Tag Archives: Paul Ryan

Oct 15 2012

It’s not the demeanor, stupid!

Wonder how Ryan’s mom feels being one of the 47%?

It has been a while since my last post and to be perfectly honest I have pretty much tired of this presidential campaign as I can hardly bear to listen to Romney and Ryan as they manipulate and lie their way forward. I can only hear so much garbage and can only tolerate those who continue to not see anything problematic with the shifting sands in which their campaign run sits. However, after the last debate with Biden and Ryan, to hear the differing perspectives of who won, who was more professional and/or stately, whatever, it become entirely clear that the details really don’t matter to most. We have reached the point where it is less about what really is impactful and critical to our future and more about whether the candidate presented themself in a way that meets our expectations. To be honest, I would rather have someone who I feel is honest about who they are and how they feel. I find Biden’s dismissal of Ryan as basically a liar and a lightweight actually refreshing – not only because I agree but mostly because I know that is really how he feels. This positioning and guidance that Obama got for the first debate not to get angry and not to show his true feelings I believe did more harm than good. And in typical Republican style, Mitt took quite the advantage of it and has continued to pound his chest and throw off all that recently found testosterone – which was usually more reserved for Ann Romney.

It is time to really get angry and more aggressive in light of what lies ahead as potential consequences. To be at this point in the election and still be undecided speaks more to someone not really paying attention or someone who really has no stated values or philosophical stand on life. This is symptomatic of our arrival at being a society where People Magazine is the literary choice of most, the Kardashian family a focal point of many and how we look is less important than who we really are. Pretty sad but also something that explains the lack of real attention to detail.

I don’t think that everyone else needs to believe what I believe or feel strongly about those issues I find important. But you have to stand for something. You have to know what is important to you and what will make a difference.  To be undecided and to have your decision on who you vote for based on whether Joe Biden interrupted too much (was it only me who thought Romney did a bit more butting in) or snickered more than you thought was right, I find that mind-boggling. What really set me off was an item I saw right after the debate this past week. I actually read a twitter comment from someone who was part of a group our local paper (a bastion on inadequacy in its own right) that after watching how Biden comported (my word) himself in that debate, she was changing her vote.   Amazing – but not really a surprise given the “undecideds” still on the fence. If you are still undecided at this point I would submit you did not pass the litmus test of having enough intelligence to actually vote – or you have been in a cave for the past 11 years and didn’t see what had brought this country to its knees. But that is my concern – to think that Romney might win and it not be because people agree with his policies (what ever they are today) or what he will likely change is disheartening – it is because of some shallow, really unimportant factor like whether you like someone’s demeanor.  Look, I think Romney is a flaming asshole and is so far away from what it most people’s life experience that his ability to understand or relate is non-existent. But if I believed in his policies and his direction for America, his persona is of less importance. Sure we want likeable. But that won’t cut it. As I recall, the Bush the 2nd polls showed him as someone with whom you would want to have a beer – unfortunately that “likeability” can now be enjoyed by almost 7000 less American military people given the execution of his policies and his view of what was good for the US.

This time around, I see there are several key areas where you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to recognize a difference between the candidates. You don’t need to agree but recognize what you will get on each side. My list of what is important:
1. Equal Rights for our gay citizens – whether you want to recognize it as the same as the rights won by minorities over the past decades, gay rights and equal right to marriage and the perks that go with it will not move ahead in a Romney win.
2. Women’s reproductive rights and their ability to control their own destiny – I still remain in awe of the women that support Romney. His abortion and birth control agenda will move our country back 50 years.
3. Abortion – related to above but important enough to put as its own headliner. Still trying to overturn Roe v Wade 40 years later – persistent but not based on what the American people want.
4. Religious Freedom – or what is in reality the installation of religious intolerance of anyone who doesn’t believe as I do or doesn’t hold the same view of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I could give two shits about what you do and how you do it in your personal space – but don’t limit mine. I won’t tell you what to do beyond stay out of my life and how I live it.
5. The poor and the needy – as if they haven’t had it tough enough already. Sure there are those who suck off of the rest of us but let’s not ignore our responsibility to those who are really in need – not going to happen with Romney – once politics are aside, it is back to Republican tactics and focus on the rich getting richer.
6. Behind most everything – who sits on the Supreme Court – do we want another Scalia? Do we want more political leaning and furthering of a right leaning agenda? It is likely the next 4 years will bring us at least one appointment of a new justice – and the current tenuous balance will disappear with a Romney administration.

Sure the economy is important but it is and will continue to improve. Not my hot button since I will likely be okay no matter who is in the Whitehouse and probably better with the Republicans but that really doesn’t sit well – we aren’t great as a country because we only care about our own self-interest. Bringing back the policies of yesteryear and depending on trickle down economics flies in the face of reality. There is quite a bit of money sitting in corporate coffers (keep in mind that corporations are people too) and they are doing nothing to take care of the workers – middle class or not.  They are the rich and well-off – and they have been at the core of much of the pain of the middle-class.  Do we really think corporate behavior will change?  It will only to the extent that their profits are larger – and profits at the expense of everything else.

An uncanny resemblance – has anyone checked Ryan’s birth certificate? (A “Saved by the Bell” moment – who could forget Screech – no doubt one of the more annoying characters from kid’s TV)

 

Now, quick comment on the debate this week – townhall-style, questions I believe from the audience. If I could have my wish, I’d love to see a “Michael Dukakis” moment where Romney can’t hide behind his corporate and political persona. I’d ask him “what are you going to do and what is your first action when one of your sons announces he is gay?”.

Let’s really see what kind of person we have here.

Sep 16 2012

Romney – World Leader? – not

“Study the past if you would define the future.”   ―    Confucius

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”  Sir Winston Churchill

There are a host of reasons to have concerns about a new Republican administration led by Romney and Ryan.  It is obvious to many that neither man has any real depth of understanding or solution to anything going on in the US today or even more so, the world beyond our shores.  To think that Romney will somehow figure it all out and do things differently tomorrow ignores the longstanding view that the past is the best predictor of the future.  In some ways it actually transcends Romney and can be applied to the platform and plans for America set out by the Republican Party.  To think that repeating actions and approaches tried in the past will somehow have a different result in the future is again reflective of the degree of ignorance and denial present in much of the public today.  I wouldn’t apply that same ignorance and denial to the real leaders and key proponents of returning to the policies of the past since they know better than any it is the best way to not only keep their wealth but to enable it’s growth in the future.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and  expecting different results. – Albert  Einstein

Even ignoring Mitt’s faux pas on his recent world tour where he managed to insult multiple countries without really trying.  Now, after the most recent statements by Romney this past Tuesday as events unfolded in Libya it is time to get even more concerned as we get more insight into his position on Foreign Policy.  First off, I’ll give him credit for recognizing what he doesn’t know and assembling a group of people experienced in foreign policy – He has gathered a group of 24 “advisors (as listed on his website) as well several other individuals whom form an inner circle of advice, a majority serving under previous Republican (Bushx2) adminstrations – the administrations who have taken us to war on several occasions and who have cost our country numerous lives.  I am reminded these wars have also helped set the view the rest of the world has of the US.   So do we really have to wonder what stance or position foreign policy will take in a Romney presidency?  Again, history is the best predictor of the future and this predictor doesn’t take a brain surgeon or rocket scientist to figure out.  This is a direction of shoot first and ask questions later (if indeed questions are ever asked as the answers might not support the direction).   We saw this again this week as the tragedy in Libya played itself out and the violence escalated across other countries.  The decision by Romney to take the opportunity to make it a political attack rather than take the broader and more knowing approach that faster is not always better gives immediate rise to the type of leader Romney will be.  This is made even worse by the fact that Romney seems to have few thoughts and ideas himself and instead draws positions an decisions from those around him or where the immediate political reward is the greatest.  Not sure we have a chess master at work here…maybe chinese checkers or tiddlywinks.

We can also see how connected Romney is to the world and what forces are at work in his statement several weeks back on the position that Russia is America’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe.”  Now while I wouldn’t dismiss Russia as a foe, not sure it has moved back into that cold war status.  But worse yet, again indicating that Romney is either too naive or too stupid to realize consequences of an open mouth policy.  The statements by Vladimir Putin need little explanation as to the potential longer term effect of speaking without thinking or understanding the broader implications.

From ABC News:

MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin said today that Mitt Romney’s characterization of Moscow as the United States’ “number one geopolitical foe” has actually helped Russia.

The Russian leader said Romney’s comments strengthened his resolve to oppose NATO’s plan for a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, a system Russia believes will degrade its nuclear deterrent. The U.S. insists the system is aimed at Iran, not Russia.

“I’m grateful to him (Romney) for formulating his stance so clearly because he has once again proven the correctness of our approach to missile defense problems,” Putin told reporters, according to the Russian news agency RIA Novosti.

“The most important thing for us is that even if he doesn’t win now, he or a person with similar views may come to power in four years. We must take that into consideration while dealing with security issues for a long perspective,” he said, speaking after a meeting with Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic, according to Interfax news agency.

Might only be my read of it but it doesn’t sound like Mitt’s statement provided much help to an already complex and dangerous situation.  But then again, one has to wonder if this launch of a foreign policy stance by a Republican isn’t as much an attempt to re-kindle the fire that has kept the military industrial machine well oiled and lined the pockets of such luminaries as Dick Cheney and Halliburton.

So here we have a glimpse into Romney’s experience in the area of foreign policy – his only real experience to date being the outsourcing of US jobs to a foreign country or two. In his message, we also get a glimpse of Mitt’s ignorance (or at least ignoring) of foreign influence.  Good to know since to date, most of the focus in the Romney camp has been on the US economy and his sweeping statements (and a dearth of details) of his plans to make things better.  I would submit it is a quite different world than Reagan and even the first Bush had to deal with.  And we see what happened in the 2nd Bush years when the global community had taken a position of greater influence and control and where complexity grew and global economics and forces clashed with the historical Republican answers to everything.

See definition of Insanity ==> above.

Sep 6 2012

US Budget Deficit – Credit where Credit is Due

And you made quite a few of us older Americans cry also!

It’s hard to decide which topic to pick on any given day in the current Presidential race but there is one that I find particularly irritating.  The Obama contribution to the current deficit at $15 trillion is one that impacts everyone – or at least the deficit does.  The Republicans have had no shortage of data spinners in this area.  As we saw with the admission from a Romney Pollster, Neil Newhouse, (who has worked on the Republican side of the aisle for a good number of years, including working with Romney in his run for Governor in Massachusetts in 2002) the Romney campaign  messaging and ads will “not be dictated by fact checkers” ( or as I like to say “Let’s not confuse things with the facts”), the Republican leaders have given Obama credit for the large rise in the current budget deficit.  Paul Ryan, in a phenomenally inaccurate RNC speech filled with lies and mis-statements, has obviously taken the approach that most Americans are lazy and/or stupid and won’t dig any deeper than needed.  True at some level but just in case, let’s throw some real data out there.

Aside from lying about the closure of the GM plant in his home district, Paulie’s crap about how the Obama Medicare plan is that different from his, his ignoring of the Republican role in the US credit downgrade as a result of their holding the debt ceiling hostage, Paulie made it clear that “President Obama has added more debt than any other president before him” and proclaimed “We need to stop spending money we don’t have.”  Let’s spend a minute or so and look at the data.  I can’t speak for 100% accuracy in every bit of the analysis, but the data is consistent across multiple sources so I’ll take a risk that it isn’t too far off.  Looking at this data, it becomes pretty clear that rather than the $5 Million attributed to Obama, he can take credit for less than $1 Mil – quite a different picture.  I’d suggest you actually take a step out to the articles for more detail and context.

Both graphics make the point very clear.  Of the $5 Million or so added to the deficient on Obama’s watch, the majority (say 80%) can be attributed to the previous administration.  When the Republican idiots throwing this crap around are actually looking for the right recipient, I would suggest they look a little further in the back of the Republican crowd – only you don’t see Georgie W. Bush and anyone else from his administration who put us in this mess anywhere to be found.

I’d like to think that Georgie has a conscience (there’s that idealistic side of me) and, if so, I expect he would be drinking again – I imagine it is tough to have the sinking of the American economy (and all that goes with it) as well as the deaths of over 6500 US soldiers on your head.

So when we put almost all our ills together today, I have to think it is only right to present the latest “Head up the Butt” award to former President Georgie W. Bush.  Take a bow – wherever you are!

Aug 16 2012

Ricky Santorum – boy have we missed him!

I will admit fodder for blogs was much easier when Ricky was still in the hunt for the Republican nomination.  After realizing that most of Republican America still saw him as the jerk and reprobate that Pennsylvania voters realized several years ago, he quickly put his tail between his legs and took refuge somewhere no doubt where 21st century thinking was still decades away.

Freedom – as long as your believe what I do!

But, hallelujah, glory be, HE IS BACK! (that is the closest to a religious fervor I can get).  Yesterday, Ricky shared his opinion that President Barack Obama is “directly assaulting” religious freedom and that his administration has implemented policies that force Catholics to abandon their faith.  Now, while I understand this is politics and that Santorum plays to a select few (none of whom I can personally admit to being an acquaintance), I think Ricky really needs to understand that most Catholics, if we use their support and aherence to the beliefs of the Catholic faith, have long abandoned the rules set by the Catholic Church without help from the present administration.  I also have to wonder where Ricky’s wife, who managed to cohabit, un-married, with a renowned abortion doctor, the founder of Pittsburgh’s first abortion clinic in the 1970′s, for several years pre-Ricky, really feels about all this.  She has no doubt hit the confessional a few times – nothing a couple of Hail Mary’s can’t fix.

Let’s take a quick look at the numbers as far as Americans who are Catholic and their adherence to the faith.  In full disclosure, I am a longstanding atheist so I have issues with most any religious belief – while I’ll defend to the end your right to believe whatever you want, I’ll still never understand how you can believe what you do.  I will admit I just happen to find the Catholic belief structure and the Pope particularly abhorrent.

Hmm…Birth Control – while the more non-catholics find birth control morally acceptable than catholics, it isn’t by much.  More important, 8 in 10 catholics don’t align with their faith.  I guess most of these people won’t be abandoning their faith because of Obama – they left long ago.

This next chart is even more interesting.

Quite a bit to highlight here – but the data in the chart is pretty clear.  The majority of Catholics polled seem to fall on the wrong side of sticking with the mandates of the Catholic faith – even the church going Catholics.  Even more amazing is that more church going Catholics see abortion as morally acceptable than non-Catholics.  Quite a few of them gambling also.

Here’s another surprise (not) – not alot of support of the Catholic Church in general by Catholics – aside from a great number of beliefs remaining in the dark ages, I guess the abuse of little boys hasn’t help the cause much.

So at the end of the day, Ricky, I give to you the latest “Head in the Butt” award.  There was no question among the voters and I expect this will not be the last time you get this honor given there is still a few months to go and you will be out there helping Mitt.

Ricky has also started to weigh in on Paulie R.

“What Paul Ryan stands for in conservative circles and in the media and in this country, for those who know him, is someone who is willing to challenge the status quo and have bold ideas to confront the problems of this country in a truthful fashion,” Santorum said.

Yes, there is no doubt Paulie comes to the table with some bold ideas.

From Thinkprogress.org –

“Ryan embraces the extreme philosophy of Ayn Rand. Ryan heaped praise on Ayn Rand, a 20th-century libertarian novelist best known for her philosophy that centered on the idea that selfishness is “virtue.” Rand described altruism as “evil,” condemned Christianity for advocating compassion for the poor, viewed the feminist movement as “phony,” and called Arabs “almost totally primitive savages.”

Wow – she sounds more like a 2012 Republican than a professed libertarian.