Skip to main content

Stung by the blowback from his denunciation of the "tailspin of culture in our inner cities" bred by "generations of men not even thinking about working," Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)  took to Fox News last week to declare, "I don't have a racist bone in my body." But the GOP's 2012 vice presidential pick needn't have bothered; the leading lights of the conservative media had already circled the wagons around him. While George Will simply decreed, "Paul Ryan was right—poverty is a cultural problem," National Review editor Rich Lowry lamented that "for this offense, Ryan was awarded an honorary white hood by the liberal commentariat."

But Ryan's isn't simply a case of "if the white hood fits, wear it." Ryan's moment of candor is also about dunce caps—his and ours.

After all, Ryan's decades-old dog-whistle to Republican hardliners that the "urban" poor are neither deserving of nor likely to benefit from federal action conveniently ignores the fact that two-thirds of Americans in poverty are white and disproportionately live in the South and in rural areas. The House budget chairman and his defenders skip over four decades of globalization, tectonic economic changes that gutted entire American industries and left devastated cities like Detroit, St. Louis and Cleveland without decent-paying jobs for the people who remained. Oh, and one other thing: Congressman Paul Ryan's entire career in Washington has been dedicated to a policy program that would make poverty in America much, much worse.

Continue reading about Ryan's poverty dunce cap below.

That crusade started long before Paul Ryan published the first of his "Path to Prosperity" budget blueprints calling for giving massive tax cuts for the rich, slashing non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest share of the U.S. economy in generations and turning Medicare into an underfunded voucher scheme. And years before the self-proclaimed anti-poverty champion and second coming of Jack Kemp warned about "makers and takers" and turning "the safety net into a hammock," Paul Ryan was an ardent advocate of Social Security privatization.

As the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) rightly concluded in 2011, Social Security is the most effective anti-poverty program in the United States. But as Ryan Grim and others highlighted, Rep. Ryan was at the forefront of George W. Bush's 2005 effort to divert contributions from the Social Security trust fund into private accounts. He would later agree with Texas Gov. Rick Perry that Social Security is "a Ponzi scheme." But as Matthew Yglesias explained, it was the privatizers like Paul Ryan who were perpetrating a fraud:

What privatizers want to say is that current retirees will keep getting benefits and future retirees will be okay despite our lack of benefits because we'll have private accounts. But current retirees can't get benefits if my money is in a private account. And my account can't be funded if I'm paying benefits for current retirees.
Vice President Al Gore made the same point during his presidential debates against then-Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, noting that "the trillion dollars that has been promised to young people has also been promised to older people," adding, "and you cannot keep both promises." By 2005, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated President Bush's plan to let younger workers divert a quarter of their payroll taxes into private accounts would add $17.7 trillion to the national debt by 2050. But as Jonathan Chait recounted, Paul Ryan made George W. Bush's "fuzzy math" seem brilliant in comparison:
In 2005, when Bush campaigned to introduce private accounts into Social Security, Ryan fervently crusaded for the concept. He was the sponsor in the House of a bill to create new private accounts funded entirely by borrowing, with no benefit cuts. Ryan's plan was so staggeringly profligate, entailing more than $2 trillion in new debt over the first decade alone, that even the Bush administration opposed it as "irresponsible."

Ryan's scheme looked even more irresponsible after the implosion of Wall Street in 2008. (After all, millions of seniors would have seen their retirement accounts plummet, even as investment managers raked in billions in fees.) Nevertheless, even after the near-collapse of the American financial system, Paul Ryan stuck with his Social Security privatization gambit.

With the rollout of the first version of his "Roadmap for America's Future" in February 2010, Ryan merely reduced from half how much of their Social Security payroll taxes Americans could shift into their own private accounts. As Talking Points Memo explained:

Rep. Paul Ryan, (R-WI) the ranking Republican on the budget committee, recently detailed the Republican plan for Social Security that preserves the existing program for those 55 or older. For younger people the plan "offers the option of investing over one-third of their current Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts, similar to the Thrift Savings Plan available to federal employees."
But Ryan's boss, then-House Minority John Boehner, was having none of it. Sensing the political danger, Boehner said of Ryan's Roadmap v1.0, "it's his." And with that, Social Security privatization disappeared from Roadmap 2.0 and the 2011 House Republican budget based on it.

Ryan's plan to ration Medicare, however, was another matter.

Along with Social Security, the Medicare health program now serving 50 million American seniors has played a crucial role in dramatically reducing poverty among the elderly. And over its 49 years of existence, the cost of Medicare coverage per beneficiary has risen much less rapidly than private health insurance. So it should come as no surprise that since 2009, Paul Ryan has been trying to convert government-run Medicare into a voucher program to enrich private carriers.

In April 2009, 24 months before all but four House Republicans voted for Ryan's plan to ration Medicare, the smaller GOP minority said yea on essentially the same plan. As Steve Benen detailed in the fall of 2009:

In April, 137 Republicans voted in support of a GOP alternative budget. It didn't generate a lot of attention, but the plan, drafted by the House Budget Committee's Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) called for "replacing the traditional Medicare program with subsidies to help retirees enroll in private health care plans."

The AP noted at the time that Republican leaders were "clearly nervous that votes in favor of the GOP alternative have exposed their members to political danger."

In February 2010, Rep. Ryan unveiled his next "Roadmap for America's Future" and its "slash and privatize" agenda for Medicare. Because the value of Ryan's vouchers would fail to keep up with the out-of-control rise in premiums in the private health insurance market, America's elderly would be forced to pay more out of pocket or accept less coverage. Ezra Klein of the Washington Post described the inexorable Republican rationing of Medicare that would ensue:
The proposal would shift risk from the federal government to seniors themselves. The money seniors would get to buy their own policies would grow more slowly than their health-care costs, and more slowly than their expected Medicare benefits, which means that they'd need to either cut back on how comprehensive their insurance is or how much health-care they purchase. Exacerbating the situation -- and this is important -- Medicare currently pays providers less and works more efficiently than private insurers, so seniors trying to purchase a plan equivalent to Medicare would pay more for it on the private market.

It's hard, given the constraints of our current debate, to call something "rationing" without being accused of slurring it. But this is rationing, and that's not a slur. This is the government capping its payments and moderating their growth in such a way that many seniors will not get the care they need.

Which is exactly what the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded. As the CBO documented in 2011, Ryan's plan to replace public insurance provided by the government with vouchers for the elderly to buy their own coverage in the private market would mean getting less care for more money. The CBO analysis concluded that "a typical beneficiary would spend more for health care under the proposal." At $6,500 a year, as Director Douglas Elmendorf explained, a lot more.
Under the proposal, most elderly people who would be entitled to premium support payments would pay more for their health care than they would pay under the current Medicare system. For a typical 65-year-old with average health spending enrolled in a plan with benefits similar to those currently provided by Medicare, CBO estimated the beneficiary's spending on premiums and out-of-pocket expenditures as a share of a benchmark amount: what total health care spending would be if a private insurer covered the beneficiary. By 2030, the beneficiary's share would be 68 percent of that benchmark under the proposal, 25 percent under the extended-baseline scenario, and 30 percent under the alternative fiscal scenario.

In 2012, Chairman Ryan tweaked his proposal, keeping a government-run "public option" as one of the choices for future seniors using their "premium support" to purchase an insurance policy from his new Medicare exchanges. Nevertheless, in March 2012 the CBO still found that the elderly would have to pick up more of their own health care costs. ThinkProgress explained why version 2.0 of Ryan's voucher program was little better than the first:

Beginning in 2023, the guaranteed Medicare benefit would be transformed into a government-financed "premium support" system. Seniors currently under the age of 55 could use their government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or--unlike Ryan's original budget--traditional fee-for-service Medicare...

But the budget does not take sufficient precautions to prevent insurers from cherry-picking the healthiest beneficiaries from traditional Medicare and leaving sicker applicants to the government. As a result, traditional Medicare costs could skyrocket, forcing even more seniors out of the government program. The budget also adopts a per capita cost cap of GDP growth plus 0.5 percent, without specifying how it would enforce it. This makes it likely that the cap would limit the government contribution provided to beneficiaries and since the proposed growth rate is much slower than the projected growth in health care costs, CBO estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $2,200 more by 2030 and up to $8,000 more by 2050. Finally, the budget would also raise Medicare's age of eligibility to 67.

That grim math is why Ryan in his new budget released this week has abandoned some of the most punishing provisions of his Medicare voucher scheme, if not the scheme itself. The cap on per capita cost growth is gone, as is fixing the value to the second-cheapest plan (rather than the average) of what insurers propose. But while those changes will help ease the burden of his gambit on individual seniors, the overall Medicare program savings Paul Ryan previously claimed for Uncle Sam would be undercut.

But that wasn't all that was missing from Paul Ryan's 2014 edition of the "Path to Prosperity." Just weeks after he launched his War on the War on Poverty (a crusade thoroughly debunked and mocked by many of the same experts whose research he cited), Rep. Ryan abandoned it altogether in his new April Fool's Day budget:

"Although this budget does not lay out a full welfare-reform plan, it takes steps toward reforming these programs to encourage work, to increase economic growth and jobs, and to preserve the safety net."
Of course, as the numbers show, it does no such thing. Ryan's budget breaks his poverty reform promise for the simple reason that his proposals will make poverty worse.

The same "Flim Flam Man" Paul Krugman aptly charged with "pink slime economics" is back at it. Ryan claims his budget will balance in 10 years, thanks to $5.1 trillion in new spending cuts. But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) detailed, 69 percent of those reductions come from programs for low-income Americans. College loan programs are drained by $135 billion. Food stamps, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), would be slashed by $137 billion over the next decade. The Affordable Care Act would be repealed (though not its funding), with a staggering $2.7 trillion taken from Medicaid. (What remains would be handed over to the states as block grants.) Even new consumer protections, like prohibiting insurers from discriminating against Americans with preexisting conditions, would be jettisoned. The result:

Under the Ryan plan, at least 40 million low- and moderate-income people -- that's 1 in 8 Americans -- would become uninsured by 2024.
Ryan's numbers, CBPP rightly concludes, "contrast sharply with the budget's rhetoric about helping the poor and promoting opportunity." They also happen to not balance the budget, either.

As it years past, Paul Ryan delivers a massive tax-cut windfall for the wealthy by reorganizing the tax code into just two brackets (10 and 25 percent) that cost almost $6 trillion by 2024. Along with his proposals to eliminate the estate and capital gains taxes, Ryan's tax reforms would drain trillions of dollars from the United States Treasury in order to stuff the vaults of the wealthiest Americans, all at a time of record income inequality. The chart below from last year's version of Ryan's budget tells the tale:

The perverse result—the same one produced by every Ryan budget since 2009—is a gargantuan payday for the gilded class while Uncle Sam flounders in red ink as far as the eye can see. (The prospect is made worse by an austerity budget that would almost certainly cost millions of jobs and shrivel tax revenue, rather than deliver the mythical supply-side miracle of enhanced economic growth.)  That pathetic fate could be avoided, however, if Paul Ryan were only as "courageous" as he claims he is and would name a single tax break he would close. But five years after he first pledged to "broaden the base" by curbing or ending some of the tax expenditures that cost the federal government $1.3 trillion a year, we're all still waiting for Paul Ryan to identify even one.

None of this is to suggest that Paul Ryan is a clandestine Klansman or that he doesn't speak passionately about poverty in America. But when Barack Obama speaks to African-Americans and other minority audiences about "fewer young black and Latino men participate in the labor force compared to young white men," as a community organizer, state legislator, senator and president, he has walked the walk and talked the talk. Measures like the stimulus, the Affordable Care Act, hiking the minimum wage, extending long-term jobless benefits, expanding the Earned Income tax Credit, investing in infrastructure and establishing universal pre-K programs have—or would have—actually reduced poverty. Which is why Rich Lowry is willfully ignorant when he claims:

"When Barack Obama says such things, which are undeniably correct, he is a brave truth-teller; when Paul Ryan says them, he is making an odious play for racist votes."
Given the past 50 years of Republican strategy, Americans can be forgiven for thinking the worst. Unfortunately for Lowry, the best that can be said of Paul Ryan is that the man is either a fraud or an idiot. If Ryan believes what he says about fighting poverty, he should be wearing a dunce cap. If we believe what he says, then we should all wear them.

Either way, turning to Paul Ryan for guidance on alleviating poverty is like asking a dog why it licks its ass. Actually, it's even worse: the dog doesn't pretend to care and doesn't claim to be an expert.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 11:16 AM PDT.

Also republished by Obamacare Saves Lives.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  It would be simpler to: repeal all safety net (0+ / 0-)

      programs, replace the federal income tax with a head tax, make failure to pay the head tax a capital offense, and then enforce that death penalty.  A good way to wipe out poverty by wiping out the poor in a short period of time.  I can't say I am in favor of it--only that it would accomplish Ryan's objectives more quickly.

  •  indeed (21+ / 0-)
    Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)  took to Fox News last week to declare, "I don't have a racist bone in my body.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 11:20:03 AM PDT

  •  Every Ryan proposal (20+ / 0-)

    just like those of everyone who wants to 'privatize' is simple.  After having stolen our pensions, our jobs, our homes and our savings, the money in the safety net programs is the last big pile of money they have not yet been able to steal.

    Every proposal for SS or schools, or prisons, or any other government program is a way to get their greedy hands on it.

  •  When ideology conflicts with reality, simply (9+ / 0-)

    Discard reality.  Methodology, Part 1. Ryan, Paul.

    Think about the baby Jesus. Up in that tower, letting His hair down so that the three wise men could climb up and spin the dreidle and see if there's six more weeks of winter. -- Will and Grace

    by Rikon Snow on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 11:52:03 AM PDT

  •  OK, Ryan's bones aren't racist (11+ / 0-)

    but his brain sure is.

    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by maybeeso in michigan on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 11:52:09 AM PDT

  •  I wonder if Mr. Ryan even knows (5+ / 0-)

    basic information such as how many bones in his body that he has (206) let alone how many of those bones might be racist.

    I mean, seriously, since bones aren't remotely involved in cognitive functions such as racial dispositions, why that parameter even matters.

    Not to be mean or anything, the more I learn about this guy, the more batshit crazy he appears to be.

    •  Actually, Paul Ryan is bonehead n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      We're all just working for Pharoah.

      by whl on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:59:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not that there's anything wrong with that (0+ / 0-)

        as Jerry Seinfeld and George Constanza might say, albeit in a slightly different context.

        •  Sorry but the last time I heard that line... (0+ / 0-)

          It was regarding homosexuality. So I'm PMSL.
          Gormsby "Bastabus is a homosexual..." all together "...and there's nothing wrong with that."

          Sorry the show was totally politically incorrect but I loved "Seven Periods with Mr. Gormsby" precisely because of stuff like that from someone that looked old enough to have fought in WWII.

          I wish I had stocks in aluminium these days. All that foil would be a great investment opportunity.

          by Ceri Cat on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:41:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Paul Ryan compelled me to register Democratic (15+ / 0-)

    I had been a registered R since 1980, although voting D since Bush v. Gore.

    Ryan is the architect of the hypocritical "The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America's Promise" budget. This 2012 Republican proposal was formalized and passed by the House of Representatives on April 15, 2011.

    I was, and still am, incensed at the Medicare voucher-care and many other pitfalls of this heartless and immoral budget.

    I proudly registered Democratic April 16, 2011.

    Thank you, Paul Ryan and your tea party cohorts, for making this such a gratifying event.

  •  As attributed to Albert Einstein (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Aunt Pat, whl, Words In Action

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    Albert Einstein

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:26:18 PM PDT

  •  When Ross Perot did the "you people" bit, (7+ / 0-)

    I did NOT think, "You're too racist to be president."

    I thought, "You're too stupid to be president."

    I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

    by Crashing Vor on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:27:08 PM PDT

  •  If we had Sunday pundits or Sunday guest with (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Aunt Pat, whl, Calamity Jean

    guts they would be excoriating Paul Ryan for being in favor of "premium support" for some Americans (Seniors) but denying them to other Americans. Especially since they used to be in support of them (RomneyCare).

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)! Follow on Twitter @dopper0189

    by dopper0189 on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:30:09 PM PDT

  •  All this comes from a Guy (8+ / 0-)

    that used Social Security, Invented by Liberal Democrats,
    to pay for his college education and to keep from Starving.

    Paul Ryan's middle name is Hypocrisy.

    Paul Ryan and his Wealthy Friends Already have Money.

    STOP !!!  There is NO NEED to help ANYONE Else !!!

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:32:29 PM PDT

  •  Mr Paul (6+ / 0-)

    You talk as if you are so smart that ordinary people can't possibly understand you, but yet, you are unable to add one and one and get two!! Anyone with even half a brain knows you can't balance a budget by simply cutting expenses! Let the rich pay 80% over $1,000,000 in income like THEY PAID 35 years ago!  We sure didn't suddenly lose all our millionaires! By the way, Social Security will be just just fine forever....all we have to do is remove the cap on contributions and have the tax apply to all forms of income, even the ones that are exclusively there for the upper class, whose backside you  continually kiss!  Can't you people in WI get rid of this inhuman pile of excrement?

  •  Are the clean dishes dirty yet Paul? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    StillAmused, Aunt Pat, whl, RightHeaded

    The guy is a liar.

    Blessed are the hearts that can bend; for they can never be broken Albert Camus

    by vcmvo2 on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:36:15 PM PDT

  •  How does this guy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, whl

    even get elected in the first place?

    Oh, that's right.  Racism, probably.

    29, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

    by TDDVandy on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:47:55 PM PDT

    •  His district says otherwise. (0+ / 0-)

      A swing district, it was carried by George W. Bush in 2004 with 53%; the district voted for Barack Obama over John McCain in 2008, 51.40-47.45%; and the district voted for Mitt Romney over Barack Obama in 2012, 52.12%-47.88%

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      The 1st district is not Arizona or Mississippi.

      New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

      by AlexDrew on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:56:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  However, race may still play some role (5+ / 0-)

        The Democrats don't do much that's very progressive, but in their defense, they did do something extremely radical in 2008.  In fact they took advantage of the intense unpopularity of Bush to do the most radical thing they could have.  They nominated a physically black man for president.  

        I personally believe that if race were not an unconscious factor, far, far fewer Americans would support a party with the policies of the Republican party.

        I don't think it's even entirely or mainly conscious, I just think that the propaganda that the Democrats are a party that "favors" black people has had an effect.

        Contrary to popular belief, white Canadians and Australians are not much more progressive than white Americans; arguably there is no part of Canada where whites are more progressive as they are in, say, Massachusetts.  But Canadians and Australians have voted themselves universal health care, affordable higher education, and higher minimum wage.  They are markedly less prone to vote directly against their own economic self-interest.  

        As a progressive white person, I'd like to convince other white people not to be fooled by appeals to simple-minded tribalism and prejudice.  

        •  The problem I have is that we are ignoring the (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a2nite, Calamity Jean

          fact that the GOP was against almost all of the policies we promote years before BHO took office. The minimum wage; universal healthcare; higher taxes to pay for more government programs (since late 80's).

          We have/are painting people with the racist brush who have opposed these policies for years. This let's our Dem reps off the hook when we have working majorities.

          New York and California will be interesting. Is Jerry Brown a racist? Are the Cali Senate and Assembly? What about Cuomo and the split legislature? If you look at states like North Dakota etc...where race does not come into play on the state and local level, conservative policies still dominate.

          New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

          by AlexDrew on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 02:18:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Who said it started with Obama? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Calamity Jean

            The GOP became the party of coded racism circa 1964, and was trending that way earlier.

            Surely you've heard of a certain guy named Willie Horton.

            Just because the other actual Democratic presidential candidates weren't physically black hardly means that Republicans haven't been trafficking in coded racism for years.

            •  You can't deny that as a group, the left has (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              a2nite

              made it very clear that the opposition to BHO is because of his race. But they were against these policies before he arrived and in states/cities where race is not an issue.

              Like I said, it will be interesting to see what excuses we come up with here in Cali for not pursuing an aggressive, progressive agenda.

              New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

              by AlexDrew on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 04:35:10 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I hate arguing (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                carrps, Terry S, rabrock, dewolf99

                With people I basically agree with, but I have to make some points here.  Overall we probably agree on many things.

                Even if "the Left" did claim that all opposition to President Obama was because of his race, that would not in any way mean that opposition to prior Democrats was not also partly due to (probably largely unconscious) racism.  If people oppose Socrates now because he is a Greek and they can be manipulated by unconscious bias against Greeks, that does NOT rule out that possibility that they opposed Bob in the past, even if Bob is not personally Greek, because Bob was associated with Greeks by his opponents in a negative way.

                Second of all, I don't know who this guy "the Left" actually is.  Perhaps he's related to "the Edge" or "the Rock".  He is frequently claimed to make stupid statements.  Perhaps he does.  Meanwhile, of course, neither Democrats nor progressive have ever, ever made the asinine claim that ALL opposition to Obama is due to his race.  I oppose many of his policies myself; he was simply far, far superior to other available alternatives.

                Your denial of the use of race-related code by the Republicans, at least since 1964, is not healthy.  It is well known and well documented that they behave this way.  It is highly plausible that race is a factor in the fact that the US has behaved differently from otherwise highly similar Anglophone societies like Canada and Australia, specifically since the time when race became a major issue.

                •  I don't deny it, I just don't think we can (0+ / 0-)

                  use it as crutch for when Dems don't get things done when we have the power. Keep an eye on Cali and NYC.

                  New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

                  by AlexDrew on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 02:07:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  He's hell spawn evil which includes all the "isms" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, whl, Shawn87

    He's not the decider, I am.

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 12:48:41 PM PDT

  •  The 'good' news is that (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, Columba, carrps

    Ryan is the best 'budget wonk' the GOP has to offer, even if he learned his values (and math) in college paid for by Social Security benefits... and the rest from his frat-house brothers.

    A poster-boy for "smug".

  •  Ryan's condition is not either/or (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alice kleeman, a2nite

    Paul Ryan is both/and

    Rep. Ryan is both an idiot and a fraud

    They go hand in hand

    Or bone on bone

    See--you can by a Boehner-ite, a bonehead, and a Tali-bagger all at the same time

    We're all just working for Pharoah.

    by whl on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 01:03:51 PM PDT

  •  Chart on cuts and expansion of Defense (0+ / 0-)

    alone makes one want to beat the crap out of all involved in crafting that crap he calls a budget.

  •  His budget is Feudalism (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, alice kleeman

    Seriously, his budget is a return to the Feudalist system. Vote that crap out of office.

  •  I always enjoy the failed attempts (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shawn87

    of the right-wing to paint Obama as somehow anti-white.  It's both projection (they're anti-minority, or, at least, see all minorities as "other" and less worthy) and racism (i.e., he's black, so he must hate whites).  Obama has spoken about the issue of race a whopping three times since he began his presidential campaign in 2007,  that's right, three times in seven years.  But, because he's black, he must, must be fixated on race, because, you know, all black people are sullen, angry pseudo-victims who hate whitey and have nothing else going on in their lives.

  •  First it was..."American Dream"... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    Then it was "tax cuts for job creators".....
    Then it was "repeal Obamacare"....

    Anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-woman....Benghazi, gun rights....

    They are running out of dog whistles to obfuscate for their overlords....!!!!

  •  Medicare vouchers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Columba

    So Paul Ryan wants to replace Medicare (single-payer) with a program that would allow seniors to receive a government subsidy to buy private health insurance.  Please tell me how this "new" idea differs from the Affordable Care Act which Mr. Ryan loathes.  If the ACA (Obamacare) is so awful, why would Ryan inflict it on our senior population?  

  •  Ryan is a case study in effective marketing (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shawn87, citizen dan, a2nite, carrps

    An empty suit and thoroughly nondescript politician, rebranded by his party as the "serious intellectual." Of course it's all a sham, which becomes more and more apparent the longer he has to keep up the charade. Whether or not he's a dunce is debatable, but he's unquestionably a fraud.

    "The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities" - Adam Smith

    by Jesse Douglas on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 04:22:06 PM PDT

  •  "I don't have a racist bone in my body."-paul ryan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rabrock

    Well then he must have some awfully racist blood and sinew, because that racism is coming from somewhere!

    Time sets all things right. Error lives but a day. Truth is eternal. - General James Longstreet

    by kbrown2225 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:21:10 AM PDT

  •  For the last 30 years.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    carrps

    I have been hearing about how lowering taxes for the rich and cutting social programs for everyone else would do "wonderful" things for the economy.  

    Well that is what we have been doing for over three decades, so where is all this "prosperity" they promised?  Oh wait, there has been tremendous prosperity, of course ALL of it has gone to the wealthy while everyone else suffered.  

    Maybe they have a different definition of "prosperity" than the rest of us?

    Time sets all things right. Error lives but a day. Truth is eternal. - General James Longstreet

    by kbrown2225 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:45:02 AM PDT

  •  I simply do not get Ryan, on almost any level. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dewolf99

    He's a middle-class punk who did alright for himself in terms of getting a college degree and successfully running for the House. Beyond that, what? His pandering to the Super-Rich, because he is NOT one of them, nor will he ever be, is what is so obscure. Why? There is NOTHING for him in vociferously throwing himself at their feet - as he does at every turn - and agrees to be their patsy. Willingly he jumps into the pit of Doing All The Dirty Work for the Kochs and Adelson - for what? Does he actually believe he is going to be rewarded by the Quasi Royalty of this country? Not even close. He will still be in his suburban tract house when The Palace Gates are slammed shut for that final time. Poor Pauly - then it will not matter whether he's a racist and a crook or not. He'll simply be on the outside looking in.

  •  Well, Harry… (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rabrock

    You waited far too long to start fighting back— its only 'Class War' when we fight back— but its about time: better late than never…

  •  Democrats need to expose Ryan's budget daily (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rabrock

    This is an area that Democrats can fight against the republican-led devastation of this country. We cannot remain silent. We can't just hear the voice of republicans. This is a gift and we better use it as such.

  •  Conservatives (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    francinefishpaw

    don't care about the poor, the middle class, the underprivileged and less fortunate among us. They care nothing about Americans in need through no fault of their own. They're haters and they're bigots. That's a sad and disgusting thing to say but it's the truth.

  •  Does Ryan's budget and/or (0+ / 0-)

    "health care"plan include the use of the Guillotine?

  •  An investment plan replaced the pension plan... (0+ / 0-)

    in the state where I worked.  I was close to retirement, so I stayed with the old plan.  Many who went with the investment option lost much of their nest eggs when the economy went south, and couldn't afford to retire.  

    If they did something like this with Social Security, some would lose.  These tea baggers, like life insurance salespeople, never talk about one's retirement losing value.  Ultimately, this could place a tax burden on the people, because some whose Social Security loses value will end up eligible for SSI, which comes out of the general revenues (rather than the Social Security trust fund) and would also make the individual eligible for Medicaid, creating a greater tax burden.

    These privatization programs benefit only those companies who administer them, no doubt big campaign contributors to conservative candidates.

  •  incorrect data on poverty? (0+ / 0-)

    Perhaps youi don't realize that this quote in your diary also includes Hispanics:

    the "urban" poor are neither deserving of nor likely to benefit from federal action conveniently ignores the fact that two-thirds of Americans in poverty are white
    This is the publication that was the original source.
    https://www.census.gov/...
    The poverty rate for non-Hispanic Whites was 9.7 percent in 2012, lower than the poverty rates for other racial groups. Non-Hispanic Whites accounted for 62.8 percent of the total population and 40.7 percent of the people in poverty
    So not two-thirds, but two-fifths.
    •  Your misleading links (0+ / 0-)

      In your diary you provide this link to substantiate this statement (link is bolded):

      Ryan's decades-old dog-whistle to Republican hardliners that the "urban" poor are neither deserving of nor likely to benefit from federal action conveniently ignores the fact that two-thirds of Americans in poverty are white
      However, this link goes to an unattributed blog post on Perrspectives titled "Kentucky Showcases Paul Ryan's Wrong-Way War on Poverty."  At the bottom of that blog post it notes "This piece first appeared in the Daily Kos."  

      It turns out this was a blog post you made of a prior DKos diary.  I do not find citations of these circular postings very useful for helping to determine whether something is accurate.

  •  He's right! (0+ / 0-)

    Paul Ryan is probably correct that he doesn't have a racist bone in his body.  Unfortunately, he doesn't use his bones for thinking.  What's in his brain cells is what matters, and there it seems there is a different picture.  He knew what he was saying and chose his words carefully.  It's not his bones we should be worried about.

  •  The More We Learn (0+ / 0-)

    ... about Ryan's so-called plans, the more we understand how bat-shit crazy this guy is.

    And the more we must question how people like him, McConnell, Boehner, and others - even with Gerrymandering - can get elected to Congress!

    With so many uneducated - spelled ignorant - voters in their districts, shouldn't an excellent article like this one be translated into terms everybody can understand, then delivered to every single voter in their districts, to educate them on how they're voting their own doom?

    With so many brilliant people just in these forums (fora!) alone, and so many others capable of doing what is necessary to educate people, why is it not being done?

    Sometimes, you need a sensa uma!

    by HashHoward on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 09:05:24 AM PDT

  •  Paul Ryan (0+ / 0-)

    This is the best summary of the self delusion of Pau Ryan during his time in the US House.  I am sure he knows that he is shredding the safety net while he continues to say that his goal is to create better opportunities for struggling Americans.  I am sure he knows that each millionaire in America, (himself  included) would gain a huge tax boost at the expense of the safty net and increase the national debt.   But repeating a lie many times has worked for the GOP, like sending a bill to the Senate 50 times to defund Obamacare.  The Tea Party chant of "Keep the Government out of my Medicare, Medicaid, Part D and Obamacare" will soon be heard in all 22 states that voted GOP in the past 4 elections for the Whjaite House.

    Wayne

  •  Paul Ryan (0+ / 0-)

    I blieve that while Paul talks the talk of white supremacy and serves as surrogate for white supremacists, he could convince a lie detector that he loves blacks and other minorities.  He can compartimentalize brain so that he can sleep at night.

    Wayne

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site