Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:36:24 -0400, Boater
wrote:

The majority of the public thinks she is an empty-headed opportunist

Um...no?

When she appears, she draws more crowds than Biden and has since she
was selected.

That doens't seem to me to indicate they think of her as an "airhead".

And besides, who thinks that the left wing represents the majority of
the public?

Only you. :)


Biden wasn't selected to "draw crowds."

Biden was the first to say yes on the list of many who said no before
that reached Biden.

Palin attracts "the base," and very little more. The fact that 10,000 or
15,000 of "the base" show up to watch Palin slam the Democrats doesn't
mean she is attracting more than "the base." Her negatives are higher
than her positives.

It ensures that they will show up to vote rather than stay at home.

The question is does she have the chops to take over as POTUS is McCain
drops dead. The answer is...no.


Nobody thought Turman had the chops to take over, FDR treated him like a
mushroom.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:36:24 -0400, Boater
wrote:

The majority of the public thinks she is an empty-headed opportunist

Um...no?

When she appears, she draws more crowds than Biden and has since she
was selected.

That doens't seem to me to indicate they think of her as an "airhead".

And besides, who thinks that the left wing represents the majority of
the public?

Only you. :)


Biden wasn't selected to "draw crowds."

Biden was the first to say yes on the list of many who said no before
that reached Biden.


You've said this at least three times here, and you have nothing with
which to back it up.




Palin attracts "the base," and very little more. The fact that 10,000
or 15,000 of "the base" show up to watch Palin slam the Democrats
doesn't mean she is attracting more than "the base." Her negatives are
higher than her positives.

It ensures that they will show up to vote rather than stay at home.


Good...then their disappointment will be greater.



The question is does she have the chops to take over as POTUS is
McCain drops dead. The answer is...no.


Nobody thought Turman had the chops to take over, FDR treated him like a
mushroom.

Truman was an experienced county official and national legislator who
held numerous hearings in the U.S. Senate. He was qualified by intellect
and experience. Palin is an uninformed ditz.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:00:59 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

It appears that the vicious attacks on Joe the Plumber by the Dems
(particularly by Joe "The Senator" Biden) is beginning to backfire.

It matters not if he is licensed or not, owes back taxes or not or is a
single parent. People can understand that and the majority of the public
can relate much easier to Joe the Plumber than they can to his critics and
media propaganda.

Gee, the Dems may even lose some close swing states by annoying too many
people.


Obama should install a remotely controlled muzzle on Biden.

All that sounds like typical McCain campaign boilerplate.
IMO "Joe the Plumber" is an idiot. He thinks SS is socialism.
His right to think that, but it doesn't say much for his brainpower.
What is it up to now that all the Joes are kicking in to Wall Street?
A $trillion and counting?
That's socialism.
And "Shareholder Value."
Joe's a typical sucker. Might be the nicest guy in the world.
Still a sucker.
I don't care about him being a sucker. His problem.
But I don't like deadbeats.
He's got a lien on his house because he's a deadbeat.
Just like the Repub and Dem pols got a lien put on our country.
Deadbeats.
And that's bad for business.

--Vic

Boater wrote:
WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:29:07 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

His boss is not a licensed plumber
So what?


Not one of the officers of Local 50 of the union shop of plumbers is on
the list of licensees.


Are they practicing plumbing at the moment?

It is my understanding that to be an officer of a trade union you
actually have to remain proficient in that trade. Which means you have
to actually turn a wrench for a certain number of hours a year. This is
to ensure that you stay in touch with they members you represent. At
least this is the way it is in the long shore mans union. A guy who was
a Director of Software Engineering at a company where I worked had to
actually go work the docks one day a month to keep his $75,000 a year
union officer job.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:49:50 -0400, Boater
wrote:

WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:29:07 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

His boss is not a licensed plumber
So what?


Not one of the officers of Local 50 of the union shop of plumbers is on
the list of licensees.


Are they practicing plumbing at the moment?

The question is are they accepting plumbing jobs, sending guys out to
do the work, and taking the money? That is what requires the license.
The owner/operator of the business needs a license, but the plumbers
who work for him don't.

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
It appears that the vicious attacks on Joe the Plumber by the Dems
(particularly by Joe "The Senator" Biden) is beginning to backfire.

It matters not if he is licensed or not, owes back taxes or not or
is a single parent. People can understand that and the majority of
the public can relate much easier to Joe the Plumber than they can
to his critics and media propaganda.

Gee, the Dems may even lose some close swing states by annoying
too many people.


Obama should install a remotely controlled muzzle on Biden.

Eisboch



What evidence are you offering that shows what you claim?

Joe is not the guy's real first name.

Irrelevant.

He's not a licensed plumber.

According to the law the doesn't need to have a license. His employer
is supposed to have a license.

His boss is not a licensed plumber.

Then go after the boss and not the employee who did nothing wrong.

Therefore, the business is running illegally.

Then go after the business owner and not the employees.


Further, the business *grossed* about $100,000 a year and "Joe"
earned about $40,000 a year. He would have benefited from Obama's tax
play.

Joe the Plumber is thinking about 10 and 20 years out, not about
immediate satisfaction or gratification. The country could use a
couple of million Joe the Plumbers.

The truth shall set you free.

Please keep that in mind when talking about your own accomplishments.

The problem here is that the McCain campaign did not bother to
vet...the same problem it has with Ms. Palin.

The guy talked to Obama when Obama was walking down the street. It was
an Obama event. You and Hillary need to get a room so that you can
talk about the VRWC.



If you are going to tout someone 15 or so times as McCain did, you ought
to make sure of his bona fides.

You are missing the main point. Joe's dream is the main point and how
government can help Joe attain the dream by getting out of his way or
how government can prevent Joe from attaining the dream by taking his
profits from him and giving them to some homeless guy under the notion
that Joe has an obligation to pull lazy people up with him.

It is the responsibility of the individual to assure he is working
according to the laws. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse in this
instance. I'll bet both Sam and his boss knew the licensing requirements.

Do you have knowledge of any and all laws that pertain to consulting and
taxing? That's why as a part of business you hire lawyers.

I appreciate your lack of appreciation for those pieces of paper that
say you have accomplished something.

I have plenty of pieces of paper that say I have accomplished something.
The fact that I took a different route in life and succeeded far
beyond you really gets your goat.

"Boater" wrote in message
...


If you are going to tout someone 15 or so times as McCain did, you ought
to make sure of his bona fides.



http://features.csmonitor.com/politi...3/picture1.jpg

Eisboch

Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:49:50 -0400, Boater
wrote:

WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:29:07 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

His boss is not a licensed plumber
So what?

Not one of the officers of Local 50 of the union shop of plumbers is on
the list of licensees.

Are they practicing plumbing at the moment?

The question is are they accepting plumbing jobs, sending guys out to
do the work, and taking the money? That is what requires the license.
The owner/operator of the business needs a license, but the plumbers
who work for him don't.

That depends upon where you are working. There is no uniform set of
rules, obviously.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:29:07 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

His boss is not a licensed plumber
So what?


Not one of the officers of Local 50 of the union shop of plumbers is on
the list of licensees.


Are they practicing plumbing at the moment?

It is my understanding that to be an officer of a trade union you
actually have to remain proficient in that trade.

Your understanding is wrong. Further, proficient if it is require does
not mean working at the trade. Typically in the building trades you have
to have worked at the trade and been a journeyman/journeywoman, and, of
course, your book has to be current to hold office. Some locals require
officers to be "active" members, and therefore theoretically available
for work. Others allow non-active, retired members to hold office. There
are no national rules for such.

My "book" is up to date and I pay monthly dues, but I am by choice
"inactive" in my local and therefore ineligible to run for office.

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...


Joe's a typical sucker. Might be the nicest guy in the world.
Still a sucker.
I don't care about him being a sucker. His problem.
But I don't like deadbeats.
He's got a lien on his house because he's a deadbeat.
Just like the Repub and Dem pols got a lien put on our country.
Deadbeats.
And that's bad for business.

--Vic\


Used to sorta feel that way until one year, early in business as a sub-S
corp, my accountant announced that I owed over $50K in state and federal
taxes due to the screwy way we recognized revenues. Didn't have it. A
lien on our house was the next step.

Found out the IRS is pretty understanding if you are honest with them. Paid
the back taxes off over 6 months and paid the state when I finally got some
money in.

Sometimes **** happens.

Eisboch