Getty Images
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), talking to CBS News yesterday, on automatic sequestration cuts:
"Don't forget it's the president who first proposed the sequester," Ryan continued. "It's the president who designed the sequester as it is now designed."
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), talking to Fox News in August 2011, on automatic sequestration cuts:
"What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money. And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can't turn that off without a supermajority vote. We got that in law. That is here." [emphasis added]
These can't both be true. Either, as Paul Ryan said at the time, Republicans got the sequester in law, or this is all President Obama's idea.
Ultimately, Ryan and his cohorts' desperate attempts to play a childish blame game are pointless. Yes, they're factually incorrect, but that's really secondary to the larger point: the sequester is a genuine threat to the health of the American economy, military, and public. To the degree that accountability matters, it's worth realizing that Ryan and his party aren't telling the truth about the policy's origins, but it matters more that Democrats want to strike a compromise to scrap this dangerous policy and GOP lawmakers, at least for now, don't.
Indeed, the follow-up question for Ryan should be obvious: if you disapprove of the policy you think the president came up with, why aren't you making any effort at all to avoid it?
Even some of Ryan's allies find this entire line of attack silly.
This was a pleasant change of pace yesterday.
Rep. Justin Amash has a message for the masterminds of his leadership's recent fascination with the use of Twitter hashtags: forget the marketing games and get back to the substance.
Amash says he's less bothered by the hashtags themselves than by the messages behind them -- particularly "#Obamaquester," which aims to blame President Barack Obama for initially proposing the mandatory spending cuts known as the "sequester."
"I think it's a mistake on the part of Republicans to try to pin the sequester on Obama," Amash said. "It's totally disingenuous. The debt ceiling deal in 2011 was agreed to by Republicans and Democrats, and regardless of who came up with the sequester, they all voted for it. So, you can't vote for something and, with a straight face, go blame the other guy for its existence in law."
Well said, congressman.
Leave a Comment:
If you're wondering how this guy could lie so easily, just remember this is the man who taught his children how to pretend to work an empty soup kitchen.
Nice! Thanks for the laugh.
I wonder if since he is a good Catholic that after he says things like this publicly if he says an act of contrition for lying...
and I bet that the last time he went to confession the priest called for take out.
Didn't you recognize his type from high school? The guy who always was 'innocent' of any wrong doing, flashing his big blue eyes, while acting like a total rat?
Conservatism is not one of his traits, he should try being a role model and stop buying bigger houses and cars. How can we believe in less spending when our representatives are using the taxpayers' money to pretend they live in castles. Who in the world nowadays needs a million dollar home? Especially when people are trying to save their homes. A lesson from mother Theresa is what they need.
Seemingly, the only thing left in Ryan's arsenal for this most profound political moment is sand to throw in the eyes of the American voter!
A sneaky coward condemns what he secretly holds dear if such condemnation gives him cover for his sneaky cowardice! Ryan's pursuit will be the ruin of our national economy.
I hope you'll can buy yourselves your own militias because obviously Paul Ryan lives in Wayne LaPierre's future world already! -Kevo
I have said it before but I think it bares repeating...this is economics (and therefore politics) by wrecking ball.
There are a whole host of follow on consequences that would be created if the sequester were to go into effect. If the American economy tanks it has the effect of destroying unions and severely eroding the influence of the middle class, creates labor conditions that are favorable to management and capital and even helps on social issues by forcing more people to rely on religiously based charity rather than a secular government safety net and if at the same time you can use it to try and make your opposition look bad so much the better.
Those were the same conditions that allowed the growth of the tea party and helped pave the way for Conservative State Government to take root. None of it is good for anyone but when you consider that the GOP have never been particularly concerned with anyone but themselves it isn't at all surprising.
You forgot that in a tanked economy, people who have money or good credit can Hoover [1] up property, equities, etc. at fire-sale prices and then make enormous profits when the economy recovers.
[1] Sue me.
That's right, D.C. There were a whole lot of people who made bucketloads of money during the Great Depression. Wealth didn't totally disappear. It was redistributed upwards.
That was part of my point. It is an old axiom of business and markets that in Chaos there is profit.
Agreed, Dragoon. When you shake up the pot, it's a little like playing musical chairs. The opportunists swoop in to pick the low-hanging fruit, leaving everyone else to rattle the tree for the last withered apple and fight over it when it falls to the ground. (Sorry for all the mixed metaphors. But it was fun.)
Who listens to this tool anyway, liar and hypocrite
If you can stomach it, go spend an hour reading posts and comments at RedState.com. Those are the people right there.
They wrap themselves in God and the Flag, and yet are anything but godly or patriotic. It's really, really sad.
That photo came from the little known "Pose like a famous statue day" congressional event
That's Paul's rendition of "The Thinker"
Put a pencil-thin mustache and black top had on him and you have Snidely Whiplash.
From Wikipedia:
Do you think any of it fits?
Of course you can -- they do. And it works, too.
Better yet, they can simultaneously
With people all over the country nodding along at every line.
Not quite fully correct. The repuknicans insist that militarization spending creates jobs. It's just that 'other' spending by the feds that do not.
I get the feeling that this guy loves to watch working men and women suffer.
Does he even see working men and women, or does his eyes kinda slide over them?
Marty and Coffee, see 6.2. I'm telling you. There's some truth to this.
I was watching yesterday morning when the CBS 'interviewers' (Charlie Rose & Nora O'Donnell) never questioned any of Ryan's uninterrupted string of lies. Benen does not even start to describe the level of disgust that I felt!
#9 I was thinking the same thing. Does anyone else in the media call him on this crap besides the Benen?
Just follow the timeline of the election. The very minute Ryan gave his convention speech is the very minute the nation found out he does not think past stale dishonest Republican lies. Then at the end they hid the guy from interviews.
I still do not understand why the American people are not demanding their politicians tell the truth. I watched the Hagel thing...no honesty there eh..Mr. McCain..Ryan you know the ten years of tax breaks for your rich friends created no jobs..now this about the sequester. I never saw a vote that included Obama's hand in the air. Why CNN and others that claim to be news people do not question these guys when they are telling lies is wrong. The American people have to stand up and demand the truth. Unlike Jack Nicholson, I believe people can handle the truth.
When you can't tell the truth, you must stoop to telling lies. Hey, "Congressman" Ryan? Do you actually have any idea as to how our government functions? That you, as a member of the Congress of the United States, are responsible for producing budget legislation? That the President does NOT have the authority (on his own) to dream up a sequester? The ignorance of a man who should know better is stunning. But then, nothing the modern GOP "Rethuglicans" come up with really surprises me any more. Let's hope the American people have the good sense (finally) to see these charlatans for what they are. Tools of big business and the Koch brothers. Disgusting.
you must remember the obvious. the people who vote for the gop will continue to vote for them until hell freezes over. there is no logic to this, but these same people keep voting no matter how bad the gop screws them. i am beginning to believe most of these people don't care or understand whats going on. it's mindless. when the average person is shown the truth or a good idea, they will listen and sometimes accept the truth. not this group. i think it's hard for them to accept that they are no longer in power. even their 'genius's' thought that mitt romney was going to win. so how out of touch are they. if the sequester kicks in, so be it. when the defense budget gets cut, the gop states will get hurt the worst. why, because when the gop was in charge they moved or opened the defense businesses to the gop states. thats the reason they will not get all the way to sequester; there buddies would not be happy. and the prez. knows that!
Sooo,, it's like if I were a white southern baptist, and I know most Blacks are baptist, and the President is black,,, it follows then, that I would vote for a mormon,,?
no mystery here. ryan is an intellectual flyweight who can't imagine that there are a lot of people who are smarter than himself, or is hoping that the number who are are outnumbered by those who aren't.
As stated: regardless of who came up with the sequester, they all voted for it.
So what he's saying is the Republican House, now well known as obstructionists for not voting on, or voting against any proposal of Obama's, voted to approve the sequester plan that Obama came up with. In the words of Weekend Update's Seth Meyers, "Really?"
Paulocchio hits again!
(To me he looks like a mix between Pinocchio and a sad puppy...and that is kind of how he acts too)
Wait...we need "statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money".
Aren't those called appropriations bills? Shouldn't a policy wonk and Chairman of the Budget Committee know about these?