Obama Calls for Blagojevich to Resign  |   Home  |   Week in Review

Paul Ryan Disgraces Himself

In the shadow of Rep. Paul Ryan’s advocacy for the $700 billion bailout, he has lept out in support of the Big 3 bailout.

“We’re all worried about losing our jobs,” Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. “Most of us say, ‘I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it — not me.’ ”

With their dire warnings of impending economic doom and their sweeping request for unprecedented sums of money and authority to bail out cash-starved financial firms, Bush and his economic chiefs have focused the attention of world markets on Congress, Ryan added.

“We’re in this moment, and if we fail to do the right thing, Heaven help us,” he said.

In the past I had been a fan of Ryan.  I am not a fan any longer.  His support of bigger government and massive spending increases is nothing short of a disgrace.  He’s become yet another congresscritter. 

UPDATE: The quote above from Ryan is actually from his floor speech regarding the $700 billion bailout.  Here’s his statement regarding his support for the Big 3 bailout. 

Posted by Owen at 2152 hrs
Politics + Politics - General + Politics - Wisconsin

1. He represents a blue collar district in a blue State. 

   You can either have him in there, fighting reasonably effectively on many issues but not all of them…....or you can have Lydia Spotswood or Peter Barca in there voting 100% democratic.

   That is not a GOP district in my opinion. He does a nice job of stayin alive.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2008 at 2207 hrs




2. His political future is not my concern.

   Posted by Owen on December 10, 2008 at 2211 hrs




3. It should be your concern.  In case you haven’t noticed, the GOP left us standing in a puddle of pee once again.  He may be our best bet against Rusty if he can stay in office.  The GOP sure can focus on old.  They keep asking for donations, then turn around and do the same thing over and over.  Like him or not Ryan is our future.  We need to do something different.  Get behind a good young candidate and push like the devils’ on our heels.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2008 at 2249 hrs




4. I hate the thought of an auto bailout. Things need to fail and rise again on their own.

   That being said, he is representing his district and must serve his constituents. We, on the other hand, cannot throw promising candidates under the bus because we disagree with them on one or two issues. We will have nobody on the field of battle and nobody on the bench.

   Get behind a good young candidate and push like the devils’ on our heels.

     Wise advice.

   spotter: Who is “Rusty”?

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2008 at 2335 hrs




5. Until we, the American people, insist on term limits for all elective office, the political game remains survivor.  I can’t fault Ryan for voting for his political future in a game of unlimited political survival.  If you want honesty and principled integrity, then support term limits.  Newt was right. The primacy of the private over the powerful depends upon limiting the time in power.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2008 at 2341 hrs




6. I think the bailout sucks, but I understand Ryan’s vote.  The guy’s from Janesville, for crying out loud.

   What I do find interesting, however, is the attitude of “well, his political future is not my concern” if he has to take a vote for his district.  This mentality, so perfectly encapsulated in Owen’s one sentence, is precisely why the GOP is an absolute mess right now.  Conservatives will throw one of their own under the bus the second he has to cast a pragmatic vote or a vote that honors the wishes of his constituents.

   Combine their blind, doctrinaire insistence on ideological purity with the kind of power-hungry goobers that run the GOP in Washington and it’s perfectly easy to understand why nobody wants anything to do with the GOP these days.  Normal people think its base is nuts and its leaders are corrupt.

   Apparently Paul Ryan’s not conservative enough any more.  Hilarious.  I guess the future of conservatism involves defeating school referenda here and there and bitching about how everyone in power is doing it all wrong.

   You’ll love being governed by Democrats, Owen.  You’ll never have to defend anything ever again.

   Posted by Recess Supervisor on December 10, 2008 at 2342 hrs




7. Ryan (RS):
   The public overwhelmingly opposes these bailouts. What the hell is the matter with you?
   No wonder you ended up getting booted from the state capitol are banished to a life of playing the french-horn and occasionally traveling to the gayest corners of the earth to share your blowing talents.
   Shit. You are a pathetic waste of talent. Both musically and logically. Yes. I know that Latin men are pretty, but look what you have done to yourself.
   You can play like you are a populist moderate, but let’s face it… you have no clue what populism is, what moderation is, what conservatism is, what principles are, and you have no capacity to comprehend or express any part of an intelligent political argument.
   You are an artist who bases every decision and choice on feelings and you are threatened by those who are secure in their system of beliefs and possess and values and a continuity of thought, reason and logic.
   Thus, when Paul Ryan, commits an act of fraud, not once, but twice, by voting for bailout scams and defrauding generations of taxpayers – even the unborn – you see him as a hero for denying his own beliefs. He is a fraud, but you – you are your own inexcusable mess of a human.
   Your entire motivation for being alive isn’t even for your music , your talents or your personal preferences for non-procreative activities – you merely hate those who can articulate a principled adherence to generations of common-sense and an aversion to the illogic of big-government, big-spending, or even worse, big-fraud.
   To you, anyone big enough to stand up to those things, may believe in God. They may believe in a power bigger than themselves, they may, in humility, put God’s approval of their actions ahead of their own, or almost as bad (in your view), they may put their own views ahead of the voters, rather than pandering to them – and then let the chips fall where they may.
   It takes a special person to do that. It takes someone who has a faith in their beliefs, a faith in something bigger than themselves, something bigger than the small dome that marks a small spot in the not-so-central part of a small state in a big country, in a large world, in a huge galaxy, in a massive universe. They must also be comfortable in the knowledge that they occupy a small slice of time in a history and will most likely never accomplish anything that is remembered by almost anyone for even the short period of history they occupy let alone the history that will follow them.
   That is why, those of us who have principled beliefs fight so hard to protect them. It isn’t about the next election cycle, the next day or the next week or the next year. We believe that our job is to preserve our first principles, our belief in limited government, limited taxation, individual liberty, prosperity and a better, more free world for those that come after us.

   Ryan voted, not once, but twice, to destroy these things. Yes. We will throw him under the bus for it. To quote that broad you hate so much – you betcha!

   Paul Ryan is a fraud. As for you, my little bitch, let’s get to the bottom (pun intended) your issues (not that there’s anything wrong with that, but you are obsessed with dissecting our views, so let’s have fun with yours):
   Fuck You Gruber – we will defend our first principles against your wayward, horn-blowing, non-achieving, love to take-it-up-your-ass because you can’t get firm enough to give it, and because you still can’t figure out which team you are batting for. You may like women, but you are so damn insecure and socially retarded that you always bend over for the guy that buys you one more than you intended to drink and you will go back to his place to play the offended, confused, victim.
   That’s not a stretch – that’s how you acted when you were in the big dome you so love to critique today. Unfortunately, your views come (wait, I don’t want to excite you, let me reset this).

   When you worked as a worthless desk jockey in the building - for what – 3 years?)  you worked as a third-rate-bitch? You had a lust for a girl in that dome, didn’t you? Hint: she is working for a Dem now? She made you insecure and unmanly and now, here you are… a horn-blowing, angry, confused quad-sexual trying to lecture the rest of us about why we should be moderates like you who believe in nothing, know nothing, value nothing, and are obsessed with self-loathing.
   So, Ryan, who is it that we should have lead us?  Who would put us in a ball-gag, tie us up and beat us into the proper ideological submission? Who is your fantasy woman that will bring you back to the “putting” side? Who do you want to lead you?

   What you need is therapy… but you continue to babble out loud and in public, so I thought I would try to help in that same venue.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 0413 hrs




8. Owen, you want to go off on a tangent next time, please make sure your own Congressman isn’t voting “Present” or not even bothering to get in the chamber to have the stones to cast a vote.  How about you trap Paul Ryan in a bathroom when you want a straight answer from him?

   That’s often your M.O., right?

   Admittedly, I’m not lost on how the only Republican voting “No” in Wisconsin was Fond du Lac’s Tom Petri.

   Posted by Kevin Binversie on December 11, 2008 at 0612 hrs




9. So, are you a fan of Steve Kagen now?  He voted against the bailout.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 0650 hrs




10. Kris,

    That meant for me or Owen?  If it was me, the answers “No.”  If the Cerberus-Chrysler thing wasn’t a factor, Kagen would’ve been a “Yes.”

    He’s nothing more than a puppet for the paper maker unions. Always has, always will.  A quick once-over between statements from the unions and statements from Kagen look mighty familiar.

    Posted by Kevin Binversie on December 11, 2008 at 0730 hrs




11. Actually it was for Owen, but it is good to get more of the story.  All I heard was the vote count on the news and Kagen voted no. Didn’t know the backstory.

    For the record I am opposed to the bailout and to Jim Doyle asking for a hand out in Washington.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 0842 hrs




12. Ryan voted ‘yes’ because the money’s coming from the already-allocated “Green Fund” ($25Bn) for the Big 3.  It’s not new money.

    And, yes, he DOES represent a District—his first responsibility—which includes both Janesville and Kenosha.  (And there’s a UAW presence at JICase/Racine, too…)

    We call it “representative Government” for a reason.

    Posted by dad29 on December 11, 2008 at 0921 hrs




13. We call it “representative Government” for a reason.

    Exactly! It amazes me how many people brag about how well they did on the civics test and can’t grasp this simple concept.

    It is like getting your Masters in Automotive Engineering and not knowing which way to turn a wrench.

    PS RecessSupervisor’sSupervisor: What the hell is up with your demented rant? Forget it. I don’t want to know and I just ate. The Libertarian Party as a seat waiting for you in ward 6.

    RecessSupervisor: I thought you made perfect sense. But what do I know?

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 0931 hrs




14. For the New Year (and going forward) can we please come up with a better phrase than “thrown under the bus”? 

    It’s getting to be about as relevant as “where’s the beef”?

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1000 hrs




15. Owen, I agree with your sentiments completely, however I find it intellectually dishonest that the article you link to, and the Paul Ryan quote you put up is not from a floor speech about the Big 3 Bailout, but rather is from the Financial Bailout a couple months ago.  The way you put it makes it seem like the quote in your post is in regards to the Big 3 Bailout.

    I think you should clarify your post to make sure people know where you are quoting, or find a more recent article and post to link to.

    Posted by Nick on December 11, 2008 at 1001 hrs




16. Nick,

    Thanks.  My bad.  I’ll clarify the post. 

    All,

    I understand WHY he voted the way he did.  I disagree with his vote.  Last I checked, I’m still free to do that. 

    Kevin,

    My congressman was in Poland fighting against global warming nutjobs and missed the hastily scheduled vote.  He voted against the financial bailouts and his office says that he opposes the Big 3 bailout.

    Kris,

    No, I’m not a Kagen fan, but he got this vote right.

    Posted by Owen on December 11, 2008 at 1020 hrs




17. Rusty would be the illustrious Feingold.  I like conservitive and discussion.  Not radical and argumentative.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1047 hrs




18. The thing that you are forgetting is that as of now, the bailout appears to be DEAD in the Senate.  Thus, the entire House vote last night is essentially meaningless.  Don’t bash Ryan until his vote actually allows bad legislation to be ENACTED.  It’s possible that Ryan forsaw the trouble that this would have in the Senate and made the pragmatic decision not to make a “principled stand” on a bill that was DOA.  History only remembers the principled stands that actually matter, not frivolous ones.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1714 hrs




19. It’s possible that Ryan forsaw the trouble that this would have in the Senate and made the pragmatic decision not to make a “principled stand” on a bill that was DOA.

    You mean he just wanted to look like he was supporting his constituents but was just being another duplicitous politician?

    Is that supposed to make me feel more favorably about him?

    I hope your not going to be his campaign manager.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1829 hrs




20. Owen has been consistent when it comes to opposing congressional or legislative votes where parochial interests appear to trump policy.

    While I, too, oppose the bailout and favor bankruptcy (if it comes to that) for the Big 3, I don’t have a major concern with this particular Paul Ryan vote. 

    Ryan is, hands down, the most knowledgeable member of Congress on economic and fiscal issues.  He is way out in front of his colleagues in laying out the nightmare fiscal train-wreck the nation is headed for because of unfunded entitlement programs.  In the unlikely event that we actually come to grips with these problems, it will be because people like Paul Ryan sounded the alarm bell.

    It is relevant that a no vote from Ryan would not have changed a thing as it pertains to the outcome of the auto legislation.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1838 hrs




21. What is the explanation for post #7?

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1839 hrs




22. Too late for Rep. Ryan, according to some on this blog. Last time I checked it was their right to do so. So he is already (insert bus analogy here).

    Pelican Pants: Let’s try some new “bus” analogies

    1. Thrown in the mulcher.

    2. Assisgned target practce duty-as the target.

    3. Hung on the meat hook.

    4. Sleeps with the fish. (Oldie but goodie)

    5. Driving home with Ted Kennedy as designated driver.

    6. Helping OJ steal sports memorabilia

    7. Walking point in the Taliban

    8 Iceberg lookout on the Titanic

    9. Plaxico Burress’ next holster

    10. Persona non grata

    Pick one you like or offer some of your own.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2008 at 1846 hrs

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.