|
|
Paul Ryan is so damned smart. He is articulating conservatism in a way that very few people can. Awesome speech.
If the Republican Party wrote a research paper about their campaign points, my history/englush teachers would tear them a new asshole.
Watching this convention is like watching a film noir-- its a train wreck in the making, but you're perversely pleased to be watching it happen.
glad you are both watching the same thing
|
Paul Ryan attacks Obama on medicare, Ryan holds the same position. Then attacks Obama on Simpson - Bowles he was against said plan warned the GOP that if passed Obama would have a victory.
|
On August 30 2012 12:07 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +Paul Ryan is so damned smart. He is articulating conservatism in a way that very few people can. Awesome speech. Show nested quote +If the Republican Party wrote a research paper about their campaign points, my history/englush teachers would tear them a new asshole.
Watching this convention is like watching a film noir-- its a train wreck in the making, but you're perversely pleased to be watching it happen. glad you are both watching the same thing
Well, at least we know who has a poster of Paul Ryan on his wall ...
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
A shirtless one? That would be enticing even for me.
|
On August 30 2012 12:03 ticklishmusic wrote:
If the Republican Party wrote a research paper about their campaign points, my history/english teachers would tear them a new collective butthole. Biased data, quotes out of context, ad hominem, false analogies... its a textbook case of find the logical fallacy.
Watching this convention is like watching a film noir-- its a train wreck in the making, but you're perversely pleased to be watching it happen.
lol next week, can we get your take on the DNC?
|
Speech was laughable and so was the audience clapping at the end of the band's song.
I guess all those old men fell asleep.
|
On August 30 2012 12:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Paul Ryan attacks Obama on medicare, Ryan holds the same position. Then attacks Obama on Simpson - Bowled he was against said plan warned the GOP that if passed Obama would have a victory.
Exactly. Paul Ryan was instrumental in cock-blocking a bipartisan plan that would have reduced the deficit.
The double-speak in that speech was ridiculous.
In a nutshell:
I don't believe in pointing fingers! I believe in personal responsibility! But all YOUR problems are not your fault! They are a result of Obama's leadership! I believe in an America where we (and God) can solve our own problems!
|
Canada11398 Posts
On August 30 2012 11:59 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 11:57 Falling wrote:On August 30 2012 11:55 Kaitlin wrote:On August 30 2012 11:52 Falling wrote:On August 30 2012 11:45 DeepElemBlues wrote:On August 30 2012 11:39 BlueBird. wrote:On August 30 2012 11:32 xDaunt wrote:On August 30 2012 11:27 Falling wrote:On August 30 2012 11:20 xDaunt wrote:On August 30 2012 11:17 Kaitlin wrote:
[quote]
Nah. I was thinking Secretary of Education, or we might need to leave him in NJ to keep them going the right direction. Nikky Haley head of the NLRB. Not sure if Condi would want to be Sec. of State again, but she would work. Can we at least send him to the UN? I really, really want to see him tell other countries to suck our balls in a way that only he is capable. Which is why a lot countries have an issue with American foreign policy. And why Obama was/is much more popular amongst the international community. And why Canada has often tried to position themselves as a mediator between America's 'splendid isolation' and the rest. Can we at least agree that we can never tell the Russians to suck our balls too many times? On a more serious note, I really don't want a foreign policy whose end is to get other countries to like us. I want them to respect, and in some cases, fear us. Above all, I want the unapologetic pursuit of American interests just like how every other country pursues their interests. The fact you just posted about making people "fear" us, as if it's no big deal, makes me question everything that America stands for. We need to make the world a better place for everyone, and being assholes and bullies is not the way to do it. I want other countries to like us, not because we are trying to make them like us, but because our actions as a nation should just be likable by doing things that don't come off as selfish, condescending, and arrogant. Making people fear us, should never ever be on our priority list, ever. Making people fear you is (rightly and sensibly) the number one foreign policy goal of any nation, for obvious reasons (if you think about it). Doing it by proxy is almost as good, that's why small countries ally themselves to big ones. To make other big countries scared of trying to push them around or gobble them up. Is it though? I can't imagine Canada allied with US in order to make other nations fear them. The only country Canada would care to make afraid would be US itself. If it is fear based, then if anything, it would be out of fear that US would gobble up Canada otherwise (memories of Manifest Destiny). It's rather incidental that few would attack Canada because they'd risk war with US. Far more likely, Canada's foreign policy was dictated by economic reasons (needing a natural trading partner when they lost exclusive trade with Britain.) I wonder if at some point if Canada and the U.S. weren't allies, the former Soviet Union would have cut across Sarah Palin's yard and come for your oil ... The deterrent of being aligned with the U.S. prevented that possibility. I'll grant you that. But the close allegiance between Canada and US predates Cold War politics. For the longest time, the biggest threat to Canada... was the US. Democracy spreads through trade, not takeover. I may be wrong, but are there any examples of a democracy taking over another democracy ?
Well that's rather my point. It seems Canada's foreign policy was as much guided by trade as it was by trying to make other people afraid of them or their allies. Sure for awhile Canada had the possible backing of the RN (in the later years that wasn't exactly a sure thing), but the switch to allying with US had less to do with trying to make some other country fear Canada and more out of economic self-interest. I mean it's not a zero-sum argument as both are certainly major factors. I just wonder if this is the primary factor vs being tied with economic self-interest or just behind economic.
|
BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state?
![[image loading]](http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e2017c318ba2e9970b-550wi)
|
I have a feeling FactCheck.org will be busy tonight lol.
|
Ryan didn't blame Obama for the plant closing.
Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, 'I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.' That’s what he said in 2008.
Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight."
It's a contrast of Obama's rhetoric with reality. Government was supposed to make things right again, didn't happen.
|
Condi referenced an interest in Education Reform during an interview with Andrea Mitchell. I wonder if she would be a candidate for Sec. of Education.
|
On August 30 2012 12:19 Defacer wrote:BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state?
Proof? I am all for mass democrat/socialist circle jerks but all I am reading is "BULLSHIT, FUCK HIM, ITS ALL LIES" Links please. I wish the same discussion would come up when Obama Milhouse makes speeches because I could do the same but no one listens to those.
|
On August 30 2012 12:22 DeepElemBlues wrote:Ryan didn't blame Obama for the plant closing. Show nested quote +Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, 'I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.' That’s what he said in 2008.
Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight." It's a contrast of Obama's rhetoric with reality. Government was supposed to make things right again, didn't happen.
Alright, fair enough.
|
On August 30 2012 12:30 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 12:22 DeepElemBlues wrote:Ryan didn't blame Obama for the plant closing. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, 'I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.' That’s what he said in 2008.
Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight." It's a contrast of Obama's rhetoric with reality. Government was supposed to make things right again, didn't happen. Alright, fair enough.
You can interpret it either way really, I would have worded it more clearly. Something more like: "Well, the plant closed, and the president's efforts at government support didn't bring it back, or bring back so many of the other factories and businesses that had to close down."
|
On August 30 2012 12:24 CajunMan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 12:19 Defacer wrote:BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state? Proof? I am all for mass democrat/socialist circle jerks but all I am reading is "BULLSHIT, FUCK HIM, ITS ALL LIES" Links please. I wish the same discussion would come up when Obama Milhouse makes speeches because I could do the same but no one listens to those.
BOOM.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/17/paul-ryan-used-government-funds-and-power-to-try-and-save-gm-plant-in-his-district.html
Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, was a leading member of a task force convened by the state’s Democratic governor in 2008, Jim Doyle, to save a once-flourishing automobile plant in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, according to state officials.
After General Motors announced on June 3, 2008 that it intended to close the nearly 100-year-old plant by 2010, Ryan joined a core group of about a dozen other Wisconsin officials from both parties in the GM Retention Task Force. Their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the company suspended all operations at the facility by Dec. 23, 2008, eliminating 2,400 jobs. It has been in “standby” mode since.
In his role on the task force, Ryan—the House Budget Committee chair whose plans to reduce the size of government and with it the extent of what he’s called “crony capitalism” made him a national figure—negotiated directly with GM executives; about how a taxpayer-funded; “incentive package” to try to convince the company to keep the plant in his district running.
Ryan was one of 32 Republicans who voted for the $14 billion auto bailout in December 2008, arguing at the time that it was a better idea than using TARP money, which he opposed. A month before the bill passed, he warned about the dangerous precedent the bailout would set: "Is it airlines? Steel companies? Is it widget manufacturers? Where does it end?"
The task force of which Ryan was a member went as far as to explore the possibility of using funds from the $789 billion stimulus deal approved by Congress, task-force members said, a package Ryan voted against and publicly called a “wasteful spending spree.”
One reason why House members rarely end up on presidential tickets, aside from representing far fewer voters than senators or governors, is that they have to balance their national views with the needs of their districts (and Ryan’s in particular heavily dependent on the auto industry). While Ryan initially denied an Associated Press report this week that, despite opposing the bill, he’d asked for stimulus money for two companies in his district, he later acknowledged he had, calling it a “constituent-service matter.”
Ryan did everything he could to get GM to stay, even offering and petitioning for government assistance, but GM didn't bite.
|
Just to be clear ... I don't think Ryan is wrong to criticize Obama or the administration, or petition for more fiscal responsibility, even if he did try to save the GM plant in his town using stimulus money.
But why do these politicians -- on both sides -- have to use such weak and distorted examples? In an age where anyone can just fact-check anything at the drop of a hat?
Why can't the argument be more nuanced. Like 'The stimulus saved a lot of jobs ... but not every job. It should have and could have done better."
|
On August 30 2012 12:34 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 12:24 CajunMan wrote:On August 30 2012 12:19 Defacer wrote:BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state? Proof? I am all for mass democrat/socialist circle jerks but all I am reading is "BULLSHIT, FUCK HIM, ITS ALL LIES" Links please. I wish the same discussion would come up when Obama Milhouse makes speeches because I could do the same but no one listens to those. BOOM. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/17/paul-ryan-used-government-funds-and-power-to-try-and-save-gm-plant-in-his-district.htmlShow nested quote +Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, was a leading member of a task force convened by the state’s Democratic governor in 2008, Jim Doyle, to save a once-flourishing automobile plant in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, according to state officials.
After General Motors announced on June 3, 2008 that it intended to close the nearly 100-year-old plant by 2010, Ryan joined a core group of about a dozen other Wisconsin officials from both parties in the GM Retention Task Force. Their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the company suspended all operations at the facility by Dec. 23, 2008, eliminating 2,400 jobs. It has been in “standby” mode since.
In his role on the task force, Ryan—the House Budget Committee chair whose plans to reduce the size of government and with it the extent of what he’s called “crony capitalism” made him a national figure—negotiated directly with GM executives; about how a taxpayer-funded; “incentive package” to try to convince the company to keep the plant in his district running.
Ryan was one of 32 Republicans who voted for the $14 billion auto bailout in December 2008, arguing at the time that it was a better idea than using TARP money, which he opposed. A month before the bill passed, he warned about the dangerous precedent the bailout would set: "Is it airlines? Steel companies? Is it widget manufacturers? Where does it end?"
The task force of which Ryan was a member went as far as to explore the possibility of using funds from the $789 billion stimulus deal approved by Congress, task-force members said, a package Ryan voted against and publicly called a “wasteful spending spree.”
One reason why House members rarely end up on presidential tickets, aside from representing far fewer voters than senators or governors, is that they have to balance their national views with the needs of their districts (and Ryan’s in particular heavily dependent on the auto industry). While Ryan initially denied an Associated Press report this week that, despite opposing the bill, he’d asked for stimulus money for two companies in his district, he later acknowledged he had, calling it a “constituent-service matter.” Ryan did everything he could to get GM to stay, even offering and petitioning for government assistance, but GM didn't bite.
I would say, and do say, So? It's an example of government (Paul Ryan) trying to offer government support, and he failed. Not exactly an example of government being effective. That's spin, but also, the battle was already lost. TARP and the bailouts were happening, why not try to get money for the plant? It's not going to help anyone to not try to get on the horse after it's ran out the barn door even if you wanted that barn door closed and not opened even an inch.
A little Abraham Lincoln as well: I do not think much of a man who does not know more today than he did yesterday. If Ryan didn't know enough then and tried to get money for that plant, he knows enough now to know it wasn't a good idea.
|
On August 30 2012 12:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 12:34 Defacer wrote:On August 30 2012 12:24 CajunMan wrote:On August 30 2012 12:19 Defacer wrote:BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state? Proof? I am all for mass democrat/socialist circle jerks but all I am reading is "BULLSHIT, FUCK HIM, ITS ALL LIES" Links please. I wish the same discussion would come up when Obama Milhouse makes speeches because I could do the same but no one listens to those. BOOM. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/17/paul-ryan-used-government-funds-and-power-to-try-and-save-gm-plant-in-his-district.htmlWisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, was a leading member of a task force convened by the state’s Democratic governor in 2008, Jim Doyle, to save a once-flourishing automobile plant in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, according to state officials.
After General Motors announced on June 3, 2008 that it intended to close the nearly 100-year-old plant by 2010, Ryan joined a core group of about a dozen other Wisconsin officials from both parties in the GM Retention Task Force. Their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the company suspended all operations at the facility by Dec. 23, 2008, eliminating 2,400 jobs. It has been in “standby” mode since.
In his role on the task force, Ryan—the House Budget Committee chair whose plans to reduce the size of government and with it the extent of what he’s called “crony capitalism” made him a national figure—negotiated directly with GM executives; about how a taxpayer-funded; “incentive package” to try to convince the company to keep the plant in his district running.
Ryan was one of 32 Republicans who voted for the $14 billion auto bailout in December 2008, arguing at the time that it was a better idea than using TARP money, which he opposed. A month before the bill passed, he warned about the dangerous precedent the bailout would set: "Is it airlines? Steel companies? Is it widget manufacturers? Where does it end?"
The task force of which Ryan was a member went as far as to explore the possibility of using funds from the $789 billion stimulus deal approved by Congress, task-force members said, a package Ryan voted against and publicly called a “wasteful spending spree.”
One reason why House members rarely end up on presidential tickets, aside from representing far fewer voters than senators or governors, is that they have to balance their national views with the needs of their districts (and Ryan’s in particular heavily dependent on the auto industry). While Ryan initially denied an Associated Press report this week that, despite opposing the bill, he’d asked for stimulus money for two companies in his district, he later acknowledged he had, calling it a “constituent-service matter.” Ryan did everything he could to get GM to stay, even offering and petitioning for government assistance, but GM didn't bite. I would say, and do say, So? It's an example of government (Paul Ryan) trying to offer government support, and he failed. Not exactly an example of government being effective. A little Abraham Lincoln as well: I do not think much of a man who does not know more today than he did yesterday. If Ryan didn't know enough then and tried to get money for that plant, he knows enough now to know it wasn't a good idea.
See post above. Not a big deal. The guy was asking for proof, is all.
|
On August 30 2012 12:42 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 12:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:On August 30 2012 12:34 Defacer wrote:On August 30 2012 12:24 CajunMan wrote:On August 30 2012 12:19 Defacer wrote:BTW, that plant the Ryan described, that closed in his state? Proof? I am all for mass democrat/socialist circle jerks but all I am reading is "BULLSHIT, FUCK HIM, ITS ALL LIES" Links please. I wish the same discussion would come up when Obama Milhouse makes speeches because I could do the same but no one listens to those. BOOM. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/17/paul-ryan-used-government-funds-and-power-to-try-and-save-gm-plant-in-his-district.htmlWisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, was a leading member of a task force convened by the state’s Democratic governor in 2008, Jim Doyle, to save a once-flourishing automobile plant in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, according to state officials.
After General Motors announced on June 3, 2008 that it intended to close the nearly 100-year-old plant by 2010, Ryan joined a core group of about a dozen other Wisconsin officials from both parties in the GM Retention Task Force. Their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the company suspended all operations at the facility by Dec. 23, 2008, eliminating 2,400 jobs. It has been in “standby” mode since.
In his role on the task force, Ryan—the House Budget Committee chair whose plans to reduce the size of government and with it the extent of what he’s called “crony capitalism” made him a national figure—negotiated directly with GM executives; about how a taxpayer-funded; “incentive package” to try to convince the company to keep the plant in his district running.
Ryan was one of 32 Republicans who voted for the $14 billion auto bailout in December 2008, arguing at the time that it was a better idea than using TARP money, which he opposed. A month before the bill passed, he warned about the dangerous precedent the bailout would set: "Is it airlines? Steel companies? Is it widget manufacturers? Where does it end?"
The task force of which Ryan was a member went as far as to explore the possibility of using funds from the $789 billion stimulus deal approved by Congress, task-force members said, a package Ryan voted against and publicly called a “wasteful spending spree.”
One reason why House members rarely end up on presidential tickets, aside from representing far fewer voters than senators or governors, is that they have to balance their national views with the needs of their districts (and Ryan’s in particular heavily dependent on the auto industry). While Ryan initially denied an Associated Press report this week that, despite opposing the bill, he’d asked for stimulus money for two companies in his district, he later acknowledged he had, calling it a “constituent-service matter.” Ryan did everything he could to get GM to stay, even offering and petitioning for government assistance, but GM didn't bite. I would say, and do say, So? It's an example of government (Paul Ryan) trying to offer government support, and he failed. Not exactly an example of government being effective. A little Abraham Lincoln as well: I do not think much of a man who does not know more today than he did yesterday. If Ryan didn't know enough then and tried to get money for that plant, he knows enough now to know it wasn't a good idea. See post above.
I don't think it's distorting or being hypocritical when politicians say things like this. I think it's the gotcha mentality. You opposed this spending but then you tried to get some of it directed to your district! Gasp! Well the money was going to be spent somewhere regardless. The fight to not spend it was over and done with and lost, so why not try to get some of it? Principle? The principle of cutting off your nose to spite your face?
You can extend that, in my opinion, to most situations where politicians are accused of hypocrisy, not just on spending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
