Sometimes I Make Predictions

I think Paul Ryan is going to be in the House of Representatives for a long time. I know, the Oracle of Philadelphia leans over her bourbon glass and inhales the heady vapors thereof, but I'm just saying. He puts out these budget things. If he's willing to put his name on these things, House Republicans should be quite glad to have him. He's got good support in his district, and maybe, you know, he'll get a hair out of place and go a handful of states in a presidential primary, like, once. Just to remind himself of when he was a running mate. But otherwise, he has a way of spinning ideology into something very like numbers. Numbers in a budget, mind you, is a step up from not having any. The problem is that the Ryan measuring stick is marked with rubber inches. His numbers are a bit elastic.

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.)

Maybe Those of Us on the Outside Should do Some Changing--

That, folks, was Sen. John McCain sarcastically deriding a bill intended to help veterans get jobs. It's kind of weird for him to do that.  But it isn't surprising anymore. The atmosphere in Washington is frankly abysmal:

Barring a burst of productivity in the lame-duck session in November and December, the 112th Congress is set to enter the Congressional record books as the least productive body in the post-World War II era. It had passed a mere 173 public laws as of last month. That was well below the 906 enacted from January 1947 through December 1948 by the body President Harry S. Truman referred to as the “do-nothing” Congress, and far fewer than many prior Congresses have passed in a single session.

And for that reason, when President Obama makes the case that Washington needs to be changed from the outside--I'm appreciating what he's talking about.  It's not just watching what's going on right now--it's thinking about what we could be dealing with if we, the voters, don't make some changes down there.

One of the most compelling arguments I've heard on the subject comes from Elizabeth Warren, who makes the case that keeping Sen. Scott Brown may mean getting a climate change denialist like Sen. Inhofe as head of the Environment Committee.  See, that would be a real problem. You can't say it wouldn't happen. After all, the GOP put Michele Bachmann on the House Intelligence Committee even though she's a credulous boob--they have a funny sense of humor. Or rather, disdain for whatever constitutes effective, informed, rational government.

I am reminded of this particularly by Woodward's recent book regarding last year's debt ceiling crisis, The Price of Politics. I think Woodward gets a bit wrong (I'm not the only one) regarding what the president could even do to make more happen with the great, dysfunctional mess that a desperately polarized Congress had become. But he at least does remind me clearly of what did happen.

When You're Hot You're Hot, When You're Not You're Mitt

Wait, wait.  Before I get into the whole Romney mishegas more than I want to—but as much as a have to, being a political blogger, can I just start with the running mate story?  M’kay. Here’s a perfectly well-programmed Randroid getting booed for lying in front of people who are old enough to know better than he probably ever will:

I understand his own mama was in the audience. and some of the seniors walked out on his ass. Somehow, Lyin’ Ryan and his mam benefited from government survivor benefits just enough for him to want to fiddle with them to make them dependent on market forces and less available to people who could use them.  Obama is leading Romney in Wisconsin per the polls.  That’s all I have to say about all that.

But when I’m not mentioning that Romney relied on a rock star privatization/supply side ideologue to be his running mate to give him a boost with a base that distrusts him—why don’t I point out that they still don’t love him enough to refrain from talking shit about him?  Because Herman Cain just did:

“Stupid people are ruining America, and we’ve got to take it back,” he said.
Cain told members of the media after the speech that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s recent “47 percent” comment was a “non-story” being blown out of proportion by the media. But Cain said he would have been doing better if he was the nominee, saying that he’d probably have a “substantial lead” on President Barack Obama at this point.
“The reason is quite simple: I have some depth to my ideas,” he said.

Yeah. The guy who gave us the “999” plan and said he wouldn’t sign any bill more than three pages long, believes he has more depth to his ideas.  Because, of course, he would handle the Libya situation that much better.  And of course he wouldn’t be as especially crass in his language about the poor in America.  By which I mean—seriously, whatever. The Hermanator isn’t running for president—Mitt is.

So, I think that Romney had a Friday doc-dump of his 2011 return and a notarized statement about his previous 20 years of returns is one ginormous subject-changing.30-second over the pants handjob. I expect there to be more educated opinions than mine, but I would say that even if he paid taxes as attested, he did release the info when he said he wouldn’t—didn’t he? Huh? Right. And folks are picking over it, such as it is, huh? Also right.

Does it distract from whether he’s still a bloody awful candidate with a rotten campaign going on?  Not especially. It’s like proof of it.  Cheers.

(X-posted at Rumproast.)

I See What Romney Did There...I Don't Get It

There's something about this whole unveiling of the "Paul Ryan as running mate" pick that feels a little "whirlwind" to me. From the word that Romney was going to announce his pick in VA at the USS Wisconsin  , to the rumors on my Twitter-feed that the pick would in fact be Paul Ryan (and I was like, whoa--head-fake?)  to my actually getting my ass up at 9am to find that it truly was Paul Ryan--it just feels so sudden.  After all the talk about how Romney's pick would be a safe choice (think: Pawlenty, Portman) that doesn't shake things up too much, Paul Ryan seems like a GAMECHANGAHH SUPAHSTARRR!

Which is the kind of thing that makes me wonder. You know, with the polls being what they were (having Romney down by several points) and with the World Tour (three countries worth) going as well as it did,  and with the constant "pick, pick, pick" about what ever could be lurking in those mysterious old tax returns, I kind of got the feeling that the MittCampaign might have decided to finally play that VP Selection card and own the weekend news cycle with how shiny and young and fresh and all their new associate was.

This is good for a weekend news cycle, Team Romney. This card gets played one time, and then you don't get to play it again.  Unless something happens to Rep. Ryan. (I'm not suggesting anything, Christ Almighty, he has a family!)

But in the meanwhile, let's take a look at what other stuff Paul Ryan might be bringing to the ticket. After all, it's not unusual for a candidate to pick a running mate who shores up a perceived weakness. Obama picked Biden to shore up his foreign policy cred. Kennedy picked Johnson to shore up support in the South. What we have as the perceived weaknesses of Mitt Romney is an out-of-touch wealthy technocrat who has no foreign policy experience who is basing his run on the precept that his private sector experience gives him insight into what the economy needs (with scant details as to how.)

What he's picking up is a brash Young Gun with no foreign policy experience who fills in a lot of economic policy details with no private sector experience at all.  Who does not fill the bill on empathy:



very well, either. Actually, he will not be helpful in shoring up support with women, the LGBT community, or independents, and he'll probably peel off some support with seniors (who are awfully fond of Medicare) and students (who are awfully fond of being able to pay for college without working three jobs.)

Who is Paul Ryan liable to be helpful with? Donors, I think. The Tea Party loves him, and so do the billionaires that invented it.

So much for the pivot to the center--I don't see it happening after the convention either, at this point.

There Hasn't Been a Spending Binge Under Obama, Despite What Romney Says

The graphic really does most of the talking, here, and I don't have a whole lot to add to it, except to point out that just because this chart has gone viral on Facebook and been called "mostly true" by Politifact, doesn't mean that Romney won't carp on about spending under Obama's administration as if his candidacy depended on it--because it probably does.

The only way things Romney says about the economy make sense is if you buy into the idea that government spending is an economic problem. The federal debt is a kind of problem, but at historically low interest rates, it's not as immediate a problem as unemployment, for example, or high personal debt in the form of mortgages, credit card debt, or student loan debt is for millions of Americans whose wages have been stagnant even as some staple costs like fuel or health care have gone up.  A lot of the federal spending arguments strike me as being beside the point--revenue should be paying down the debt, but not at the expense of functions of the government that are necessary to protect the welfare of our citizens. If we have more homeless, hungry and unhealthy people among us--we will all pay more in the long run than if we are taking steps to keep people capable of contributing to the economy and to our society.

Romney has come out as a proponent of the Ryan budget, which is definitely not a debt-reducing plan in the least. When conservatives wax maudlin about how future generations will suffer under the yoke of massive debt, they kind of forget one of the possibilities that exist for not so encumbering their grandbabies--actually generating revenues right now to pay it down (which is why I'm bullish on the Progressive Caucus' budget plan, myself.)

Anyhow, Romney's claim about understanding the economy is just bullshit, and not just because Krugthulu and I say so.  Listen to him, and compare what he says against your own kitchen table conversations about how we can get out of the financial mess going on. In your guts, you'll know-- (he's....not right).

Well, at any rate, he's willing to lie about it all, Romney is. And his ability to lie--well, that counts, too.

Paul Ryan faces more sad but still makes a "funny."

What happened, if you can't see the video, is that an older gentleman who exclaimed that he paid into the "entitlement programs" that Paul Ryan was decrying as being so expensive, was led out of the townhall meeting and was treated somewhat brutally.  He was also handcuffed. Rep. Ryan's charming quip?  "I hope he's taking his blood pressure medication!"  Because old people need lots of expensive medications sometimes to live! And because stress can be a real killer! Oh, what a funny, charming man that Paul Ryan can be!

Of course, this is probably more funny to you if you are a relatively young and healthy man with a taxpayer-provided healthcare plan given to you as a congressman, than it would be for someone who has paid into a so-called "entitlement program" (which I would say one is certainly entitled to if one has paid into it, yes?) and were of retirement age and possibly facing some degree of health crisis.  That latter person wouldn't find it funny at all, and for that matter, I don't find it especially funny.  It was kind of callous and ageist and you know what?   Having one's staff call the police because you're too big a baby to answer questions from your constituents is pretty weak.

Okay--Paul Ryan/Barack Obama Slash fic. This is a "No."

I thought this was a little weird when I saw David Brooks doing it.  It's extra-super-weird when I see Ruth Marcus doing it.  Jeez-Louise, Villagers, stop writing Ryan/Obama slash fic.

I'm not opposed to seeing a little bit of political 'shipping. But that's usually about running mates  and...you know. Lots of canonical demographic wonkish stuff goes down considering those pairings. But Ryan/Obama mash-ups just make no sense. This isn't about two individual politicians feeling their own passionate feelings about what kind of moral statement they want to make with a budget.  Oh, no. It's a story with a multitude of characters--and Obama and Ryan are simply from two different and contesting worlds. Their love is not meant to be--especially if we want a budget that doesn't suck. They don't need to share lunch or a beer or hold hands.

Obama needs to remember that part of what he ran on was ending the Bush tax cuts, and that protecting Social Security and Medicare are generational promises.  Ryan needs to learn basic math, and why Ayn Rand is not actually so great, really.  In other words--no. No pillow talk. No beer summit. No bromance. The story of our economic future kind of depends on them getting it right--not getting it together.

Otherwise, yeah, I'd find that kind of hot, but still....

Rep. Paul Ryan is getting a sad at local Townhall Meetings--

What I've been hearing is that Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin-yeah, weirdly enough, that Wisconsin, has been given a hard time by his constituents for some of the ideas in his budget proposal.

He's being booed and challenged by these people who sometimes aren't even being as nice to him as he expects. It's like they thought their elected representatives should represent their interests somehow. It's really a big mess. 

I'm so ideologically separated from his cause.  And yet, I have a dumb amount of Paul Ryan pictures on my hard drive. I think it's because of the dark hair and light eyes--a combo I find really attractive.  But that's irrelevant. I hate to see anyone so....well, justifiably called to answer for one's shortcomings and so obviously disliking it so much. So I will dedicate my next jukebox pick to Paul Ryan.

The House Passed the Ryan Budget Bill

Probably because of the seriousness.

Because when you only have 4.3 trillion in budget cuts vs. 4.2 trillion in tax cuts, you might have to wait a long while before you see success--

But the GOP believes it is totally worth it.

And every little scrap, every detail, that the GOP House voted for, is something they have ideologically determined to be part of their vision for America--which includes dismantling Medicare. 

Of course, this was passed along party lines.   This means that only nearly all the Republicans and absolutely none of the Democrats thought dismantling Medicare and endorsing a flawed budget bill was the right thing to do. I'm not exactly polishing John Boehner's House Minority Leader plaque, but...

Just sayin'.

Also, Sen. Reid says this thing will never pass the Senate--

You give'em hell, Harry.  I say this is the GOP's albatross. Republicans will be boring wedding guests with how this sunk them for ages.*

*Regards to Coleridge.

GOP budgets aren't any better with numbers in them, actually

Two items of note regarding the budget plan set forth by darling of the hour Rep. Paul Ryan, R, WI, one somewhat oldish, and one rather newer, but no less interesting--

Item the first: the budget plan involves so much cutting that it could piss away as many as 200,000 to a mind-blowing 700,00 jobs.  This would be a really dumb thing to want to do, coming out of a recession.  People need jobs to afford to do necessary things like eat and take care of themselves and their families. Surely, the GOP doesnt mean to have even more Americans out of work, out of luck, out of their homes, out on the street and suffering?  (Actually, maybe they do. I don't pretend to be the big expert on what they consider "winning" these days.)