Ryan's Lessons from a "Tree Stand," or, Will the Media Please Stop Defending Paul Ryan!!!

What is wrong with the media? This dance around Paul Ryan’s recent “inarticulate” commentary is even more pathetic than ever. The media is now making excuses for Ryan.

PolitiFact even decided to offer up a larger part of Ryan’s Bill Bennett interview, so we could put Paul’s comments in “context.” What a joke…big difference?

Simple Truths…missing in action:

#1. Ryan’s False Premise A: Ryan’s culture of work statement isn't a brilliant observation, who would disagree with it…only “the left” I guess. PolitiFact would rate that as “Pants on fire.”

#2. Ryan’s False Premise B: Lefties love the “status quo/no changes,” therefore oppose Ryan’s ideas. Like cutting people off (“courage to face that down”) the safety net programs, unless they did what they were told with new and stricter back to work laws. A desperate slave labor force? You’ll also notice Ryan hedges his bets with “if we succeed.” He wants to use the entire U.S. population for his experiment. See for yourself below:

And so when you question the status quo of the government’s poverty -- this war on poverty -- you get all the criticisms from the adherents of the status quo who just don’t want to see anything change. We’ve got to have the courage to face that down, just like we did in welfare reform in the late 1990s. And if we succeed, we can help resuscitate this culture and get people back to work and get people back to meeting their potential…”

#3. Ryan ignores the economic bloodletting known as the Great Recession. That one moment in history destroyed jobs at big box retailers and neighborhood small businesses. Remember when Best Buy had to compete with Circuit City and CompUSA, two stores that employed millions nationwide. They’re gone now. My own business died instantly when car dealerships were wiped out en masse.

Ryan and his accomplices like Gov. Scott Walker can’t seem to fix the problems with tax cuts to big business and deregulation. Corporate promises of job creation, a bust.

#4. One-note Ryan’s Remedy? Deregulate, open up our parks for big energy, tax cuts for business, create a desperate workforce by cutting the safety nets and a demoralize Americans enough so they gravitate to more conservative policies and big talking “leaders.”

I thought this ridiculous example of Ryan’s rugged individualism and leadership said it all in a "nutshell:"

Bennett:  What’s the roadmap, as someone might say?

Ryan: In a nutshell, work works. It’s all about getting people to work ... Mentors and my mom. My dad’s friends, his buddies taught me how to hunt and taught me a lot of things, and my mom. And so --

Bennett: Hunting is not working, is it?

Ryan: Well, no, but you can learn -- by the way, you can teach your kids character in the woods. A lot of good life lessons are learned in a tree stand, Bill.

It's More Than Inarticulation. And It Repeats Itself.

Caught trashing and stereotyping the central city poor,  Ryan says he was inarticulate.

Why do wealthy Republican politicians attack the poor and then blame and feign verbal clumsiness?

Ryan Race Baiting comment wilts his new image as concerned poverty fighter.

So "inner city" poverty was really all about the culture of rural joblessness?

Just to be clear, this is what Paul Ryan said the other day:

On Bill Bennett’s Morning in America Wednesday, (Ryan hinted) that he would focus on creating work requirements for men “in our inner cities” and dealing with the “real culture problem” in these communities. “We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work, and so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.”

Today? (He's) saying the remarks had "nothing to do" with race. Ryan suddenly switches the subject to rural poverty, which wasn't mentioned in the audio clip:

“This isn't a race based comment it’s a breakdown of families, it’s rural poverty in rural areas, and talking about where poverty exists.

Yea, that's the ticket. Here's the audio with no mention of "rural poverty." When someone is "driving to the sports arena downtown"...oops:

)

Ryan will teach inner city men the culture of work, you know, like we see in white neighborhoods.

Inner city men are about to meet the social engineering genius of Rep. Paul Ryan. That’s right, that wonkish numbers guy is really closet culture warrior, shaping economic policy around his Darwinian belief the social swill can be elimination…one way or another, with or without creating jobs.

.

Democratic Candidate Rob Zerban, running against Paul Ryan again, pointed me to this Think Progress story where Ryan admits he's a student of…

…Charles Murray, a conservative social scientist who believes African-Americans are, as a population, less intelligent than whites due to genetic differences and that poverty remains a national problem because “a lot of poor people are born lazy.”

The ugly truth is out now about Ryan intentions and his disturbing plans for the poor:

On Bill Bennett’s Morning in America Wednesday, (Ryan hinted) that he would focus on creating work requirements for men “in our inner cities” and dealing with the “real culture problem” in these communities. “We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work, and so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.”

Dealt with? Listen to this sociopath get tough on the victims of the 1 percenters:

"You just can't say, I'm paying my taxes, government is going to fix that. You need to get involved, you need to get involved yourself through a good mentor program or some religious charity, or whatever is to make a difference and that's how we resuscitate out culture." 

New Flash! Democrats, liberals, nonpartisan organizations, and churches are already doing just that. I guess Ryan wouldn't know about that though.

What Ryan is really saying is forget about those no-show "job creators," or your local freeloading Republican politician (not) working hard to solve America's problems, instead the government will save money while charities and churches magically do our work for us. That's been his message all along.

Paul Ryan's Cynicism

So here's how politics can work in America these days if you are willing to walk a particularly callous and cynical path:

Re-inflate for personal and political gain a failed 'smartest guy in the room' persona and attack, with even some false information, American citizens who do not have your wealth and tools of power - -  PAC's, ad budgets, staffs, lobbyists, PR people, 'think'-tanks, talk shows (see him on ABC's "This Week" Sunday show tomorrow), and Rovian organizations - - to fight back.

Let The Los Angeles Times explain it:

WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), the former Republican vice presidential nominee, launched an attack Monday on the nation's poverty programs, provoking an election-year confrontation with the White House amid a growing focus on income inequality... 

The plan returns Ryan to the national stage, where he hopes to position himself as the party's big thinker in advance of a possible 2016 presidential run.

This is an old, soulless trick. Attacking the poor. It's so easy. 
Cross-posted at The Political Environment.

Ryan thinks feeding school kids empties their soul, and other mindless cruelties.

Paul Ryan is running on empty "false premises." He's got nothing else, so instead of trying to defend his agenda, he created straw man targets to shoot at.

Ryan's sparsely attended CPAC speech had 3 false premises. Red meat to stir up the small crowd, who by the way didn't applaud or appear to believe him. Can we say it? Ryan is over the top.



False Premise #1: Freedom not to Work! Ryan is still using the already debunked "people don't have to work" lie. People might pursue their own business plans, work parttime or take care of their kids...but not working? Is Ryan clueless? Of course not. He's lying.

False Premise #2: The Left Offers a Full Stomach but an Empty Soul: We're talking about free hot lunch for kids at school, living at or under the poverty line. Two years ago, my elementary and middle school sons had empty souls. Funny thing, we didn't guilt trip them about lunch. We can thank Ryan for telling us about the kind of people that still work under Scott Walker. Just a ridiculous story when you think about it. It starts off with "Once..."

RYAN: The Left is making a big mistake here. What they're offering people is a full stomach and an empty soul ... You know, this reminds me of a story I heard from Eloise Anderson. She serves in the cabinet of my buddy Gov. Scott Walker. She once met a young boy from a very poor family. And every day at school, he would get a free lunch from a government program. He told Eloise he didn't want a free lunch. He wanted his own lunch. One in a brown paper bag, just like the other kids. He wanted one, he said, because he knew a kid with a brown paper bag had someone who cared for him. This is what the Left does not understand.

Ryan might want to give the kids parents a hike in the minimum wage.

UPDATE: The story above is even another Ryan lie, as reported by Daily Kos:

It turns out, that touching story is actually from a book about a kid in New York City in the 1980s, and the lunches he was getting for free were not from the government, they were from an ad sales rep who befriended him ... the Miss Laura and now-adult Maurice of the story are advocates on child hunger, and let's just say they are not out campaigning against free school lunches. No, they're partnering with No Kid Hungry on a mission that includes "connect[ing] kids in need to effective nutrition programs like school breakfast and summer meals."

Ryan posted a notice on Facebook saying, “I regret failing to verify the original source of the story.” But this comment nailed Ryan: Sherry Edwardson: “You feel that way yourself Ryan or you wouldn't have repeated it. Quit passing the buck!”

False Premise #3: People just want a life of Comfort: No one ever said that. Sadly, he sincerely believes this. He's obsessed with keeping the poor from hammocks and comfort.

National Review Online praised his argument with the headline, "Paul Ryan's Moving Story That Explains the Difference Between Hard Work and Dependency." On Fox's Happening Now, correspondent Carl Cameron characterized Ryan's speech as taking a "middle-of-the-road tone." Ryan's comments fit in well with conservative media's history of shaming the poor, and in particular, free school lunch programs for children of low-income families. In the past, Fox has even suggested children be forced to work for their meals.

Media Matters put this together, comparing Ryan to...Rush? Yes:



These Two Charts say Ryan is Wrong Again:

Paul Ryan's Moral Leadership may not be Popular, but it's "the right thing."

History is littered with despots who claimed they knew more than the people that elected them.

Rep. Paul Ryan is just that kind of "leader."

Upfront's Mike Gousha asked Ryan about all the polls that directly contradicted Ryan's positions on the minimum wage, extending unemployment etc. Ryan just laughed.

I purposely included Ryan's jaw dropping corporate focused agenda that exemplifies the failure of trickle down economics-it hasn't worked so far, so business needs even more help. Where in Ryan's to-do-list is there something that has to do with people directly?

But what Ryan said next...including his Freudian slip:

"It sounds simple...but if I believe this is counter productive for the very people we're trying to hurt...to help...and will hurt them by doing this, but it's politically popular, what does that say about you as a moral person...leaders have to take positions that may not be popular sometimes if they think they're doing the right thing."

It's a message Republicans haven't been shy about saying, with absolutly no blow back from the media. Scott Walker has made a run for president contingent on the Senate turning Republican, because he too wants to do the unpopular "moral" "right thing." Divided government would just get in the way.

Tea Party's Lyin' Ryan claims Obama is a Lawless President! And we're supposed to take him seriously on the budget?

Paul Ryan knows how to spin BS, like his workaround argument regarding the number of Obama’s “executive orders.”

According to Ryan, it’s not how many orders, because Republicans lost that lie to the facts, but the

“scope” of his executive orders. And that means…?

One important fact: The Affordable Care Act allows for flexibility and delays to the mandates as problems come up. Below, Ryan feeds off the tea party frenzy over ObamaCare.

Think about it, this guy who could have been our vice president is calling Obama's term, a “Lawless presidency.” That's not true, unless we’re getting rid of presumed innocence?

jsonline: Rep. Paul Ryan said Sunday that President Barack Obama is running an "increasingly lawless presidency" by circumventing Congress. Host George Stephanopoulos suggested to Ryan that Obama's rate of using executive orders was far behind Presidents Reagan, Bush and Clinton.

It’s the “scope” and “new laws?” Ryan then admits it’s just a difference of opinion:

Said Ryan: "It's not the number of executive orders, it's the scope of the executive orders. It's the fact that he is actually contradicting law like in the health care case, or proposing new laws without going through congress, George, that's the issue."

Stephanopoulos asked Ryan if he planned to try to impeach Obama. Said Ryan: "No, I'm not — look, what we — we have a difference of opinion, clearly, and — and some of these are going to get fought out in court. And I think these executive orders are creating a dangerous trend which is contrary to the Constitution."

Like the dangerous trend from all the past presidents? Ryan has lost it. 

Budget Deal partially Fixes Paul Ryan's ruthless Cuts to Veterans Benefits.

There are two very important points in the budget deal Rep. Paul Ryan isn't going to like politically.

First and foremost was Ryan's attempt to reduce the budget on the backs of younger veterans. That's right, he didn't go after cuts to big oil, needless farm subsidies or corporate loopholes, he went after veterans. These big supporters of our troops?  Not so much.

I pieced together a string of clips where conservatives attack Ryan ruthlessly, from Fox News to Mark Levin. As an experiment, replace the promise of veterans benefits with "Social Security" or "Medicare." It's all the same to Ryan, and conservative pundits are using the same arguments to keep the benefits liberals make for keeping our safety nets. Listen up Democratic challenger Rob Zerban, this stuff is campaign gold:



 With every single Democrat except for one, voted against the cut:

The U.S. Senate gave final congressional approval Thursday to a massive, $1.1 trillion spending bill … Baldwin cited a provision in the bill that offers at least partial relief for working-age military retirees whose cost-of-living adjustments were going to be cut by 1% under the budget agreement co-authored by Ryan. Under the omnibus spending bill, that change will not occur for those medically retired and their survivors.

Debate: Jason Thigpen vs Paul Ryan

The other day a friend in southeast Wisconsin sent me a reply to a letter he had written to his congressman about Social Security. His congressman is Paul Ryan. It happened just around the time Jason Thigpen had switched parties and decided to run for Congress as a Democrat instead of as a Republican-- primarily because he realized his values weren't compatible with the current bent of the GOP and fit much better with the Democratic Party. Jason's in eastern North Carolina but Ryan is such an icon of what passes for Republican thought on the budget that I asked him if he'd mind responding to Ryan's points. Here then is a former Republican analyzing his old party's basic economic agenda. And below that is Ryan's original letter. If you'd like to help Jason's grassroots campaign, he can use some net roots live here on his ActBlue page.

Fact Over Fiction: Jason Thigpen responds to letter by Paul Ryan addressing constituent concerns over Social Security reform

When first reading Paul Ryan’s response to a constituent inquiry regarding concerns for Social Security reform I felt compelled to respond with more clarity by offering more substance over form. At best I believe more facts are deserved before anyone could render a decision on a matter as important as Social Security.

Like many career politicians, Ryan has offered a slanted perspective on this issue benefiting the special interest groups who continue to support his lifelong campaign efforts against social programs, that he and his fellow multi-millionaire career politician buddies will never use themselves.

So, let’s dispel several myths Congressman Ryan would have you believe:

1.     Social Security is not an entitlement program. Rather, it’s an earned income benefit.
2.     Social Security, according to law, does not contribute to the federal deficit.
3.     Social Security is not in danger. In fact, it has a surplus of over $2.7 Trillion.

Ryan’s proposal to cut Social Security in 2012 was unpopular, where Americans overwhelmingly agreed that making such drastic cuts to programs certain to have dire consequences for all middle and working-class Americans isn’t an acceptable solution. One should ask who is lobbying Congressman Ryan to disregard the needs of his constituents for his own personal and political ambitions. Perhaps the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is assisting him with an onslaught of pre-drafted legislative bills in an attempt to undermine the very process of what representative government should truly be. They can best accomplish this by privatizing Social Security and Medicare, getting rid of minimum wages, the privatization of education, and promote fossil fuel expansion endeavors while destroying environmental regulations.

Trying to leverage such terms as “chained CPI” (chained Consumer Price Index) in hopes of endearing support from folks unaware it’s merely a ploy to reduce what many surmise of the cost-of-living-adjustments (COLAs) as being "too generous." COLAs are the annual increases, based on inflation, recipients of Social Security are supposed to receive even though COLAs have been virtually non-existent in recent years.

Even worse, I find it personally offensive Congressman Ryan would push forth legislation that would not only take away from our seniors, but would also cut the VA benefits from over 3 million veterans. He had no issue voting for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with no end in-site. While he was fighting calories on his P90X workout routine, I was fighting in a war on terror while serving the US Army in Iraq along with nearly 3 million other service-members whom have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. For this career politician to sit here at home pushing an agenda to keep us at war, while also systematically seeking to disparage those who have sacrificed so much to ensure the continued freedoms of our American way of life, is beyond repugnant. It’s shameful. I’d ask him, and any other elected leader sharing his views, to please come with me and truly visit some of the families and service-members who’ve lost so much in order to preserve his freedom to ravage their sorrows with such policies. I’d ask him to explain his proposal to the children of these great men and women.

But there’s no need to worry because there are viable solutions to remedy future concerns for Social Security but it’s not popular to the corporations that have no heartbeat but according to the Supreme Court, are people too.

I believe the three best solutions for resolving concerns over the future solvency of Social Security are:

1.     Congress should keep their hands off Social Security. How about a jobs bill?
2.     Raising the federal minimum wage by a modest amount, whereby more funds are paid into Social Security.
3.     Increase the cap on taxable income for Social Security from 83% to 90%, as it was during President Reagan’s administration, for incomes up to $200,000.

These are practical and reasonable solutions for addressing the future concerns of Social Security. I don't personally believe any cuts to Social Security are acceptable. My sincere hope is that we can work together to ensure Congress addresses the issues and concerns regarding Social Security for all Americans, especially those most affected by it as well as those whom have sacrificed so much for it.

And now the Ryan letter:

Thank you for contacting me regarding efforts to reform Social Security. I appreciate you taking the time to let me know your views on this important issue.

You raised some interesting and insightful points regarding Social Security. As Chairman of the House Budget Committee, one of my top priorities is to preserve the Social Security safety net and to make sure the program remains solvent for future generations. This critical program provides financial support for more than 54 million beneficiaries. However, the risk to Social Security, driven by demographic changes, is nearer at hand than most acknowledge.

One of the primary looming financial pressures facing Social Security is the aging of the American society. The "Baby Boom" generation has already started to collect their Social Security retirement benefits. As a result, there are fewer workers to support each retiree than when Social Security was created. Increasing life expectancy and the approaching retirement of more "Baby Boomers" continues to put increasing pressure on Social Security each year. Over the next several years, the number of retirees is expected to grow more rapidly than the number of individuals whose taxes will pay for future benefits. Unfortunately, Social Security faces a $9.6 trillion deficit over the next 75 years.

Social Security must be reformed to prevent severe cuts in future benefits. According to the 2013 Social Security Trustees Report, beneficiaries will face a painful 23 percent benefit cut in 2033 when the Trust Funds are exhausted.  At that time, even those who are currently on Social Security-- those now 62 and older-- may experience indiscriminate cuts in benefits at a time when they are increasingly reliant on the program.

There is a bipartisan path forward on Social Security—one that requires all parties first to acknowledge the fiscal realities of this critical program. The budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2014 that my colleagues on the House Budget Committee and I have put forward,   The Path to   Prosperity , addresses the challenges Social Security is facing and serves as a blueprint for American renewal.

This budget strengthens Social Security by establishing a requirement that policymakers come to the table and enact common-sense reforms to keep the program solvent for current beneficiaries and makes it stronger for future generations. It would build upon President Obama's Fiscal Commission, calling on action to solve the pressing problems Social Security faces by requiring the President to put forward specific ideas on fixing Social Security. It also puts the onus on Congress to offer legislation to ensure the sustainable solvency of this critical program. Both parties must work together to chart a path forward on common-sense reforms, and this budget provides the nation's leaders with the tools to get there.

The problems facing the future of Social Security are real, and the numbers do not lie. We cannot demonize those who offer solutions if we seriously intend to tackle the inevitable solvency of Social Security. Ultimately, we cannot kick the can down the road and let another generation of retirees struggle because Congress failed to act. By addressing these issues now, we can ensure that each individual is given the resources to save for their future in the manor which they see fit. This fiscal crisis is not a Democratic problem or a Republican problem. It is an American problem, and it cannot be solved exclusively using the political ideology of either party. I welcome the long overdue debate regarding how we will leave the next generation with a better America.

I am hopeful that Congress will address the issue of Social Security reform and have a serious discussion on the problems associated with our entitlement programs. If you would like to learn more about the specific reforms proposed by The Path to Prosperity, I would encourage you to visit: http://budget.house.gov/fy2014/.

To Fake Obamacare Rollout Whiners, A Tom Harkin Snicker

Great retort to the likes of Paul Ryan, from the Iowa Democrat:

Woman at restaurant: The food here is terrible. 

Man at restaurant: And the portions are so small.

The Man without Conscience, Paul Ryan, ironically pushing Conscience Clause.

Paul Ryan is at it again.

I've always maintained that the “conscience  clause” is the biggest threat to law and order in this country than most people realize. It leaves a person’s freedoms up to the discretion of another person’s conscience-their belief system, fears and prejudices.

“Laws” passed with a conscience clause neutralizes a meaningful law. It creates a voluntary law, which fits into the conservative view that if it's a law they don’t like, they don’t need to follow it.  

That’s what Paul Ryan is trying to introduce into our society, voluntary laws, allowing others to infringe on the constitutional rights of others. Ryan's conscience clause negates the First Amendment:

MSNBC: There’s been little public talk lately about the so-called “conscience clause” allowing employers to reject birth control coverage for their employees. But according to the Washington Post, Paul Ryan, is still hammering away at it behind closed doors. At the Values Voter Summit, the USCCB’s powerful lobbyist acknowledged that “the only way to get the Senate to deal with” contraception coverage is getting it “attached to must-pass legislation” … When a previous version of the clause, known as the Blunt amendment, died in the Senate in 2012, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski disavowed her vote for the amendment, saying, “Back home, it was being viewed as a direct attack on women’s reproductive rights, on their ability to access contraception.”  

The Paul Ryan Government Shutdown!!!

Many articles have been written about the Paul Ryan disappearing act during the government shutdown. It is odd isn't it that he’s nowhere to be seen or heard from. What media bubble has he been able to construct to block reporters out? It’s all so strange.

Ah, but there’s a reason Ryan isn't around; the shutdown was his doing, and he’s tricked the tea party into taking the hit.

Anyone trust this guy to be our president?

A small local Milwaukee publication the Sheppard Express had to make what seems to be an obvious call. Everybody else just got caught up in the media circus:

Americans are rightly outraged that a small group of extreme House Republicans successfully bullied the more rational members of Congress into shutting down the government this week. While we may think these tea partiers are members of the fringe, the sad fact is that one of them is Wisconsin’s own Paul Ryan, the powerful chair of the House budget committee.

Ryan voted along party lines to defund and delay Obamacare and shut down the government …

So that's how we got here:

…when the Senate passed its own budget resolution, Politico reported recently that Ryan and the rest of the Republican members of the House refused to negotiate with the Senate. They were waiting for a showdown and a shutdown to get their list of tea party demands written into the budget. Ryan has kept a low profile during all of this mess. He had to vote for the shutdown to retain his tea party credibility, but it’s so wildly unpopular with the general public—and Wall Street, the source of a lot of his campaign dollars—that he doesn’t want to be the face of it in the media. 

Ryan Opens Townhall Schedule in New Mexico with The Koch Brothers

Fresh with new marching orders from a secret meeting hosted by the Koch brothers in New Mexico, Rep. Paul Ryan returns to our district to host a series of townhall meetings. The schedule for the Rock County area is as follows:

UPDATE: Ryan Town Hall Schedule Posted Below is in Error

Wednesday, August 14

MILTON
8:30 – 9:30 a.m.
The Gathering Place
715 Campus St.

CLINTON
1:45 – 2:30 p.m.
Village Hall
301 Cross St.

JANESVILLE
3:15 – 4:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, Room 417
18 North Jackson St.

FAIRUS.org - Paul Ryan's full townhall schedule for August, 2013

Down The Rabbit Hole With Paul Ryan And Ayn Rand

Remember when Canter and McCarthy screwed up on the Farm Bill and Boehner had to pull it? It just happened again-- this time with the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development funding bills. The House of Representatives is now officially an out-of-control madhouse. Boehner is just another Member with an agenda, who some Republicans follow and others ignore. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY), as far from a "moderate" as you'll find in their crazy caucus, issued the following statement concluding that the conservative sequestration scheme is wrecking the economy and ruining the country and must come to an end.

“The Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development funding bill that was pulled from floor consideration today was the first major attempt by the House to consider and pass an Appropriations bill that funds domestic programs under the austere level delineated under the Budget Control Act and the House budget resolution.

“The bill today reflected the best possible effort, under an open process, to fund programs important to the American people-- including our highway, air and rail systems, housing for our poorest families, and improvements to local communities-- while also making the deep cuts necessary under the current budget cap. In order to abide by sequestration budget levels, this bill cut $4.4 billion below the current, post-sequestration total to a level below what was approved for these programs in 2006-- over seven years ago.

“I am extremely disappointed with the decision to pull the bill from the House calendar today. The prospects for passing this bill in September are bleak at best, given the vote count on passage that was apparent this afternoon. With this action, the House has declined to proceed on the implementation of the very [Ryan] budget it adopted just three months ago. Thus, I believe that the House has made its choice: sequestration-- and its unrealistic and ill-conceived discretionary cuts-- must be brought to an end. And, it is also clear that the higher funding levels advocated by the Senate are also simply not achievable in this Congress.

“This Congress must now deal in a productive way to address the nation’s crippling deficits and debt to put our budget back on a sustainable and responsible path. This means that all government programs-- not just those on the discretionary side of the ledger-- must be reduced. Spending reductions in mandatory and entitlement programs, which are the drivers of our deficits and debt, are the most effective way to enact meaningful change in the trajectory of federal spending. The House, Senate and White House must come together as soon as possible on a comprehensive compromise that repeals sequestration, takes the nation off this lurching path from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis, reduces our deficits and debt, and provides a realistic topline discretionary spending level to fund the government in a responsible-- and attainable-- way.”

This was a worse mess than the Farm Bill fiasco. The Republicans, as a party, are incapable and/or unwilling to fund anything other than the Military Industrial Establishment that the last plausible Republican President warned them about. They've followed Paul Ryan down a rabbit hole where there is no Social Security, no Medicare and no Medicaid and where everyone worships Ayn Rand. These people are not in the real world-- and they control, more or less, the House of Representatives... and half the state governments, not just in the crazy, secessionist South, but in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. On the federal level, when the House Republicans try using Ryan's fantasy budget to draft actual budgets for actual functions of the government, they fall flat on their faces and... well impossible situations like what happened on Wednesday happen. It's pure nihilism in the real world and if it isn't stopped by the American people at the ballot box next November, or children and grandchildren will curse us to eternity-- and with good reason.

The House Republicans don't have the political will-- even without taking the House or Senate Democrats into account-- to pass any of this Ryan-ordained Randian garbage. There's no way to fund the rest of the government outside the military while keeping faith with Ryan's crackpot budgetary constraints. Even Hal Rogers understands that now. "Unrealistic and ill-conceived discretionary cuts must be brought to an end." He's talking about the whole insane edifice Ryan and his Wall Street pals have imposed on America through blackmail and threats. From the Associated Press report on the mess:

As the House measure faltered, a companion bill in the Senate seemed likely to be killed by a GOP filibuster on Thursday for the opposite reason. It breaks the budget limits of sequestration, the automatic cuts required by Washington's failure to strike a bipartisan budget deal.

The twin developments reflect the broader dysfunction in Washington over the budget. All sides want to reverse the crippling sequestration cuts but a partisan impasse over tax increases sought by President Barack Obama and his Democratic allies and cuts to so-called mandatory programs like Medicare and food stamps demanded by Republicans shows no signs of breaking.

Congress leaves Washington this week for a five-week vacation; the battle will be rejoined in the fall.

Cuts in the House transportation measure were made deeper by a Republican move to cut an additional $40 billion-plus from domestic programs and transfer the money to the Pentagon. That left the transportation measure $10 billion, or about 18 percent, below the Senate's bill.

...A spokesman for GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy of California said the Republican majority's top vote counter was confident he would have been able to round up enough votes to pass the bill if there were more time for debate.

The move comes as companion legislation in the Senate may be filibustered to death on Thursday by Republicans because it exceeds budget levels called for under the automatic budget cuts.

"Voting for appropriations legislation that blatantly violates budget reforms already agreed to by both parties moves our country in exactly, exactly the wrong direction," Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said.

"The collapse of the partisan transportation and housing bill in the House proves that their sequestration-on-steroids bills are unworkable, and that we are going to need a bipartisan deal to replace sequestration," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., chief author of the Senate bill. "And while we work toward that, we should pass the bipartisan Senate transportation and housing bill and show our constituents that we are putting them and their communities above partisanship and political games."

Big Money Invented Paul Ryan To Work For Them, Not For Teabaggers

Palin's not happy with the Republican Party Establishment-- and she claims she may be ready to bolt and start one of her own. No one represents that Establishment better than Paul Ryan. Ryan's a packaged product, courtesy of Wall Street and Madison Avenue. That's all he's ever been and Boehner was more than happy to boost him into the chair of the Budget Committee to please the banksters both serve. Recall, if you will, Ryan's first big effort for the criminal banksters who lifted him out of obscurity.

It's September 2008 and the GOP kleptocrats are winding up their last months in office. They wanted to deliver one more grand giveaway to Wall Street-- Henry Paulsen's bankster bailout. One problem: enough Republicans (133 of 'em) joined with Democrats to defeat it 205-228 when it was first brought up for a vote. Wall Street's best-paid shills, Boehner, Cantor and Paul Ryan, mobilized for battle. At the time Ryan, a relatively junior Member, had already taken $1,704,095 in legalistic bribes from Wall Street (a number that has now risen to $$3,303,872, just slightly more than the $3,283,687 the banksters gave Democratic crook Steve Israel). After the defeat in the House, Wall Street and the banksters went bonkers and pulled all Bush's strings and he and Paulsen easily got the monstrosity passed in the House of Lords and then went back to the House with a no less odious version of the bill that they had rejected a few days before. This time it passed 263-171 with not 65, but 91 Republicans joining in. Among the vote switchers who had had their arms twisted by Boehner, Cantor and Ryan plus the official registered Wall Street lobbyists:

• Gresham Barrett (R-SC- $807,723)
• Judy Biggert (R-IL- $1,675,717)
• Charlie Dent (R-PA- $760,872)
• Mary Fallin (R-OK- $336,576)
• Jim Gerlach (R-PA- $1,670,352)
• Pete Hoekstra (R-MI- $295,830)
• Gary Miller (R-CA- $807,688)
• Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL- $928,068)
• Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH- $458,449)
• John Shadegg (R-AZ- $1,218,261)
• Lee Terry (R-NE- $1,246,007)
• Patrick Tiberi (R-OH- $2,438,284)

At the time some people wondered if teabaggers and fiscal conservatives would hold a screamingly hypocritical Ryan accountable at all. Yesterday's selection by Romney-- popular with the GOP base-- shows they didn't give a damn. At the time, Ryan was the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee and a member of the Ways and Means Committee. He' had assigned himself the job of spokesperson for fiscal austerity but he had already taken more money from the banksters than any other politician in the history of Wisconsin politics and, as we saw, he voted for the bank bailout not once, but twice. In fact, Ryan was one of the hypocrites exposed in Michael Moore's film, Capitalism: A Love Story:

In a section of the critically acclaimed examination of how Wall Street insiders diverted hundreds of billions of tax dollars into their accounts, Moore illustrates how the bailout happened. Democratic and Republican members of Congress who do the bidding of the bankers scared their colleagues and the American people into approving a massive bailout of the speculators whose misdeeds created the financial meltdown that shocked the nation in September 2008.

Ryan, the Republican congressman from southeast Wisconsin's hard-pressed 1st District, is shown playing the fear card by telling the House that it had to steer almost $800 million BILLION to Wall Street's sleaziest players.

"If we fail to do the right thing, heaven help us-- if we fail to pass this I fear the worst is yet to come," claimed Ryan.

The statement from the Wisconsin Republican who has positioned himself as a budget specialist in the House played a significant role in securing support for a bailout bill that had not been adequately analyzed and that included few protections against fraud.

Had Ryan used his reputation and his role on key committees to aggressively oppose the bailout, he might have blocked the rush to judgment that economists now say could end up costing American taxpayers trillions of dollars-- and a big chunk of their country's future.

Instead, the GOP establishment's favored point man on fiscal issues claimed-- without benefit of facts, figures or any grounding in economic reality-- that a failure to give the bankers everything they were asking for could bring on a depression.

"This is a Herbert Hoover moment," Ryan told the House, as he reached a fear-mongering crescendo. "(Hoover) made mistakes during the Great Depression-- let's not make those mistakes."

It was a virtuoso performance. Moore was right to highlight it.

The filmmaker has given Wisconsin taxpayers a dramatic illustration of how it came to pass that we are bailing out bankers and billionaires at the same time that auto plants are closing in cities such as Janesville and Kenosha-- both of which are in the 1st District. More importantly, Moore has reminded the voters of southeastern Wisconsin how key members of Congress such as Paul Ryan determined to take care of the speculators on Wall Street rather than working families on Main Street.

Ryan was overjoyed to bail out his bankster/paymasters on Wall Street but when it came to bailing out their victims who, through no fault of their own, were swamped with screwed up mortgages, he changed his tune... drastically. Ryan always stands up for corporations and never stands up for working families.

And Ryan's a gift that keeps on giving. Over the weekend, a far right propaganda website wigged out at the way Ryan's playing Pied Piper to Republican House backbenchers over immigration, just as he did in the TARP battle.

Ryan has been meeting with House conservatives to persuade them that reform of the immigration system, including a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, is an economic necessity and critical to fixing the nation's fiscal problems.

...Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist said the sheer amount of time Ryan has spent talking with House Republicans about budget issues gives him the credibility to court them on immigration reform.

"I would bet you a nickel that he has had more face time with each member than anyone else in the caucus," said Norquist, an influential conservative who also believes immigration reform is vital to the economy.

Republican strategist Whit Ayres calls Ryan "one of the most effective messengers the Republican party has in the House," adding that "If Paul Ryan talks, the House Republicans will listen."

That assessment may be overly optimistic, considering the large number of House Republicans from conservative districts who see legalization of illegal immigrants and offering them a path to eventually become U.S. citizens as an "amnesty."

But Ryan said a Republican-backed amendment to the Senate bill to boost security on the U.S.-Mexico border improves the chances that the House and Senate could ultimately agree on a compromise version of the legislation.

The amendment "brings the Senate bill closer to the House's position and that gives me the belief that we have a better chance at getting this law fixed at the end," he said.

Unlike Republican Senator Marco Rubio, an architect of the Senate immigration bill and a potential rival for Ryan if both seek the presidency, Ryan is not writing legislation or participating in a congressional working group on the issue.

But both Ryan and Rubio face risks from the divisiveness of the immigration issue among Republicans.

Support for immigration reform could cost either man votes with conservatives who will nominate a 2016 Republican candidate. On the other hand, the influence of Hispanic-Americans in U.S. elections could make it harder for any candidate who opposes immigration reform to win the White House.

...In April, Ryan teamed up with his friend, Democratic Congressman Luis Gutierrez, who is a staunch supporter of immigration reform, to tout the issue at an event in Chicago. He has also co-sponsored immigration reform bills in the past.

Like Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, Ryan talks of the work ethic of immigrants and the high proportion who start businesses. He often tells of his Irish ancestors who fled the potato famine in the 1850s and started a family farm in Wisconsin.

In the interview, he cited future budget deficits as a reason for urgency on immigration reform. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring from the workforce each day, "our economy is going to need more labor in the future," he said.

Ryan said he believes the country needs a system "designed for the economy, to bring workers in to do jobs that people won't do or to bring their high-tech intellectual capital."

The fiscal argument helped fuel momentum for the Senate immigration bill when the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would reduce deficits by $197 billion over a decade because of additional workers paying income and payroll taxes.

If Ryan is worried about a conservative backlash on immigration, he is showing no signs of it.

He has offered to debate anyone who says an "earned" path to citizenship is the equivalent of amnesty.

And the man who has sparred for years with Democrats on budget issues believes he can play a role in getting the two parties to work together. "I think when you get Democrats to listen to Republicans and Republicans to listen to Democrats you can find the common ground," he said.

Alex Nowrasteh of the libertarian Cato Institute said Ryan could give other Republicans political cover to support immigration reform. "Nobody is going to question the conservative credentials of Paul Ryan," he said.

Really?

Will someone tell Paul Ryan, Government doesn't give us rights, it protects them!!

Rep. Paul Ryan always starts his discussions off with a false premise. Like the one given in this audio clip below; Democrats and liberals think government gives us our rights. The simple truth; Bullshit.

Based on his premise, Ryan wants people to go back to "natural law, natural rights," given to us by God. Ryan clearly thinks government is there to protect and serve business. Natural law would allow corporations to be sued out of existence; Ryan's idea of government is to protect businesses from the risks and consequences under "natural law," creating "access," "opportunity," "upward mobility," and of course great wealth.

The following is just plain scary rhetoric. I don't know how else to describe it. Mr. Full-of-himself "wants to save civil society." Jeeze. Why do I get the feeling our natural rights from God flow exclusively from Ryan policy? And who will retire this ego-maniacal madman? Wisconsin Radio Network:

Ryan says the book will reflect his beliefs in natural law, natural rights, and that the “role of government is to provide a quality of opportunities so that we can make the most of our lives,” something he says Republicans have not done a good enough job of articulating.

Just as bizarre; when asked if his book means a run for president:

He says it’s not right to “cloud my judgment with other personal ambition concerns.”

Paul Ryan Goes To Battle For Big Business Again-- This Time Over Immigration

It wasn't a very Tea Party thing for Paul Ryan to do to vote to bail out the Wall Street banksters. In fact, it was even less teabagger-friendly when Ryan joined with Boehner and Cantor between September 29, 2008 and October 3. It was less than a week, but it's the real story of Paul Ryan that Tea Party activists would rather not face.

The long, catastrophic Bush Regime was finally coming to an end and the GOP kleptocrats were winding up their last months in office. They wanted to deliver one more grand giveaway to Wall Street: Henry Paulsen's bankster bailout. One problem: enough Republicans (133 of 'em) joined with Democrats to defeat it 205-228 when it was first brought up for a vote on September 29. Wall Street's best-paid shills, Boehner, Cantor and Ryan, mobilized for battle. At the time Ryan, a relatively junior Member, had already taken $1,704,095 in legalistic bribes from Wall Street (a number that has since then risen to $3,207,247, the most any Wisconsin politicians has ever gotten from Wall Street in history). After the defeat in the House, Wall Street and the banksters went bonkers and pulled all Bush's strings and he and Paulsen easily got the monstrosity passed in the House of Lords and then went back to the House with a no less odious version of the bill that they had rejected a few days before. This time it passed 263-171 with not 65, but 91 Republicans joining in. Among the vote switchers who had had their arms twisted by Boehner, Cantor and Ryan plus the official registered Wall Street lobbyists, not many are still in the House, although all these big bankster bribery recipients are:

• Charlie Dent (R-PA- $1,186,979)
• Jim Gerlach (R-PA- $2,607,380)
• Gary Miller (R-CA- $1,453,324)
• Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL- $1,360,707)
• Lee Terry (R-NE- $1,813,883)
• Patrick Tiberi (R-OH- $4,100,845)

We all, already know that Wall Street rewards its shill handsomely. This post isn't about that. It's about how Paul Ryan never hesitates to sell out the far right base that idolizes him and sticks its collective head in the sand when presented with the evidence that he's nothing-- and has never been anything-- but a shill for Big Business. That's right-- just a garden variety old timey Republican hack, only younger and not as ugly... on the outside. His latest foray on behalf of his Establishment overlords-- to the dismay of the right-wing base-- is how he's embraced immigration reform, which is popular nationally, hated by the Know Nothing and racists who dominate the Tea Party/GOP activist army... and an absolute must for the big money donors who want the cheap labor.

Call it a marriage of convenience. In the battle to win over the majority of the Republican Party on immigration reform an alliance has been formed between two of the GOP's rising stars. Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) has endeavored to assist Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) in his push to convince the Republican Party to go along with the immigration reform plan proposed by the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" group of senators.

Both Rubio and Ryan are widely seen as potential frontrunners for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. Although helping the other will boost their profile in the minds of voters, the risks of sitting on the sidelines during this debate are too great to not take action.

Rubio was a member of the Gang of Eight and this immigration reform effort is widely seen as his first major legislative opportunity to build up a profile in the minds of voters toward 2016. After the release of the plan, Rubio has essentially went all in on efforts to convince fellow Republicans to support it, appearing in ads that tout the plans conservative values, especially border security and no social assistance to undocumented immigrants who go through the 13 year process to become legal. Rubio has essentially tied up much of his political capital in this bill and a defeat would be catastrophic for any future higher office ambitions.

But Rubio has faced backlash from fellow Republican legislators, conservative media pundit, and activists over the plan that emerged last week. From being attempted to be linked to the false "ObamaPhone" meme with "MarcoPhones" to dealing with members of his own party making statements that hurt his cause, such as Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) saying that Al Qaeda terrorists, "are now being trained to come in and act like Hispanic," Rubio has quite a bit of work ahead of him in convincing his fellow republicans to follow his lead on immigration reform.

Ryan is providing support on the fiscal front. Ryan has acquired a status among the Republican Party as a budget wonk so his involvement will be crucial for a House version of the Senate immigration reform bill to pass. His position on Capitol Hill allows him to vouch for the price tag and economic effects of the bill, providing much needed cover for nervous Republicans who would like his stamp of approval for the vote for the bill.

Ryan has already started taking heat for his position on immigration. Conservative radio host Mark Levin blasted Ryan on his program, saying, "he's creating a record here for himself that makes it very, very hard, in my view, if he chooses to run for president, to vote for him."

Listen to a radical right-wing nutjob Mark Levin, a virulent racist on whom it's beginning to dawn that Ryan is no friend of the right-wing base:



Ryan works, first and foremost, for Big Business. They invented him. They dragged him out of obscurity (or a gym), cleaned him up, taught him how to speak politically, taught him how to convince dumb DC pundits that he knows something about economics, got Boehner to make him Budget Chair and Romney to give him the VP nomination... and they're still investing in making him a governor or senator or president or something where he can further their agenda.

And there is nothing higher on the Big Business agenda, prioritized more highly than low taxes on the rich and low wages for the poor. Low wages for the poor means lots of immigrants. That's always been the irony of the GOP base opposing immigration and the GOP Establishment always trying to move it along. Bush certainly did and today Boehner, Rubio and Ryan are. Obviously, they want to do as much damage as they can to any bill that advocates anything smacking of humanitarian values-- like keeping families together and access to public services-- but the corporations who finance their cushy careers want cheap labor and they expect this guys to deliver-- regardless of what loudmouthed bigots like Mark Levin have to say.

The End of Paul Ryan, Economic Policy Wonk!

I heard The Nation's John Nichols on Sly's afternoon radio show on 93.7 FM yesterday extolling a new study that completely destroys Paul Ryan's argument that because of our troublesome debt to GDP ratio, the country could fall at any time. Fear mongering much?

Nichols thought it was a shame this important story came out at a time when so many huge stories were breaking, because this essentially reverses and changes the nations economic equation. After contributing $15 to save The Nation, I purged the guilt I would normally feel posting so much of Nichols article. You can always read the whole article with the link above:

Paul Ryan’s numbers are wrong. Really wrong. As in: his most urgent argument on behalf of painful cuts to federal programs and the denial of new funding for job creation, education, healthcare and infrastructure repair is based on a coding error.

The paper the House Budget Committee chairman has used as the intellectual and statistical underpinning for his austerity agenda has been significantly discredited by the revelation that essential data was excluded from the study, leading "to serious errors that inaccurately represent the relationship between public debt and growth."

The Harvard professors who produced the paper—which Ryan cited as recently as last month—haveacknowledged their mathematical error.

Now, the question is whether Ryan and conservative proponents of austerity will acknowledge that they have built their arguments on a false premise. Ryan positioned himself as an economic "Paul Revere," warning that public debt was stalling out the US economy. This notion was always questioned by savvy economists, such as Center for Economic and Policy Research co-director Dean Baker. But Ryan went all in … preaching an economic gospel based on his absolute certainty that when a country’s debt level tops 90 percent of its gross domestic product, it’s economy will decline and crisis will ensue … how the US economy was heading toward a apocalyptic "tipping point." Ryan has argued that any “pain” suffered by working Americans—in the form of restructurings of Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, post office closures and cuts to state and local aid—was necessary in order to avoid an economic meltdown.

But the 90 percent threshold is a false precipice based on a false premise. In a new paper, "Does High Public Debt Consistently Stifle Economic Growth? A Critique of Reinhart and Rogoff," Thomas Herndon, Michael Ash, and Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst successfully replicate the results … they reached out to Reinhart and Rogoff … to see how Reinhart and Rogoff's data was constructed … First, Reinhart and Rogoff selectively exclude years of high debt and average growth. Second, they use a debatable method to weight the countries. Third, there also appears to be a coding error that excludes high-debt and average-growth countries.

When they included all the data from all the years and all the countries, the average growth rate of nations with a 90 per cent debt load does not decline by 0.1 percent … Rather, the growth rate is a positive 2.2 per cent. Reinhart acknowledged to the CBC News business reporting team that “Herndon, Ash and Pollin have written a useful paper, finding a significant mistake in one of our figures.”

Ryan must either alter course or confirm the darkest assessments from his critics: that he cribs data from academics not with an eye for accuracy but with a determination to advance his austerity agenda at any cost.