Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

[Old Pio]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Too early to tell.

Romney won the nomination by default against the weakest major party field in memory. Now he faces a very strong campaign, and his Signature Move (go negative, then squeal when your opponent goes negative) isn't working. Picking Ryan is, IMHO, a sign that his handlers have decided to run a substantive campaign because they had no other choice.

However we got here, it's better than I expected.

Well known Romney surogate Lanny Davis said: "The President owes it to the American people to repudiate the (Romney killed my wife) ad."

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (AKA the human toilet brush) this morning denied knowing the political inclinations of Priorites USA. Really? Headed by a former deputy press secretary for His Newtoneness? Really?

Quelle surprise that you hold yourself out as an expert on Romney campaigns and his "Signature Move." Dream on about what "his handlers" have decided and whether or not they "had a choice." Hide and watch.

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Meanwhile, this will probably pry open the gender gap by another 2-3 points.

Less attention has been paid, though, to Ryan’s hard-right positions on social issues. Indeed, on abortion and women’s health care, there isn’t much daylight between Ryan and, say, Michele Bachmann. Any Republican vice-presidential candidate is going to be broadly anti-abortion, but Ryan goes much further. He believes ending a pregnancy should be illegal even when it results from rape or incest, or endangers a woman’s health. He was a cosponsor of the Sanctity of Human Life Act, a federal bill defining fertilized eggs as human beings, which, if passed, would criminalize some forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization. The National Right to Life Committee has scored his voting record 100 percent every year since he entered the House in 1999. “I’m as pro-life as a person gets,” he told The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack in 2010. “You’re not going to have a truce.”

Indeed, Ryan exemplifies a strange sort of ideological hybrid that now dominates the GOP. On economic issues, he’s a hardcore libertarian who once said, “[T]he reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker…it would be Ayn Rand. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism.” Yet when it comes to women’s control of their bodies, he quickly turns into a statist. “In the state of nature—the ‘law of the jungle’—the determination of who ‘qualifies’ as a human being is left to private individuals or chosen groups,” he wrote in a 2010 essay titled “The Cause of Life Can’t Be Severed From the Cause of Freedom.” “In a justly organized community, however, government exists to secure the right to life and the other human rights that follow from that primary right.”

[joecct]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Meanwhile, this will probably pry open the gender gap by another 2-3 points.

Why? There is not, despite the DNC Platform Committee, 100% agreement on the right to kill an unborn human. You and a few others think its OK, I and a few others think its murder.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Well known Romney surogate Lanny Davis said: "The President owes it to the American people to repudiate the (Romney killed my wife) ad."

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (AKA the human toilet brush) this morning denied knowing the political inclinations of Priorites USA. Really? Headed by a former deputy press secretary for His Newtoneness? Really?

Quelle surprise that you hold yourself out as an expert on Romney campaigns and his "Signature Move." Dream on about what "his handlers" have decided and whether or not they "had a choice." Hide and watch.

Lanny Davis is irrelevant. That's why you keep quoting him.

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Why?

Because it's a more extreme position than the one the GOP usually presents.

I agree that if your position is abortion is murder then it's perfectly reasonable to criminalize it and make no distinction in any case, even rape, incest or the risk of the mother's death. But that's a minority opinion. Most "pro-lifers," particularly women, recognize some conditionality. Ryan's position explicitly ignores that.

I think he's more logically consistent, but paradoxically that makes him far more radical. This is one of those times when logical inconsistency is what holds a coalition together.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Hmm....the latest version of Medicare reform is the Ryan (R) - Wyden (D) proposal....you did know that, right?

Ryan is a clear thinker and would IMHO be a persuasive bridge-builder due to his existing contacts in the House. Put Ryan to work with Congressional leaders of both parties and you'll get a budget that members of both parties will vote for. Reid / Democrat-controlled Senate have not passed a budget in three years, despite having a majority.

I still maintain that the R&R team (you can use that ) represents quite narrow experience on financials/numbers and a lack of experience and understanding on the human side of things...domestic govt policy, the economy and international relations.

Here's a piece from Robert Reich that shows how Ryan has had a pretty 'right' approach to spending...and that he is in fact not so much in tune with the outcomes of his recommendations (the long term ramifications of wrecking opportuniites to transfer out of poverty and pushing folks out onto the streets):

Ryan's views are crystallized in the budget he produced for House Republicans last March as chairman of the House Budget committee. That budget would cut $3.3 trillion from low-income programs over the next decade. The biggest cuts would be in Medicaid, which provides healthcare for the nation's poor -- forcing states to drop coverage for an estimated 14 million to 28 million low-income people, according to the non-partisan Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Ryan's budget would also reduce food stamps for poor families by 17 percent ($135 billion) over the decade, leading to a significant increase in hunger -- particularly among children. It would also reduce housing assistance, job training, and Pell grants for college tuition.

In all, 62 percent of the budget cuts proposed by Ryan would come from low-income programs.

The Ryan plan would also turn Medicare into vouchers whose value won't possibly keep up with rising health-care costs -- thereby shifting those costs on to seniors.

At the same time, Ryan would provide a substantial tax cut to the very rich -- who are already taking home an almost unprecedented share of the nation's total income. Today's 400 richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million of us put together.

Here's an add on by the NYT...just where else the budget cut (education, science, etc) and where it doesn't (military spending):

While most of his savings would come from entitlement programs, which are about 40 percent of the federal budget, his spending reductions would be felt most, and sooner, in the so-called discretionary domestic programs — agriculture, education, transportation, science and much more — which account for roughly 15 percent of the budget. Mr. Ryan would not cut military spending, which is roughly 20 percent of the budget.

[geezer]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Mr. Ryan would not cut military spending, which is roughly 20 percent of the budget.

this part is a pretty serious blind spot. How can you justify cutting food stamps if you're not willing to cut defense contractors' budgets? How many fighter jets and whatnot do we need?

Still, Ryan seems to be better than I thought (the years of vilification in the press seems to have colored my earlier condemnation of his candidacy). Who else thinks the Republicans should flip the ticket at their convention and let Ryan run for the top office?

I still maintain that the R&R team (you can use that ) represents quite narrow experience

That would be an elegant nickname, but for the fact that Ryan is apparently known for "fiendish daily workouts" that have him in "tip top condition".

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Here's a thought:

suppose John Kerry had won in 2004, instead of GWB having been re-elected. Would we be nearing the end of Kerry's 2nd term? Would John Edwards still be Vice-President?

Or would a Republican....who?? be running for re-election against .... who?

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Who else thinks the Republicans should flip the ticket at their convention and let Ryan run for the top office?

Why would Ryan pick Romney as his veep?

[geezer]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Why would Ryan pick Romney as his veep?

well, you know.... because.... it's his turn?

[huskyfan]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Obama is spending three days in Iowa? Tell me how that is not a sign of serious trouble in his reelection campaign?

[SJHovey]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Obama is spending three days in Iowa? Tell me how that is not a sign of serious trouble in his reelection campaign?

He likes the corndogs at the Iowa state fair?

[bronconick]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Obama is spending three days in Iowa? Tell me how that is not a sign of serious trouble in his reelection campaign?

Because you clearly don't understand the electoral college?

[bronconick]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

Here's a thought:

suppose John Kerry had won in 2004, instead of GWB having been re-elected. Would we be nearing the end of Kerry's 2nd term? Would John Edwards still be Vice-President?

Or would a Republican....who?? be running for re-election against .... who?

It'd be a Republican. The economic implosion in 2008 was taking the incumbant party out of the White House and there was no likely way to forestall or stop it.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Carrion My Wayward Son!

I still maintain that the R&R team (you can use that ) represents quite narrow experience on financials/numbers and a lack of experience and understanding on the human side of things...domestic govt policy, the economy and international relations.

Here's a piece from Robert Reich that shows how Ryan has had a pretty 'right' approach to spending...and that he is in fact not so much in tune with the outcomes of his recommendations (the long term ramifications of wrecking opportuniites to transfer out of poverty and pushing folks out onto the streets):

Ryan's views are crystallized in the budget he produced for House Republicans last March as chairman of the House Budget committee. That budget would cut $3.3 trillion from low-income programs over the next decade. The biggest cuts would be in Medicaid, which provides healthcare for the nation's poor -- forcing states to drop coverage for an estimated 14 million to 28 million low-income people, according to the non-partisan Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Ryan's budget would also reduce food stamps for poor families by 17 percent ($135 billion) over the decade, leading to a significant increase in hunger -- particularly among children. It would also reduce housing assistance, job training, and Pell grants for college tuition.

In all, 62 percent of the budget cuts proposed by Ryan would come from low-income programs.

The Ryan plan would also turn Medicare into vouchers whose value won't possibly keep up with rising health-care costs -- thereby shifting those costs on to seniors.

At the same time, Ryan would provide a substantial tax cut to the very rich -- who are already taking home an almost unprecedented share of the nation's total income. Today's 400 richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million of us put together.

Here's an add on by the NYT...just where else the budget cut (education, science, etc) and where it doesn't (military spending):

While most of his savings would come from entitlement programs, which are about 40 percent of the federal budget, his spending reductions would be felt most, and sooner, in the so-called discretionary domestic programs — agriculture, education, transportation, science and much more — which account for roughly 15 percent of the budget. Mr. Ryan would not cut military spending, which is roughly 20 percent of the budget.

So, people starve and we get some more tanks. Sounds like a deal to me.