Ryan unspun

The half-truths and lies about V.P. Candidate Paul Ryan are rebutted.

By naming Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan to the Republican presidential ticket, Mitt Romney offered Democrats an opportunity to reject demagoguery and engage in a serious intellectual debate about the future.

Or so says conventional media wisdom. To this point, however, no such luck. The path of least political resistance, it seems, is to scaremonger the electorate with half-truths and outright lies. Mitt Romney might be running on his own budget—though he has embraced many of the components of the Ryan plan—but that hasn’t stopped Democrats.

The issues:

1. No, the Ryan budget isn’t extreme

2. No, his plan doesn’t favor the rich

3. No, Ryan’s plan does not destroy Medicare

4. No, he’s not at war with women

5. No, he’s not a congressional obstructionist

Focus on #3

3. No, Ryan’s plan does not destroy Medicare

Rep. Steve Israel of New York, a representative of the hyperventilating wing of the Democratic Party, recently claimed that Romney and Ryan partnership was a “nightmare for seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits. For the last 18 months, we’ve said Republicans will have to defend the indefensible—their vote to end Medicare.” Messina says that the duo would end “Medicare as we know it by turning it into a voucher system.” And Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, has been running around from one media outlet to the next casually claiming that Ryan’s plan would destroy Medicare for today’s seniors.

No, no and no. The Wyden-Ryan Medicare plan —co-authored by a liberal Democrat—wouldn’t affect anyone over 55. Seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits would not see a change, and those under 55 would not have to ever see a change either—unless they voluntarily took part in a more competitive plan. Even then, Washington would pay premiums as you made choices, which, if you believe in the basics of free market economics, would bring down prices and improve service.

Moreover, the liberal Urban Institute recently found that the average citizen will pay $149,000 in Medicare taxes but take out $351,000 in medical services during retirement. So it seems that in reality, the party unwilling to reform a program before it reaches the point of unsustainability is the one acting as the agent of its destruction.

source article


I guess this clears things up pretty much.

Maybe it's all about Liberal "Ryanoia".

reply to post by xuenchen


And I am supposed to trust a source that itself attempts to spread lies???

Wyden Comments on him being a co-author of the Ryan plan:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

“Governor Romney is talking nonsense," Wyden said in an emailed statement Saturday night. "Bipartisanship requires that you not make up the facts. I did not ‘co-lead a piece of legislation.' I wrote a policy paper on options for Medicare."

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Did you not read the entire link to Wyden & Ryan Advance Bipartisan Plan to Strengthen Medicare and Expand Health Care Choices for All

maybe there's some conflicts in there?

it was "published" last December.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

WASHINGTON – This morning, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) introduced a new proposal that represents a major advance in the effort to build a more secure future for the millions of seniors who rely on Medicare.

The new report from Sen. Wyden and Rep. Ryan, titled “Guaranteed Choices to Strengthen Medicare and Health Security for All: Bipartisan Options for the Future,” outlines a bipartisan path forward on expanding health care choices for seniors while preserving a traditional Medicare plan as an option. The report also proposes to give Americans under 65 more power and freedom to purchase coverage they can carry with them into retirement. ................

reply to post by xuenchen


Paul Ryan is sounding better and better all the time.

Now why couldn't HE have been #1 and better yet, telling Romney the VP slot isn't open to offer him?

We might actually get a VP that works for a living though. Now that would be a nice change for modern history.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Paul Ryan is sounding better and better all the time.

Now why couldn't HE have been #1 and better yet, telling Romney the VP slot isn't open to offer him?

We might actually get a VP that works for a living though. Now that would be a nice change for modern history.

Look at it this way.

Mitt Romney = CEO

Paul Ryan = CFO

Vice President Paul Ryan will balance the books and ensure prosperity.

He will also preserve and strengthen MediCare.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Paul Ryan is sounding better and better all the time.

Now why couldn't HE have been #1 and better yet, telling Romney the VP slot isn't open to offer him?

We might actually get a VP that works for a living though. Now that would be a nice change for modern history.

Paul Ryan sounds good because he has both supported and voted for big spending and also claims to be against it, He will play whatever role he is told to it seems.

Look at it this way.

Mitt Romney = CEO

Paul Ryan = CFO

Vice President Paul Ryan will balance the books and ensure prosperity.

That is a very logical way of looking at it, given the way everyone presents themselves and their positions in this race. You know, for the left minded folk in this, I say that after the U.S. is backed up from the cliff of financial collapse and ruin...or after we get to the other side of the Abyss, whichever happens, Social change is important.

Someday in the future...when money again exists to do such things...many of the liberal based reforms probably make sense to varying degrees...

As you note right there though, CEO and CFO. Indeed. Very well put. When a community is bankrupt and ready to default across the board and collapse in on itself.....you don't recruit a community organizer to sow seeds of discontent and anger to bring social change. You hire a businessman who knows something about fixing this GIANT business we call America. It's sure on the verge of falling apart.

Did you notice whom the author of the article was? He is a GOP apologist and propagandist.

This article may make some of you feel real good inside, but there is not much substance to this piece. He does not go into the nuts and bolts of these plans, instead he only scratches the surface to reassure GOP readers that it's going to be ok.

Fact is, this is spin. "Ryan unspun"?

You should know by now that myself and others that like to think for themselves are not going to take this article as gospel. We do our own research.

This is just for the hardline GOP'ers. They are in need of reassurance that Ryan is not what his record shows.

Sleight of hand....... psychological deception.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Look at it this way.

Mitt Romney = CEO

Paul Ryan = CFO

Vice President Paul Ryan will balance the books and ensure prosperity.

That is a very logical way of looking at it, given the way everyone presents themselves and their positions in this race. You know, for the left minded folk in this, I say that after the U.S. is backed up from the cliff of financial collapse and ruin...or after we get to the other side of the Abyss, whichever happens, Social change is important.

Someday in the future...when money again exists to do such things...many of the liberal based reforms probably make sense to varying degrees...

As you note right there though, CEO and CFO. Indeed. Very well put. When a community is bankrupt and ready to default across the board and collapse in on itself.....you don't recruit a community organizer to sow seeds of discontent and anger to bring social change. You hire a businessman who knows something about fixing this GIANT business we call America. It's sure on the verge of falling apart.

We will avoid another credit downgrade when VP Paul Ryan orchestrates the reform of

Social Security, MediCare & Medicaid .

When small businesses begin to grow again that will create a huge tidal wave of payroll

taxes that will wash away our $$$ trillion deficits.

------------
First things first - Send Obama back to Chicago.

His economic policies have failed. We deserve better.

reply to post by xuenchen


No.
Paul Ryan supported TARP and supported making the patriot act permenant. So don't try to sell us this garbage.
We know all we need to know about Paul Ryan.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by xuenchen

 

No.
Paul Ryan supported TARP and supported making the patriot act permenant. So don't try to sell us this garbage.
We know all we need to know about Paul Ryan.

All adults realize that National Security trumps Civil Liberties.

The Patriot Act was created by Bush and - endorsed - by Obama.

----------
TARP - the big banks paid their money back with interest.

Wells Fargo never really wanted it in the first place.

reply to post by Eurisko2012

All adults realize that National Security trumps Civil Liberties.

You said this many times lately. I can't tell you how much this scares me.

If this is how the GOP thinks.....we are screwed!

My American brothers and sisters are fully able to defend themselves when needed. Unfortunately, we need a government to protect the rights of the people.

In fact, that is why this nation was founded.

I can only hope that you are an extremist within the party. If you're not...then I fear it may be you and your "party" coming for my freedoms next.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by xuenchen

 

And I am supposed to trust a source that itself attempts to spread lies???

Wyden Comments on him being a co-author of the Ryan plan:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

“Governor Romney is talking nonsense," Wyden said in an emailed statement Saturday night. "Bipartisanship requires that you not make up the facts. I did not ‘co-lead a piece of legislation.' I wrote a policy paper on options for Medicare."

LOL. I find it amusing that one uses the Huffington post as a source to suggest another source is lying. Huffington post is not exactly a bastion of truth and objectivism either.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

All adults realize that National Security trumps Civil Liberties.

You said this many times lately. I can't tell you how much this scares me.

If this is how the GOP thinks.....we are screwed!

My American brothers and sisters are fully able to defend themselves when needed. Unfortunately, we need a government to protect the rights of the people.

In fact, that is why this nation was founded.

I can only hope that you are an extremist within the party. If you're not...then I fear it may be you and your "party" coming for my freedoms next.

edit on 21-8-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

Obama also thinks that way.

Try walking into an airport. TSA will mug and grope you before you get on the airplane.

The ACLU is remarkably quiet.

They very quietly said........you know , you really shouldn't be doing that.....shhhhh.....

.....nevermind....forget we said anything.



-- National Security trumps Civil Liberties --

reply to post by Eurisko2012


The best you can do is claim Obama thinks like I do and name-drop the ACLU?

You are a piece of work buddy.

I'd be willing to bet that you would be asking for your constitutional rights when the establishment kicks down your door to take them.

But of course as many of us on ATS know, you work for the establishment. That's why you say what you say.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

All adults realize that National Security trumps Civil Liberties.

You said this many times lately. I can't tell you how much this scares me.

If this is how the GOP thinks.....we are screwed!

My American brothers and sisters are fully able to defend themselves when needed. Unfortunately, we need a government to protect the rights of the people.

In fact, that is why this nation was founded.

I can only hope that you are an extremist within the party. If you're not...then I fear it may be you and your "party" coming for my freedoms next.

edit on 21-8-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

But that is how the Democrats think too--gun control for example. Security over liberty. Heavy taxation and wealth redistribution--security over liberty. It would be nice to have a party that was for leaving the citizens alone.

reply to post by NavyDoc


I think there is a big difference between gun control and "hand over all of your rights so that you may be safer."

I don't agree with either, but I don't see our right to bare arms going anywhere soon.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I hate to be rude but I feel that your are being delusional here. Allow me to explain why.

What is the main difference between Obama and Romney? Is there one? Many? I can't really tell.

Also, I feel that Paul Ryan is not experienced enough and therefore, not qualified to be a VP candidate for any party at this point.

You can go vote for Romney but you'll just get 4 more years of the same, even with Ryan on the ticket.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

The best you can do is claim Obama thinks like I do and name-drop the ACLU?

You are a piece of work buddy.

I'd be willing to bet that you would be asking for your constitutional rights when the establishment kicks down your door to take them.

But of course as many of us on ATS know, you work for the establishment. That's why you say what you say.

Why is the ACLU so quiet?

- National Security trumps Civil Liberties -

Just face reality . Obama did. Why can't you?

All the rest of us has. - You stand alone -

Who else here on ATS agrees with you?

reply to post by Eurisko2012


Trust me, voting for Romney is NOT facing reality.

Voting for Romney is like voting for another set of blinders, probably with a jazzy color scheme and a false sense of hope.