The Paul Ryan Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I still agree with Bill Maher, that a single payer system should have been sold as Medicare for everyone, because that sign proves that some people don't see Medicare as socialized medicine.
 
The worst part is that Republicans repeatedly cite how 'unpopular' the ACA is. Yet a 'public option' was extremely popular, yet gained no traction.
 
[quote name='IRHari']The worst part is that Republicans repeatedly cite how 'unpopular' the ACA is. Yet a 'public option' was extremely popular, yet gained no traction.[/QUOTE]

...when the Democrats controlled both haves of Congress and the White House...
 
Whoosh, its about consistency. If you're going to defer to public opinion when it comes to passing legislation, then Republicans should have been pushing for the public option since it was extremely popular.
 
You want consistency? From politicians?

The only thing that's consistent is that politicians will do what they can that they believe will get them in power and keep them in power.
 
You remind me of a guy I used to work with, when he couldn't defend the conservative viewpoint he'd just resort to the old "politicians lolllllll" argument.
 
[quote name='Clak']You remind me of a guy I used to work with, when he couldn't defend the conservative viewpoint he'd just resort to the old "politicians lolllllll" argument.[/QUOTE]

My purpose isn't to defend the conservative viewpoint - and you're going to be sadly disappointed if you expect me to.

I'm amused and saddened by how many times I plainly state that I'm not "Republican" or "Conservative", then people come out and flatly accuse me of being nothing but an (R) Water Boy... then, the next day, complain that I do a crappy job promoting/defending Republican/Conservative talking points.
 
Oh get off your horse bob, I'm not a registered democrat but it's obvious I'm a liberal, as obvious as it is that you're mostly conservative. We think you do a crappy job of defending viewpoints because your arguments usually hold as much water as a paper bag. You cna be a conservative without being a republican.
 
None of that really explains why the public option gained no traction when the Democrats had a super majority, now does it? Which, of course, was the comment I made at that beginning.
 
Mostly because the plan wasn't sold all that well and Congresswoman Pelosi made that ridiculous "we need to pass it to find out what's in it" comment which pretty much sunk the whole thing in the talk radio world.
 
[quote name='nasum']Mostly because the plan wasn't sold all that well and Congresswoman Pelosi made that ridiculous "we need to pass it to find out what's in it" comment which pretty much sunk the whole thing in the talk radio world.[/QUOTE]

Does not compute.

No one in talk radio - and the vast majority of those who would be swayed by what is said on right-wing talk radio - would have an opinion that would make a bit of difference to anyone on the (D) ticket anyway. So why would the Democrat-Controlled Congress and White House care what the minority opinion of talk radio listeners are if the Public Option plan is so popular?

[quote name='Clak']Skillfully deflected.[/QUOTE]
Yes, you're right. I deflected your baseless accusations that I'm a conservative that doesn't do a good enough job defending conservative view points with a statement that said I'm not a conservative.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Maybe we could talk about Paul Ryan in the Paul Ryan thread?
[/QUOTE]

I dunno. You might ask permission from that guy earlier on the last page who took the thread in to the usual "I don't agree with this poster, so I'm going to attack them and call them names" territory.
 
Didn't Ryan's plan say unemployment would be at like 2.8% or something unrealistically low like that if it was passed? And that 2.8% was so crazy that the Heritage foundation wiped it from their website?
 
Yep. 8.6% unemployment by the end of 2012, 2.8% unemployment by 2022. To call it voodoo economics would be a disservice to practitioners of voodoo.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I dunno. You might ask permission from that guy earlier on the last page who took the thread in to the usual "I don't agree with this poster, so I'm going to attack them and call them names" territory.[/QUOTE]

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries.

RE: Previous post directed at me
That's the funny thing about the polls, depending on your pool you may get the wrong answer. To use your very correct assertion that politicians are only reliable when trying to stay in the job, once the polls were down on "Obamacare" it was time to jump ship and vote for it before not voting for it.
The whole thing has really been a PR nightmare and until President Obama figures out how to self promote now that he has the job, most of his policies won't be well received by the public. Sadly he's nearly as much of a dismal failure as the last guy, but at least the last guy had the gumption to get his policies passed (misdirected as they were) while this guy can barely meet his campaign promises on one hand and getting egg on his face on the other when he just ignores other promises.
 
You can't say stupid shit and not expect someone to call you on saying stupid shit. It isn't about agreeing or disagreeing, it's about the stupid shit that is sometimes posted on here. And if it were an honest mistake, that's one thing, but it isn't.
 
However, two ideological factors caused most Southern whites, including those who were not slave-owners, to defend slavery. First, Americans are wondrous optimists, looking to the upper class and expecting to join it someday. In 1860, many subsistence farmers aspired to become large slave-owners. So poor white Southerners supported slavery then, just as many low-income people support the extension of George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy now.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...e-south-seceded/2011/01/03/ABHr6jD_story.html

:lol: Optimism
 
I've got to say, the "Bush tax cuts for the wealthy" is complete BS. EVERY tax bracket went down.
 
But they're talking specifically about the cuts that applied to the wealthy, the ones we (liberals) wanted to see expire.
 
What Clak said. Most folks just wanted to keep the tax cuts for the lower 95% (i.e.: their's) and wanted the evil rich people's taxes to go up.

I will give credit where credit is due and say there were more than a few people who said they'd support ending all the tax cuts, across the board.
 
Interesting to see Ron Paul among the 4 GOP Congresspersons who voted against this bill - particularly when there are people in this thread who defend this unicorn magic budget bill in the same breath they deny being conservatives, saying they identify more with Ron Paul.
 
I would have been shocked had he voted for it. It would have been the first time he's voted for an unbalanced budget.

Meanwhile:

Paul Ryan on Bailouts and Government Stimuli
-Voted YES on TARP (2008) (you should see the video of him literally begging on the House floor for this to pass)
-Voted YES on Economic Stimulus HR 5140 (2008)
-Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
-Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

Paul Ryan on Entitlement Programs
-Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
-Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)
-Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)
-Voted YES on Head Start Act (2007)

Paul Ryan on Education
-Voted YES on No Child Left Behind Act (2001)

Paul Ryan on Civil Liberties
-Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005)
-Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
-Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)

Paul Ryan on War and Intervention Abroad
-Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)
-Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)
-Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
-Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)

Limited government conservative? Hardly. Paul Ryan isn't a serious individual, and neither is his budget.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']-Voted YES on TARP (2008) (you should see the video of him literally begging on the House floor for this to pass)[/QUOTE]

Got a link? I'd like to see that.
 
So...9+ months for ACA, and 2 weeks for dismantling Medicare as we know it?

Awesome find on that Ryan speech FtA. I heard Obama finally laid into Ryan's hypocrisy on the deficit during a fundraiser.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Interesting to see Ron Paul among the 4 GOP Congresspersons who voted against this bill - particularly when there are people in this thread who defend this unicorn magic budget bill in the same breath they deny being conservatives, saying they identify more with Ron Paul.[/QUOTE]

Has anyone on here defended this bill? Anyone?

Or is someone making stuff up... again?
 
[quote name='IRHari']So...9+ months for ACA, and 2 weeks for dismantling Medicare as we know it?

Awesome find on that Ryan speech FtA. I heard Obama finally laid into Ryan's hypocrisy on the deficit during a fundraiser.[/QUOTE]Yeah and no, he did, but he didn't mean for anyone to hear it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theti..._theticket/obama-caught-on-audio-slamming-gop
"I said, 'You want to repeal health care? Go at it. We'll have that debate. But you're not going to be able to do that by nickel-and-diming me in the budget. You think we're stupid?'" the president said.
Click to expand...
 
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/16/civility-is-the-last-refuge-of-scoundrels/

The easy, and perfectly fair, shot is to talk about the hypocrisy here; where were all the demands for civility when Republicans were denouncing Obama as a socialist, accusing him of creating death panels, etc..? Why is it OK for Republicans to accuse Obama of stealing from Medicare, but not OK for Obama to declare, with complete truthfulness, that those same Republicans are trying to dismantle the whole program?

Beyond that, are we dealing with children here? Is one of our two major political parties run by people so immature that they will refuse to do what the country needs because the president hasn’t been nice to them?

But the main point is, what are we supposed to have a civil discussion about? The truth is that the two parties have both utterly different goals and utterly different views about how the world works.

It’s not nice to say this (but the truth is rarely nice): whatever they may say, Republicans are not concerned, above all, about the deficit. In fact, it’s not clear that they care about the deficit at all; they’re trying to use deficit concerns to push through their goal of dismantling the Great Society and if possible the New Deal; they have stated explicitly that they want to reduce taxes on high incomes to pre-New-Deal levels. And it’s an article of faith on their part that low taxes have magical effects on the economy.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Interesting to see Ron Paul among the 4 GOP Congresspersons who voted against this bill - particularly when there are people in this thread who defend this unicorn magic budget bill in the same breath they deny being conservatives, saying they identify more with Ron Paul.[/QUOTE]

Not surprised at all, it's RON PAUL after all.

Who were the other 3?
 
Walter Jones of North Carolina, David McKinley of West Virginia, and Denny Rehberg of Montana.

Walter Jones is pretty strongly anti-war, is against the PATRIOT Act, has recently flipped against the War On Drugs, and is against rigged Free Trade agreements. Bit too populist for my taste when it comes to tariffs and too socially conservative, but the Republican Party would be a'ight if it had 100 or so likeminded peeps.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']Walter Jones of North Carolina, David McKinley of West Virginia, and Denny Rehberg of Montana.

Walter Jones is pretty strongly anti-war, is against the PATRIOT Act, has recently flipped against the War On Drugs, and is against rigged Free Trade agreements. Bit too populist for my taste when it comes to tariffs and too socially conservative, but the Republican Party would be a'ight if it had 100 or so likeminded peeps.[/QUOTE]

I like Walter Jones. His district includes Camp Lejeune and he's still anti-war. He's using his own eyes to see the effects of the last decade and doing what's best for his constituents instead of the Republican Party. He might be a little too socially conservative but that matches his district.
 
It's interesting to hear about such variation in Congresspersons. We know better than to act like the Republican party is "all these right-wing dipshits and Ron Paul," but outside of some Olympia Snowe types, most of the people whose votes do vary on issues go MIA in terms of media coverage (outside of their own districts).

And we bloody well know that the Democratic Party isn't similarly in lockstep, either - since we know they're a bunch of goddamned wimps who bend over for anything.

But, hey, good for those 3/265+ Republicans.
 
Hey, can we talk about Paul Ryan in the Paul Ryan thread? Or, at least can we talk about those mythical people that supposedly defended Paul Ryan's budget in this thread? Because I'm still looking for those guys. I suppose the one person I have on ignore could have been defending it, but I highly, highly doubt that to be the case.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']It's interesting to hear about such variation in Congresspersons. We know better than to act like the Republican party is "all these right-wing dipshits and Ron Paul," but outside of some Olympia Snowe types, most of the people whose votes do vary on issues go MIA in terms of media coverage (outside of their own districts).

And we bloody well know that the Democratic Party isn't similarly in lockstep, either - since we know they're a bunch of goddamned wimps who bend over for anything.

But, hey, good for those 3/265+ Republicans.[/QUOTE]

Justin Amash, first-term rep from Michigan, is another anti-war/anti-PATRIOT Act Republican. He's more Ron Paul than Walter Jones, but those three will probably combine to draft a few bills. Mike Lee is a Senator who holds similar beliefs. Also a first-term guy. He's teamed up with Rand Paul for a few issues. Joe Miller ran a terrible campaign, but was also anti-war/anti-PATRIOT Act (I think anti-drug war, too). Ken Buck seemed to be against the war and PATRIOT Act, but I'm not quite sure if it was an act or not. BJ Lawson and Adam Kokesh lost their races in the House. Could have been a really nice year for non-establishment Republicans, didn't quite shake out that way.

depascal:

I agree, Jones is pretty good. I sometimes let perfect be the enemy of good.
 
Guess you missed those Weiner vs. Bachmann episodes of Hannity. Pretty lawltastic.

Hopefully we won't see Republicans complaining about being demagogued. I'm pretty sure every GOP federal election commercial I saw in 2010 tried to hit the Democrats for cutting Medicare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top