From The Columbus Dispatch, news from yesterday that you may have already seen regarding Ohio state employees conducting deep record searches on Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher. Somewhere, someone must have noted the most unbelievable part of the whole defense: The inspiration behind the searches.
Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, disclosed today that computer inquiries on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher were not restricted to a child-support system.The agency also checked Wurzelbacher in its computer systems to determine whether he was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes, she wrote.
Jones-Kelley made the revelations in a letter to Ohio Senate President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, who demanded answers on why state officials checked out Wurzelbacher.
Harris called the multiple records checks "questionable" and said he awaits more answers. "It's kind of like Big Brother is looking in your pocket," he said.
If state employees run checks on every person listed in newspaper stories as buying a business, "it must take a lot of people a lot of time to run these checks," he said. "Where do you draw the line?"
The checks were run after the news media reported that Wurzelbacher was considering buying a plumbing business with more than $250,000 in annual income, Jones-Kelley wrote.
Oh come on. How stupid does she think the public is? The inspiration behind the deep background searches - and the release of the information to media allies, mind you - was the revealing and damaging unscripted remarks Joe Wurzelbacher elicited from Barack Obama.
Why does Bill Harris, President of the Senate in Ohio, even afford this dissembling explanation any sense of plausibility?
Hardball is being played from the top of the campaign, to the grassroots individual actions to the 'underground' funneling money via the Obama campaign's intentionally fraud-friendly online campaign donation operation.
Yet Harris gives plausibility by responding that "it must take a lot of people a lot of time to run these checks. Where do you draw the line?"
His response should have been, "Oh, please. He was not being systematically destroyed because he said he wanted to buy a business, and Jones-Kelley's department's role in it wasn't because of that either."
When will Republicans stop showing up to a tackle football game with red and yellow flags hanging from their waists and unprepared for an impact sport?
NOTE: Such checks are run by state departments when an individual or group actually files to purchase a company, not when they express interest, whether on air or over a beer at the pub. That's the whole purpose of filling out the reams and reams of official forms and applications. Jones-Kelley's lying explanations should be treated as such, without equivocation.
I should lay off Bill Harris perhaps. He did, after all, demand the report in the first place. But for crying out loud, afford such abuse of government position and access by state employees no quarter when clearly lying through their teeth.




Comments (24)
The Obama campaign is VERY ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Justrand
| October 30, 2008 11:41 AM | Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
The Obama campaign is VERY successfully sending a VERY clear message to all Americans:
Do NOT mess with us!
Chicago Rules are not all that dis-similar to those of the old Soviet Union...oh heck, of the current Venezuela!
The Age of Obama (aka: the First Reich) will see these tactics used more and more effectively...and see the counter-voices (TalkRadio, Political Blogs, etc) silenced to a degree that will make Hugo Chavez envious!
1. Posted by Justrand
| October 30, 2008 11:41 AM |
Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 11:41
2. Posted by Roy | October 30, 2008 11:54 AM | Score: 9 (11 votes cast)
Perhaps, Justrand. However, we've got one thing the others didn't - guns and ammo.
2. Posted by Roy | October 30, 2008 11:54 AM |
Score: 9 (11 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 11:54
3. Posted by MagicalPat | October 30, 2008 11:56 AM | Score: 14 (14 votes cast)
Originally, Jones-Kelley said that she looks into anyone who makes the news.
Well, now that she has made the news, may we look into her finances?
3. Posted by MagicalPat | October 30, 2008 11:56 AM |
Score: 14 (14 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 11:56
4. Posted by Captain America | October 30, 2008 11:58 AM | Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
Right. So everyone who wants to own a business gets the deep dive?
I think it's time to open up a grand jury. Let's conduct individual interviews with members of the team that Jones-Kelley dispatched to do the skull thuggery.
The American people can smell a con and many of us are outraged.
4. Posted by Captain America | October 30, 2008 11:58 AM |
Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 11:58
5. Posted by Mark | October 30, 2008 12:01 PM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
"When will Republicans stop showing up to a tackle football game with red and yellow flags hanging from their waists and unprepared for an impact sport?"
After Watching the USSA for one year.......
5. Posted by Mark | October 30, 2008 12:01 PM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 12:01
6. Posted by Justrand
| October 30, 2008 12:38 PM | Score: 5 (7 votes cast)
Roy, exactly...which is why a full assault (pun intended) on the 2nd Amendment will be an early activity.
Oh, it'll be couched as: "Safety precautions", "Reducing crime", "Generating desperately needed revenue", etc...
and the method will VERY deceptive, I predict! They simply use the English system. Guns are NOT outlawed in England...AMMUNITION is (well...VERY tightly controlled).
So either restrict ammo...or put a "Special Tax" on it...say 500%??? If a box of .357 goes from $15 to $100 then it has the effect they desire without actually hitting the 2nd Amendment head-on!
and the SALES PITCH for this massive taxation??? Showing all the wonderful things the new revenue streams can do!!!
all too easy, I'm afraid
6. Posted by Justrand
| October 30, 2008 12:38 PM |
Score: 5 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 12:38
7. Posted by jim2 | October 30, 2008 12:40 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
I think it is obvious that anything negative or potentially discrediting on Joe would have found its way into the hands of the MSM.
This time they found nothing and are left chanting, "Nothing happening here. Move along", in hopes it will all blow over.
One thing I find amusing is that, if O wins, he may well throw them under that same crowded bus in the interests of "purity" because (like the others under there) they have served their purpose.
7. Posted by jim2 | October 30, 2008 12:40 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 12:40
8. Posted by Cambridgian | October 30, 2008 12:55 PM | Score: 3 (7 votes cast)
If this is to be full contact, then When are we going to get CNN and others to spend equal time asking to see Obama's Birht Certificate ?
How about the tape from LA Times where Obama is reportedly seen praising PLO Terrorists ?
Let's ROLL!
8. Posted by Cambridgian | October 30, 2008 12:55 PM |
Score: 3 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 12:55
9. Posted by Darren | October 30, 2008 1:14 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
The best possible interpretation would be to keep her talking, and generate more of her own statements to prove how unfounded they are. His answer invites her to invent another explanation, which is likely to be even less plausible than the first and second explanations.
Once they get in session and explore this he lays out her first answer, then destroys it, then her second answer and destroys that one, then the third and finally, her credibility in tatters, he offers his own explanation that is more plausible than anything that has come out of the woman's own mouth.
Hopefully he's waiting for the Big Takedown. Patience can be a virtue in cases like these. The reported facts alone should make independents worry about a police state where flunkies curry favor by releasing your personal information, that will suffice until 11/4.
The hammer, one hopes, will fall on clowns like this particular woman after the election.
9. Posted by Darren | October 30, 2008 1:14 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 13:14
10. Posted by Mike | October 30, 2008 1:25 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Steve wrote,
Bingo! My thoughts exactly when I read her totally idiotic explanation.
Likewise, Jones-Kelly's further statement that Joe The Plumber was "receiving significant media attention which suggests that the person appears to have available financial resources" is utterly ridiculous.
If simply being shown on camera, asking a political candidate a question based on what a person is "thinking about" is now considered "significant media attention" and proof of "available finances" then Jones-Kelly is a horse's ass.
By her standards, anyone who publicizes a future goal of attaining wealth is immediately considered a fair target for a state investigation, on the assumption that you wouldn't be telling your dream to someone else unless you already had the "available finances" to make your dream into an immediate reality?
What a load of nonsense.
10. Posted by Mike | October 30, 2008 1:25 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 13:25
11. Posted by Chad | October 30, 2008 2:25 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Well, I guess it's time to celebrate. Lee has declared me a troll and banned me. All because he refused to admit that he lied about a video clip. And because I asked him what made me a racist, being against Obama, or against reparations for slavery. It's nice to see he's so rational. Some of you that aren't banned might want to go over and say hi for me. Joe the plumber should have all the same rights to privacy as you and I, but not in a socialist America. Thank you all you socialist beaurocrats out there for showing your true colors.
11. Posted by Chad | October 30, 2008 2:25 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 14:25
12. Posted by Chad | October 30, 2008 2:53 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Lee Wards idea of fact-checking is "I disagree with you, you lied, you're banned" even when you can prove him wrong. What a joke.
12. Posted by Chad | October 30, 2008 2:53 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 14:53
13. Posted by Larry | October 30, 2008 3:44 PM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Unfortunately, Lee Ward represents a class of Liberal that tolerates no disagreement, even one supported by the facts. Now imagine that class of person in charge of the government.
Why does Kevin put up with Ward's crap?
13. Posted by Larry | October 30, 2008 3:44 PM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 15:44
14. Posted by Michael | October 30, 2008 4:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Where are the likes of Brian and Herman to defend this outrage? They are all fascists.
14. Posted by Michael | October 30, 2008 4:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 16:37
15. Posted by Doodad Pro | October 30, 2008 4:40 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Joe probably doesn't use Facebook or Gmail.
Good thing because if he did the Obamatroids who work for those companies might very well have outed all of his personal information.
15. Posted by Doodad Pro | October 30, 2008 4:40 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 16:40
16. Posted by Oyster | October 30, 2008 4:59 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"...even when you can prove him wrong."
Chad, especially when you prove him wrong.
Gratz on your banning!
16. Posted by Oyster | October 30, 2008 4:59 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 16:59
17. Posted by OLDPUPPYMAX | October 30, 2008 5:02 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It was the craven cowardice of republicans, coupled with the RINOs penchant for selling out the nation and the American people which lead to their defeat in 2006. Things haven't changed and never will as long as the party is "led" by NE country club liberals.
17. Posted by OLDPUPPYMAX | October 30, 2008 5:02 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 17:02
18. Posted by Tom Blogical
| October 30, 2008 5:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Come to Ohio! We've gotcher voter/voter registration fraud right here! Need someone intimidated? No problem, our Dept. of Job and Family Services will get right on it!
Makes me so proud to be a Buckeye.
OT: I've had some pretty good disagreements with Lee, but I've never been banned. Then again, I rarely ever visit that fever swamp.
18. Posted by Tom Blogical
| October 30, 2008 5:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 17:34
19. Posted by Mac Lorry | October 30, 2008 5:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
That's only true for publicly held companies. Lots of small business are LLC, or Sub-chapter S corporations. There's no such red tape with these because there's no publicly traded stock. It almost certain that the business Joe was talking about buying is not publicly traded.
19. Posted by Mac Lorry | October 30, 2008 5:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 17:35
20. Posted by Oyster | October 30, 2008 5:38 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
That's right, Mac. No one delved into my background when I bought a music store.
20. Posted by Oyster | October 30, 2008 5:38 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 17:38
21. Posted by Les Nessman | October 30, 2008 6:06 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
The checks were run after the news media reported that Wurzelbacher was considering buying a plumbing business with more than $250,000 in annual income, Jones-Kelley wrote.
WTF? If that is true, then Jones-Kelley is behaving like a kommisar in a police state. If it is not true, then they were digging up private info for political reasons.
Either way, it's dirty. I hope there is a full investigation into this abuse of power.
21. Posted by Les Nessman | October 30, 2008 6:06 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 18:06
22. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | October 30, 2008 6:48 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I wonder how long before Hooson comes over to tell us how he was "checked" when he bought his many, many companies, inherited his extensive real estate holdings (with historical buildings you can wiki!) and became the King of Siam. And how none of it was the least bit inconvenient or prying...
22. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | October 30, 2008 6:48 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 18:48
23. Posted by twolaneflash | October 30, 2008 6:50 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
leeward = on the side to which the wind is blowing. Lee Ward: still a blowhard.
23. Posted by twolaneflash | October 30, 2008 6:50 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 18:50
24. Posted by Tom Blogical
| October 30, 2008 7:04 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
SCSIwuzzy:
Way to go! Now he's sure to do it! ;-)
24. Posted by Tom Blogical
| October 30, 2008 7:04 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 30, 2008 19:04