Paul Ryan Budget has ZERO cuts in military spending. Nice job buddy. :roll:
Did you expect there would be?
I hope the budget has provisions for returning military who can not find jobs with the current
problems. I want them taken care of... actually I hope to hire some if the economy can improve.
Except Ryans budget cuts spending for veterans by $11 billion
You know one thing people haven't talked about too much...
Paul Ryan has never even run for statewide office. This guy is going to be thrown to the wolves, perhaps in an even more extreme say than Sarah Palin was. I understand he is smarter than Palin, but at least she had run for a statewide office.
This op-ed is biased, but I think underscores the challenges he's going to face.
It was not exactly the kickoff Ryan and Romney wanted, but it did help to establish why Romney chose the young House Budget Committee chairman as his running mate: Ryan is almost as awkward as Romney.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Paul Ryan Budget has ZERO cuts in military spending. Nice job buddy. :roll:
Did you expect there would be?
I hope the budget has provisions for returning military who can not find jobs with the current
problems. I want them taken care of... actually I hope to hire some if the economy can improve.
Except Ryans budget cuts spending for veterans by $11 billion
"Military spending" does nothing to get jobs for veterans after they come home. Nothing in Ryan's budget does anything to make jobs for anyone, really. For a campaign that wanted to talk about jobs, it really is a curious choice.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
You know one thing people haven't talked about too much...
Paul Ryan has never even run for statewide office. This guy is going to be thrown to the wolves, perhaps in an even more extreme say than Sarah Palin was. I understand he is smarter than Palin, but at least she had run for a statewide office.
This op-ed is biased, but I think underscores the challenges he's going to face.
It was not exactly the kickoff Ryan and Romney wanted, but it did help to establish why Romney chose the young House Budget Committee chairman as his running mate: Ryan is almost as awkward as Romney.
he is coming straight from congress... the white house and election race is a very different animal. agreed he will find it tough and if they lose come November may hurt his career for decades.
I'm just flying around the other side of the world to say I love you
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
Besides, when these corporations are more regulated, all they do is fund politicians that vote and address legislation in their favor. By taking that away, you take away the power they seek.
shhhh
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
GOP pros fret over Paul Ryan
By: Alexander Burns and Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Martin
August 14, 2012 04:30 AM EDT
You’ve heard them on television and read them on POLITICO — cheerful, defiant statements from Republican political professionals about Mitt Romney’s bold masterstroke in tapping Paul Ryan as his running mate, and turning the 2012 presidential race into a serious, far-reaching debate about budgets and the nation’s future.
Don’t buy it.
Away from the cameras, and with all the usual assurances that people aren’t being quoted by name, there is an unmistakable consensus among Republican operatives in Washington: Romney has taken a risk with Ryan that has only a modest chance of going right — and a huge chance of going horribly wrong.
(PHOTOS: Scenes from Romney's VP announcement)
In more than three dozen interviews with Republican strategists and campaign operatives — old hands and rising next-generation conservatives alike — the most common reactions to Ryan ranged from gnawing apprehension to hair-on-fire anger that Romney has practically ceded the election.
It is not that the public professions of excitement about the Ryan selection are totally insincere. It is that many of the most optimistic Republican operatives will privately acknowledge that their views are being shaped more by fingers-crossed hope than by a hard-headed appraisal of what’s most likely to happen.
(PHOTOS: Paul Ryan hearts charts)
And the more pessimistic strategists don’t even feign good cheer: They think the Ryan pick is a disaster for the GOP. Many of these people don’t care that much about Romney — they always felt he faced an improbable path to victory — but are worried that Ryan’s vocal views about overhauling Medicare will be a millstone for other GOP candidates in critical House and Senate races.
Let’s get to the caveats: No one is asserting that Washington operatives in either party are oracles or seers. What’s more, it is not as if there is anything like unanimity in GOP circles about the merits of the Ryan pick, though the mood of anxiety and skepticism is overwhelming.
Most of all, if you are one of those people who thinks if someone has something negative to say, they should have the guts to put their name on it, you won’t find much to impress you in this article. Nearly all the Republican professionals interviewed for this story said they would share their unfiltered views only “on background” rules of attribution.
(PHOTOS: Paul Ryan through the years)
But Washington political chatter is a pervasive reality even when the chatterers prefer not to risk personal relationships or professional prospects by publicly second-guessing their party’s nominee. For Romney, even if he ultimately proves the doubters wrong, the skepticism among capital insiders is an obstacle as he seeks to frame a general election argument.
And that skepticism about Ryan among GOP strategists is striking.
They’re worried about inviting Medicare — usually death for Republicans — into the campaign. They’re worried it sidetracks the jobs issue. They’re worried he’ll expose the fact that Romney doesn’t have a budget plan. Most of all, they’re worried that Romney was on track to lose anyway — and now that feels all but certain.
(Also on POLITICO: Ryan alters campaign's dynamic)
“I think it’s a very bold choice. And an exciting and interesting pick. It’s going to elevate the campaign into a debate over big ideas. It means Romney-Ryan can run on principles and provide some real direction and vision for the Republican Party. And probably lose. Maybe big,” said former President George W. Bush senior adviser Mark McKinnon.
“Whether or not they [the Romney campaign] want to say that they have their own plan on Day One, or whatever they’re doing, it doesn’t change the reality of them having to own the Ryan plan. How is that in the wheelhouse of creating jobs?” added a GOP consultant.
Joked another: “The most popular phrase in Washington right now is: ‘I love Paul Ryan, but …’”
“This could be the defining moment of the campaign. If they win the battle to define Medicare, then I believe Romney wins the presidency. If they lose it, then they lose big in the fall,” the same strategist said, acknowledging that Romney had to choose from a flawed list of VP options.
The most cutting criticism of Ryan, shared only by a handful of strategists, is that Ryan isn’t ready to be president — or doesn’t come across as ready. A youthful man who looks even younger than his 42 years, Ryan could end up labeled as Sarah Palin with a PowerPoint presentation, several operatives said.
“He just doesn’t seem like he can step into the job on Day One,” said the strategist, who professed himself a Ryan fan.
And that’s just what it does to the Romney-Ryan ticket. Forget how it plays in close House and Senate races.
“Very not helpful down ballot — very,” said one top Republican consultant.
“This is the day the music died,” one Republican operative involved in 2012 races said after the rollout. The operative said that every House candidate now is racing to get ahead of this issue.
Another strategist emailed midway through Romney and Ryan’s first joint event Saturday: “The good news is that this ticket now has a vision. The bad news is that vision is basically just a chart of numbers used to justify policies that are extremely unpopular.”
The Romney campaign isn’t oblivious to Republican skittishness about the pick. In fact, several sources close to the Romney campaign said that top advisers to the candidate initially favored Tim Pawlenty as a “do no harm” choice for the vice presidency, and that even late in the process some leaned toward Ohio Sen. Rob Portman as a running mate who would bring gravitas and governing heft to the ticket — without Ryan’s obvious risks.
Sources close to the selection process tell POLITICO that within the Romney campaign, there was considerable unease about picking Ryan — but also a recognition that each of the possible picks for running mate had drawbacks to varying degrees.
With Ryan, some on the campaign feared that his first and most crucial days on the trail would be consumed with answering charges about his views on entitlements and completely get the ticket away from its economic message. That’s the signal concern now among the Republican worrywarts.
Asked about alarm in the consultant class about the Ryan selection, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said Ryan’s selection would allow Romney to campaign on big ideas and argued: “The excitement is on our side.”
“President Obama and his Democrat allies have done everything imaginable to keep from talking about the issues and President Obama’s failed record and to make this big election about small things,” she said. “This election will be about the issues and President Obama’s inability to get this economy going, regardless of how small President Obama and the Democrats try to make it.”
Strategists across the party call that the absolute best-case scenario for the Romney campaign and everyone else involved: President Barack Obama gets forced into a policy debate on ground where Republicans are most comfortable, Republicans counterpunch hard on the Affordable Care Act and Democrat-approved spending reductions in Medicare, and Romney roars into November with an energized Republican base behind him.
Longtime GOP presidential strategist Charlie Black conveyed that view of the race: “We have plenty of time and money and four debates to air out this Medicare reform issue. And I think we win on it when we air it out.”
Still, that remains a complicated way of saying Romney now needs to win a titanic clash of contrasting policies and ideologies. That may be a good deal harder than treating the 2012 campaign as a pure up-or-down vote on Obama and his handling of the economy.
“It turned a referendum into a choice,” said one Washington Republican lawyer. “[Choosing Ryan] forfeited the no-real-world-experience point Romney has been building up for months [about Obama] and put a new state in play that was otherwise trending his way [Florida].”
A top Republican in the 2012 campaign expressed doubt that even a protracted fight about the national debt would produce the kind of outcome Republicans are looking for: “My polling says that while the debt does matter to people, (a) they don’t really like any of the things we would have to do to fix it and (b) the economy has roared back as the No. 1 issue in every battleground state, eclipsing the issue that Ryan brings to the fore.”
Republicans are not (evidently) at the point of publicly breaking ranks with Romney and Ryan, and may never get there. After all, Romney is still the presidential nominee and Ryan commands deep respect — even awe — in many corners of the party. Several have noticed that Romney seems more energized since Ryan joined the ticket and that their chemistry seems real.
Yet the Romney campaign has quieted few doubts in the 36 hours since announcing Ryan for vice president. The Republican presidential nominee has endured withering press coverage in senior-heavy Florida and dodged questions about where his views on Medicare differ from Ryan’s.
The longer Republicans have to litigate this issue instead of campaigning on jobs and the economy, strategists say, the more ground they will lose against Obama and the greater the odds that Romney will drag down other members of his party.
The short-term trajectory of the race could turn around quickly if Romney’s able to deliver a clear and consistent message on Medicare that parries Democratic attacks and sends him into the Republican National Convention at the end of the month in Tampa with momentum behind him. Ryan’s first visit to Florida this coming weekend will be an important test.
Republican consultant Terry Nelson is hoping that a big debate on the presidential level will make it tougher for Democrats to mischaracterize the debate down ballot, where many Republican candidates in the House and Senate have already taken votes in favor of the Ryan plan. The more Romney and Ryan have to defend Ryan’s plan in the presidential race, the more they’ll provide air cover for other candidates.
Nelson believes, too, that if and when Romney comes out with a plan, that’s what will matter. “What matters is not where Paul Ryan stands, what matters is where Mitt Romney stands. The Romney campaign may make its own proposal on Medicare, Social Security and the budget. At the end of the day, that will be the more important debate,” he said.
Since Saturday, however, the actions of campaigns on both sides of the 2012 race have effectively spoken for themselves on the importance Ryan’s plan may have in the race: Democrats have launched, almost by reflex, into a full-scale “Medi-scare” campaign while Republicans have rushed to blunt that argument with attacks on Obama’s health care plan.
Yet another operative deeply involved in the 2012 campaign said that in “every competitive race in the country, strategists have held conference calls in the last 48 hours to try to figure out how to be on offense on this. A week ago we were talking about jobs, and this week we’re talking about entitlement reform.”
“Everybody loves Paul Ryan. Everybody supported the Ryan plan,” the strategist said. “But nobody thinks Ryan should be the tip of the spear.”
Well — not literally “nobody.”
“I am personally and politically ecstatic,” said veteran Republican strategist Mary Matalin, whose publishing house imprint produced a “Young Guns” book co-authored by Ryan. “I have heard from all quarters of the party and have heard nothing but ecstatic shock and awe. What everyone wanted was a campaign and presidency of purpose with a mandate for reform. In addition to the issue excitement, there were universal accolades for the manner, method and substance of Romney’s decision-making process.” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/08 ... html?hp=t1
My main obsession these days is President Obama’s misunderstood stimulus bill—why, yes, thanks for asking, The New New Deal did come out today—but I’m also fascinated by the partisan Republican budget-buster Paul Ryan and his absurd reputation as a brave deficit hawk. So I thought I’d check out Ryan’s positions on the stimulus. Let’s just say they won’t surprise those of us familiar with his work.
Ryan made his skepticism about stimulus clear in a Roll Call op-ed just a month after Obama’s election, complaining, as he always does whenever a Democrat wants to spend money, that it would add to deficits and debt. He also took aim at “the most recent example of stimulus failure,” the $168 billion stimulus package that President Bush had enacted earlier in the year, consisting mainly of tax rebates to American families. “Instead of spending the extra cash, as proponents had hoped, most recipients simply paid off bills or saved the money,” Ryan declared.
Funny, Ryan somehow forgot to mention that he was one of those proponents. He had voted for the Bush stimulus, along with the Bush tax cuts, the Bush wars, the Bush security spending binge, the Bush prescription drug benefit, the Bush highway bill that included the Bridge to Nowhere, and the Bush bank bailout. Fiscal conservatism!
Ryan did oppose the Obama stimulus, as did every other House Republican. But as I describe in my book, there was an interesting behind-the-scenes debate going on within the GOP caucus about what Republicans should support instead, and it’s telling to see where Ryan ended up.
One side, call it the political side, was led by Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. He’s a staunch conservative, but his top priority was making sure the Republican vote on the Obama bill was unanimous. So he wanted to stage a vote on a GOP alternative that had plenty of highway projects and other spending that Republican moderates and concrete lovers could support, so they would have something to say yes to while saying no to Obama. The other side, call it the ideological side, was led by Conference Chair Mike Pence of Indiana, who argued that the whole point of fiscal conservatism was opposing government spending, that the Republicans shouldn’t be trying to out-New Deal the Democrats.
“You can’t say spending does nothing for economic growth and then on the other hand, let’s put it all in highways,” one conservative leadership aide recalled.
So the Republican leadership, as former Democratic congressman David Obey put it, decided to fall off both sides of the horse. The official $478 billion Republican stimulus alternative was an ideological bill, consisting entirely of tax cuts and unemployment benefits, with not a penny for infrastructure or other spending. But Republicans also crafted a second $715 billion substitute that was almost as expansive as the $787 billion bill Obama signed into law. It slashed spending on Obama priorities like energy efficiency, the smart grid, summer jobs programs, and aid to help cash-strapped states avoid massive layoffs of teachers and cops, but it actually increased spending on highways and the environmentally destructive water projects of the Army Corps of Engineers.
Republicans never explained how $715 billion worth of tax cuts and spending could be good public policy while $787 billion worth of tax cuts and spending was freedom-crushing socialism. In the minority, they didn’t have to. And Paul Ryan? As usual, he fell off both sides of the horse. He voted for the ideological tax-cut bill that would have increased the deficit, and the political spending bill that would have increased the deficit. And then he railed about Obama and the Democrats increasing the deficit.
“They shocked the American people,” he later explained. “They certainly shocked me…Bam! Out of the gates, these people had a hard-core left agenda…They used the rhetoric of freedom and choice and opportunity to sell an inherently statist agenda.”
Yes, the rhetoric of choice and opportunity. Like the rhetoric a certain congressman from Wisconsin used on October 7, 2009, when he wrote Labor Secretary Hilda Solis to push a stimulus grant for a local group.
“I have reviewed the Energy Center of Wisconsin’s grant narrative, and I believe that they would make effective use of the funds,” Ryan wrote. He noted that they would “develop an industry-driven training and placement agenda that intends to place 1,000 workers in green jobs.” Ryan also wrote several letters to the Energy Department, seeking stimulus for local groups that would help retrofit homes and businesses to “reduce their energy costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the local economy by creating new jobs.”
Courage!
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
hmm ... time to start buying gold and canned goods.
OUCH - that's gonna hurt. He's just as interested in cutting the deficit as all other Republicans.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
You still going on about that out of context quote? You didn't build this superhighway. Your Goddam Right He Didn't.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
hmm ... time to start buying gold and canned goods.
OUCH - that's gonna hurt. He's just as interested in cutting the deficit as all other Republicans.
That is why, when anyone talks about how they want to cut this and want to cut that...doesn't matter...because they aren't going to cut anything...they just increase less...
They are constantly chasing the tiger's tail...whenever they get close they simply slow down and let the tiger get away again...they could care less about balancing the budget...if they were serious they would see the need for cuts in military spending and foreign "aid".
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Besides, when these corporations are more regulated, all they do is fund politicians that vote and address legislation in their favor. By taking that away, you take away the power they seek.
You've lost me here. How does removing corporate regulations, and giving them free reign to do whatever they like, reduce their power?
Besides, when these corporations are more regulated, all they do is fund politicians that vote and address legislation in their favor. By taking that away, you take away the power they seek.
You've lost me here. How does removing corporate regulations, and giving them free reign to do whatever they like, reduce their power?
They can't alter the legislation put on them with large donations. You wouldn't see Goldmann Sachs forking out money to both of our candidates because it would be essentially pointless. They would have lost their political pull.
Wanted to retire in 2008? ... how old would this person be?
Crap everyone wants to retire ...
How about, was forced into retirement in 2008, with their 401(k) having just lost 40%.
This thing about working until one's 70s is a fantasy. Corporations have no desire to have 70-year olds working for them. They want to clear these people out and hire younger, cheaper labor. Yeah yeah, there are age discrimination laws. But they are a joke. Corporations can easily just get rid of the old people whenever they want, and get cheaper employees (or outsourcing) in their place. Workers have no rights. So now you're going from, say, an engineering job to being a greeter at Wal-Mart. If that's what you want to call "working" then great, but it's not going to pay the mortgage, or the greatly increased health insurance costs because of Ryan's voucher program.
Yes that is what I call working...
we are downsizing from a large 6 figure income...
the business is downsizing from a multi million dollar annual income...
people do what they have to do, they change and adapt.
They also realize what is really important in life.
The country should learn to do this and stop running in the red or we are going
to implode and no one will have nothin.
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have insisted they’re not running on the House budget plan Ryan’s best known for. Romney has his own economic plans, vague as they may be, and his campaign has tried to emphasize they’re different from Ryan’s.
Ryan’s first solo interview as the Republican VP nominee suggested not everyone is persuaded.
Ryan repeatedly tried to deflect attention from his own highly controversial budget proposal in an interview with Fox News’s Brit Hume Tuesday. Ryan’s plan is both a rallying point for conservatives and a whipping boy for Democratic strategists.
Hume didn’t buy the suggestion that the Romney-Ryan ticket wasn’t running on Ryan’s budget plan, and the interview focused largely on Ryan’s budget package. In one exchange on balancing the budget, Hume objected when Ryan tried to talk about Romney’s plan — which has drawn fire for being vague at best. Hume insisted Ryan talk about his own economic vision, which doesn’t bring the budget into balance for decades.
Ryan couldn’t predict when Romney’s plan would balance the budget.
Hume: The budget plan you’re now supporting would get to balance when?
Ryan: Well, there are different — the budget plan that Mitt Romney is supporting gets us down to 20 percent of GDP government spending by 2016. That means get the size of government back to where it historically has been. What President Obama has done is he brought the size of government to as high as it hasn’t been since World War II. We want to reduce the size of government to have more economic freedom.
Hume: I get that. What about balance?
Ryan: I don’t know exactly what the balance is. I don’t want to get wonky on you but we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan. The plan we offer in the House balances the budget. I’d put a contrast. President Obama, never once, ever, has offered a plan to ever balance the budget. The United States Senate, they haven’t even balanced, they haven’t passed a budget in three years.
Hume: I understand that. But your own budget, that you —
Ryan: You are talking about the House budget?
Hume: I’m talking about the House budget. Your budget will be a political issue in this campaign.
Ryan: The House budget doesn’t balance until the 2030s under the current measurement of the CBO baseline.
There are two things happening here. First, Ryan is unable to change the conversation away from the House budget, which Democrats, and reportedly some Republicans, are convinced is a guaranteed loser this fall.
Second, for all Ryan’s skill as the GOP’s budget whiz, not even he can say when Romney’s budget will balance, feeding into criticisms that the Romney budget plan is not yet fully formed.
The Romney campaign certainly wants to run on its own plans, not Ryan’s. But that’s increasingly looking like a tough sell.
If Ryan had proposed defense cuts as part of this plan, whoa man would Obama and Biden have been in trouble. But of course, he didn't do that.
Though I do wonder why we can't look at the plan as individual parts rather than a whole. It seems we are always looking for 1 guy to bring 100% to the table. That's not the way the government should even work. Not to mention, Ryan going out on a limb here shows he is willing to lead. Now, if the idiots in Washington could ever get over the "team game" concept and work towards solutions, Ryan's plan is a great source of information and opportunities.
If Ryan had proposed defense cuts as part of this plan, whoa man would Obama and Biden have been in trouble. But of course, he didn't do that.
Though I do wonder why we can't look at the plan as individual parts rather than a whole. It seems we are always looking for 1 guy to bring 100% to the table. That's not the way the government should even work. Not to mention, Ryan going out on a limb here shows he is willing to lead. Now, if the idiots in Washington could ever get over the "team game" concept and work towards solutions, Ryan's plan is a great source of information and opportunities.
just because he's "willing to lead" doesn't automatically include "in the right direction"...
Comments
Except Ryans budget cuts spending for veterans by $11 billion
Paul Ryan has never even run for statewide office. This guy is going to be thrown to the wolves, perhaps in an even more extreme say than Sarah Palin was. I understand he is smarter than Palin, but at least she had run for a statewide office.
This op-ed is biased, but I think underscores the challenges he's going to face.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryan-on-soapbox-at-iowa-state-fair/2012/08/13/7a04d3c4-e598-11e1-8f62-58260e3940a0_story.html?hpid=z2
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
"Military spending" does nothing to get jobs for veterans after they come home. Nothing in Ryan's budget does anything to make jobs for anyone, really. For a campaign that wanted to talk about jobs, it really is a curious choice.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
he is coming straight from congress... the white house and election race is a very different animal. agreed he will find it tough and if they lose come November may hurt his career for decades.
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
shhhh
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
http://swampland.time.com/2012/08/14/paul-ryan-and-the-stimulus-a-match-designed-to-make-my-head-explode/
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Fact Check: Ryan budget plan doesn't actually slash the budget
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/14/fact-check-ryan-budget-plan-doesnt-actually-slash-budget/#ixzz23Y0xFYfb
hmm ... time to start buying gold and canned goods.
OUCH - that's gonna hurt. He's just as interested in cutting the deficit as all other Republicans.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
http://www.therightscoop.com/red-meat-n ... rs-morgan/
"You didn't build this"
:roll: , you know he's wrong right? Clinton taxed the Rich, the 90's were prosperous, since we stopped.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs
You still going on about that out of context quote? You didn't build this superhighway. Your Goddam Right He Didn't.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Nice, cut the video before he responds, Brillant
that is all they're got. a hackjob edit and a partial quote...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
That is why, when anyone talks about how they want to cut this and want to cut that...doesn't matter...because they aren't going to cut anything...they just increase less...
They are constantly chasing the tiger's tail...whenever they get close they simply slow down and let the tiger get away again...they could care less about balancing the budget...if they were serious they would see the need for cuts in military spending and foreign "aid".
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
If you think there is a strong response or a smoking gun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_sceBCI ... ure=relmfu
From 14:40 - 18:15 - yawn.
SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
I'm SO face booking that.
You've lost me here. How does removing corporate regulations, and giving them free reign to do whatever they like, reduce their power?
They can't alter the legislation put on them with large donations. You wouldn't see Goldmann Sachs forking out money to both of our candidates because it would be essentially pointless. They would have lost their political pull.
Partial quote? Beginner you are. It shows his whole philosophy. It's not American.
Where are the patriots? What happened to my country?
Emoticons rule
"you didn't build this"
America!
USA USA USA.
Won the olympics AND back to back world war champions.
Woot
OK... I'm starting to think you're a democratic operative whose job is to act like... ^^
we are downsizing from a large 6 figure income...
the business is downsizing from a multi million dollar annual income...
people do what they have to do, they change and adapt.
They also realize what is really important in life.
The country should learn to do this and stop running in the red or we are going
to implode and no one will have nothin.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/ ... hp?ref=fpb
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have insisted they’re not running on the House budget plan Ryan’s best known for. Romney has his own economic plans, vague as they may be, and his campaign has tried to emphasize they’re different from Ryan’s.
Ryan’s first solo interview as the Republican VP nominee suggested not everyone is persuaded.
Ryan repeatedly tried to deflect attention from his own highly controversial budget proposal in an interview with Fox News’s Brit Hume Tuesday. Ryan’s plan is both a rallying point for conservatives and a whipping boy for Democratic strategists.
Hume didn’t buy the suggestion that the Romney-Ryan ticket wasn’t running on Ryan’s budget plan, and the interview focused largely on Ryan’s budget package. In one exchange on balancing the budget, Hume objected when Ryan tried to talk about Romney’s plan — which has drawn fire for being vague at best. Hume insisted Ryan talk about his own economic vision, which doesn’t bring the budget into balance for decades.
Ryan couldn’t predict when Romney’s plan would balance the budget.
Hume: The budget plan you’re now supporting would get to balance when?
Ryan: Well, there are different — the budget plan that Mitt Romney is supporting gets us down to 20 percent of GDP government spending by 2016. That means get the size of government back to where it historically has been. What President Obama has done is he brought the size of government to as high as it hasn’t been since World War II. We want to reduce the size of government to have more economic freedom.
Hume: I get that. What about balance?
Ryan: I don’t know exactly what the balance is. I don’t want to get wonky on you but we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan. The plan we offer in the House balances the budget. I’d put a contrast. President Obama, never once, ever, has offered a plan to ever balance the budget. The United States Senate, they haven’t even balanced, they haven’t passed a budget in three years.
Hume: I understand that. But your own budget, that you —
Ryan: You are talking about the House budget?
Hume: I’m talking about the House budget. Your budget will be a political issue in this campaign.
Ryan: The House budget doesn’t balance until the 2030s under the current measurement of the CBO baseline.
There are two things happening here. First, Ryan is unable to change the conversation away from the House budget, which Democrats, and reportedly some Republicans, are convinced is a guaranteed loser this fall.
Second, for all Ryan’s skill as the GOP’s budget whiz, not even he can say when Romney’s budget will balance, feeding into criticisms that the Romney budget plan is not yet fully formed.
The Romney campaign certainly wants to run on its own plans, not Ryan’s. But that’s increasingly looking like a tough sell.
That is pretty clever. Though, it did make me want to punch them all in the face starting with Obama. I need my coffee.
Though I do wonder why we can't look at the plan as individual parts rather than a whole. It seems we are always looking for 1 guy to bring 100% to the table. That's not the way the government should even work. Not to mention, Ryan going out on a limb here shows he is willing to lead. Now, if the idiots in Washington could ever get over the "team game" concept and work towards solutions, Ryan's plan is a great source of information and opportunities.
just because he's "willing to lead" doesn't automatically include "in the right direction"...