Ryan is no conservative hero he is a smarmy politician and talks like Obama. The choice of Ryan for VP is handing America 4 more years of Obama, Romney is a fool..
Here is why and the ads will be on a TV screen near you soon. Turn out the lights the party is over before it ever got started.
When Congressman Paul Ryan has been asked the past few years about the value of stimulus to the sagging economy and the nation's jobless, the Wisconsin Republican has dismissed it as meaningless, and dubbed it "sugar-high economics."
But that's when President Obama is pushing for the spending. When it was President George W. Bush arguing for more stimulus to boost a slow economy in the early 2000s, Ryan's economic analysis was entirely different.
"What we're trying to accomplish today with the passage of this third stimulus package is to create jobs and help the unemployed," Ryan said, in comments unearthed by MSNBC's "Up with Chris Hayes" and provided to HuffPost. "What we're trying to accomplish is to pass the kinds of legislation that when they've passed in the past have grown the economy and gotten people back to work."
"In recessions unemployment lags on well after a recovery has taken place," Ryan accurately noted in 2002.
Biden's analysis -- that the government needs to juice the economy to promote growth, or else revenue will fall long term -- is one that Ryan himself articulated cogently back when the GOP was urging stimulus. Ryan called such stimulus a "constructive answer" worked out on "a bipartisan basis." Opponents of stimulus, Ryan said, ought to "drop the demagoguery."
"We've got to get the engine of economic growth growing again because we now know, because of recession, we don't have the revenues that we wanted to, we don't have the revenues we need, to fix Medicare, to fix Social Security, to fix these issues. We've got to get Americans back to work. Then the surpluses come back, then the jobs come back. That is the constructive answer we're trying to accomplish here on, yes, a bipartisan basis. I urge members to drop the demagoguery and to pass this bill to help us work together to get the American people back to work and help those people who've lost their jobs," Ryan said.
"We have a lot of laid off workers, and more layoffs are occurring," the congressman continued. "And we know, as a historical fact, that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, unemployment is going to linger on and on well after that recovery takes place. What we have been trying to do starting in October and into December and now is to try and get people back to work. The things we're trying to pass in this bill are the time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs."
"It's more than just giving someone an unemployment check," he said then. "It's also helping those people with their health insurance while they've lost their jobs and more important than just that unemployment check, it's to do what we can to give people a paycheck."
Ryan isn't even running for president. His foreign policy experience doesn't matter.
There are those who will say that Romney doesn't have foreign policy experience either because he was a governor, but keep in mind that most presidents in the current era started out as governors.
Furthermore, Obama didn't have foreign policy experience either when he was elected president. The implication with questions about foreign policy experience is that you either have to have served as president or as Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, CIA director or a general before running for president, and that's just not the case if you look at most presidents.
Well considering he is up for a position that would place him as a successor, should anything happen that would incapacitate the President, asking him his views on foreign policy is, in fact a relevant and valid subject. There are many ways to learn about foreign affairs and policy, paying attention to those who know the subjects is just one way. The man has been in government for what, 14 years now? He strikes me as an intelligent and thoughtful man, I am sure he has picked up a thing or two.
I mean, I agree that he would make good decisions, because I think he's a smart and competent man. My main point is that the media is giving him much more scrutiny than they give any Democrat candidate.
My main point is that the media is giving him much more scrutiny than they give any Democrat candidate.
Of course they are, it's the MSM's "modus operandi". They have invested a considerable amount of their "capital" of their relevance, legitimacy and reputations as "news organizations" on this current administration and the President. They cannot be seen as "getting it wrong" or they will lose whatever "credibility" that they believe they still have. IOWs, they are in full panic mode.
Can anybody explain more clearly to me what this 'scandal' with Paul
Ryan signing letters involving stimulus funds is all about. This is
not a rhetorical question. I honestly don't understand what is being alleged nor do I understand Paul Ryan's response. Were these letters his office sent on his behalf or on behalf of constituents? My sense is that it's another non-scandal scandal, the type Democrats and the media love to create about Republicans, but I would like to understand it before I dismiss it.
"You know, I’ve voted to send people to war." another nail in the coffin of the r&r campaign. no romney has ever served in the military and now junior rubs it in the face of our service men and women by his inane comment.
thats why its important for us to focus on the down ticket races, cause the top of the ticket is a couple of losers for sure.
Losers compared to... Obama? American soldiers are dying under Obama's command. He never served in the military, the same for most of his administration. Same goes for Clinton. Both had disdain for our military.
Obama is only concerned about our service men and women when it suits him politically, especially for photo ops. I think if you are going to be commander in chief, you should love America, have respect for our Constitution and our military who defend it, and Obama has none of those. Although I wasn't too keen on Romney, I am going to vote for him. I'm certain he won't be going around apologizing for America, bowing to dictators, degrading we the citizens every chance he gets, ignoring our military, or trying to divided us by class or race. That is what a loser does.
And the idiot in chief has served in the military? Whose rubbing that fact in the face of OUR service men and women.
Just pay attention to the greeting bo gets.
"another nail in the r&r campaign"
It depends on who is listening, and who cares. Liberals don't listen to many of these interviews, and won't vote for them anyway. This is an interview for the purposes of getting out the republican vote.
"the top of the ticket is a couple of losers"
We will find out in November, won't we? (unless you believe that election fraud elects presidents, in which case it doesn't matter)
There are a lot of service men and women waking up to the fact that our federal government is working for global governing and corporate entities. This isn't the days of old when Americans had no information, and followed blindly.
Paul Ryan is John F. Kenndy esk, the Republican version of JFK. A young intellectual, energetic, speaks with passion and from the heart and he's a Catholic. He has a good grasp on foreign policy issues like JFK did. JFK handled the cuban missle crisis very well, and I feel very safe and comfortable voting for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan regardless of their foreign policy credentials. I think they would handle god forbid, a crisis, should one happen.
JFK behaved more like Republicans than today's far left loon democrats. However, please do not compare Ryan to JFK. Paul Ryan has the same appeal, charm, intellect, moral compass, core beliefs and ability to connect to people and still come across genuine and approachable that Reagan had. Besides, JFK wire tapped Dr. King. Repubs don't like spying on people.
Please not the JFK comparison. Near as I know Congressman Ryan is not a serial philanderer or drug addict. But I do agree he is the right choice.
It will be October 11 in Danville, KY. Martha Raddatz of ABC will be the moderator.
great interview, handled himself very well and avoided the mines that cameron tried to get him to stumble on
Overall, I think he did well.
Let me be the first to say that I could never run for office. The speechs, the interviews, the talkshows, the schmooozing.
Ok, I could do the schmooze.
Great interview....Carl tried to trip Ryan up....to no avail...Paul Ryan is brilliant and Carl was impressed.
The Ryan and Biden Debate will be a grand show!!!
I agree with Scoop. I think that Carl was simply presenting liberal arguments so that Ryan could answer them. Carl seemed to be lighthearted about the whole thing.
I think he asked some tough questions, but I would expect that from any journalist. I don't think he had an agenda of making him look bad at all.
Foreign policy experience - "You know, I’ve voted to send people to war."
I hope that is not a SNL moment.
I thought I detected a "jump" in the video right after he said that. Was it edited? Did he elaborate and it was cut?
His comments on Syria were disturbing to me. The media has been pumping up the false reports of Syria's leaders killing their own people. The same goes for other countries that we sent in Al Qaeda to overthrow. It has been proven that these killings are being done by "rebels" so that the current leadership could be blamed. This is done so that the western media can drum up support for UN and American intervention.
It is sad to see that Ryan is buying into it.
The media is not reporting the true story of what's happening in Syria. I refer you to this comment http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/023067.html#aug18, that supports librtifirsts posts.
The developing toppling of Syria's leader has given rise, yet again, to Islamists who intend to annihilate both Christians and Jews in the Middle East, for starters. I would say that if you want to try to keep up with the facts of the matter that you, web-wise, hang around Robert Spencer, Pamela Gellar, Michael Ledeen, Andy McCarthy, Barry Rubin, and even Claudia Rosette, who reports on the terrors of the Assad regime. Looks to me like both sides of this war are very bad guys; it's hard to get a fix on which "winner" would be the least destructive to Syrians, the region, and the world.
I thought that everyone watching knew that the rebels were Al Qaeda.
It certainly reads as if that is what you are implying.
I will refer you to this page; http://www.therightscoop.com/the-right-scoop-commenting-rules/
If you cannot control yourself and your language you will find your posting privileges short-lived.
When one picks up a gun and attacks the government (regardless of circumstances) they have ceased being a protestor and have become a combatant. Words have meaning.
He was obviously pushing the envelope. His comments were not very specific, but if someone was doing a profile on him, he would certainly get tagged. The problem is that he has done nothing to be arrested for. Questioning him may have been in order, or warning him. The whole thing looked pretty casual from what I could tell. They didn't SWAT team him, so they obviously were not worried about him opening fire on them.
He apparently served two tours in the middle east, came home and learned about how crooked our government is, then took it a bit too far on Facebook. I don't go around saying that Bush took out the twin towers, but I recognize that a lot of people have a lot of legitimate questions about 9/11 that haven't been answered.
When you combine the government secrecy on many issues that should be public, with all of the things that we see government doing to the American people, it wouldn't be hard for someone to take the information too far and fail to strike a balance on it all.
I wouldn't go as far as to say that he isn't a patriot, because being a patriot means that you love, support, and defend your country. He could have all of these things going, and still believe the things that he does. Government is not "this country", it is the supreme law and the people who make it up. The founders often drew a parallel between government and tyranny, knowing that government will always gravitate toward it, if it is allowed.
I love my country, and would defend it, but I do not support the actions of our federal government on the whole. I believe that it has grown to become tyrannical upon the people to such an extent as to have lost its legitimacy as a governing body over a free people.
This doesn't mean that I would advocate violence against it, but this is due to my Christian belief that we are in the end times, and this is how it will go. Our founders rebelled against the existing governing authority in a righteous way, but their time has passed.
This guy appears to have believed that this system could be taken down, either with force, or politically. (He did not use specifics as to which.) Using force is a flawed strategy, because the American people could not win at this point. We are too far gone.
When someone realizes that our time of prosperity has passed, and the future only holds depression and destitution, they tend to lose it. That is, if they have nothing righteous to stand on. This guy obviously did not have peace within him.
You might want to review the comment section regarding language. You can be passionate, well, let's just say you've been flagged so you might want to go back and do a few edits. It's not too late.
I completely agree. The information is usually scattered, so you have to go online and put it all together, along with alternative sources, to find out what is really going on, or at least to get a more reasonable take on it.
Some people are fans of a particular network, and believe that they are providing the whole truth.
Brian Raub isn't a patriot, by the way. He is an insane nut job who thinks that George Bush caused 9/11 and that terrorists aren't a threat (even though they murder Americans and innocents abroad). He even thinks that the government (perhaps George Bush and the Republican Party?) is trying to put "chips" in people. Basically, he just made up a bunch of fucked up shit based on nothing and posted it. He is even accused of writing "terroristic" posts threatening violence. He will have his day in court, but whatever the outcome, he is crazy, and he's not a patriot.
Here are the posts in question where he threatened to commit acts of terrorism against America:
Just one small quibble, though I support your main point. You said, "You need to look beyond the MSM. Are you dependent on a network to provide you with the big picture?" Actually, three of the links you provided were from major media networks (Fox News, NY Times and CBS). It is true that the mainstream media tries to spin the news, usually with a liberal bias, but as proven by your links, there are often MSM stories that include grains of truth that can be taken out when reading the news critically.
Al Qaeda has a presence in Syria and is staging terrorist attacks that it blames on the government. The protesters are also attacking Syria's government and civil society with violence, so the government should respond. Do you think if someone tried to assassinate President Bush, he should have let them kill him and treat the killer as a human rights protester, or should his Secret Service have shot and killed the thug?
I found this video of his arrest.
By the way, it sounds like they are going after his right to bear arms by taking him to a psychiatric hospital. PTSD vets give them up as well.
I don't believe that the entire rebel army was Al Qaeda either. I just have a hard time believing that the Obama administration and the pentagon were clueless as to who they were supporting. The end result was a militant Islamist rule in Libya who are now flying Al Qaeda's flag on government buildings, and murdered tens of thousands of blacks in a genocidal movement. There was a subsequent white wash of the whole thing by the western media.
Al Qaeda was just positioned to be in power after it was all over.
Romney could legitimately use this to shut down Obama for good, if he wanted to.
Reading through the comments on that video, it appears the Marine in questions family has raised some serious objections to the story as portrayed by that video post. There is even some legitimate question as to whether it occurred at all.
As to the Syrian rebels, I have no doubts that there are elements of or affiliates of Al Qaeda amongst the rebels. But the claim that the entire rebel army is Al Qaeda is pure hogwash.
This is the kind of government that I have a problem with.
Would you say that this was justified, say, if the guy was a truther?
Are you kidding? I thought that everyone watching knew that the rebels were Al Qaeda. Certainly, everyone knows that Obama took orders from the UN on this one, and supported the rebel insurgency with bombs from the air, and arms for their fighters.
You might have to consider that the MSM isn't going to put it all together for you, and you might have to consider other sources, but if you want MSM links, there are some below.
You should probably brush up on your research skills.
You need to look beyond the MSM. Are you dependent on a network to provide you with the big picture? If so, you will never see it.
The rebels were not necessarily from Libya, or killing "their own people", as some of these links should make clear.
I have spent many hours considering and researching all sides of these situations. The evidence, and reporting, make it pretty obvious what is going on.
Yes: "people actually believe this"
It is interesting that you went to 9/11 to make your insinuation that I am only engaging in conspiratorial dialogue. I'll leave that one to your imagination.
@librtifirst claims that "it has been proven that the killings of people ... (paraphrasing) reported by the media has actually been proven to be the rebels killing the people so they can get Western support". That was basically or totally the gist of his thought, and I thought oh my God, if people actually beleive this?? Librtifirst - where has "it been proven that the rebels were killing there own people". What credible website or network news has "proven" this? Please help me. I googled it, and nothing. You also said the "media could guarantee Obamas political death if they simply reported on this one issue, the Republicans who have media access could make it all happen as well." Do you think the US government was the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks at the World Trade Center? I am very interested in your response. Please respond. I want to understand your sources and logic.
They could make a lot of points by harping on Obama for Egypt, Libya, and now Syria. They need to point out continually the fact that Obama is responsible for the genocide of 40k blacks in Libya, and will be responsible for tens of thousands of Christians dying in Syria if he pulls the same crap.