You know, like control-top panty hose. Not at all generous, in other words. Pinched. But with a little stretching? They will cover. Painfully.
ThinkProgress provides five of the most egregious things the Ryan budget does. Anyone could point out that his proposals benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, or point out it's pennywise and pound-foolish, or consider that the impact of austerity is a contraction of the economy, because those who must spend, haven't the wherewithal to do so. But it doesn't seem he gets any of this. His inability to "get" why his budget wouldn't be a great plan is exactly the same thing as his secret to GOP House longevity. Bad economics is the Republican secret sauce. He epitomizes what makes Republican economics wrong-headed and ideological. And so, he makes an excellent mascot for the marginalized Republican House of the future.
Which I encourage every Democrat, or economically "sane" independent voter to work towards--let's not let granny-starvers run the government. We can do better, and we will. Let's marginalize his kind of talk on the economy. And make plausible, responsible, humane choices that let working people earn salaries they can live on and allows enough of the middle class the ability to service their own economy by having the funds to enrich retail business, let's say--so that they can be self-perpetuating economic drivers and I dunno. Have more economic freedom to do stuff.
I don't think we'll shake Ryanomics. But over time, it will just look like this crustycon thing some guys used to support back in the day. And that will be worth it. So let's keep him in the House as the bad example of budgets that are so wrong. Unless his district could go blue. In which case, screw him. (I'd like a Democrat for his district, please.)
3 comments:
the fascinating thing about paul ryan and the various versions of his plan as a phenomenon is that he is crazy popular with the washington media, but his plan is crazy unpopular with the general public. which means that each incarnation of "the ryan plan" gets a major fluffing from the media, which makes the GOP think that ryan is the horse to back. but each time the ryan plan has actually gone to the voters, the voters rejected it definitively. (e.g. the hochul special election in 2011 and the last presidential election, where ryan lost not only his state, but also his home town of janesville)
there's no actual evidence that ryan or his plan is popular with voters, or gains them a single vote on election day. there is some evidence that having ryan around a politician's neck is a liability. but because he gets so much attention with his plan schtick, there's this overwhelming impression that ryan is some kind of asset to the republican party. that's how ryan got the veep nomination. and that may be part of the reason he lost. so i personally have no problem with yet another ryan plan roll out. i hope they continue to roll out plan after plan all the way through the next election.
In other words, Ryan is going to basically be Ron Paul 2.0, the psycho glibertarian limpet who can't be dislodged from a gubbermint job with a goddamn crowbar.
I think Paul Ryan's budgets are more like a flag than a battle plan--it gives the believers something to rally around, but hasn't got to do with governing, because government is soooo icky, that only the pure of heart (sure, like the Pauls, father and son, or Ryan) should be allowed to do it. It's a signifier for the small gov purists.
I think it's just good that the signifier works the other way--informed voters can identify supporters of it as "teh crazy" and give them a wide berth.
Post a Comment