Romney picks Ryan as VP choice

[SeminiferousButtNoid]

Paul Ryan is a neocon. Textbook.

[Luminiferous]

+



=

[brotherplanet]

[Luminiferous]

Exactly! It still stuns me how anyone can pick a side nowadays, and anyone who is picking a side doesn't seem to realize they're just a pawn in this game.

Good thing you haven't chosen a side or some would think your last post was proof you had..


So now Romney is in, he's gave us his VP, when may we expect some Romney based memes, birtherplanet?

[brotherplanet]

Exactly! It still stuns me how anyone can pick a side nowadays, and anyone who is picking a side doesn't seem to realize they're just a pawn in this game.

Good thing you haven't chosen a side or some would think your last post was proof you had..


So now Romney is in, he's gave us his VP, when may we expect some Romney based memes, birtherplanet?

You didn't notice the DICKHEAD image?

Besides... I like to give this place some balance.

And lets face facts,.. The anti-war image is spot on. The Left got real quiet about the stuff they were against when Obama started doing it.


Too much celebration going on from the left about the VP pick... It may backfire...



Clinton Chief of Staff: 'This Guy is Amazing'...

The following clip would make a nice 30-second ad:

“Have any of you all met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing. ... He is honest, he is straightforward, he is sincere. And the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit just like we did, by $4 trillion. … The president as you remember, came out with a budget and I don’t think anybody took that budget very seriously. The Senate voted against it 97 to nothing."

Getting this ad up in swing states with a real buy behind it would do two things: It would go a long way to inoculate the ticket against the attacks on the Ryan budget; just as important, it would introduce Paul Ryan to voters as an impressive man and public servant. I think conventional wisdom doesn't yet appreciate how much of a positive Ryan can be for the ticket. Publicizing Bowles's comments could help shape the public's view of Ryan—and improve the public's view of Mitt Romney, the man who picked him.

Video clip is here...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbzpuqWo ... e=youtu.be

[Danzig in the Dark]

Exactly! It still stuns me how anyone can pick a side nowadays, and anyone who is picking a side doesn't seem to realize they're just a pawn in this game.

Good thing you haven't chosen a side or some would think your last post was proof you had..


So now Romney is in, he's gave us his VP, when may we expect some Romney based memes, birtherplanet?

You didn't notice the DICKHEAD image?

Which one is Romney?

Besides... I like to give this place some balance.

We all know you are Fair and Balanced™.

[DEATH ROW JOE]

Exactly! It still stuns me how anyone can pick a side nowadays, and anyone who is picking a side doesn't seem to realize they're just a pawn in this game.

How old are you? Didn't you say you were in your mid-40s? You should be ashamed to have such childish political views. If you think Obama and Romney are similar, you're simply ignorant. There is a stark contrast between the candidates. Next you'll tell us that 175,000 jobs added to the private sector is a weak jobs report. Oh scratch that, you said that last week. You fucking dunce.

And lets face facts,.. The anti-war image is spot on. The Left got real quiet about the stuff they were against when Obama started doing it.

No they didn't you fucking lying cunt. They don't have a Iraq style invasion to protest but there has been lots of activity within the anti-war movement.

Video on Democracy's Now Chanel:
Americas Secret War on Somalia
http://youtu.be/hkz9oQP4D4E

[Charles Bukaki]

I've got to wonder at this point why Obama hasn't gone after Romney's racist past. I'm guessing either his campaign is biding it's time, or they're too scared to bring it up because of Obama's ties to reverend Wright. It seems like it would be worth the risk to me

[Moggio]

Exactly! It still stuns me how anyone can pick a side nowadays, and anyone who is picking a side doesn't seem to realize they're just a pawn in this game.

How old are you? Didn't you say you were in your mid-40s? You should be ashamed to have such childish political views. If you think Obama and Romney are similar, you're simply ignorant. There is a stark contrast between the candidates.

There's almost NO difference between Obama or Romney, jerk-off. They're BOTH considerably funded by Goldman Sachs, they're BOTH anti-constitution, they're BOTH anti-freedom, they're BOTH pro-war, they're BOTH demagogues, they're BOTH not even remotely qualified to be President, they're BOTH full-of-shit and if Romney becomes President, they'll BOTH be owned and operated by the Military Industrial Complex (Obama already is), dumb-shit. Get that through your head.

Next you'll tell us that 175,000 jobs added to the private sector is a weak jobs report. Oh scratch that, you said that last week. You fucking dunce.

Hmmmmmmmmmm. You seem to have a very short memory...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=274750

[FullMetalWhackit]

I've got to wonder at this point why Obama hasn't gone after Romney's racist past. I'm guessing either his campaign is biding it's time, or they're too scared to bring it up because of Obama's ties to reverend Wright. It seems like it would be worth the risk to me

Bidens comments yesterday probably didn't help the cause.

[RATTdrools]

I've got to wonder at this point why Obama hasn't gone after Romney's racist past. I'm guessing either his campaign is biding it's time, or they're too scared to bring it up because of Obama's ties to reverend Wright. It seems like it would be worth the risk to me

What racist past? Are you talking about how Mormons didn't consider blacks human till the 1970s?

That's not really Mittens fault but it is his fault for belonging to a batshit insane religion!

[brotherplanet]

I've got to wonder at this point why Obama hasn't gone after Romney's racist past. I'm guessing either his campaign is biding it's time, or they're too scared to bring it up because of Obama's ties to reverend Wright. It seems like it would be worth the risk to me

They can't go after a racist past he doesn't have... It would blow up in their face...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ek_jkwGg3I



And I love how joey post pics from one small protest. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

[brotherplanet]

We all know you are Fair and Balanced™.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=275121

Waiting for you and joey to comment...

[EvilMadman]

The fact that Mittens has once again chosen to bend to the will of the crazy ass far right (Tea Party) is going to drive the undecided Dems, neo-cons, and Independents back to the left, which is exactly what they needed.

I actually feel sorry for a lot of my Republican friends and what their party has become.

"Undecided Dems"? Uh, yeah. They were only going to vote for Obama/Biden no matter what. I doubt there are any "Romney Democrats", like there were "Reagan Democrats". But Romney was pretty moderate up in Massachusetts. So, who knows.

"Neo-Con" votes are a toss up. They could back either Obama or Romney. But if they feel that the Obama administration has not been friendly/supportive enough to Israel, they may give their vote to Romney/Ryan. You can Google "Ed Koch, Bob Turner, Israel support" for proof.

Just like in the last election, the Independents and "undecided" voters will decide this election too. When they supported Obama over McCain & Palin.

And the Dems are just as awful as the Repubs.

I hope Ron Paul wins.

[Stoner]

Hope in one hand, shit in the other...you know the rest.

That said, I know A LOT of undecided middle leaning Dems who voted for Obama in 2008 but weren't sold on voting for him this year. In fact, quite a few of them were holding out to see who Romney picked as a running mate. Had he picked someone more moderate like Portman, they would have crossed party lines in a heart beat.

Not really sure what's so hard to believe about that.

[EvilMadman]

Paul Ryan is a neocon. Textbook.

Really?

As far as know...

He's not Jewish (but does support Israel)
He was never a registered Democrat
He never considered himself Liberal
He is anti-communist, pro free market
Supports US military intervention, nation building, democracy movements

And if only three traits (pro Israel, pro free markets, pro US military intervention) make Paul a "neocon", then what's the difference between a "neocon" and say your average Republican? The only difference I see is, being Jewish and a former liberal and/or registered Democrat?

Did that make any sense?

[EvilMadman]

Hope in one hand, shit in the other...you know the rest.

That said, I know A LOT of undecided middle leaning Dems who voted for Obama in 2008 but weren't sold on voting for him this year. In fact, quite a few of them were holding out to see who Romney picked as a running mate. Had he picked someone more moderate like Portman, they would have crossed party lines in a heart beat.

Not really sure what's so hard to believe about that.

Yeah, I know the rest.

Oh, well.

It should be jolly good fun for Repubs (and maybe everyone else too) watching Paul Ryan and
Joe "I say asinine things" Biden debate on economics.

[Danzig in the Dark]

[SeminiferousButtNoid]

Paul Ryan is a neocon. Textbook.

Really?

As far as know...

He's not Jewish (but does support Israel)
He was never a registered Democrat
He never considered himself Liberal
He is anti-communist, pro free market
Supports US military intervention, nation building, democracy movements

And if only three traits (pro Israel, pro free markets, pro US military intervention) make Paul a "neocon", then what's the difference between a "neocon" and say your average Republican? The only difference I see is, being Jewish and a former liberal and/or registered Democrat?

Did that make any sense?

The contention that a "neocon" is synonymous with being Jewish and formally being liberal is a genetic fallacy. Neocon ideology (or any other ideology) isn't defined by the religion or ethnicity of its original proponents or what political ideology they used to be. If you adhere to an ideology's tenets, then you hold that ideology. Many of the original paleocons, like Richard M Weaver and John Dos Passos were originally 1930s leftists. That doesn't mean Pat Buchanan isn't a paleocon because he wasn't a former supporter of the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. And that is why Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, John Boener, Newt Gingrich, Hugh Hewitt, Richard Armitage, Seth Cropsey, Scooter Libby, and our former president George W Bush, all of who are not Jewish and are not former liberals, are considered neocons.

Paul Ryan is demonstrably a neocon because, as a Congressman, he voted lock and step with 100% of the Bush Administration's policies during those 8 years. That includes all of the hallmarks of neoconservative supported and engineered legislation and executive action on foreign policy and civil liberties.

[FullMetalWhackit]

It should be jolly good fun for Repubs (and maybe everyone else too) watching Paul Ryan and
Joe "I say asinine things" Biden debate on economics.

Damn that's going to be good tv.

[KneelandBobDylan]

It should be jolly good fun for Repubs (and maybe everyone else too) watching Paul Ryan and
Joe "I say asinine things" Biden debate on economics.

Damn that's going to be good tv.

Right, because Ryan's plan to further cut the taxes for the wealthy has worked out sooooo well in the past.

[brotherplanet]

I don't see Neo-cons supporting Obama even if he was doing a half way decent job. He's not even doing that much so I find it hard to imagine them voting Left.

[tylamonroe]

It should be jolly good fun for Repubs (and maybe everyone else too) watching Paul Ryan and
Joe "I say asinine things" Biden debate on economics.

Damn that's going to be good tv.

Right, because Ryan's plan to further cut the taxes for the wealthy has worked out sooooo well in the past.

Yeah, it blew up on JFK and Reagan big time. No growth as a result of their lowering taxes at all

I suppose you can try to pin the current shit storm on Bush's tax cuts if you like, but it's an argument you can't make and come out on top. 20 years of bad policy by both parties brought us to this door.

[brotherplanet]

I suppose you can try to pin the current shit storm on Bush's tax cuts if you like, but it's an argument you can't make and come out on top. 20 years of bad policy by both parties brought us to this door.

Bingo. Our leader's long term planning and changes to policy brought us to this dead end road. Both parties had their hands in this shit and both parties get the die hard Dems and Repubs to defend them as if they're not the ones responsible because you know... It's the other guy.


People wonder why I'm harder on Obama than I am on Romney... Romney hasn't been fucking up the country (or doing next to nothing) for the past 4 years. Four years ago I was harder on Bush. Why? The same reason.



If Romney wins I'll do the same thing I did with Obama... Wait and see... I expect beginner mistakes the first year, but by the second year I expect something positive to happen.. Something. In Obama's case the fourth year isn't looking any better than the first.

[KneelandBobDylan]

Yeah, it blew up on JFK and Reagan big time. No growth as a result of their lowering taxes at all

I suppose you can try to pin the current shit storm on Bush's tax cuts if you like, but it's an argument you can't make and come out on top. 20 years of bad policy by both parties brought us to this door.

I wish they would go back to that fucking socialist Eisenhower's 90+% tax rate. You know, back when people actually did have to use that money to invest in their companies, or give it to the government for things like the highway system, that benefit us all. Now they just park it in an off-shore account to the detriment of the rest of us.

[Moggio]

I suppose you can try to pin the current shit storm on Bush's tax cuts if you like, but it's an argument you can't make and come out on top. 20 years of bad policy by both parties brought us to this door.

Bingo. Our leader's long term planning and changes to policy brought us to this dead end road. Both parties had their hands in this shit and both parties get the die hard Dems and Repubs to defend them as if they're not the ones responsible because you know... It's the other guy.


People wonder why I'm harder on Obama than I am on Romney... Romney hasn't been fucking up the country (or doing next to nothing) for the past 4 years. Four years ago I was harder on Bush. Why? The same reason.



If Romney wins I'll do the same thing I did with Obama... Wait and see... I expect beginner mistakes the first year, but by the second year I expect something positive to happen.. Something. In Obama's case the fourth year isn't looking any better than the first.

BINGO!

[Charles Bukaki]

didn't take long for Ryan to get busted as a liar and a hypocrite:

http://news.yahoo.com/presented-letters ... tml?_esi=1

After repeated denials, Paul Ryan has admitted he requested stimulus cash even after sharply criticizing the program.

As recently as Wednesday in Ohio, Mitt Romney's running mate told ABC's Cincinnati affiliate, WCPO, he did not.

"I never asked for stimulus," Ryan said. "I don't recall… so I really can't comment on it. I opposed the stimulus because it doesn't work, it didn't work."

Two years ago, during an interview on WBZ's NewsRadio he was asked by a caller if he "accepted any money" into his district. Ryan said he did not.

"I'm not one [of those] people who votes for something then writes to the government to ask them to send us money. I did not request any stimulus money," the congressman answered.

But as we've now learned, Ryan did write letters. He did request stimulus funds.

"The Olympics may be over but Paul Ryan could have gotten a gold medal in hypocrisy," a senior administration official told ABC's Jake Tapper. "As someone who spends all day every day railing against government spending, but then secretly seeks millions in funds for pet projects, he is as Washington as it gets."

In 2009, Ryan wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis asking for stimulus money to cover costs on two energy conservation projects in his home state of Wisconsin. In the letter, Ryan said the funds would help create jobs and reduce "energy consumption" in the state. At least one of the companies received the requested cash.

The letters were first obtained by The Wall Street Journal through the Freedom of Information Act back in early 2010. The Boston Globe turned them up for the first time during this campaign season Wednesday. At that point, a Ryan aide referred ABC News back to what a Ryan spokesman said when the letters first went public.

"If Congressman Ryan is asked to help a Wisconsin entity applying for existing Federal grant funds, he does not believe flawed policy should get in the way of doing his job and providing a legitimate constituent service to his employers," the spokesman told the Milwaukee (Wisc.) Journal Sentinel.

Thursday, Ryan responded to the questions himself.

"After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled," Ryan said in a statement. "This is why I didn't recall the letters earlier. But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that.

"Regardless, it's clear that the Obama stimulus did nothing to stimulate the economy, and now the President is asking to do it all over again."

[FullMetalWhackit]

Right, because Ryan's plan to further cut the taxes for the wealthy has worked out sooooo well in the past.

I wasn't referring to either sides policies, I am looking forward to Biden debating Ryan. Just as it was interesting when Biden debated Palin last time around. Going to fun to watch.

[KneelandBobDylan]

[EvilMadman]

It should be jolly good fun for Repubs (and maybe everyone else too) watching Paul Ryan and
Joe "I say asinine things" Biden debate on economics.

Damn that's going to be good tv.

Right, because Ryan's plan to further cut the taxes for the wealthy has worked out sooooo well in the past.

Yeah, yeah.

And raising taxes has worked out sooooo well for California, New York, and New Jersey.

New York, Blue States get hit with biggest hikes if Bush tax cuts expire

OXFORD, Ohio — The end of the Bush-era tax cuts will mostly whack blue states — and New York will take one of the biggest hits, a startling new analysis shows.

New Yorkers will shell out an average $5,542 more in taxes next year if President Obama and Congress can’t agree on an extension of the current rates, a study by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found.

Only taxpayers in neighboring Connecticut would suffer a bigger hike than New York. They’d fork over an extra $5,783 if the tax cuts adopted under President George W. Bush expire Jan. 1.

Obama and Democrats in Congress steadfastly object to extending the cuts for all Americans, despite the study showing blue states will get walloped.

New Jersey taxpayers face the third-biggest hit, up $5,030, followed by Massachusetts ($4,277) and California ($4,242). All are wealthier, Democratic-dominated states.

The state facing the smallest tax hike is Mississippi, a solidly Republican and poor state, where the average tax bill would still go up $1,313.

The other states where residents would feel the least impact are New Mexico ($1,465), Alabama ($1,496), Tennessee ($1,522) and West Virginia ($1,530).

“It’s pretty dramatic,” Tax Foundation economist Will McBride told CNBC. “This is the biggest tax increase that would happen since World War II.”

NYPOST.COM
August 16, 2012