeeze on the middle class. If you’re making 500K a year, you can afford to have you taxes raised back to the level they were when Clinton was in office. The economy was booming then, and you’re an idiot if you think you’re being penalized for making more money, because you would still be netting more than you would be if you were in the other tax bracket. This idea about ushering in an era of Socialism is just ridiculous – the market has failed reward the middle class for their hard work and something needs to be done.
By: CRL on October 18, 2008
at 12:37 am
Of course redistributing wealth is socialism. If Obama is interested in doing this why does he not right off the bat tell his buddies Warren Buffet, Soros, and Oprah, hey guys you have way too much so I am going to half of your billions and give it to those making less than $20K a year; then he can turn to those multi-millionaire buddies of his in San Fran and Hollywood and tell them he is going to take (say one-third of their multi millions) and give it to those making under $25K a year; and then he can turn to those lesser multi-millionaire pundit friends of his in the media and tell them hey guys you have too much I am going to take one-fourth of what you have and give it to those making under $30k a year, and so on down the line until all of us under $250K a year are raised to that level and all those over that level are brought down to that level? In addition, using such a plan would allow for him to get rid of the tax code totally.
Frankly since I do not begrudge anyone succeeding as long as they have done it honestly without screwing everyone else over, I think if he were really courageous and really wanted to change Washington he should tell our elected officials (including himself) beginning now you will all be taxed on the perks you receive from lobbyists and you will no longer be receiving such large and outrageous pensions from the taxpayers of this country.
Oh well I guess it doesn’t make one heck of a lot of difference what we call his redistributing of wealth, he government run health insurance program fits right in with the socialized medicine programs of many other industrialized countries (but let’s not refer to it as socialism).
I wonder just how many doctors and small business owners will be downsizing/retiring/going out of business after Nov. 4th? And how many additional corporations and larger business will be moving their operations to another country?
I have only read of a couple doctors planning on hanging it up and following other pursuits and heard of a few small business owners saying they will start planning to downsize by cutting an employee or two or three after Nov. 4 if Obama wins. Has anyone seen any information relating to this at all? I would certainly be interested in knowing if there actually is a significant pattern developing.
By: Don on October 18, 2008
at 1:26 am
CRL -
“The economy was booming then, …”
Bullshit. The economy was in the middle of the high-tech NASDAQ Bubba Bubble, and like all bubbles it crashed leaving disaster in its wake. The value of the NASDAQ was $5 trillion at the start of year 2000 and one year later at the end of Clinton’s administration the value had fallen to $2.5 trillion. It continued falling like a rock and a few months later it was down to $1 trillion.
Fortunately President Bush took the proper corrective action, minimized job losses, and quickly restored jobs, productivity, and growth.
We are now experiencing the collapse of the mortgage bubble. As many bubbles as the Democrats have created recently, you should be able to recognize the phenomenon, and you might even give some consideration to figuring out why we go through these repeated social and financial calamities.
The Bubba Bubble was just ignorance; history is replete with financial bubbles (Dutch Tulip, Mississippi, South Sea, Japan 1991) and there was no excuse for Clinton to be blindsided by the Bubba Bubble.
The mortgage bubble is different. It was deliberately created by the Democrats by foolishly requiring, by law, that mortgages be given to people who could not afford them. How stupid is that?
It would have been far simpler and cheaper to just buy everyone an apartment or a bungalow and write the costs off. But no, the Dims had to jeopardize the economy , and now they pretend they had nothing to do with it.
Fortunately, we can come out of this problem as we have come out of other problem. But all bets are off if Zero is elected. Zero says he is going to raise taxes and restrict trade, the same things that prolonged the Great Depression for eleven goddam miserable heartsick years. God help us.
By: Iago on October 18, 2008
at 1:43 am
I do not want to be put on welfare by Obama.
Under Welfare you are a slave to the government.
Obama wants to put all American’s back on the plantation where everyone works for the master (government) and the master gives you only what you need to survive.
You will NEVER get rich, because once you do, the government will take your money and make you middle class again.
The only rich people will be Government Officials who will still take kickbacks from financial institutions who will pay so they get exempt from tax programs.
Obama took over 100k from Fannie Mae kickbacks.
So if you think he’s going to suffer with the rest of us.. forget it.
By: DEW on October 18, 2008
at 2:38 am
CRL, I have my facts straight my friend. The National Center for Policy Analysis reported that the tax burden on the rich has increased more than their income. That wasn’t so for everyone else with the Bush tax cuts.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080121.DC12012&show_article=1&catnum=3
By: preservetherepublic on October 18, 2008
at 11:17 am
[...] Obama’s Plan to Spread the Wealth [...]
By: Obama’s Plan to Spread the Wealth « Blogs for McCain on October 19, 2008
at 10:50 pm
[...] Obama’s Plan to Spread the Wealth [...]
By: Blogs For John McCain’s Victory » Obama’s Plan to Spread the Wealth on October 20, 2008
at 8:09 pm
Regarding Obama’s plan to spread the wealth.
Apostles and first church.
ACTS 2: 42-47
42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Any comments?
By: Bill Smith on October 20, 2008
at 11:47 pm
Obama’s tax plan will destroy the Social Security system.
Obama says his income tax plan will lower taxes for 95% of Americans. There is just one problem with this, 40% of Americans already pay no income tax. Obama’s response to this is that these people pay Social Security tax. Well, that’s not income tax, but a contribution to their retirement plan. So if he wins and implements his tax plan, for the first time in the history of Social Security, 40% of the people who will get retirement benefits will have paid nothing for them. Social Security will then loose all pretext of being a retirement plan, and will become a national welfare program.
This will cause Social Security to lose public support in a massive way. Leave Social Security contributions out of income tax plans. If you take some peoples income taxes to pay others Social Security taxes, Social Security will be destroyed forever.
http://strategicthought-charles77.blogspot.com/2008/10/obamas-tax-plan-will-destroy-social.html
By: Charles on October 23, 2008
at 12:46 pm
Sprad the wealth? Obama lost all credibility there. He spent over $600 million on his campaign. At some point, say, after raising $500 million, he should have returned all contributions, and urged them to donate it to charity instead. Then he should have publicly announced that his campaign coffers were full, and urged anyone who wanted to donate to his campaign to donate it to charity instead. That would have given him credibility, put over 100 million into the pockets of those less fortunate, and would have gotten a big jump in the polls for setting an example. Meanwhile, Palin is ridiculed for having a $150 thousand wardrobe. That’s pocket change compared to what Obama spent campaigning. It just shows the hypocracy of the vicious left wing.
By: Ed on October 23, 2008
at 8:48 pm
@Ed- Yea I can totally see the “hypocracy” you are stating. How dare Obama use campaign money on his CAMPAIGN. *roll eyes*
By: Heavenly on October 23, 2008
at 9:36 pm
Heavily – where is all of his campaign money coming from – certainly not Americans – remember we are poor that’s why we need the messiah to save the day.
How about the donations that can be made by credit card with no 3 digit verification, name or address.
Dear Lord, you seriously have to be the most ignorant person that has ever walked the earth.
There’s that song playing again….If I only had a brain!
Stick to you poorly sung music, that may be the only thing you’ve got going for you.
By: Sparky on October 23, 2008
at 10:42 pm
Bill Smith, I would like to comment on your use of scripture there. First of all the difference between that verse and Obama is that they gave on their own free will. Also, I would like to point out that God didn’t command them to do that, You could argue that it was a Communist like system though. Unfortunately for the church in Jerusalem, they went broke. The system didn’t work. The apostle Paul had to write to other churches and ask them to bail the church in Jerusalem out,
By: preservetherepublic on October 26, 2008
at 8:51 pm
TO: preservetherepublic
No it was not like a communist system, for there was no God in the Communist system as most people relate to today, susch as the old USSR. But, the verse
“42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. ” Implies this was the doctrine of the apostles from which they got from Jesus.
By: Bill Smith on November 1, 2008
at 8:08 pm
The doctrine didn’t mean they had to share everything the had like they were doing. If that was part of the doctrine then only the church in Jerusalem was following it. Like I said, the church in Jerusalem was the one that ended up broke as a result. However, if this is a scriptural attempt to say God supports Obama then you are forgetting what a baby killer Obama is.
By: preservetherepublic on November 2, 2008
at 6:39 pm
Don’t bother with him preservetherepublic – it is obvious that Bill “the Obama troll” is not worth engaging with a rational discussion. Him along with other Obama Trolls are sent out by Obama Operatives to scan any anti-Obama pages and try to throw red herrings / rhetorics to influence people. Unfortunately now is gullible to fall for their fallacies.
Bill you are an Obama Troll and a Loser.
By: Sparky on November 2, 2008
at 8:59 pm
That second from last sentence should have read that Unfortunately, no one is gullible to fall for their fallacies.
By: Sparky on November 2, 2008
at 9:00 pm
I know. I am sick of people acting like it is “christian” to vote for Obama. It makes me so sick. The man is not only guilty of promoting abortion, but outright infanticide. These people act like they have such a grasp of scripture, and then vote for a candidate that promotes everything that it condemns. The way these people worship Obama and compare him to Jesus makes me think that Obama may actually be the Antichrist.
By: preservetherepublic on November 2, 2008
at 11:36 pm
So Obama is the “Antichrist” now?
Great friends you are making Sparky.
*roll eyes*
By: Heavenly on November 2, 2008
at 11:48 pm
I use to argue with people that the world was not reaady for the antichrist because not many people would worship a world leader, especially in the U.S. However, you Obama worshippers have proved me wrong. I am not saying that he is but he fits the bill. He at least proves that you are ready to follow the antichrist. Look at the difference between a typical McCain supporter and a typical Obama supporter, We may support McCain’s overall ideology, but we don’t hang on every word nor are we actually naive enough to believe everything that McCain or any other politician says. You guys are swooning and practically falling at Obama’s feet. You believe everything that he promises you.
By: preservetherepublic on November 3, 2008
at 8:13 am
Sparky and preservetherepublic,
Regarding Obama’s plan to spread the wealth.
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), sometimes called the Earned Income Credit (EIC), is a refundable Federal income tax credit for low-income working individuals and families. Congress originally approved the tax credit legislation in 1975 in part to offset the burden of social security taxes and to provide an incentive to work. The credit reduces the amount of Federal tax owed and can result in a refund check. When the EITC exceeds the amount of taxes owed, it results in a tax refund to those who claim and qualify for the credit
Ronald Regan signed the bill:
Ronald Reagan heralded it as “the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.”
Check the facts and please comment.
No I am not an Obama Troll, but you relegious right wingnuts beleive people like James Dobson should controll the government.
Regarding dobson:
From his book “James Dodson’s War on America” Gil Alexander-Moegerle who is the former executive and co-host of the “Focus on the Family” radio program said on page 98 of his book;
Through “Entire Sanctification” or the “Second Work of Grace,” and as a result of it one’s ability to sin is eradicated-removed-exorcised by the instantaneous work of the Holy Spirit. James Dobson believes that he has been entirely sanctified, morally perfected, that he does not and cannot sin. He recalls an incident while recording a radio broadcast where Dobson lectured him on this subject.
Check it out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By: Bill Smith on November 3, 2008
at 11:15 am
Heavily you to stupid to even be a Troll.
Bill – you are a Troll and a weak one at that. Where did you get your information from Nancy Pelosi’s website?
Perhaps hearing from the jackasses mouth that he will destroy the Coal mine business in America isn’t good for you.
You are truly a mindless idiot that can not think for yourself.
By: Sparky on November 3, 2008
at 2:41 pm
I don’t remember saying that I wanted James Dobson to lead the gov’t. I support seperation of church and state and believe that it should work both ways. That’s just the thing. I don’t put that much faith in any man other than Christ himself. I know for certain that Obamessiah can’t save anyone. Answer me this: How can you justify voting for someone who is going to make certain that billions of more unborn children will be murdered?
By: preservetherepublic on November 3, 2008
at 4:29 pm
Sparky-preservetherepublic
The truth hurts.
You guys need to get your heads out of the sand, open your eyes and do a little research. Google “Ronald Regan Earned Income Tax Credit” and see if Nancy Pelosi’s website pops up. Also,Obama supports clean coal technology.
God gave us a free will to act and think as we please, as redemption and salvation are a choice, you people, “right wingnuts” want to pass laws and bans, rather than get off your butts, head out into the streets, inner cities and bars and try to make a difference and actually win souls to Christ.
The only one people have to answer to is GOD for their
actions, not you or me.
By: Bill Smith on November 3, 2008
at 6:33 pm
Mr. Smith – you need to get you head out of your butt and realize that Obama is a corrupt muslim plant. Seriously the guy is running a fraudulant campaign and you support him – so what does that say about you.
Loser any one? Oh yes – it’s you.
By: Sparky on November 3, 2008
at 7:49 pm
At least I will stand before God without having to justify why I voted for the murder of the unborn. I don’t want to “pass laws and bans (except on abortion)”. That is your Obama who wants to ban any media outlets that don’t support his doctrines. Obama wants to make more gov’t. He wants to ban talk radio because it is too conservative with the “Fairness Doctrine”. As far as winning souls, I served as a children’s pastor for years. I have seen many come to the Lord. You trust in Obama, I trust in Jesus.
By: preservetherepublic on November 3, 2008
at 8:48 pm
Sparky,
Please submit facts instead of opinions and spin.
Show me proof he is a muslin, what exactly is fraudulant about his campaign? What is not true about my previous comment.
By: Bill Smith on November 3, 2008
at 8:48 pm
Bill how can you vote for a baby killer and still claim to be a christian?
By: preservetherepublic on November 3, 2008
at 8:54 pm
preservetherepublic,
On abortion:
Ban all abortions except for rape, incest or life of the mother. A matter on the South Dakota ballot for tomorrow. At first glance that sounds good except:
What is you answer to the family where the mother had twins cojoined and where only being kept alive by one twins hart which was pumping blood for both. Under this law both would have to die because they could take the life of one to save the life of the one with the good hart. This should be a decision and choice between the husband and wife, their doctor and their GOD.
What would you do in this case???
By: Bill Smith on November 3, 2008
at 9:03 pm
As for that law I agree their needs to be an exception for a case such as conjoined twins and the life of the mother, but it is still better than allowing all the death and murder we have to day. Obama is more to the left on this than anyone. He wouldn’t even vote in the Illinios Senate to grant human status to a baby who survied a botched abortion. Your argument is that it is better to keep it all legal (people who are slept around, prople who wanted a boy instead of a girl, the child has Downs Syndrome) for the sake of a few exceptions. Mark my words, if we keep following the path of China and Europe we will see a time where abortions are mandatory in some cases. China has already seen that. It has been talked about in Holland!
By: preservetherepublic on November 4, 2008
at 8:54 am