This announcement was inevitable. Frankly, I’m surprised it took this long. These two possibly-real figures have been brought up in more speeches and on more news shows lately than Joe Biden. With all the attention that both Joe’s have been getting, it’s pretty clear that America, in general is more concerned about Plumber and Sixpack than anyone else on the planet.
They made their announcement late last night and we saw an almost immediate dramatic shift in the polls. The Joe Dream Team is now up by 15 points.
I recently sat down with the candidates so they could tell their stories, in their own words. Before we go any further, I’d like to point out that, when asked what party they’d be running under, Joe Sixpack said “Party…Til You Puke.” I asked him if he was referring to 2000 EP from Andrew WK and he stuck his tongue out and swung his head around, so to suggest that yes, he was.
Let’s meet our new candidates, shall we?
Joe The Plumber
Everybody’s been talking about me a lot lately, because of some stuff I said to Obama. I don’t really follow the polls that much, to be honest, but I assume that since everyone’s talking about me so much, they must want me to be president, so I’ll do that. What’s my campaign about? Money, mostly.
As I said in a recent Times interview that I was asked to give for no discernible reason, it’s my discretion who I want to give my money to, it’s not for the government to decide I make a little too much and so I need to share it with other people. That’s not the American dream. That is a belief I will hold until the day I die: The government doesn’t decide who I give my money to. I do.
Also, I’ve decided not to give it to anyone.
“I’d like to see you try to take my money, Senator Obama”
Senator Obama thinks of himself as a “Robin Hood” figure, taking money from the greedy, evil corporations and redistributing it to the peasants. Again, as stated in the Times, I resent being called a “peasant.” And if, as some have pointed out, Obama meant that I’m the greedy, evil corporation, I resent that, too. Hell, even if I’m supposed to be Robin Hood in this tricky, poorly-conceived metaphor, I’m still full of resentment. Basically I just don’t want anyone touching my money.
America, I’m a simple man. All I want in this life is all of the money in the world. That’s it. I want to be rich, and I just don’t want anyone screwing with my hard-earned toilet money. I’m just your average plumber earning a quarter of a million dollars a year, looking to expand my empire and make sure the government isn’t involved in any way. So what if I refuse to pay taxes and am not technically a licensed plumber? Should that stop me from being a plumber who wants the government to play fair? If I’m president, it will not.
This is, really, the only issue I can concretely say I’m running on. If elected, I promise the American People that no one will touch my money. Not a God Damn cent. The other issues, as well as your money, aren’t really concerns of mine. I only really get inspired to raise my voice when someone is indirectly suggesting that I should have less money than I think I should, which is to say, “assloads.”
“I’d like to see you try to take my money, banker from Deal or No Deal”
Joe Sixpack
Hey, I’m Joe Sixpack, and I think I should be your president, I guess. I don’t really think I’d be a good president, but according to the news, America wants “someone like Joe Sixpack” to be president, and I’m more Joe Sixpack than anyone I know, so I figured Hell, why not go with the real deal, you know? Got shit else to do.
Anyway, ever since she got the nomination, Sarah Palin’s been talking about how much she cares about Joe Sixpack, and everyone’s calling her The Joe Sixpack Candidate. As a response, it turns out that Biden’s pretty Sixpacky too, because he’s from a small town in Pennsylvania and often rides on the train, or whatever. Basically, Sarah Palin and Joe Biden are two people who claim to be very in touch with blue-collar, hardworking “Joe Sixpack types.”
Hey, here’s a thing. Let’s play a little game. Let’s say someone asked you to come up with a list of occupations that a blue-collar, hardworking “Joe Sixpack type” would have. I could come up with a few things. Carpenter. Construction Worker. Plumber, like my esteemed running mate, Joe. But you know what jobs wouldn’t make that list?
Governor and Senator.
Laying rat traps is a blue collar job. Cleaning out gutters is. Building stuff, that too. Being in charge of Alaska is not.
I don’t care what town you were born in; the second you show up on CSPAN wearing TV-makeup and expensive clothing, you’ve officially abandoned your right to call yourself the “Joe Sixpack Candidate.”
“This might be a shovel. Isn’t that blue collar? I just dig holes, like, all day. “
Oh, and let’s talk about riding trains, since that’s evidently an important factor in deciding who should lead our country. So, Biden rides trains to get from Point A to Point B. Great. But, if Point A is the floor of the Senate and Point B is an interview with Larry King, it doesn’t matter what you take to get there. If you load up a shopping cart with some kitchen appliance and push it around your mansion, does that mean you’re in touch with homeless people?
So, when you take a train—and then use it as a talking point—all it means is that you’re aware of just one superficial aspect of blue collar life.
Folks, I am not Joe Biden or Sarah Palin. I am Joe Sixpack. That is, legally, my name. My dad made me change it when I crashed his car. Something about not deserving the family name. I don’t quite remember. I was pretty blitzed. But ask yourself this: do you want a down-to-earth candidate, or do you want some rich, out-of-touch yuppy who does a good job at feigning down-to-earthness? If it’s the second one, you’ve got two options there.
If it’s the first one, vote for me. I’m Joe Sixpack. I work hard. I eat lunch and whistle at women who walk by. I take the train if I can afford it, but mostly I just wander around. I drink cheap beer out of an empty Jelly jar and I scream at my television when a black quarterback makes a mistakes. I gamble on dog fights. I might have a kid somewhere. Sometimes I just like to get drunk on a set of stairs and put on a hat I found. I’m just like you.
I’m aware that my running mate also said he’s running for president, and I’m cool with that. We’re both kinda running for president, I guess.
“We’re both kinda running for president, I guess.”
Last 5 posts by Daniel O'Brien
- More Like WebLAME Awards. WebSTUPID Awards. For JERKS. - January 9th, 2009
- 'Watchmen' Fan Cordially Invites Fox to Eat Several Dicks - December 26th, 2008
- Letters From Santa - December 19th, 2008
- 'Twas the Night Before Christmas 2: Christmasturbation - December 12th, 2008
- The X Most Blankiest Somethings in the History of Whatever - December 5th, 2008
November 5th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
I was hoping to see joe sixpack’s sixpack.
November 2nd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Will FTW.
If there’s anything I’m afraid of, it’s that Obama won’t go far enough in economic reform in the US. With a Democratic Congress (and Senate? pffft, I don’t know), he could surely put through some of the most revolutionary - and at this point necessary - economic legislation since the Marshall Plan. But politics are becoming increasingly and worryingly centrist, at a time when the only credible surviving economies are socialist.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:28 am
Looking through these posts, I’m beginning to realise a sad truth. Socialism is still a bad word in America, isn’t it?
God bless McCarthy’s nice wave of propoganda for brainwashing an entire nation for generations. (Wow, it rhymes; therefore it must be true!)
But seriously, can’t you just look at the idea of wealth distribution without instantly associating it with Communism? And can’t you look at some of Marx’s ideas without instantly branding them as evil, without even considering how beneficial the applications would be?
Think for yourselves. If an idea makes sense, it makes sense. Who gives a fuck where it came from or what it’s been used for in the past. Base it on it’s own merit.
For example, over here in the UK the Labour party is in power. They were origionally a socialist party. To this day they can still be classed as social democrats. Are we running around with red flags burning the rich and raping the aristocracy? No. We’re running an economy based on minimal state intervention, which is only used to subsidise the poor (and therefore enabling them to advance there own personal freedoms and better benefit society in the long run) and avert any major problems.
And, I hate to break it to you, but Thatcherite economics have FAILED. We’ve seen that left to it’s own devices the free market cannot properly function. There needs to be a serious rethink of the global economy and our entire political ideology. If you’re not willing to accept that, then you’re a) a moron and b) part of the problem.
p.s if you want to discuss the reasons why the free market cannot function when left to it’s own devices, and the reasons why we’re in this god damn mess, feel free to email me. S.A.Waters@hotmail.com
October 26th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Check out http://www.DanielDickey.com
It’s A Virtual Handjob, It’s Where Midgets Are Made, It’s Sex With Dinosuars, It’s Where Gay Monsters Go To Relax, It’s A Vagina Cafe.
Daniel Dickey
October 21st, 2008 at 9:44 am
There’s no loopholes on taxes there, provided you actually spend money.
annnnnnd ……… bingo. barter economy anyone? how do you tax a company that exchanges a 747 for 100 tons of raw steel?
now dont get me wrong at all here. i actualy like the idea (in theory) of a flat consumption tax, but i can poke many many many holes in the theory (too many to list here).
look its like this, tax questions arent simple, any time you take something away from someone for the benifit of others your on slipery moral ground. my example of women i have worked with getting large tax breaks for having sex with no birth control vrs my not having unwanted kids is a good one. im getting screwed no two ways about it. im being asked to pay more for someone elses mistakes. you dont get more ‘unfair’ than that when it comes to questions about taxes. but in truth i have looked each and every one of these women in the eyes, ive seen their children and in reality im more than willing to put up with the unfair taxes to help not the mothers but the children. sure the mothers dont diserve a reward for poor choices but can we ‘punish’ the mother without hurting the kids whome never had a choice at all?
put in this context should anyone feel guilty that someone with enough advantages to even be in a position for a tax on the ‘rich’ to effect them is being unfairly taxed?
i live on about $28,000 a year. im not hurting for anything right now, i have a nice place to live, plenty of food on my table, a car to drive, and plenty of ‘play’ money to do things i enjoy doing. in fact i could actualy live on much less than i have now, i could prolly live on $20,000 (less if forced into some hard decisions) a year and still have a quality life so any argument that those poor souls making $300,000 a year or more are being taken advantage of is just noise to me.
finaly if the taxes bother you that much that you dont want to pay a higher rate at the $250,000 level than make less than the cutoff. no one is FORCING anyone to make huge ammounts of money, thats a personel choice, and if you decide that $249,999 isnt enough to live on for a year and just HAVE to make that extra buck than be ready to pay the price for it. its not like the tax codes are a secret and totaly random.
October 21st, 2008 at 7:30 am
Congratulations Nattie; on posting one of the most profoundly stupid things I have ever read.
Limited personal experience applied to broad generalization?
Check.
Cites exorbitant costs to becoming an electrician as a means of discrediting “licensing” while failing to provide context?
Check.
Attacks the association of Reagan with “trickle down economics” purely on semantics, when we all know “supply side economics” (happy now?) is what is being discussed.
Check.
Thinks the word “deplane” would have been used instead of “explain”.
Check.
Use of insults like “epic fail” and “assbiter”, especially to (poorly) conceal the fact you have no idea what you are talking about.
Check.
Your name reminds me of Nattie Light/Nattie Ice
Chuh-Check
October 20th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
I still support the Fair Tax, do away with the IRS completly and start using a flat tax on consumption. There’s no loopholes on taxes there, provided you actually spend money.
I posted about it in detail further down, and dont feel like reposting the same stuff.
October 20th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
you know metal i dont totaly disagree with your idea. i DO think that a ‘free market’ economy is better than a government controlled one. what i take issue with is your idea that someone who makes $300,000+ a year is somehow a victim because they have to pay higher taxes, or that THEY are responcable for the majority of jobs creation in America. the truth is the employment numbers are all over the map, everything from a small town landscaper who employs 3 people part time, all the way up to mega companys with multi-million’s of workers.
now the whole crux of your argument seems to hinge on the idea of job creation, you imply that a company taxed more will cut jobs to afford the new tax bill, but the simple TRUTH is that company get tax credits for each and every job they create that more than offset any increase in taxes. these job tax credits were implimented specificaly to counteract your theory. so no , its pure bullshit to say that companys will cut jobs, becasue the truth is if they are having tax problems the BEST thing they can do is ADD a few workers to get those large tax credits. in fact one of the companys i used to work for would ADD people to their workforce at the ’slow’ time of the year and basicaly let them stand around with their thumb in their asses just to get a tax break. this was helped on by being in new york state and having state tax breaks as well as federal for job creation. they paid almost NO taxes in NYS because of this.
anyhow if your MAKING $300,000 a year, and earning enough to STILL be TAXED on the full 300K even taking into account tax breaks than you have nothing to bitch about. as Obama said in responce to McCains saying that the US companys pay one of the highest tax rates in the world, Obama said that would be a fair statment if they actualy PAID that rate and the tax code wasnt full of loop-holes and tax breaks, the REAL (the rate that the IRS actualy GETS) American tax rate is about anywhere between 0 and 11%.
its typical republican bullshit if you ask me, the headlines read ‘US pays highest tax rate in the world’ and people who cant be bothered to look into it take it at face value, but when you actualy get into the fine print you see that isnt even close to the truth. but the headling, the ‘on paper’ tax rate of 36% give the republicans a headline they can use to add MORE loop holes and tax breaks for their favorite companys like big oil.
want a ‘fair’ tax code? you can start by getting rid of ALL tax breaks and loop holes, then work from there.
finaly from my end of the tax scale as a ‘worker’ i want to know why a woman who cant keep her legs closed and brings one kid after another into the world when she cant afford it should get a fucking $5,000 tax credit PER CHILD, when i, who is smart and responcable enough to use a fucking condom doesnt? MY ‘reward’ for not adding MORE burdens too society? why paying higher taxes of course.
October 20th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
*real
damn typos
October 20th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
sorry about that last post, I was at school, and had to use one of their computers.
Tumblingdickweed, the reall flaw in that logic is that those european countries are much smaller than the US. A more socialist economy is much more sustainable in smaller nations, but in a country the size of the US, it would be a disaster. There are too many system abusers here, and not enough producers to supply a socialist government, but with the current system we have now we have become one of the most properous nations in the history of the world, and by in large have one of the highest standards of living in the world.
Sure the system is corrupt, but a corrupt government can not fix a corrupt system. As it is our government is corrupt, and helped build the problem that we are in now, so it absurd to think that they can fix it by playing with the market. At this point the best thing that could happen is for the government to stay the fuck out of the economy and let the free market workitself out. The economy cant stabilize if you are constantly dicking with it.
October 20th, 2008 at 11:54 am
oh nice, correct my bad spelling. That totaly makes your argument so much more vailid. Well im sorry if I have dislyexia. asshole
October 20th, 2008 at 7:36 am
“you know america still being the most wealthy nation in the world, with the highest standards of living.”
FALSE. certain european countries have a MUCH higher national income/standard of living. look things up before you start talking out of your ass.
while you’re at it, go back to school and get an education so you can spell basic words like “pretty” and learn where capital letters belong in a sentence, THEN start lecturing the rest of us about what a bunch of dumb socialists we are.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Hilarious! Personally, I’d rather see the candidacy of Raila “Africa’s Hitler” Odinga, William “I should have set more bombs” Ayers, with Jeremiah “GOD DAMN AMERICA!” Wright as backup VP, but maybe that’s just my quirk.
October 19th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
wyatt, I wasn’t talking about spending of the rich, nor was I talking about the CEO’s who make hundreds of millions anually.
I was talking about those people who make about $300,000 a year who run the small buisness across the country. They are the ones who provide most of us with Jobs, and those jobs provide us money.
As far as the “trickle down” system not working, it got us preaty damn far along as far as I can tell. You know america still being the most wealthy nation in the world, with the highest standards of living.
Without it we could be like, oh I dont know, Cuba. Great economic system they have there.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I do Ross!! Pick me, pick me!
Don’t meant to barge in on the American Tax Debate that seems to be going on in this comments section, for some reason, but as an Australian I can tell you that having different tax brackets where the more wealthy pay more tax (and those earning less than 6k aka your school kids with part time work) don’t pay any tax is a good, fair system.
We also have GST, a variation of which was mentioned earlier. (Look it up)
So before you get on your high horse and put in your 2 cents about how horrid the whole concept is why don’t you do a little research into other countries that have already implemented it because despite all of your bitching it works fine. Anybody that works on the concept “I earn more because I worked for it so screw those that didn’t and let’s all contribute the same amount” is either ignorant or selfish or both.
And that’s all I’m going to say on the matter because really this should be in the forums anyway.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Okay, common sense, devoid of political party lines and affiliations:
Rich people have more money, poor people have less money, which can afford to pay more taxes?
Is anything grasping this concept? At all?
October 19th, 2008 at 11:15 am
[...] Thanks again to the creative folks at Cracked.com. [...]
October 18th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
@nattie
if he’s rich enough to make 250000 a year, he should be able to afford getting licensed.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Look!! It’s raining candy from the heavens!! I like the fish on the TV, they sing happy songs into my brain
October 18th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I LIKE TO WATCH THE LEPRECHAUNS DANCE AROUND THE HOBOS
October 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Joe Six pack Speaks:
http://www.JoeSixPack.me
October 18th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
“obviously your far smarter than the rest of us.”
Obviously so.
This article is the best political thing Cracked has run in some time, and I gather there’s been some surfeit of political content on the Internet of late. You guys are totally in the tank for Palin, right? Woof woof!, etc.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
“Trickle-down? Trickle-down?!?! Who taught you that stupid word? That isn’t. what. it. is. At all. Reagan never said it.”
I tell you who taught me that stupid word ,David Stockman, Ronald Reagan’s budget director.
“It’s kind of hard to sell ‘trickle down,’ so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really ‘trickle down.’ Supply-side is ‘trickle-down’ theory. [11] - David Stockman, Ronald Reagan’s budget director”
October 18th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
nattie thanks for the spelling lession it sure helps you to make your points look very impressive, correcting spelling on the net is like fucking for virginity if you ask me , but obviously your far smarter than the rest of us.
anyhow i never said reagan SAID anything, i mearly pointed out that the economic theory he championed was just that. a theory about how if you reward the rich than the cash they make will ‘trickle down’ to the poor. the exact theory that metal tryed to make.
didnt work then, hasent worked for the last 28 years, wont work in the future. its a pure crock of shit.
as to the license thing, as im sure you have proven atleast once in your life any moron can in fact run a snake, but saying a plumber doesnt need a license is like saying that a NASA engineer doesnt need a degree because any moron can set of a bottle rocket. plumbing is one of the more complicated of the construction jobs.
and finaly i have never in my life, ever, bitten an ass. well unless it was ground up into hamburger or something
October 18th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Gosh Nattie! Why on earth would someone need a license to be around minors in a position of trust for an extended length of time? Absolutely nothing could go wrong there.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Reguarding the flat tax, as there are people arguing about it:
Look, I consider myself a fiscal convervative, to the right of McCain even. McCain has moved pretty leftward on fiscal issues, being not much different than Obama— whose fiscal ideas are socialist-lite. I even considered voting for Bob Barr at one point.
HOWEVER, the flat tax is where I draw the line. Look, I am all against the government redistributing wealth from the wealthy, who yes, on average, work harder than the poor and middle class. Higher taxes servers as a disincentive from working harder. Yes, I get that. I think our current taxes are a bit too progressive, or at the very least just right and shouldn’t be made more progressive.
However, implementing a flat tax is a bit too extreme and quite frankly, I don’t think I am THAT conservative. The pendelum may have swung too much in favor of bailing out the poorer, but thats no reason to embrace the other extreme either.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Ha, good one cracked.
I think honestly given the choice between Joe Six Pack and your typical, cynical out-of-touch politian pretending to understand me, I’d take the politian. They don’t understand me one bit (and neither would Joe Six Pack come to think of it), and never will, and I would prefer that at least they be honest about it, but least they know what they’re doing.
I just want someone who will make the trains run on time, fix potholes, and agree with me on the issues.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I for one hope the Sixpack/Plumber ticket wins this election, then we could have a biopic of President Plumber played by Michael Chiklis.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
timsgm you’re so right about “licensing” - all it means, really, is you’ve paid governing bodies to be allowed to do what you already know how to do. Who gives a shit? I’ve known college professors who successfully taught college math for many years who don’t “qualify” to teach elementary students to do so, because they didn’t pay their dues to the “licensing” bodies for teachers of kids. They just wanted to do something good and earn a few dollars, but weren’t “qualified.” Bullshit. They hadn’t “paid in” is what it amounts to. Licensing is the biggest fraud we perpetrate in this country. My husband is in HVAC too - does lots of wiring, but do you have any idea what it COSTS to become a legitimate “electrician”? Too damn much. The costs are prohibitive. Just as they are for “plumbers.” Like it takes THAT much brains to snake a freaking toilet? No, it takes money. Which is why, duh, the business owners have to make so much - they have to pay a shitload just to do business. And if you keep punishing them they’ll fire plenty of Joe Plumbers and have nothing to offer except snakes. Fuck that. Joe Plumber’s extra $400 a year is REALLY going to do him a lot of good when he has no JOB. Idiots.
“hmm metal drags out the old reagan era ‘trickle down’ economics logic to explane pure greed.”
Epic fail. It’s “deplane” not “explane” unless you mean “explain” but either way, fail. Trickle-down? Trickle-down?!?! Who taught you that stupid word? That isn’t. what. it. is. At all. Reagan never said it. Get your freaking facts straight, assbiter.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
And secondly, why do you presume that anything government does is going to be “sub-standard” and “more concerned with following regulations than helping people”? When it comes to bureaucracy, private hospitals have as much red tape to deal with as anyone else; legislation is the same for everyone. You have no idea whether governmental healthcare would be sub-standard or not.
oh yeah I think we have a pretty good idea what government healthcare would be like…
October 18th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
don’t understand why Joe the plumber is getting so much crap. Just because he doesn’t have a plumbers license doesn’t mean a damned thing. My son is in HVAC working under his employers license, like they all do. You don’t walk out of high school and get your plumbers license, electricians license etc, you work under somebody elses as an apprentice until you have the time in and the experience to get your own license…
And I’m with Joe the Plumber, I don’t want to give anybody else my money either, let them work for it, just like I have to
October 18th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
CavalierX, perhaps the biggest flaw I see in your argument here is that you presume that those earning the most are those working the hardest. Obviously, this is untrue - and even if it were true, you must also admit that not everyone has an equal chance at high income.
As someone else - pretty sure it was glendoor or Haruhi - pointed out, tax is not a punishment. It is a measurement of how much you can afford to contribute to the well-being of others. There are people who do not have the opportunity to earn high figures, and while that situation continues, progressive tax is the only way.
As for this: “ruining our economy in the name of providing everyone sub-standard, government-operated health care run by bureaucrats more concerned with following regulations than helping people,” it is kind of bizarre.
First off, nobody said anything about ruining your economy. Low corporate tax and business incentives combined with a progressive tax scheme for individuals worked well here in Ireland to build from what was a horrific economy in the 80s.
And secondly, why do you presume that anything government does is going to be “sub-standard” and “more concerned with following regulations than helping people”? When it comes to bureaucracy, private hospitals have as much red tape to deal with as anyone else; legislation is the same for everyone. You have no idea whether governmental healthcare would be sub-standard or not.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:50 am
They ARE professionals, just not the kind you are thinking of.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:59 am
DOB, you are seriously one of the funniest fucking people on the planet. I love you.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:27 am
Actually Glendoor, I did have that same reaction it. Or something similar, at least.
It’s the use of all their last names, makes them out to be professionals of some sort. Misleading if you ask me!
October 18th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Oh yeah , Am I the only one that thinks when you read the list of columnist names at the top of the page
“Bucholz, Gladstone, O’Brien, Swaim and Wolinsky ” that it sounds like a fucking law firm?
Probably.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:52 am
Three things trickle down, shit, piss and trouble. Money, unfortunately, is not one of them.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:56 am
@ metalbrain,
I think you have a point in theory, only you aren’t representing all the facts on the issue. I wouldn’t have known any better, but recently I happened to see a list of the personal earnings of CEOs of some of the largest corporations in the US. They ranged from a low of (from what I recall) around $30 million, to some who were actually pulling in $175 million. A year.
Yeah, I dunno, but I’m PRETTY sure that some of these guys, and consequently the corporations they work for, can afford to cough up just a LITTLE bit more, no? And btw, one of the assholes who made $175 million was current Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, as CEO of Goldman Sachs in 2006. You can look that shit up if you like. And as I don’t know the guy, I can’t say for sure, but I would be willing to bet my own salary that not a whole hell of a lot of that dough went to creating jobs for the poor folk out there.
Nevermind those greedy bastards who bankrupt their own company just to squeeze out extra profit for themselves - and there have been examples of those in the last few yrs.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:14 am
@KTF- Who did I assert was a racist? Oh, that’s right. Joe Sixpack. The insulting, fictional, over-simplified media-constructed caricature of the middle class. Him. I do think he’s a racist. And lazy. And a wizard. See? He’s whatever we want him to be!
October 17th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
hmm metal drags out the old reagan era ‘trickle down’ economics logic to explane pure greed. would be a nice argument too if the last 28 years didnt show its pretty much a shit theory when its actualy put into practice.
the only time the ‘trickle down’ seems to work is when the bill for wall street screw ups comes due, CEOs take vacation trips to luxury resorts while the bill for their fuckups ‘trickles down’ to the tax payers.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Fake, you are completley wrong if you think that taxing the rich more dosent effect them or anyone else. The rich/corperations are kind of the people who create jobs. Tax the shit out of them, they can’t afford to keep all their employees, or hire new ones. So they scale back operations/fire the least prodoctive or neccicary in order to be able do deal with it. I run a small bussiness, I know what I’m talking about.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
calm the fuck down, first off its a funny article im pretty sure thats actually the point if your offended you should drop some balls outta that vagina and man up, also Obama isnt giving poor ppl money hes taxing those who make more than a sufficient amount, they make enough money so that a higher tax bracket will not effect them, also DOB is funny you just cant take a joke as well as you take dicks
October 17th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
350 shows = 7&7/24 days
October 17th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Spread the wealth people, spread the wealth. If you work hard throughout your life to make a lot of money then why should you be rewarded for doing so. The lazy bitch on welfare with 9 kids deserves to have the same amount of money as the doctor who spent years in school. This is a socialist nation, if you don’t want to work, you don’t have to, those that do work are more than willing to support your lazy asses. I for one am all for working my ass off just to give all my money to someone who doesnt do a damn thing. I may have skills that benefit this nation, but at least you know what happend on all 350 Judge shows that you watched today.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
It seems to me that DOB gets to write whatever the fuck he wants. I mean, it’s top of the line, but this fictional gonzo journalism is just peculiar to the rest of this site.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
WHEN DO I GET MY HANNAH FUCKING MONTANA ARTICLE
I’M GETTING IRATE
October 17th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Oh boo hoo! I’m O’Brien and I’m mad that someone out there doesn’t want all their hard earned money taxed to death. Let me now assert they’re idiotic racists because anyone remotely thinking about voting Republican must be. It seems someone is pandering to ridiculously liberal Digg.
October 17th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Great article - I read Cracked daily and this one had me literally laughing out loud on a couple of the quotes.
Particularly liked Joe Plumber’s “Robin Hood” metaphor confusion, but Joe 6-Pack had some gold…
The pushed shopping cart in a mansion, and getting drunk on stairs wearing a hat he just “found”.
Classic. Keep on writing!
October 17th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
If I were going to vote, which I’m not.
I’d vote for Joe Sixpack.
Given that he used and spelt the word ‘feigning’ correctly, I’m guessing that he’s got to be more intelligent than the current stiff we’ve got in the role.
Also, I’m guessing that his honesty is actually a good quality. Apparently. I think. It’s been so long since I encountered honesty I just don’t know anymore…
October 17th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Hey, at least Joe The Plumber was honest about it. How many other polotitions can you count on to actually come right out and say “All I want in this life is all of the money in the world.” How refreshingly honest!
October 17th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
What are people doing having a serious debate about a flat tax on this site? Maybe this will derail it.
http://www.queerty.com/new-frontier-in-wasteful-spending-20081016/
(I strongly advise against clicking on the link to “faux foreskin” after the jump)
October 17th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
@Daniel O’Brien: I was feeling nostalgic. Harkening back to the days before my computer died and I was Cracked deprived for over 2 months.
October 17th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Wyatt is completely right, raising the cost of regressive taxes would be a moronic to do as it absorbs a far greater percentage of total income for poor people. It’s like how in some countries they live off a dollar a day, covers the food bill but that takes up their entire income. The wealthy don’t pay out of their income because they don’t live from paycheck to paycheck, they have savings. We have had these stealth taxes introduced for years under the promise of a smaller government but that hasn’t happened at all.
Vote for Tits the Nun!
October 17th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I don’t know why I argued so vehemently over the tax thing anyway, American policay on tax, and this whole election are utterly devoid of any meaning to me, seeing as I, like most people in the world, am not in the US.
C’mon cracked, cater to your international brethren, enough with the election commentary.
October 17th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Weiner poopies?!? That is so Ninja Turtles. What an expensive hat.
October 17th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
winer poopies?
October 17th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Best line for my money: “If you load up a shopping cart with some kitchen appliance and push it around your mansion…”
Oh yeah…Weiner poopies AND boobs
October 17th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Something I find both funny and disturbing…The media has been building this election up as the most important presidential race ever (war,terrorism, record-breaking national debt, market collapse, etc..) but where are they?
Camped out on some guy’s front lawn in Ohio like they can’t find anything more interesting to report on.
October 17th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I loved it. =)
Officially voting for Joe Sixpack. He’s much better looking. Isn’t that what this election is all about?
People should stop complaining and demanding Hannah Montana!
October 17th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
DOB promised to “get back to his roots…” on Monday. Mark your calendars folks.
The guy who’s being called the real Joe Plumber says McCain isn’t conservative enough.
I’d be more likely to vote for Joe Plumber if you switched the bald guy above with the bald guy from TAPS. At least he’s a real plumber, plus he chases ghosts. Cool.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
If only Hannah Montana would run for something, then DOB could combine two of his passions AND give the people what they want. Personally, I’d like to trade in this college education for a plumbing business right now.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
You mean eliminate? I gotcha.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Food would not be taxed….
October 17th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
an income ‘flat tax’ is in fact not at all fair to the poor in the system. it WOULD be fair if the prices of goods and services cost the same percentage of your income as the tax does, but when you have a poor person buying a loaf of bread for the same price as a rich person that cost is more (percentage wise) for the poor than the rich.
sure your paying the same percentage of your income in taxes but the other side of the coin is that your by NO means paying the same percentage in COST of good and services. when a loaf of bread costs $100,000 for a millionare and $1 for a poverty level person then ill agree that its ‘equil’.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
sorry about the spelling, I am typing on a small keyboard, and playing guitar at the same time, all the while being sleep deprived.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
elimintate*
I have no idea how I spelled it that wrong
October 17th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Yeah, I have a question: What are your thoughts on proper spelling? For, or against?
Ka-POW! Tits.
October 17th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
I’m all for the fair tax…bring it on..and bring the damned jobs back here, so that I can understand the IT people when I have to talk to them….please?
October 17th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
MANMEAT…..fucktardery is now my favorite word…
CavalierX you are awesome… just my 2 cents, but in a flat tax scenario like you mention, don’t forget, with the rich having more money they tend to pay other people to do things they don’t want to do…more jobs. I agree a flat tax is the way to go, or stop income tax altogether and just raise sales tax. Everybody buys stuff, you really can’t avoid that
October 17th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
to everyone talking of a flat tax:
The Fair Tax is what you want, a national flat rate consumption tax that replaces the income tax, capital gains tax, corrpeate tax, ect. It eleminates the IRS, and then substitutes an imbeded 23% sales tax on every new product or service you purchase.
The key to what makes this work is that companies pass on the taxes they pay to their cutomers buy embedding the tax cost into the prices of their products. When totaled up this leads to about 22% the price of everything you buy. When you eleminate those taxes, that 22% is deducted from the price. Then you add the 23% sales tax into the cost (embeded) so when you buy a $1.00 item $0.23 go to the government. And all this time you get all of the money you make, no taxation.
And there is a monthly prebate everyone gets that provides the cost of the taxes on the neccesities of life, efectively untaxing the poor.
Since it is a consumption tax, there are no loop holes. And since we now have no corperate tax, bussiness are free to expand and prosper, and move back in shore.
Any questions?
October 17th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
give me more of the old dob!!!
October 17th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
One final thing
BOOBS
October 17th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Oh, and one more thing: taxes are not a “social responsibility” nor are they paid to become a member of any society. Government is not a moral good in itself. Taxes are paid purely for one reason: to enable to government to provide certain services. There is no socially redeeming value in paying more taxes, or you’d see all those rich weasels in Hollywood falling all over themselves to give 90% of their money to the State.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
“Cavalier, at the end of the day you pay a tax in order to be a contributing member of society.”
Fine. That sounds good. let everyone contribute 10% of his or her income, then. That’s as fair as anything could possibly be.
“A flat tax, as glendoor says, hits lower income families the hardest”
A flat tax, being a tax system under which everyone pays the same percentage of their income, hits no one harder than anyone else. They pay the same rate, you see.
“as there are more poor people than rich people, the idea is unbalanced and unfair”
Now you’re not even making sense. Why is it unfair to tax people the same rate as everyone else? You’re just trying to create special groups to receive government favors, which is the root of the problem to begin with. Those groups will always vote for whomever promises to give them the most “free” money. But it’s NOT free. Someone else has to work for it. Government does not create money; it can only take it away from those who earn it.
“Sure you’ll get a few leeches sponging off the state”
Yeah, and they all keep getting elected year after year.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I didn’t read the article, but that’s because i dont need to read about politics on this site.
the articles about politics are the same jokes that everyone else is telling, and I’m not looking for news here, either.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Neither of these guys look like Hannah Montana and I couldnt find the words Hannah Montana anywhere in the article.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Canadians don’t drink six packs, we drink two-fours.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
[...] now, because we can’t get enough of them, CRACKED.COM presents [drumroll] your new co-presidential candidates, the Joes, whose campaign slogan is: [...]
October 17th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
We were promised an article on Hannah Montana…What happened to going back to your roots Dan? I am very disappointed in you…
October 17th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Can I just point out that this is a fraud? Joe Sixpack is obviously a Canadian. He’s wearing what we call the “Canadian Armani”.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
From now on, I’m just gonna do any work/thinking here in pounds.
If it helps, imagine that £1 = $2. That’s because our money is awesome.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I saw glendoor, Sorry, I read it incorrectly before I wrote my post.
Cavalier, at the end of the day you pay a tax in order to be a contributing member of society.
A flat tax, as glendoor says, hits lower income families the hardest, seeing as they are the people who do the real work in any country (all the manual labour and menial service tasks), why should they have to pay a higher rate of tax just so that rich people can save a few thousand dollars.
Also, as there are more poor people than rich people, the idea is unbalanced and unfair.
If a person has the means to pay more, then it is their civic duty to do so, after all, not everyone on benefits is there die to laziness or selfishness, the majority of them are there due to misfortune and activly work to get out of them, if they can. Sure you’ll get a few leeches sponging off the state, but that happens in every country.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Thank you, Jarrod. Me, too.
Less politics, less seriousness, less anger, less debate.
More drunk rock stars, more stupid celebrities, more drugs, more funny.
I’ll check back later to see how that’s all comin’ along…
October 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
“once you have it all you get to do is sit there with an ever increasing sum of money that you’ll never actually use and don’t actually need”
Again, who the hell are you to decide what I want, what I can use and what my needs are?
October 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Haruhi, Please read the previous posts and you will find we are in agreement. I said basically the say thing as you, just more concise.
So sayeth the Sergeant.
CavalierX If you consider a flat tax fair then you and I are at impasse. I believe a flat tax is not fair to lower income families.It hurts them. I would like to know what you consider paying your fair share is?
Also my example about the raise said “would be taking home more money”. So if you took home more money you would have taken the job.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
“Dave, depends on the charity.”
Well, that’s up to the person donating the money to decide. It’s not the job of government to take my money at gunpoint and use it to make others dependent upon handouts. Not in this country, anyway.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Dave, depends on the charity.
If you look at a charity’s published reports and see how much gets spend on “administration expenses”, you’ll see that it isn’t an efficiant use of money at all.
Also, to the person who complained about free health care, we have that here in the UK, it’s called the NHS, and while it isn’t perfect, it’s still good.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Like I said, it’s not exactly “working harder” either.
Who do you think does the real work in Microsoft nowadays, Bill Gates or all the techno geeks who actually work on the next edition of windows?
Answer that then ask, who gets paid more?
And I’m sorry, but once you earn over a certain threshold, money becomes less and less meaningful. There’s only so much you can buy, and once you have it all you get to do is sit there with an ever increasing sum of money that you’ll never actually use and don’t actually need, complaining cause you have to pay more taxes due to having it.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
progressive taxes are fair. High taxes are not? Who do you think would use my money better? $500 toward a charity of my choosing or $500 to the government?
October 17th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
“if you work harder and earn more, then the “bigger bite” becomes less and less meaningful the more you earn.”
But who are you to tell other people what the money they work for “means” to them?
October 17th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
“Contrary to popular belief, paying your fair share of taxes is not a punishment. It IS a civic duty.”
Oh, I’m all for everyone paying their fair share. But I’m against the government demanding a bigger cut of the action just because the person in question is working harder. That’s hardly fair at all.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Also, you’ll find that it’s people on the lower levels of the business who “work harder”.
Once you get into upper managment, things become a lot easier.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Ah, but glendoor, if you work harder and earn more, then the “bigger bite” becomes less and less meaningful the more you earn.
Let’s say that people who earn over $40,000 per year(I have no idea how the US tax system works) are taxed at 40% of their income.
Now, for a person earning $40,000 of taxable income, tax of $16,000 will be paid.
Now, if another person earns $1,000,000 of taxable income, $400,000 of tax will be paid.
You may think that’s unfair, but bear in mind that that leaves $600,000 left over, and that’s easily enough to live on.
So in essence, a progressive tax system is fair as the richer have a better capacity to pay taxes, plus as their income rises the relative bite reduces,
Also bear in mind that the law allows one to arrange his/her finances in the way that causes the least tax liability (provided legal methods are used). Rich people have more access to these legal measures than poor people.
So sayeth an accounting student
October 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
“What so the next time your boss offers you a raise your going to tell him no,because even though you will take home more money you don’t want the government take taking more of your check”
I nearly did do that when a company at which I was working as a consultant offered to hire me on. I did the math and realised I’d be taking home $3000 LESS per year than I was currently making, though they were offering me more money on the surface. I told them they needed to raise their offer by another $5000 or the equivalent or I couldn’t take the job. Unfortunately, they declined to do so, and I remained a consultant for another three months and then left.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
“Well, good for them. Why do you wnat to punish them for doing well”
Contrary to popular belief, paying your fair share of taxes is not a
punishment. It IS a civic duty.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
“some people are still making obscene amounts of money”
Well, good for them. Why do you wnat to punish them for doing well?
“and others are still dying for lack of health insurance”
No one dies for lack of insurance; it’s lack of care which does that. Emergency care is provided free of charge in every hospital in this country by law. But can you honestly think that ruining our economy in the name of providing everyone sub-standard, government-operated health care run by bureaucrats more concerned with following regulations than helping people, a system in which politicians get to decide what medicines and oeprations are the most cost-efficient for you to have, is a good idea?
October 17th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
“The rich find ways to hide their money, when they even have a taxable income.”
That’s because the current tax code is written by rich people for rich people. Hurting the middle class is just a side effect. Simplfy the tax code and that will stop.
“Make more money, you should pay more taxes. That’s fair.”Not at all. What a progressive tax system does is remove the incentive to work harder. Why bother, when the government’s just gonna take a bigger bite?
What so the next time your boss offers you a raise your going to tell him no,because even though you will take home more money you don’t want the government take taking more of your check.
I doubt that.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“You work harder, you earn more, you pay more tax, you still earn more”
But not as much more as you could have earned if the government didn’t punish you for working harder. Eventually, you reach the point of diminishing returns, and decide that it’s not worth all the extra work just to earn a fraction more than you do now. It’s like climbing up a ramp that keeps getting steeper the higher you climb. At some point, you realise you’re going all-out just to make tiny advances. It’s designed to keep you from getting to the top.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I’m glad DOB hasn’t abandoned politics. Genuinely.
CavalierX: A progressive tax system does not remove incentive to work harder. You work harder, you earn more, you pay more tax, you still earn more. The government is taking a bigger bite, but you’ve got a bigger apple.
The reality is that in the same country, some people are still making obscene amounts of money and others are still dying for lack of health insurance. The spreading around of excess wealth seems to me to be the only way to solve that problem.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
JOE SIXPACK IS REAL!!!
October 17th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Hillarious, I loved the Joe Sixpack part and the Joe the Plumber part was pretty good as well.
October 17th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
What business is it of anyone how much money I make? I don’t need incentives or disincentives and I certainly don’t need someone who thinks they even have the prerogative (Hammer Time!) to decide upon the best usage of MY money! I may just want to spend it on barrels of KY (Jelly Time!)
Defense, police, courts and a few part time politicians is all that is needed, expenses of which can be covered by national lottery.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
“Make more money, you should pay more taxes. That’s fair.”
Not at all. What a progressive tax system does is remove the incentive to work harder. Why bother, when the government’s just gonna take a bigger bite? It’s a knife pointed right at the heart of Obama’s precious middle class. The rich find ways to hide their money, when they even have a taxable income. The poor don’t really pay income taxes. The current tax system is configured to keep the middle class from moving up.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Joe the plumbers lamp looks like a plunger…
October 17th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I apologize for my last comment and submit the following:
Tits.
That is all.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Joe Sixsack is made of potatoes. Joe Sixpack is made of Bud Ice and wood pulp.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Flat tax is an excellent and practical idea as evidenced by its success (just check wiki on “flat tax”). I am not sure what tax loopholes are being spoken of. A system of taxation that requires large numbers of CPAs , tax attorneys is surely more prone to loopholes than a flat tax system. Moreover, why should a corporation pay taxes to begin with? That money is invested into the business otherwise it is considered income. Surely the employees are all paying taxes on their salaries from the corporation in question. …What would be even less morally offensive would a nationally monopolized lottery system as proposed by Ayn Rand.
There is no more than a nuanced difference between Mccain and Obama on taxes. Only difference is one of candidates idiotically chose a religious nut who believes in witches, possessions and no abortion for incest and rape victims.
Why is Joe6Pack essence of American electorate? Does he believe in value of an education at least for his kids? Could he maybe save money by NOT buying beer, butane and buckshot …. and skoal?…Does he EVEN make enough to QUALIFY for taxes or is he languishing in Earned Income Credit Nirvana?
October 17th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
No, the 18 pack was beer and Rumple minze is 100 proof. That is otherwise what i would call my tuesdays.
@Panzer-Stier Ross No, if he was made of potatoes he would be Joe Vodka.
And flat taxes would suck. Think about, let’s say that, just to make it simple, that you made $100 a year and rich dude made a $1000 a year. Take away 10% flat tax from both and who do you think that hurts more, the guy with $90 dollars left or the guy with
$900 dollars left.
Make more money, you should pay more taxes. That’s fair.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Yeah, we get it, the election is ridiculous, so it would be nice if the Hannah Montana article was actually here to give people a break from the obvious ridiculousness of the election (obvious meaning, we don’t need it pointed out time and time again.)
October 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Is Joe Sixpack made of potatoes?
Oh sorry to lower the tone guys, I thought this was a comedy website not a roundtable financial debate.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I don’t think a flat tax is workable, honestly. It would fall victim to the same tax loopholes as the current tax system. I know that one of the qualifiers was that the flat tax system would have no tax loopholes, but, frankly, I’m not sure that could be done in the real world. It just looks good on paper and appeals to our sense of “fairness”. Not arguing that a flat tax (”flax”?) wouldn’t be nice, just saying I don’t think it could ever work. People (corporations mostly) will always “hide their money to avoid paying taxes”, whether taxes are 10% or 22% or whatever. It’s all about that bottom line.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
“CavalierX - i really hope that was a joke….”
What, a flat tax? Greatest. Idea. Ever. It’ll stop the government from picking the pockets of honest people to hand $700 billion dollars over to corporate executives. It’ll stop Congress from handing out special tax breaks and exemptions in return for votes. It’ll stop people from hiding their money so as to avoid paying taxes. It’ll stop the government from taxing businesses and laughing when those businesses simply raise their prices. It’ll even stop male pattern baldness, end the heartbreak of psoriasis and cure the common fucking cold. I’d vote for anyone I thought would really be able to give us a flat tax.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Haha Rumplemintz? so that 18 pack is Zima isn’t it?
October 17th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I want a candidate that speaks to me Joe “18 pack and 7 shot of Rumplemintz”.
Unfortunately that candidate would probably be a cab driver, hooker or law enforcement officer, who were generally the only people would speak to me after I consumed said alcohol.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
That’s: I think by definition ‘being put on the spot’ is part of the presidential candidate job description….oops.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
DOB - My “dared to ask a question” was meant to come with some sarcasm aimed at people who are holding him up as a hero or villifying him as a plant. Did he ask the question to put Obama on the spot? I think by definition that’s part of the presidential candidate job description.
As for the rest of what you said. I agree. I wish the issue could be discussed instead of shifting the focus or reduced to soundbites.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
I guess we know who you are voting for, dob.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Couldn’t you have at least added one little Hanna Montana joke? That little bitch has had it easy the past month and a half or whatever…where does Joe Sixpack and Joe Plumber stand on Hanna Montana euthanization?
October 17th, 2008 at 11:39 am
I so want that bumper sticker. The graphic is priceless, and it’s a perfect summary of the absurd fucktardery of America politics & media. Another good on, DOB.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:35 am
JJJS-
I don’t know if I’d say Joe “dared to ask an actual question of a politician,” like he’s some kind of brave crusader. He’s someone who stood to make a lot of money with his new business under McCain’s tax plan. He’d still make a lot with Obama’s, just less. He was aggravated, so he tried to put Obama on the spot, on camera.
Is this the way the system should work? Is it fair to Joe? Is the system fair to anyone? Instead of analyzing the situation, something that would take time, someone yells “SOCIALISM” and everyone runs away, because “Ergh, Socialism Bad, argh.” It’s a complicated issue without an easy solution, simplified to two soundbites “You’re gonna make me pay more money, aren’t you, Senator Obama” and “Senator Obama doesn’t want Joe the Plumber to have a small business that he’s worked on his whole life.”
October 17th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Genius. Then I propose Road Warrior/MasterBlaster in ‘12, then Cockroach/Bacteria ‘16.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:24 am
CavalierX - i really hope that was a joke….
October 17th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Yet another great satire. DOB, you rule.
I really don’t get this plumber business. A dude asks Obama to defend an actual policy. Something which the media has proven unfit to do with either candidate–which Cracked has done well to point out in previous blog entries. In return, the one who dared ask an actual question of a politician is the person looked on with scrutiny and investigated by the press. Or made into a hero. Or elected president. Whatever.
Keep it up.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:11 am
This could be my favorite DOB article.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:09 am
“Socialists” are the new communists. Fear-mongering is a hallmark of American politics, unfortunately.
Hey, when you pay taxes, where do you think that shit goes? Taxation in general is wealth redistribution. So I suppose paying taxes makes you a socialist. Which means I have to hate you. I’m sorry.
But I still love Joe the Plumber, since that dude doesn’t pay his taxes.
Vote Tits the Nun.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:40 am
BEST. CRACKED. ARTICLE.
EVER.
fuckin’ hysterical, man. perfect renditions of the two “heroes” of the election.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Amen Jarrod, Amen
October 17th, 2008 at 10:26 am
is this shit for real? good thing i registered as liberal….
October 17th, 2008 at 10:20 am
“It’s not socialism, it’s percentages. ”
Great, so let’s institute a flat tax and stop worrying about who’s paying a bigger percentage. If we all pay 10% of whatever we earn with no loopholes in which people can hide their income, what could possibly be more equal?
October 17th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Joe The Plumber is pretty fucking hot.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:18 am
No more politics. I come here to forget.
I seriously can’t take it anymore. You (O’Brien, Swaim, Bucholz) really need to knock it off with the “hey, ain’t this election” ridiculous??? Well, here’s our WAAAACKY take on it!” horseshit and get back to writing about bitter female rock songs, or the crappiest superheroes in comic book history. You know… What you’re GOOD at.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:07 am
It’s not socialism, it’s percentages. If you are profiting from the America system, it is your responsibility to maintain that system to maintain your profits.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:06 am
If I lived in the USA I’d vote for Joe Sixpack.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Funny Article though, DOB.
If only Gladstone would do a Hate by the Numbers piece on his previous Hate by the Numbers (the worst one ever).
That would just be a total mindfuck.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Where the fuck is Hannah Montana?
October 17th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Hey There, Bailoutbillions,
Your number of $4,913 per taxpayer is assuming we each pay an equal amount when taxed, which is certainly not true. The top 5% are paying around 70% of the taxes (if not more). So do they get a break? Plus, all of the people on the bottom certainly weren’t bitching when they got their $300.00 stimulus check for doing nothing this Spring (which those upper middle class and on up didn’t get). And if the spawn of satan herself, Nancy Pelosi, manages to pass this next stimulus package of even more money, there will be a second Christmas next year as well.
Not that either one is that great. Obama takes taxes and gives it to poor people. McCain takes taxes and gives it to businesses. Both are wealth distribution plans, just with different targest.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:46 am
This proves that DOB can’t keep his promises, and thus, if I were american, I’d be voting for Wolinsky.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:45 am
There’s a small problem with your logic, Bailout. Democrats supported both. They wrote the bailout giving money to rich people, and they go on camera talking about giving it to poor people. So really it’s just the middle class who suck in their book.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:44 am
We were promised an article about Hanna Montana.
I’m sad now…
October 17th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I dislike McCain, I hate Obama, I dislike Bob Barr, I loathe Cynthia McKenny, and hate Ralph Nadar. I truley have no candiate.
I guess I just have to vote for McCain and hope that he has to resign due to age, and Palin can take over.
Yeah, thats how much I dislike everyone else.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Am I the only one who thinks Joe SixPack looks kind of like a drunk Michael Keaton?
October 17th, 2008 at 9:31 am
bailoutbillions, I agree, and was totaly against the bailout. The nationalizing of fannie and freddy, the buying out of bad debt from banks ect and now McCain’s bullshit plan about buying out bad home mortgages to put a “floor” on the market are all socialist and it pisses me off to no end that either I have to vote for someone who is kind of socialist or someone who is REALLY socialist this election.
Were all fucked. For the love of God I just want the government to keep their dick out of the economy for just one day.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:27 am
really makes you think
but not that hard.
October 17th, 2008 at 9:15 am
According to the Census bureau, there are 142,490,656 Americans working for either the military or civilian corporations, and paying taxes. Giving $700 billion to Wall Street means taking $4,913 from each taxpayer and giving it to CEOs who are already rich. When I hear about “Socialism pure and simple” or complaints about wealth re-distribution, I have one response: shut the fuck up. We’re already doing it. Only now, it’s going from the bottom to the top to help the rich get richer in spite of their incompetence.
This doesn’t mean I support Obama’s idea for wealth re-distribution. It just means: either complain about both sides doing, or don’t complain about either side doing it.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:56 am
based off of*
October 17th, 2008 at 8:55 am
If the plumber dude was a plant, or a dude who just wanted to ask a question based of a made up story, I don’t really care. He asked a good qestion, and got an even better answer from Obama.
“I think that when people spread the wealth around, everyone does well” - Obama
Ladies and gentleman, that is socialism pure and simple.
Also, you said this was going to be a blog about Hannah Montana. WHERE THE HELL IS HANNAH MONTANA IN ALL THIS. I had a list of Mabism thought out.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:38 am
I’ve been hating all this Joe the Plumber bullshit. Thank you for pointing out a few of the holes in his story.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:33 am
I found this hilarious, and it did a good job of disarming something that probably will dupe people one way or another.
‘If elected, I promise the American People that no one will touch my money’
almost had me spewin coffee
October 17th, 2008 at 8:30 am
The best DOB since accidentally auditioning for a prono, and I do not say that lightly. Though I do say it twice if my comment doesn’t appear immediately.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:27 am
“Again, as stated in the Times, I resent being called a “peasant.” And if, as some have pointed out, Obama meant that I’m the greedy, evil corporation, I resent that, too. Hell, even if I’m supposed to be Robin Hood in this tricky, poorly-conceived metaphor, I’m still full of resentment.”
Around this point I cracked up and nearly had tea coming out of my nose.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:23 am
the part where he said “I’m Joe Six pack and I work hard” ?
all of a sudden “Oh I’m a lumberjack and I’m ok, I sleep all night and I work all day” popped into my head, now how the hell am I supposed to work with that damned song playing in my head all day? huh? how? damnit
October 17th, 2008 at 8:21 am
i like how these are humorous and still contain large amounts of truth. Great work.
October 17th, 2008 at 8:08 am
i’m dissapointed in you, mr. o’brien. i didn’t even laugh once at this. you can do much better than this.
October 17th, 2008 at 7:55 am
I’m definitely going to write them in on the ballot.
October 17th, 2008 at 7:35 am
God damn it, I shouldn’t have read it…
October 17th, 2008 at 7:35 am
first!
October 17th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Gimp! :o) ha ha
October 17th, 2008 at 7:33 am
This is a good idea. At the next British general election we shall put forward Joe’s long lost cousin for Prime Minister. His name is White Van Man. http://www.skynews.com/foreignmatters
October 17th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Fantastic. This was funny and did a great job pointing out the absurdity of this situation.
October 17th, 2008 at 7:33 am
You forgot that, you know… “Joe the Plumber” also happens to be a relative of Charles Keating: http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/joe-plumber-more-joe-keating-family-
Yeah, his close relations are some interesting people. We’re *really* supposed to believe he wasn’t a plant? SRSLY?
October 17th, 2008 at 7:31 am
FIRST