"I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody" ~ Barack Hussein Obama
Once again, the Obama apologists in the media have released the hounds.
After some time spent overturning every stone, searching every closet, and poking under every bed in a vain attempt to find dirt on Ms. Sarah Palin, Republican Governor and candidate for Vice President, the thundering hordes of mass media have now set their sights upon a previously unknown and unassuming Mr. Average Working man, also known as "Joe the Plumber". For what vile seditious crime is Joe the Plumber guilty?
He asked a question.
From the many newspapers breaking this earth shattering news story across this great nation, The New York Slimes has this feature, entitled "Joe in the Spotlight".
This innocuous appearing headline belies the hatchet job that follows, which reads, in part:
Turns out that “Joe the Plumber,” as he became nationally known when Senator John McCain made him a theme at Wednesday night’s third and final presidential debate, may run a plumbing business but he is not a licensed plumber. His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes a bit in back taxes.
Interestingly enough, I have seen parts of this exact paragraph posted in the comments of several Conservative blogs (posted by Liberal blog cruisers) with the theme, "The real winner of the debate was Joe the Plumber". I suppose Liberals feel they don't have the intelligence or expertise to form their own opinions, so they rip off the Slimes, which, as it happens, is probably the most leftist publication this side of Cuba.
But I digress.
Now, I don't have any reason whatsoever to doubt the veracity of these charges against Mr. Wurzelbacher. Nor do I do rule out the possibility that some idiot, somewhere, at one of John McCain's many campaign rallies, may have shouted the phrase, "Kill him".
The fact is, neither of those two so-called "news worthy" events negatively reflect on the character or capabilities of the candidates themselves.
But, the suspect credentials of Joe the Plumber are irrelevant to the true issue.
Joe the Plumber, in reality, may be unlicensed, and delinquent on his taxes, and he may even be an ax murderer. He may be a welfare recipient, or a disgustingly filthy rich Corporate magnate. He could be a nearly perfect example of the typical hard working, church going, flag waving, gun toting, Conservative redneck, or he could be a God-hating, (or God-loving) Liberal yet "moderate", pro-choice, gay elitist. He could be a member of the John Birch Society, or a member of the Communist Party of America. He could be either Republican or Democrat.
What he is, in spite of all his faults, is irrelevant.
It really doesn't matter if he's Joe the Plumber or Joe the Mafioso.
Because the issue isn't who asked the question of Obama. It isn't even what question Joe the Plumber asked.
The issue is about the answer that Obama gave:
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."
That statement is a paraphrase of a famous quotation, ripped right out of "The Communist Manifesto", by Karl Marx, which is the basis of Marxism, succinctly encapsulated into one sentence:
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
But, instead of dealing with a statement that the majority of Americans would roundly reject as un-American, The Obama apologists in the media attack the man who's only crime was asking an honest question. A question that would help him understand Obama's policy on taxation.
It is frankly deplorable and dishonest. There appears to be no longer any honor in journalism.
This is the simply the typical Liberally biased media, also known as Obama apologists, doing what they do best.
Distract and obfuscate.
They are hoping that ordinary Americans like me will focus their attention of the dubious character of Joe the Plumber instead of focusing on Obama's answer to Joe's question. If they can distract the public's attention away from the real issue, an issue which goes to the heart of Obama's Marxist agenda, that we the public will allow Obama's answer to quietly slip away into obscurity, never to raise it's ugly head again.
I say again:
The story is not the personal character of the questioner. It is the political agenda of the questionee.