Destroying "Joe the Plumber"

"Joe the Plumber" was the real winner of the final debate between candidates McCain and Obama. Because everybody's been talking about him since. And like anyone who challenges Senator Obama, he has become the intense target for media scrutiny and character assasination.

Didn't you hear? His name isn't Joe! It's Samuel Wurzelbacher. He's not really even a licensed plumber! (gasp) And he isn't buying a plumbing business! (gasp) It's just a dream! (gasp) He owes back taxes! ($1200) He didn't go through proper union channels (faint)! And he's...a Republican! All of course intended by the press to "discredit the witness" as a GOP operative or worse. David Gergen actually mused that the McCain campaign hadn't "properly vetted" Joe the Plumber, as if to indicate he might be a Republican plant. But this all is smoke and mirrors detracting from the real issue, which was Obama's response to "Joe's" question.

Nobody forced Obama to talk to Wurzelbacher. Well, perhaps Karl Rove was holding a seance with Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives in which they secretly directed Obama through mind-control to approach this man on a rope line. But probably not.

What people are missing is that it DOESN'T MATTER whether his name is Joe or Sam, Carl, or Biff. It doesn't matter if he's a licensed plumber or not (he's been working as a plumber for 15 years contracting for other companies). It doesn't matter whether he is close to buying a real business or it's simply his version of the American Dream he wants to accomplish some day. The question to Obama is still significant. "You're going to raise my taxes aren't you?"

Obama didn't deny it. He didn't correct it. His answer was his legitimate answer to someone he truly perceived would own a small business who's income would put him over the magical $250,000 threshold. He was being absolutely straightforward when he said to Wurzelbacher that he wanted to "spread the wealth around to everyone who's behind you to make sure they have a chance at success too".

Chance at success? How about the fact that for those "behind" Joe, their chance at success comes with having one of the 70% of American jobs that are created by small businesses. Nearly half of that number are created by small businesses over $250K. If you raise their taxes in order to "spread the wealth around" to everyone else in a tax welfare giveaway, they will have to cut back on the number of employees they have. Less jobs mean less "chances at success" these people have. Besides, when people have jobs and take home a paycheck, they spread the wealth around all by themselves...in their communities, other businesses, their children, their churches, in the local coffee shop, car dealership and so on. We don't need Government to do that. We can do it pretty nicely by our little old selves.

What Obama's tax plan really amounts to is not a real tax "cut" for middle America. It's a $500 to $1000 tax giveaway that redistributes money from those who "make too much" to others, many of whom don't even pay income taxes. Using your income tax to reduce someone else's payroll tax is not a tax cut! If you want to reduce the payroll tax, just reduce it and leave everyone else the heck alone. To give the Obama plan its proper name, it's welfare. You know, that thing that Bill Clinton and the Gingrich Congress reformed during the 90's?

And what will people do with that $500 to $1000? Very little. Especially when the small businesses they patronize have gone out of business because they can't afford to stay in it. Or worse, when they don't have a job.