Sir Loin

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit770 I think you should watch the full exchange. I don't think Joe's question was nearly as "penetrating" as you think. In fact, it looked to me as if Joe was satisfied with Obama's answer. You are wrong in the fact that it was Joe's question that was the topic of every political show. They were far more interested in his "spread the wealth around" comment. You cannot deny that the detrimental coverage of Joe aired after the debate. Sure they were investigating him after the coverage his exchange got, but there was no mud slinging or exposing of his financial records until after the debate.

I’ve read every post in the thread. Including way back when you were making claims like his name is not Joe.

You cannot deny that Joe was the topic of every single show on air since the day he asked his question. You also can’t credibly attempt to claim that he was not being investigated prior to the debate, yet point out the results of the non existing investigation was all ready to hit the air and news the morning after the debate.

Why keep trying to defend the obvious with it is all McCain’s fault for bringing him up pabulum.

Reverend_Hellh0und

This is how they operate.... Making idiotic claims about what his name is and his contracting license to ignore the socialism proposed my Obama....

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

shiznit770

You still didn't watch the full exchange, did you...or read my post for that matter. If you're going to base everything on some soundbites you heard, then this is a waste of time. I didn't deny he was being investigated before the debate, I just said they didn't start slinging mud until he was used in the debate.

Let me be clear, I don't have any problem with Joe. Initially I was a little taken in by the Liberal attacks on his character, but after looking around more I came to my own conclusion. Joe is an innocent bystander in this political race.

If McCain had talked about his own economic policy instead of attacking Obama's with Joe's image, this would have never happened. If he wanted to discredit Obama, he could have easily made his argument without attaching Joe to it. If you don't see how McCain used this poor guy for political gain then you might consider changing your alignment from 'Independent' to something that suits you better.

Sir Loin

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit770 You still didn't watch the full exchange, did you...or read my post for that matter. If you're going to base everything on some soundbites you heard, then this is a waste of time. I didn't deny he was being investigated before the debate, I just said they didn't start slinging mud until he was used in the debate.

Yes it is quite difficult to mud sling until you have made an investigation. However it did not stop Chris Matthews or Keith Olberman from making some smart arsed remarks and snides the day of Joe’s question none the less. So what is your next claim going to be? That the results of the investigation would not have been revealed and “mud slinging” not engaged in, if McCain had just not brought up Joe or his question in the debate? Right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit770 If McCain had talked about his own economic policy instead of attacking Obama's with Joe's image, this would have never happened.

Bullshizle and just speculation predicated on a faith in the modern MSM that is justified by what?

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit770 If he wanted to discredit Obama, he could have easily made his argument without attaching Joe to it. If you don't see how McCain used this poor guy for political gain then you might consider changing your alignment from 'Independent' to something that suits you better.

Joe asked a question that is relevant and frustrating for Obamaiacs to field. Demonstrably, unless you want to argue that too. That fact has no impact on my political inclinations. So I don’t agree with you and brought up some points you would rather not have had to deal with too? OK, so what does that have to do with my political leanings? Do tell.

shiznit770

lol you still didn't watch it! Tell me what Joe's "relevant and frustrating" question is.

My point about your political leaning is your clear bias towards defending McCain at all costs. To expect the media to do anything different than jump on a candidates words is stupid. The attacks were made to serve a purpose, can you at least accept that?

azura28

Exactly...and the obamanites are all lying to themselves that Mccain asked Joe to approach him at the rally, and he's not even a REAL HUMAN BEING.

FACT: Barack was strolling through a neighborhood, AFTER THE RALLY, and Joe was playing catch football with son and saw him approaching. He said he heard him being asked a lot of easy questions on the street so he would ask a little tougher one. This is America, is it not??

He works as an apprentice for a licensed plumber, and in a few more months will be certified as to the timeline as an apprentice.

EgoffTib

I haven't heard anyone say that McCain had Joe do this. If they did, smack them for me. The problem was that Joe, a registered republican, said he was an independent and a plumber(which he is neither).

I don't think anyone's arguing that this isn't how the events transpired.

So then he's not a plumber...

__________________

shiznit770

I don't recall Joe claiming he was an independent. Maybe sometime later he said he wasn't affiliated with a party and someone dug up his Republican membership. So maybe he changed his mind....

The debate about him not being a plumber is just sad and petty. You're arguing about technicalities and licenses. I'm sure Joe had some pride in his job and hard work, I think its just wrong for you to belittle him and take that away.

Politicians are held to these standards, not ordinary people.

EgoffTib

When the story of Joe broke, I read the papers at work(New York Times and Fort Worth Star Telegram), both of which stated that Joe claimed he was an independent.

No, I'm just having some fun

__________________

shiznit770

I'm not sure where the papers got that from, he didn't say it in the exchange with Obama. Maybe in their inquiries afterwards he said it.

I know you're just having fun

My comment should have read differently...directed more at the liberal media for pouncing on him when all that was required was clarification. Unfortunately they get their money from ratings, and most people would rather hear their view confirmed than the truth.