Posted by
Bob B on Sunday, October 19, 2008 8:26:46 PM
The first lesson Law students in Litigation 101 are taught is “When the evidence supports your case focus on the evidence. When the facts are against you, discredit the witnesses”.
Joe’s case is his opposition to having money he may earn taken from him and given to others who have not earned it. His evidence is Barack’s statement “we need to spread the wealth around”. The evidence is rock solid. The only defense is to discredit the witness. That is what we are seeing.
Nothing Obama supporters have said about Joe is relevant to the question at hand. The question is, doesn’t increasing taxation on small businesses discourage those who would endeavor to develop such a business? Whether Joe happens to be a licensed plumber in Toledo or someone named Sam with an unpaid bill for $1,200 has no bearing whatever on the question. Joe is a straw man.
The Democratic Party has acquired a reputation for being the Party of personal destruction. How do you suppose that reputation came to be? Could it be because they have had to fall back on the first lesson of Litigation 101 so often? Is it because it has worked so well that ethics be damned?
Seems to me it has become instinctive. What do you think?
Sorry, there is no joke here. But if you want to read a really funny comment on the subject of Joe go to this Mark Steyn column.