Skip to main content

A**hole of the Year - Joe the Plumber (and it's not even June)

Starting next year, next to the words "insensitive," "jerk," "prick," and "douche" in the dictionary will be a picture of Samuel Wurzelbacher, or as he's better known, Joe the Plumber.

Following the recent Santa Barbara shooting rampage, Wurzelbacher wrote an open letter to the victims' families, where he actually said this:

"I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through right now. But: As harsh as this sounds -- your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional rights."

He then claimed that pro-gun control activists "don't care about your family or your dead children at all," before following that up with this:

"They sound like they do, whereas I sound uncaring and like I say, harsh. Don't be fooled - I care about your family and mine. The future of our very liberty lies in the balance of this fight."

Joe the Plumber is half right regarding that final quote. He does sound uncaring, but I wouldn't label his statement "harsh." While he sounds uncaring, he also sounds like an idiot, and the epitome of a first-class jerk.

Wurzelbacher doesn't care about these victims' families or the thousands of other families whom are affected by gun violence. He just cares about his delusion of having total freedom with regard to firearms and his paranoia about the government controlling his every thought and action. He claims the "future of our liberty lies in the balance of this fight" - the fight to ensure "complete" freedom with regard to guns. Yet the combination of an insane individual and a gun will prohibit these victims from ever seeing the future. They'll never live to see tomorrow. They'll never live to laugh or smile again. They'll never be able to fight for what they feel are worthy causes to move this country forward. They'll never be able to look Samuel Wurzelbacher in the eyes, stand up for the victims of gun violence, and do everything in their power to decrease the frequency of such happenings. If only we had done a better job of that before the tragedy occurred, they may still be alive today. Of course, according to Wurzelbacher, this would be an example of not caring about the victims of gun violence. With that kind of logic, those whom stand up for minorities' equal rights are racists, those whom stand up for women's equal rights are sexists, and those whom try to reduce child abuse are abusers themselves. Here I thought Joe the Plumber couldn't sound any dumber. Not only is Joe the Plumber the Douche of the Day, he's the a**hole of the year - and it's not even June. Congratulations, and how about looking those victims' families in the eyes and telling them what you wrote in an open letter. Yeah - best of luck with that...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/27/joe-the-plumber-guns_n_5397981.html

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/joe-the-plumber-guns-politicians

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"