Why is this comic making me think about science? » « Mary’s Monday Metazoan: It’s a good day to fly

The Zombie-Eyed Granny Starver

That’s Paul Ryan’s official new title, granted by Charles Pierce, the one political commentator you must read this election season. He’s got Ryan pegged.

Paul Ryan is an authentically dangerous zealot. He does not want to reform entitlements. He wants to eliminate them. He wants to eliminate them because he doesn’t believe they are a legitimate function of government. He is a smiling, aw-shucks murderer of opportunity, a creator of dystopias in which he never will have to live. This now is an argument not over what kind of political commonwealth we will have, but rather whether or not we will have one at all, because Paul Ryan does not believe in the most primary institution of that commonwealth: our government. The first three words of the Preamble to the Constitution make a lie out of every speech he’s ever given. He looks at the country and sees its government as something alien that is holding down the individual entrepreneurial genius of 200 million people, and not as their creation, and the vehicle through which that genius can be channelled for the general welfare.

The other appalling thing about Ryan is how much the media is puling about how smart he is, and calling him a brilliant policy wonk (also hammered on by Pierce). Ryan is a guy with a bachelor’s degree in economics whose entire career is defined by political gladhanding and devotion to far-right ideological nonsense. He’s not particularly well-qualified; a BA is a degree that gives you a general knowledge of the basics of a field, and it’s a good thing, but it does not turn you into an expert. Ryan’s degree in economics is worth about as much as Bobby Jindal’s degree in biology.

OK, one other guy you should listen to: Paul Krugman.

What [Saletan]’s doing – and what the whole Beltway media crowd has done – is to slot Ryan into a role someone is supposed to be playing in their political play, that of the thoughtful, serious conservative wonk. In reality, Ryan is nothing like that; he’s a hard-core conservative, with a voting record as far right as Michelle Bachman’s, who has shown no competence at all on the numbers thing.

What Ryan is good at is exploiting the willful gullibility of the Beltway media, using a soft-focus style to play into their desire to have a conservative wonk they can say nice things about. And apparently the trick still works.

That’s the painful spectacle we’re going to be suffering through for the next few months: Mitt Romney pretending to be a human capable of empathy, and Paul Ryan pretending to be serious and intelligent. And the media will play right along.

Why is this comic making me think about science? » « Mary’s Monday Metazoan: It’s a good day to fly

Comments

  1. mythbri says

    Ryan has constructed a narrative that paints him as a relative outsider who is smart, quick, savvy, and all of those other words that are acceptable to the Republican base as synonyms for “intellectual” (which is a dirty word). He has to come off that way so that it can seem that he “reasoned” his way into his political positions – that the positions he espouses “just make sense”. This perception of him is supposed to lend credibility to his ridiculous budget plan, and it has worked. The media love a darling like that. It makes for a good story.

  2. Stevarious says

    What [Saletan]’s doing – and what the whole Beltway media crowd has done – is to slot Ryan into a role someone is supposed to be playing in their political play,

    I suspect the articles were already written before the announcement. It didn’t MATTER who Romney picked, because they already planned on calling his pick a “brilliant policy wonk” and everything else, no matter who he picked. He could have tapped Rick Perry or Rand Paul and the articles would be the same.

  3. phud says

    It is interesting that yet another sociopath, radical ideologue, and supposed Xian wants to kill a program that he himself took advantage of; namely, the Social Security Dependent benefit that Ryan received from the age of sixteen when his father died until he graduated from Miami University (Oxford, Ohio).

  4. says

    I’ll give the GOP one thing, they play the media like a fiddle. Put the little flag pin on your lapel, smile with those dead eyes, coach your classist, sexist and racist beliefs in polite terms and watch as even the so called “liberal” media eat from your hand.

  6. says

    Ryan’s bachelor’s degree in an actual academic discipline makes him an intellectual giant to the Tea Party morans. (In fact, it might even render him suspect!)

  7. theophontes (坏蛋) says

    @ OP

    And the media will play right along.

    Then hammer the media. Education is repetition. A lot of the media today (particularly blogs and online magazines) allow for comments. Disassemble their dodgy arguments with better ones – at every opportunity. Democracy is not just about voting, it is about making sure that one’s voice is heard … and understood.

    Correcting this mob’s lies will only come from getting the truth out there. If the media fail, they can be challenged. More forum and less podium.

    (Did I mention: Education is repetition?)

  8. equisetum says

    In fact, it might even render him suspect!

    How’s this for a headline: Paul Ryan, closet elitist.

    That should at least make them think. Oh, wait . . .

  9. theophontes (坏蛋) says

    @ phud

    Social Security Dependent benefit that Ryan received from the age of sixteen when his father died until he graduated from Miami University

    As I understood this, he saved the money while at school – because he did not really need it – and then repurposed it for whatever. In this case getting a degree. (Not the purpose of the Social Security Dependent scheme in the first place. He is the “freeloader” he is now attacking.)

  10. robro says

    …Paul Ryan does not believe in the most primary institution of that commonwealth: our government.

    It’s fascinatingly self-contradictory that a guy like Paul Ryan, who has spent his entire professional career working in government, wants to kill it.

    The first three words of the Preamble to the Constitution make a lie out of every speech he’s ever given.

    There are a few other words in the Preamble that the Ryan ilk seem to forget such as “promote the general welfare” or “establish justice.”

  11. says

    If elected, Romney and Ryan will certainly achieve something in their first year that Obama didn’t achieve in his four: Make Obama look like a good president.

  12. crocswsocks says

    Can you guys direct me to a good site I can use to dissuade someone I know from voting for Romney/Ryan?

  14. Brownian says

    It’s fascinatingly self-contradictory that a guy like Paul Ryan, who has spent his entire professional career working in government, wants to kill it.

    Conservative and libertarian politicians think that they are the only people who should be drawing a salary from the taxpayers.

  15. raven says

    I’ll give the GOP one thing, they play the media like a fiddle.

    That is not hard at all.

    The GOP owns much or most of the media.

  17. Q.E.D says

    The GOP isn’t even bothering to hide it’s psychopathic, Randian worldview that the rich are deserving ubermensch and the rest of society are undeserving, sponging, scum. This is the guy Romney selected as VP candidate:

    [T]he reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism.” – Paul Ryan in 2005 in a speech he gave to the Atlas Society, the Washington-based think tank devoted to keeping Rand’s “objectivist” philosophy alive.

    Let’s revisit Rand’s Atlas Shrugged:

    Atlas Shrugged, published in 1957, depicts a United States crippled by government intervention in which heroic millionaires struggle against a nation of spongers. The millionaires, whom she portrays as Atlas holding the world aloft, withdraw their labour, with the result that the nation collapses. It is rescued, through unregulated greed and selfishness, by one of the heroic plutocrats, John Galt.

    A Manifesto for Psychopaths

  18. bodach says

    Charlie writes something every day; his long posts are a must read.
    His caustic wit fits right in with the pharyngula regulars.

  19. equisetum says

    crocswsocks: You might point him here to start, or to Krugman.
    And good luck.

    I’m waiting for Rachel Maddow’s take on this. She’s usually spot on with her critiques. And funny.

  20. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Paul Ryan is trying to prevent future Paul Ryans from getting benefits. Why does he need the competition?

  21. says

    Back in the day when I was on the staff of the California state senate, the halls of the capitol were haunted by a senator whose basic argument was that government cannot do anything right. He then proceeded to try to prove his point by screwing up as many things as possible. It was both fascinating and disgusting to watch in action. He helped to defeat reform measures in Sacramento in hopes of making things worse and sparking an anti-government revolt, which eventually blossomed into Proposition 13, the infamously draconian property-tax slashing measure. “The legislature failed to pass tax relief!” he screamed, having voted against it several times. “The people must rise up and enact it themselves!”

    Elegant, isn’t it? Yelling “this doesn’t work!” while hammering at it with a sledge hammer. Irrefutable logic, too.

  22. says

    I’m cross posting here a few comments I posted earlier today on the old Paul Ryan thread.

    Steve Benen is completely fed up with the political pundits worshipping Paul Ryan, and rightly so. I’m fed up too. If one more new story tells me about how serious, good looking, intelligent, and brave Paul Ryan is I’m going to upchuck.

    Look beyond the facade people. Even his vaunted numbers don’t add up. This is not serious. It’s more like Ryan is still in college writing papers and needing a red pencil edit from a more knowledgeable professor.

    Any sign of some intelligence is taken by the wingnuts as genius, but Ryan really is missing the mark. I guess love is blind.

    Ryan is a real fiscal conservative. He isn’t just another Tea-Party ideologue spouting dogma about less government and the magic of free enterprise. He has actually crunched the numbers and laid out long-term budget proposals. — wingnut William Saletan

    Oohh, look, he actually did something all by himself — no matter that it is bunkum.

    Excerpts from Benen’s article:

    I realize I’m tilting at windmills here. The political/media establishment has decided, practically by edict, that Paul Ryan is a credible wonk whose work must be respected. Proof to the contrary doesn’t matter; this characterization is now accepted fact. Why? Because the establishment says it is thus, so stop asking questions….

    Ryan was a member of the Simpson-Bowles commission, but rejected their debt-reduction plan. He also reviewed President Obama’s $4 trillion debt-reduction plan last year, and rejected it, too.

    … It’s true that Ryan crafted a budget plan that brutally cuts investments in domestic priorities like education, health care, and programs that benefit struggling families. Isn’t this evidence of fiscal conservatism? Doesn’t that prove Ryan has the “courage” to make “tough calls”?

    Actually, no. For one thing, there’s nothing “courageous” about redistributing wealth from the bottom up, asking those without to suffer more. For another, Ryan’s budget redirects those savings into tax cuts, not debt reduction, which is pretty much the opposite of “fiscal conservatism.”

    But at least Ryan’s plan makes gets the nation’s finances under control, right? Wrong.

    Rep. Paul Ryan made absolutely clear that he is not now and never was interested in deficit reduction. After a couple of years of being lauded by deficit hawks as the man prepared to make hard choices, he proposed a budget that would not end deficits until 2040 but would cut taxes by $4.6 trillion over a decade while also extending all of the Bush tax cuts, adding an additional $5.4 trillion to the deficit. Ryan would increase military expenditures and then eviscerate the rest of the federal government.

    Oh yes, Ryan claims he’d make up for the losses from his new tax cuts with “tax reform” but offered not a single detail. A “plan” with a hole this big is not a plan at all.

    I can’t explain why so many in media choose not to believe these facts. I really wish I knew why otherwise-sensible people put aside their critical thinking skills and choose not to read Ryan’s actual work before praising it….

    “I reacted too quickly and didn’t sort out just how laughable Ryan’s long-term spending projections were. His plan projects an absurd future, according to the Congressional Budget Office, in which all discretionary spending, now around 12 percent of GDP, shrinks to 3 percent of GDP by 2050. Defense spending alone was 4.7 percent of GDP in 2009. With numbers like that, Ryan is more an anarchist-libertarian than honest conservative.” — Jacob Weisberg

    Why do we have so few intelligent, skeptical media people in Washington? Or is it just that most of them are lazy? Or perhaps the lazy fuckers get the center stage position?

  23. says

    On CBS’s 60 Minutes yesterday, Paul Ryan said that he will follow Romney’s lead when it comes to releasing his tax returns.

    Also, Romney worked very hard to make Ryan sound like he’s not a career politician nor a Washington insider, though of course Ryan is both.

  24. says

    So, Paul Ryan is in Iowa making speeches to counter Obama’s campaign in Iowa. And Ryan is backing Romney up on the false welfare ads.

    Luckily, the Koch brothers don’t own the Des Moines Register. The newspaper is greeting the Romney/Ryan campaign with a story about one of their lies.

    On the same day that VP candidate Paul Ryan plans to attack President Obama for taking the work requirement out of welfare, the editorial board of the Des Moines Register, the state’s largest paper, called the welfare attacks false.

    “Everyone agrees Americans collecting ‘cash welfare’ should meet work requirements. And they do,” the editors write. “A recent policy tweak to the program by President Barack Obama’s administration does not undermine that. Yet Mitt Romney can’t pass up this one.”

    It continues:

    The presumptive Republican presidential nominee wants voters to conjure images in their minds of freeloading moms sitting on couches watching big screen televisions. And he wants voters to think the president is helping them do just that.

    Then there is reality.

    Only about 15,000 Iowans actually receive a meager monthly check from Uncle Sam. Collecting an average of $334 a month for less than two years probably is not covering utilities and school clothes, let alone putting anyone on Easy Street. Requirements are so stringent, the program that once served more than 14 million Americans now helps only about 4 million.

    But the idea of anyone “sponging off the system” is apparently something Romney believes voters will rally behind him to oppose.

    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/iowa-paper-calls-romney-welfare-attack-false.

  25. says

    In case you haven’t seen it yet, here’s an article that includes video of the second(!) false welfare ad from the Romney campaign:

    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/romney-releases-second-welfare-attack-ad

    Link to story that includes video of first false welfare ad.

    These dirty dealings follow hard on the heels of Romney telling President Obama to get his (Obama’s) campaign out of the gutter, and of Ryan pumping up the myth that Obama does not address the issues but does make personal attacks.

    Whining and lying.

  26. says

    Did you notice that Ryan (in CBS “60 Minutes” interview) said he had to give “several years” of tax returns to the Romney campaign during the VP vetting process? Romney needs to see more than two years of tax returns, but we the people can just fuck off.

  27. says

    An nicely detailed article by Sahil Kapur puts reality back into the Medicare debate.

    Excerpt below:

    Lost in the back and forth between the Obama and Romney campaigns over who’s the real Medicare cutter is a critical difference between visions: President Obama’s plan is to make the program solvent by reducing payments to health care providers, while Rep. Paul Ryan achieves his savings by transforming Medicare into a voucher-like system….

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/difference-between-paul-ryan-barack-obama-medicare.php

  28. says

    The Maddow Blog sees the fight over the Medicare message as potentially very troubling. Paul Ryan is on deck to sell bullshit, and like Steve Benen, I’m afraid he will succeed.

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/13/13258482-an-election-about-medicare?

    Excerpts below:

    Both sides claim to be helping Medicare, and both sides say their rivals are hurting Medicare. Only one is being cynically, breathtakingly dishonest, but since it’s easy to get confused, let’s set the record straight.

    President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, recognizing Medicare’s long-term financing challenges, found significant savings in the program. What kind of savings? As Sahil Kapur noted, they come “largely in the form of reduced payments to hospitals, discounts on Medicaid prescription drugs, and pay cuts to private insurers under Medicare Advantage.”

    The savings help extend the financial health of the Medicare program — without touching Medicare benefits — and were endorsed by the AARP. What’s more, the savings go “back into the pockets of people who need help with their medical bills,” not to pay for tax cut for millionaires.

    Romney now wants voters to believe these “cuts” are evidence that Obama is “gutting” Medicare. The Republican must realize he’s lying — the savings strengthen the Medicare system. Indeed, Paul Ryan’s own budget plan embraces the identical savings. If Obama wants to “cut Medicare funding by $700 billion,” then Romney’s own running mate also wants to “cut Medicare funding by $700 billion” — and then some.

    And that leads us to the Ryan plan for Medicare.

    Under the congressional Republican budget plan, which Romney has enthusiastically endorsed more than once, Medicare as it currently exists would be destroyed. In its place, there’d be a new, privatized system that would be called Medicare, but which would function very differently.

    Seniors would be given a modest voucher that they would use to purchase insurance in the private market. The voucher would not keep up with the growing costs of seniors’ medical care, and it’d be up the elderly and their families to somehow make up the difference, because the guaranteed benefit of the Medicare program would be gone.

    The money saved by this scheme would go — you guessed it — to pay for tax cuts, not health care, and not debt reduction.

  29. says

    I am sick of these douchey republicans arguing that they should have much easier jobs with no reduction in salary. why the fuck would anyone vote for someone whose platform is essentially “I should have far fewer job responsibilities”?

  30. says

    A more concise exposé of the Romney/Ryan campaign tactic when it comes to Medicare debate:

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/13/13259945-doubling-down-on-the-welfare-lie

    Excerpt below:

    Consider a brief series of events.

    Step One: Mitt Romney lies in an attack ad, falsely claiming that President Obama “gut welfare reform by dropping work requirements.”

    Step Two: Romney watches fact-checkers go berserk, condemning the ad for being demonstrably false.

    Step Three: Romney expresses amazement that President Obama “keeps on running” ads, even after “the various fact-checkers” deem the spots “inaccurate.”

    Step Four: Romney launches a new attack ad accusing Obama of “quietly ending work requirements” in the welfare law — an accusation that has no connection to this plane of reality.

  31. says

    Why do we have so few intelligent, skeptical media people in Washington? Or is it just that most of them are lazy? Or perhaps the lazy fuckers get the center stage position?

    the lazy fuckers absolutely get center stage position. Millionaires want a raise and they own most media, so there are ideological controls in place. Anyone who has journalistic integrity is unlikely to make it far in such a system, they probably get derailed to irrelevant bullshit early on.

  32. says

    Anyone who has journalistic integrity is unlikely to make it far in such a system, they probably get derailed to irrelevant bullshit early on.

    Yes. I am reminded of Republican threats to cut off funding for NPR.

  34. says

    Paul Ryan is trying to prevent future Paul Ryans from getting benefits

    I paper I can support Paul Ryan’s position of stopping future Paul Ryans. We apparently agree that the world needs less Paul Ryans

  35. anteprepro says

    crocswsocks: Send them here , stand over their shoulder and make sure they read and fully comprehend every word. If they still think it is okay to vote Republican, then they are beyond hope. The only way that you could hope to get them to not vote for Romney is to convince them that Mormonism is The Devil or that Romney’s governorship showed he was Librul. Their reaction would have at least informed that all appeals to logic, facts and human decency will be fruitless.

    You can try though. You can try to explain the tired old, hypocritical “activist judges” bullshit that “The Courts and the Constitution” is clearly gesturing towards. Explain how his approach to Education is to make sure people have THE RIGHT to abandon “failing” schools and how he loves to see schools focusing on Teaching to the Test. How it is ridiculous that his Energy page blames lack of innovation on Teh Environmentalists and wants to make sure that we properly way Environmental Safety against the equal priority of Making Money. How it is absurd that his Gun Rights policy is to completely ignore any problems that excessive numbers of guns causes us and to oppose any regulations or restrictions, period. That is profoundly stupid that Mitt’s page on Health Care mocks Obama for the number of pages of his health care law and calls it a “government takeover”. That he opposes labor unions (ironically, speaking only about labor unions and not about companies themselves when complaining about “politicking”) and laws regulating how companies handle employment (The Right to Discriminate!). He buys into the fearmongering regarding immigration leaving us open to terrorists and wants to create a “high-tech fence” on the border. Make it clear that he deserves mockery for his complaining that Obama cut the defense budget and that the military isn’t using new, cutting-edge equipment and that we only have 284 ships and 40 fighter squadrons, which isn’t enough to have a “role of global presence” and we need a massive force in order to prevent war (and also there are too many civilians and supervisors). Mention that he wants to apply more pressure to Russia, for some reason, and to China, because BUSINESS. Mention wants to cut the corporate tax rate (and also cut a bunch of other taxes, because taxes bad). Note that he ridiculously blames Obama for an increase in federal spending that has been part of decades old trend and puts his weight behind the ridiculous “debt ceiling” nontroversy. Allude to the fact that he wants to ditch public broadcasting and national endowment for the arts in order to nickel-and-dime and wants to ditch support for Family Planning because PLANNED PARENTHOOD. Yes, he wants to overturn Roe v. Wade, opposes non-adult stem-cell research, and supports “traditional” marriage and wants to defend DOMA and create a law where marriage is defined as One Man-One Woman. And he claims that Obama’s decisions in Afghanistan are a “Failure” entirely because on speculation about a potential withdrawal in the next few months being a political decision to benefit Obama during the election.

    If you can get your friend to understand why all of the above is nonsense, you will have won any misinformed or ignorant rube who got tricked into voting Republican. Otherwise, your specimen is too far gone to completely save, and you just need to convince them that the voting booth is a anti-Christian, socialist conspiracy. Good luck.

  36. Ed Seedhouse says

    I hate to bring this up, but wouldn’t the most effective way to hurt him politically be that his economic ideas and beliefs follow those of a notorious Atheist? How would the crazy religious right react to that. An Atheist’s follower one heartbeat from the White house, imagine!

    Obama should recommend that tea party members actually read Ayn Rand. I bet they can find lots of sound bytes of Ryan praising her to back up their case with.

    Ugly, ugly, ugly idea. But what if it keeps a mediocre president in for one more term and keeps the psychopathic candidates out? Mediocre is a lot better than crazy.

  37. DLC says

    Depressing, isn’t it. Romney and Ryan. Sounds like a bad vaudeville act. Dumb Ryan’s express. Of course, this sets Ryan up to run for President in 2016.

  38. raven says

    I hate to bring this up, but wouldn’t the most effective way to hurt him politically be that his economic ideas and beliefs follow those of a notorious Atheist?

    Naw.

    They are all hypocrites. It’s the fundies third major sacrament.

    Despite all their god babble, their presidential candidate isn’t even a xian, according to most xians.

  39. Pteryxx says

    More on Romney’s welfare lies, via my friend who’s actually ON welfare:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/08/07/romney-claims-obama-guts-welfare-work-requirements-by-doing-precisely-what-romney-requested-in-2005/

    Contrary to the hysterics of the Obama opposition, the modification, which allows the Department of HHS to waive certain state requirements under the law, does not make any significant change in the substance of the law. Rather, the modification—which comes in the form of the occasional waiver— is a response to the many states seeking more control over how they administer their welfare program. These states have discovered that the federal requirements are tying up too many welfare workers and resources with cumbersome paperwork, resulting in less time being spent by welfare workers on actually helping those getting assistance find the work they need to keep, and ultimately no longer need, the government aid.

    The waiver would also permit states to tighten up on some language in the federal law that allows welfare recipients to claim unpaid internships and other such endeavors as qualifiers for welfare rather that getting actual, paying jobs.

    So, the states ask for more power to operate their welfare programs in a way they believe will produce a better local result than the system required by the federal government…the Obama Administration agrees to this request in the understanding that the states are in a better position than the central government to determine what works for them….and the Republicans go nuts.

    Are you starting to grasp the concept of pretzel logic?

  40. r3a50n says

    And the media will play right along.

    To be fair, you, PZ, are part of “the media,” though not in the traditional sense. As a blogger, you are part of what has been called “new media” while the folks that I believe you are referring to represent the “traditional media.”

    I think it is a good idea to make that distinction, i.e. “and the traditional media will play right along,” because you won’t and neither will many others that represent new media.

  42. Alukonis, metal ninja says

    Romney and Ryan are both such colossal douches that I’m actually surprised their close proximity to each other hasn’t yet formed a douche singularity that destroys the earth.

    Maybe not the earth, but at least the campaign bus.

  43. BeyondUnderstanding says

    I hate to bring this up, but wouldn’t the most effective way to hurt him politically be that his economic ideas and beliefs follow those of a notorious Atheist?

    He’s already been confronted about it. He just weaseled out of it.

    “I reject her philosophy,” Ryan told Robert Costa of the National Review. “It’s an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview.” He added that he had merely “enjoyed a couple of her novels.”

  44. carlie says

    I saw somewhere else recently (probably an ftb, and I’m embarrassed I don’t remember the source) a comment that would be a devastating ad to the Romney campaign. It suggested something like a picture of a middle-aged person, with the narration “You’ve paid into Medicare for over 30 years. Now that you can use it, Romney and Ryan want to cut the amount you get down to a quarter of what it should be. And they want to give all that money to millionaires now as a tax break.” If only the Democrats were smart enough to do that.

  45. says

    skeptifem:

    I am sick of these douchey republicans arguing that they should have much easier jobs with no reduction in salary. why the fuck would anyone vote for someone whose platform is essentially “I should have far fewer job responsibilities”?

    Bingo. I never understood the appeal of the “government can’t be trusted, vote for me!” politicians.

  46. says

    I’m always amazed when people cite the American media for anything, as if that made it true. It’s hard to get real facts about what’s going on in the world, but a good first step is to never listen to or read anything produced by US ‘news’ organizations.

  47. What a Maroon, el papa ateo says

    A few voices from the mainstream media.

    Ezra Klein:

    The truth is that the Ryan budget’s largest long-term savings don’t come from Medicaid or Medicare or Social Security, or even Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security put together. They come from everything else. Ryan says that under his budget, everything the federal government does that is not Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security will be cut to less than 3.75 percent of GDP by 2050. That means defense, infrastructure, education, food safety, energy research, national parks, civil service, the FBI — all of it. Right now, that category of spending is 12.5 percent of GDP.

    Critics point out that defense alone has always cost more than 3 percent of GDP, that Romney has promised to keep defense spending above 4 percent of GDP, and that the cuts to government services required to make those numbers work are beyond draconian. They also note that Ryan’s plan increases defense spending in the short term, and that his tax cuts have a 10-year price tag of more than $4 trillion, but he’s not identified any offsets.
    …
    But the real north star of Ryan’s policy record isn’t deficits or spending, though he often uses those concerns in service of his agenda. It’s radically reforming the way the federal government provides public services, usually by privatizing or devolving those public services away from the federal government.

    And Dana Milbank:

    I don’t mean this in the policy sense:His plan to scrap Medicare and slash most other government functions in favor of more tax cuts for the rich should be a ball and chain for Mitt Romney.
    …
    Hopefully, Ryan will inspire more Americans to get healthy. That’s important, because if Ryan succeeds in ending Medicare, they won’t be able to afford getting sick.

  49. says

    Oh, good grief. We’ve been reading all the wrong news sources. Right wing news sources (and even a few supposedly neutral sources) have Paul Ryan pegged as “Reaganesque” and as a “Rock Star.”

    Did Mitt Romney pick Paul Ryan to be his Vice Presidential running mate because his last name begins with R? As in Ronald Reagan? Or rock star? Rrrrrreally?

    “Romney-Ryan: Best Since Ronald Reagan. It Even Sounds Like the Right RR”

    “The Gipper would be most pleased with Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan.”

    “That’s because Paul Ryan has President Reagan’s trait of optimism”

    The Romney-Ryan Reagan Factor

    Romney Ratifies Reagan with Ryan Pick

    Michael Reagan: Dad Would Approve: Ryan is Romney’s ‘First Great Move’

    “[Paul Ryan] Sounds Very Reaganesque, He Has A Very Positive Message, And He’s Likeable.”

    And then there’s that much-abused term, “rock star,” which should only be used for, um. rock stars.

    Paul Ryan: Considered “Rock Star” VP Choice

    US presidential candidate Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan got rock-star treatment this weekend…

    Paul Ryan may be a conservative rock star

    “I’m so excited. Paul Ryan is a rock star and is exactly what our country needs, along with Mitt Romney”

    A conservative rock star in the marbled halls of Congress, Paul Ryan…

    Low standards for “Rock Star” is my conclusion.

    I’ll provide just a few of the links. You can find all of them here:
    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/13/13259051-r-you-serious

  50. says

    Rush Limbaugh on Paul Ryan:

    “We now have somebody on the ticket who’s us,” Rush Limbaugh said Monday. Someone “who can explain all of this, who believes all of this in his heart, in his soul, and he can do it with optimism and a smile on his face.”

    “The pick signals a decision was made somewhere that … we’re going to go head-first, going to take it straight to them and we’re going to win or we’re going to lose [we are going to] articulate exactly what we believe.”

    “The presence of Paul on stage with Romney has elevated Romney … Romney’s a new guy.”

  51. says

    Paul Ryan clearly outed himself as a radical conservation on Glenn Beck’s radio show in 2010.

    [Excerpt is from http://www.thenation.com/blog/169357/paul-ryans-got-great-big-problem-progressivism#

    In 2010, Ryan told conservative commentator Glenn Beck: “What I’ve been trying to do is indict the entire vision of progressivism because I see progressivism as the source, the intellectual source for the big government problems that are plaguing us today. And so to me it’s really important to flush progressives out into the field of open debate—so people can actually see what this ideology means and where it’s going to lead us and how it attacks the American idea.”

    “I love you!” gushed Beck.

    Beck referred to progressivism as “a cancer.”

    “Exactly,” replied Ryan. “Look, I come from—I’m calling you from Janesville, Wisconsin where I’m born and raised, where we raise our family. (It’s) 35 miles from Madison. I grew up hearing about this stuff. This stuff came from these German intellectuals to Madison‑University of Wisconsin and sort of out there from the beginning of the last century. So this is something we are familiar with where I come from. It never sat right with me. And as I grew up, I learned more about the founders and reading the Austrians and others that this is really a cancer because it basically takes the notion that our rights come from God and nature and turns it on its head and says, no, no, no, no, no, they come from government, and we here in government are here to give you your rights and therefore ration, redistribute and regulate your rights. It’s a complete affront of the whole idea of this country and that is to me what we as conservatives, or classical liberals if you want to get technical.”…

  52. says

    Ryan has constructed a narrative that paints him as a relative outsider who is smart, quick, savvy, and all of those other words that are acceptable to the Republican base as synonyms for “intellectual” (which is a dirty word).

    How do these jackasses manage to keep constructing these narratives? How does one go about getting perceived as smart, savvy, or even intellectual(non rightwingers often bemoan the loss of ‘intellectual’ conservatives like Buckley) without ever being factually or morally correct on any point? No matter how many syllables you use to dress it up, supply-side economics doesn’t work, and segregation and bigotry remain despicable.

  53. mmghosh says

    Also, Paul Ryan believes in Climategate.

    http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=193671

    To the detriment of the American people, environmental issues have fallen victim to the hyper-politicization of science. The Journal Times editorial board sensibly cautioned both sides of the political divide against this unfortunate trend (“Science must trump spin,” The Journal Times, 12/3/09). At issue in the Journal Times’ recent editorial and on the minds of many Copenhagen observers are published e-mail exchanges from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU). These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to distort their findings and intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change.

    The CRU e-mail scandal reveals a perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion. The e-mail scandal has not only forced the resignation of a number of discredited scientists, but it also marks a major step back on the need to preserve the integrity of the scientific community. While interests on both sides of the issue will debate the relevance of the manipulated or otherwise omitted data, these revelations undermine confidence in the scientific data driving the climate change debates.

  54. opus says

    Slightly off-topic, but I think it’s worth asking: Does Ryan have credible opposition for his seat in Congress? I wouldn’t mind dropping a few dollars into the pot to help him lose two elections this cycle, if it’s in the realm of possibility.

  55. StevoR says

    @12. crocswsocks asked :

    Can you guys direct me to a good site I can use to dissuade someone I know from voting for Romney/Ryan?

    Adding to what others have suggested here* I’d recomend :

    http://www.stonekettle.com/2012/08/the-unsinkable-mitt-romney.html

    With, among a great deal more this take on why Ryan was chosen :

    “Mitt Romney needed somebody who can carry that message, somebody who can convince the slaves to fight for the Confederacy, somebody who can convince the crew to help the rich folks into the lifeboat and then go down with the ship with a smile on their faces. He needed somebody young, dynamic, pretty, and – and given the lessons learned from McCain’s mistake – intelligent and well spoken. In short, just like McCain he needed a running mate that would offset his image as an old stodgy rich white guy pissing on the rest of us. What he really needed, was somebody who could look the crew and passengers right in the eye and convince them that lifeboats are just for the owner of the shipping company and anything more is really just a waste of deck space. Trust me, the ship will never sink.”

    On Jim Wright’s excellent Stonekettle Station – one of my other favourite blogs.

    * #13 Ing: The World is Dying :

    @Crocswocks
    No I don’t believe in magic

    Was that the name of a blog or something?

  56. says

    Limbaugh via Lynna:

    we’re going to go head-first, going to take it straight to them and we’re going to win or we’re going to lose [we are going to] articulate exactly what we believe.

    But, if they lose, it will be because Romney and Ryan weren’t conservative enough. The worse they lose, the more conservative they should have been.

    The irritating thing is that this is the lesson Democrats keep taking away from their losses, too.

  57. StevoR says

    @55. D’oh! Blockquote fail. Mea culpa. Guess you can all tell where right?

    @ 56. ^ Naked Bunny with a Whip :

    .. if they lose, it will be because Romney and Ryan weren’t conservative enough.

    Or were too Mormon-y!

    Otherwise, yeah.

    That Overton window shifting ever further Right, right?

  59. says

    Or were too Mormon-y!

    Yeah, they’re already primed on that one. Hell, they’ll bury Romney and say that Ryan should have been heading the ticket (assuming Ryan doesn’t capitulate to pragmatism in trying to attract non-teabaggers).

  60. theophontes (坏蛋) says

    @ Janine

    Paul Ryan is trying to prevent future Paul Ryans from getting benefits. Why does he need the competition?

    The British expression is: “I’m alright Jack, take away the ladder!”

    @ Ed Seedhouse

    I hate to bring this up, but wouldn’t the most effective way to hurt him politically be that his economic ideas and beliefs follow those of a notorious Atheist [Ayn Rand]?

    My take: He has taken to Ayn Rand the way a xtian takes to the babble. There is no amount of logic and reasoning that will divert him from the epiphany he had on reading her works.

    Now he has, belatedly, discovered that Ayn Rand was an atheist and has come out denouncing her as an atheist, while remaining under her spell nevertheless.

    @ Lynna, OM

    [aRyan]… our rights come from God and nature …

    He keeps saying this. Is he a theocratic anarchist?

    o_O

  61. blf says

    The cyborg and the zombie aren’t the only nutcases to worry about. Israeli speculation over Iran strike reaches fever pitch:

    In the past few days, the Israeli public has been hit by a blizzard of speculative articles suggesting a military strike against Iran’s nuclear sites is imminent.

    The talk is now of a timetable of weeks, rather than months and some observers believe that Israel will act in the run-up to the US presidential election – at a time when it could be difficult and damaging for President Obama to withhold his backing in the face of a hawkish and vehemently pro-Israel opponent, Mitt Romney, who has already indicated his support for unilateral action by the Jewish state.

  62. abb3w says

    @0, PZ Myers:

    The other appalling thing about Ryan is how much the media is puling about how smart he is, and calling him a brilliant policy wonk (also hammered on by Pierce). Ryan is a guy with a bachelor’s degree in economics whose entire career is defined by political gladhanding and devotion to far-right ideological nonsense.

    I think you’re mixing up “smart” with “well informed” or “particularly educated”. It may also be that the media senses are using a comparative measure, relative to the median GOP congresscritter, the median US citizen, a golden retriever, Sarah Palin….

  63. says

    He keeps saying this. Is he a “theocratic anarchist”?

    theocratic libertarian. you know the type: “government small enough to fit into a woman’s uterus”

  64. says

    Mitt Romney added yet another falsehood to the Paul Ryan myth when he was campaigning in Virginia. The Romney campaign has a habit of co-opting the work of others, legitimate economists, author Jared Diamond, etc. And the unfortunate co-optee has to catch them and object. This time they co-opted a Democratic Senator, and he is not happy. The excerpt below was posted by Steve Benen.

    Mitt Romney … boasted that his far-right running mate, Paul Ryan, worked with Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) to craft his Medicare privatization scheme.

    Referencing Ryan, Romney boasted, “This man said, ‘I’m going to find Democrats to work with.’ He found a Democrat to co-lead a piece of legislation that makes sure we can save Medicare. Republicans and Democrats coming together.”

    Wyden was not pleased.

    “Gov. Romney is talking nonsense. Bipartisanship requires that you not make up the facts. I did not ‘co-lead a piece of legislation.'” Wyden said. “I wrote a policy paper on options for Medicare. Several months after the paper came out, I spoke and voted against the Medicare provisions in the Ryan budget.”

    Ryan and Wyden did work together in December 2011 to develop a paper outlining ways to provide for Medicare solvency, including a “premium support” model. Under premium support, Medicare would allow a menu of competing plans to offer coverage with government payments. Wyden, however, never signed on to support the House-adopted budget resolution written by Ryan that included plans for a premium support approach.

    “Gov. Romney needs to learn you don’t protect seniors by makings things up, and his comments today sure won’t help promote real bipartisanship,” Wyden said.

    It looks like we have another McLuhan Moment.

    To recap, there’s a scene in “Annie Hall” in which Woody Allen starts lecturing some loudmouth in a movie-theater line about how little he knows about Marshall McLuhan. When the guy protests, Allen brings the actual McLuhan over. “You know nothing of my work,” the scholar says….

  65. r3a50n says

    @63

    “government small enough to fit into a woman’s uterus”

    That’s brilliant. I might have to steal borrow it. ;)

  66. says

    Why didn’t we think of this before?

    In trying to parse Romney’s pick of Ryan as VP we forgot to follow the money.

    Paul Ryan … brings his status as a fundraising heavyweight.

    …Ryan has been propelled by sizeable donations from insurance companies and other players in the financial sector, including notable hedge fund names…. Elliott Management, a Wall Street hedge fund run by prominent Republican donor Paul Singer…

    Anthony Scaramucci, managing partner at alternative investment firm SkyBridge Capital LLC, said people in the hedge fund community with whom he has spoken are “ecstatic” about the Ryan choice.

    “Of everybody in the Republican leadership, there’s nobody that understands pro-growth economic policies and how massive deficit spending can actually lead to a drag on job creation better than Paul Ryan,” said Scaramucci. [one of eight co-chairs of Romney’s National Finance Commitee]

    …Financial firms went all-out for Ryan in the 2010 election cycle…

    Topping the list of Ryan’s 2010 donors as well as the list of his biggest donors over his career since 1998 is Northwestern Mutual, a life insurance company based in Milwaukee…

    Among Ryan’s other top 10 donors over the course of his career are mobile carrier AT&T with $74,850, drug company Abbott Laboratories with $61,700, and health insurer Blue Cross Blue Shield with $58,150.

    Ryan has received $65,500, his sixth-biggest donation, from the energy company Koch Industries, run by prominent conservative financiers and big 2012 election donors the Koch brothers….

    You knew the Koch brothers would be in the mix.

    Romney and the Republican Party have outraised President Barack Obama and the Democrats for the past three months in a row, topping $100 million a month largely thanks to his appeal to a disgruntled Wall Street.

    But one area where Romney continues to lag is Obama’s historic advantage: the small donors, which are seen as a gauge of grassroots enthusiasm and support.

    Obama has raised almost 40 percent from donors giving $200 or less as of June 30, compared with Romney’s haul of only 15 percent from such donors, according to an analysis by the Campaign Finance Institute…..

    Excerpts above are from Reuters.

  67. r3a50n says

    The good news is that the Ryan pick is far more likely to hurt Rmoney than to help him:

    We were winning, and now we’re winning even more thanks to Ryan. It’s no big secret. Everyone knows it. Only, it used to be just Romney who was doomed. Now, the House is in play and the Senate isn’t going anywhere near Mitch McConnell’s grasp.

    Get ready to have the most fun since 2008. There’s nothing like Republicans in disarray to spice things up. And best of all? When they go down in defeat in November, the internal GOP battle over who lost the election—the squishy liberal Romney or the firebrand conservative ideologue Ryan—will keep things spicy for a long, long time.

    It’s nice to finally see Republicans (rather than Democrats) snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

  69. says

    Hmmm. So Romney is now walking arm in arm with Paul Ryan. Yes, this makes Medicare a big issue, brings it to the front.

    So what does the Romney campaign do? Knowing they have to blunt Ryan’s kill-Medicare-as-we-know-it budget they issue a new attack ad that is so full of lies it’s silly. Unfortunately, I think they’ll get away with the lies. Fox News and Republicans in general will adopt the lies as talking points. I’ve already seen Ryan doing so in speeches. I thought Ryan was the smart one.

    In this painfully ridiculous spot, the voiceover tells voters Obama “cut $716 billion dollars from Medicare … to pay for Obamacare.” The ad goes on to say, “So now the money you paid for your guaranteed healthcare is going to a massive new government program that’s not for you.”

    What’s remarkable is just how spectacularly dishonest Romney is. It’s like he heard about an award that goes to the lyingest liar who ever lied in the history of liars, and Romney’s so eager to win the award that he’s becoming a parody of himself.

    Reality is actually quite simple. Republicans argue that Medicare savings are necessary for the health of the program, and Obama found such savings, without touching Medicare benefits, and while strengthening the financial health of the system. …

    Think about that for a second. Romney’s truly pathetic attack ad goes after Obama for a policy that Republicans, including Romney’s own running mate, have adopted.

    The ad goes on to claim that the Affordable Care Act doesn’t help seniors. Romney’s blatantly shamelessly lying — the law has already cut prescription drug costs for seniors and already makes preventive care available to seniors without copays.

    Of course, in the bigger picture, I understand the loathsome strategy — Romney just partnered with the “kill Medicare” guy, so he has to lash out with a massive deception in the hopes that voters are fools….

    Link, with video of deceptive ad.

  70. What a Maroon, el papa ateo says

    Thanks for putting this all in one place, Lynna.

    My interaction with the mainstream traditional media is largely limited to the Washington Post, so I no doubt have a distorted view, but it does seem that (aside from the predictable conservative columnists) they’ve been pretty harsh on Ryan. And it occurs to me that that’s at least in part because he’s going after Medicare, and like most of us, the people in the traditional media are either old already or they have plans to be old one day.

  71. says

    …they’ve been pretty harsh on Ryan. And it occurs to me that that’s at least in part because he’s going after Medicare…

    He’s going after Medicare in the wrong way.

  73. theophontes (坏蛋) says

    @ Lynna, OM

    Romney’s blatantly shamelessly lying

    Alt: He fell from the top of the Lying Tree and hit every branch on the way down.

  74. Amphiox says

    It’s nice to finally see Republicans (rather than Democrats) snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    I like to imagine that the Ryan pick is part of a long-term strategy by the Republican old-guard to take back their party from the Tea Party monster they inadvertently created in 2010. (Congressional gridlock and the low approval of Congress is part of this plan).

    Basically, they have conceded that they can’t win in 2012, and are going to throw it. But they’re going to throw it in such a way that the Tea Party, through Ryan, gets the blame, and gets discredited.

    I doubt this is actually true, but it is fun to fantasize about it….