Here come the crowds! — Ryan electrifying the GOP

What's that have to do with Reagan?

 

I thought the small government GOP types were all about cutting government programs. Why are you complaining about insignificant cuts in Medicare?

 

If you look at the graph in its entirity, you will see the beginning of the upward climb of increasing debt when Reagan took office. The only time that our debt was maintained was duing the later part of Bill Clinton's presidency which both Bill Clinton and the GOP Congress worked together, well, at least on the surface. If you look past 2000, you see bush tax policy effects that even Obama continues to use.

What this says is that Reaganomics, as a tax policy, is a failed policy. Tax cuts do not pay for themselves and never had paid for themeselves, either in the short run or in the long run. It is time for a new apprach which neither the Romnye/Ryan camp or the Obama/Biden camp wants to do right now.

 

I'm getting bombarded with emails from folks who are going to see Paul Ryan today in Oxford Ohio. Even more than when Rubio made a stop in Dayton some weeks back. Things are heating up with excitement for Republicans hre in the swing state of Ohio.

 

See, and there I was thinking that Americans only voted for the guy with the best teeth and shiniest suit. I didn't realise that crucial issues like bar-appeal were in the running too. You're progressing.

 

What are they going to see this guy Ryan for anyway? To hear some predictable politicians' spin and empty rhetoric they can high-five and whoop over? Sounds like a great day out...

 

liberals.

Honestly, you cannot have it both ways. You whine that "Ryan is cutting programs!" when it is fact YOUR side that is red-handedly proven to be cutting programs...and now you say ;you should be happy', "I thought the small government GOP types were all about cutting government programs. Why are you complaining about insignificant cuts in Medicare?"

How intellectually dishonest. How morally bankrupt.

You're calling a 750,000,000 million dollar cut insignificant, while simultaneously attempting to build a histrionic case against Ryan for reforming the Medicare program with a far less fiscally impactful change? Get real, libby.

Let me answer your dishonest contortion of our position with the truth. We're in favor of cutting programs as long as we develop a suitable - and BETTER - alternative.

Yours is ObamaCare, which we neither find suitable nor better - or even less expensive!

Your emperor has no clothes.

 

Ok. Let me take this slowly. Who was president between 1981 and 1988, left side of the graph when the dept started rising? You know, right there at the left side of the graph? If I had extended the graph to ww2 then guess what direction the debt would have been going? That's right, down. But remember, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" as Dick Cheney said to the guy saying it was a bad idea to increase spending and reduce income which had been the GOP attack line for the previous 8 years.

Anyway, back to Paul Ryan (dont you hate it when I say stuff like that?) Lets meet Paul Ryan!

http://meetpaulryan.com/

It's pretty much a 290 page discussion of Paul Ryan, mostly based on direct quotes from the man. But hey I'm sure they are cherry picking quotes as its only 290 pages! Obviously if it was 291 pages it would be fairer right?

Lets give you a taster. For instance, did you know that Ryan believed for 30 seconds that the tax system benefits rich people too much? Page 244

What a commie! As Mitt Romney would say if Barack Obama had said something like that.

So basically everyone has to cut deep into their pockets... apart from Big Oil, Big Rich and the military. And lets get rid of all that nasty scientific research into cheaper energy production.

So have a read. its only 290 pages of pure Ryan goodness. Most of it in his own words. And in his own voting record. And if you look at when it was set up, it was BEFORE he was chosen as VP

Oh and speaking of which, Nate silver has been giving his measurement of the "Ryan Bounce" in the polls so far. TLDR The Ryan Bounce is weak but its measurable.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...4-the-fog-of-polling-and-ryans-bounce-so-far/

 

Who was the one complaining? It was Grokmaster. Are you calling Grokmaster a liberal?

the rest of your post is pure nonsense based on a lack of reading comprehension both of my post and Grokmaster's.

As for Ryan's budget to "reform" Medicare, giving block grants to states is a lesson of stupidity. That is not reform, just shifting the burden of payment from federal to state and let the states, who are already in dire financial straights, to incur additional costs.

Reforming medicare and medicaid will only occur if we get rid of the FOS (look that up), means test the program, and possibly increase the tax rates as they did in 1986.

 

Our history isn't so long that we couldn't take a gander at the whole graph, that might actually demonstrate specific trends and such, couldn't have that eh? I know what the problem is, I think you do to, it isn't what Cheney said, but what history would teach us...

 

Sure, ssa. I responded to your one stupid statement. Ya know...the one I responded to. That's all I needed. Your pithy asinine comment about "you thought that Conservatives wanted small Government".

You're ignorant to the purpose. Doing so removes a massive level of bureaucracy, and puts the next layer of the onion far closer to the end user.

Yes, I know, liberal. You want to restrict usage of those who are more successful, regardless of what they've paid, and you want to raise their taxes on top of it.

The usual liberal answer.

 

So you are saying conservatives want large governments?

Shifting money from the federal obligation to state isn't going to save any money on regulations, much less taxpayer money. The block grants will still have to meet federal guidelines and as they are utilized today, adminstered by the state. The federal job is more of coordination, but now you shifted that responsiblity from executive to legislative, which means, more congreesional staff members, more committee members, more sub committees, etc to oversea the program. Congress isn't that stupid to let this type of money be used without one shred compliance management to make sure the money is being used properly.

You have no clue what I just wrote, so you wrote more babel and threw in a couple of labels. And are you sayng Reagan was a liberal because he raised taxes on medicare and Social Security?

 

THere you go. The Gross public dept in raw dollars, an fairly meaningless statistic that you have zero chance of interpreting as it does not ad-gust value for inflation or % of GDP or anything else. But still instructive. See the way that Reagan was a fiscal conservative compared with previous presidents?

Heres the total Spending graph. YOu see that leveling off bit to the right? Thats where Obama has cut the rise in spending despite the GOP fighting him all the way



These are from www.usgovernmentspending.com where someone with your obvious intelligence can play with graphs all you want. Knock yourself out.

NOW, back to Paul Ryan.

Paul Ryan In 1995: Slowing The Medicare Growth Rate Isn't A Cut

Heres the videos where he is arguing the oppisite of what he is saying now... with some bonus hilarity.

[video=youtube;G22apRZRX2g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G22apRZRX2g[/video]

OMG!! Medicare is going to be insolvent by 1997 and going bankrupt in 2001!!! Paul Ryan says so, so it must be true!!

[video=youtube;Adq1vaTyXhw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adq1vaTyXhw[/video]

 

He did more than that. He closed Tax Loopholes on the top 1%, and called them "Revenue Enhancements" because calling them tax raises was such a dirty phrase.

see http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-16/why-reagan-raised-taxes-and-we-should-too-echoes.html