Ryan's Uncomfortable Truths:
Paul Ryan denied having requested stimulus funds, saying he would NEVER vote against something he was ideologically against and then turn around and request funds from the stimulus. He said he would never do such a thing.
“No, I’m not gonna vote [against] something, then write letters to the government to send us money,” Ryan said at the time. “I did not request any stimulus money.”
Ryan wrote a series of letters between October and December of 2009 on behalf of the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corp. and the Energy Center of Wisconsin, as the Globe reported this week.
The
Wall Street Journal in 2010 reported that Ryan had also sought funds from
the Department of Labor on behalf of a local group and asked his office to
square that with his anti-stimulus rhetoric." --Washington Post
Except that's exactly what he did. And then denied it. And then had to admit he did.
This is the guy Rmoney tapped for his running mate? He doesn't stick to his own deeply held principles, and when confronted with that embarrassing fact, he thinks lying about it will absolve him of the hypocrisy. Except it can't. And he knew it and had to admit to what he did.
By Bryan Bender Globe Staff
WASHINGTON _ After seeking millions of dollars from a federal stimulus program he opposed, Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan repeatedly denied lobbying the Obama administration for home state aid -- first on a Boston radio station in 2010 and then again on Tuesday in an interview with a Ohio television station.
On October 28, 2010, after the Wisconsin Republican penned at least five letters to two federal departments seeking grants under the Obama administration’s economic recovery package, Ryan responded to a caller on WBZ’s Nightside with Dan Rea who asked if he sought any of the money.
Ryan said that he would not vote against something “then write to the government to ask them to send us money.”
“I did not request any stimulus money,” he continued.
Meanwhile, in an interview yesterday with an Ohio television station, Ryan repeated the denial, before quickly adding “I don’t recall.”
“No, I never asked for stimulus,” he told Cincinnati’s WCPO-TV, whose reporter mentioned an Associated Press article reporting on Ryan appealing to two departments seeking stimulus money for Wisconsin projects. “I don’t recall—and I haven’t seen this report so I really can’t comment on it. I opposed the stimulus because it doesn’t work, it didn’t work. It brought us deeper into debt.
Thursday evening, Ryan acknowledged having sent the letters above his signature. “After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled. This is why I didn’t recall the letters earlier. But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that.”
Presented With Letters, Ryan Admits Requesting Stimulus Cash
The Olympics may be over but Paul Ryan could have gotten a gold medal in hypocrisy,” a senior administration official told ABC’s Jake Tapper. “As someone who spends all day every day railing against government spending, but then secretly seeks millions in funds for pet projects, he is as Washington as it gets.”
In 2009, Ryan wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis asking for stimulus money to cover costs on two energy conservation projects in his home state of Wisconsin. In the letter, Ryan said the funds would help create jobs and reduce “energy consumption” in the state. At least one of the companies received the requested cash.
The letters were first obtained by The Wall Street Journal through the Freedom of Information Act back in early 2010. The Boston Globe turned them up for the first time during this campaign season Wednesday. At that point, a Ryan aide referred ABC News back to what a Ryan spokesman said when the letters first went public.
“If Congressman Ryan is asked to help a Wisconsin entity applying for existing Federal grant funds, he does not believe flawed policy should get in the way of doing his job and providing a legitimate constituent service to his employers,” the spokesman told the Milwaukee (Wisc.) Journal Sentinel.
Thursday, Ryan responded to the questions himself.
“After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled,” Ryan said in a statement. “This is why I didn’t recall the letters earlier. But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that." --ABC News
The Associated Press wrote a follow-up story to Ryan’s comments:
"Ryan’s statement directly counters the evidence of four letters obtained by the AP which the congressman wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, praising energy programs supported by the stimulus and requesting funds for initiatives in his district.
Ryan’s private praise for Department of Energy programs and his written requests for stimulus funds contradict not only his public criticism of the 2009 stimulus bill, but also many of the budget priorities he has laid out, including cuts to investments in green technologies.
Raising further questions about the vice presidential candidate’s claim today that he never sought stimulus money, Ryan spokesman Brendan Buck referred AP to previous explanations by the congressman’s office that by requesting funds Ryan was simply “providing a legitimate constituent service.”
Yes, Mr. Ryan, now that you can't obfuscate your way out of the truth, you'll take responsibility.
We understand why. Other conservatives refused the funds on principle, but not Mr. Ryan. He took the money he called a "wasteful spending spree" and ingratiated himself with the those who wanted the funds. He's been in politicas all his life, afterall, and he knows how to play the game. We're sure his constituents were very pleased that Ryan could so easily abandon his principles for a bit of good old fashioned pork.
33 comments:
I am sure people will soon say that Obama has done the same, and perhaps he has...
However Shaw, unless they are willing to deal with the substance of this post first, you should delete their comments...
Since I cannot reach out and smack any GOP candidates in person, I have decided to spare no hesitation in hurling tirades at their supporters. Why?
Because everything I believe in is under threat. Medicare, free and fair elections, women's right to chose, and more. While the media focuses on Ryan's budget plan and sensationalized news accounts of low-road polemics, journalists have been remiss in pointing out that Ryan is also the author of a federal "personhood" bill that would outlaw all forms of abortion and contraception (including IUDs), and a mandatory "rape-by-government" ultrasound sound bill. What next? A Putin-style persecution of dissenters? The GOP has morphed itself into a neofascist party.
Yesterday, an appliance salesman sneaked a dig at Obama. Immediately I told him how offended I was, that a retail store is an inappropriate venue for partisan politics. Thereupon, I reported his conduct to the store manager and swore I would never shop there again. Yes, piss in their faces! Boycott their businesses. Let them know there is a price for partisan disrespect. And fuck-em every way you can.
Republicans have perfected the art form of lying. Democrats are not innocent, but it is one area where republican far out shine them.
Part of the problem , not part of the solution. Ryan has been Washingtonized. As is/ has Obama. Two great Reasons to vote Johnson.
Dave,
See below. You predicted correctly. And an amazing thing is out there now: The GOP is saying, along with Ryan, that he never embraced Ayn Rand or her cult of selfish self-interest.
Even though we have Ryan on video praising her and her philosophy and admitting he is what he is today because of her Randian ideas, the double-speaking people on the right seem to think by saying he never applauded and followed her philosophy makes it so.
(O)CT(O)PUS,
Nice to see you here. Truly.
I covered Ryan's draconian positions on women's issues in my August 14 post:
"Ryan supported mandatory ultra-sounds for girls and women seeking legal abortions. As a "Get Government Out of Our Lives" conservative/libertarian, he supports government-forced examination of girls' and women's uteri.
He also supported the Protect Life Act, which would allow federally-funded hospitals to deny a woman an abortion, even if it's necessary to save her life. IOW, he's in favor of taking a desperate life and death decision away from a girl or a woman, her family, and her doctor and giving it to the government. That's a real "death panel" idea."
Strip away the GOP's uncritical adulation of this wet-behind-the-ears career politician, and all they've got is another Sarah Palin with the ability to read.
Jerry,
if medals were given out in this campaign for lying, the GOP would walk away with all the gold.
RN,
your comment has nothing to do with the fact that Ryan, the guy who's supposed to fire up the unenthusiastic base of the GOP, didn't have the backbone to stick to his principles when it came to stimulus money--some of his colleagues and some GOP governors did, Ryan didn't.
And Ryan dissembled when he was found to be lying about it.
It has nothing to do with being "Washingtonized." It has to do with Ryan's depressing similarity to Romney and his habit of talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Now that Ryan has taken some heat over his adulation of Ayn Rand, he's even gone so far as saying she was/is not an important influence on his political thinking.
That is a complete and total LIE.
And there are videos out there to prove his cowardly duplicity in saying so.
Actually Shaw my comment is factual.
1) Ryan is part of the problem
2) He has been Washingtonized, just like the rest of the dishonest, cheating, corrupt politicians.
3) I have seem the videos, they speak for themselves.
4) Ryan is not a Randian, never has been. Note Arron Brook from the ARI, Ryan was influenced by certain aspects of her philosophy, A full fledged Ojectivist he certainly is not.
Analysis, he is a politician, an opportunist and sometimes disingenuous. News flash, so is the President as well as Romney.
I once worked with a very liberal VP, lived in Amherst MA (I'm sure you know Amherst) who said often, " it is what it is." I never liked the phrase much because of its obvious implications.
Yaron Brook of the ARI, not Arron Brook.
I am disappointed to hear this about Ryan. He did what the voters elected him to do and that was represent his constituents, shame on him that he didn't just do what was good for him and his party. My disappointment comes from the fact that this is to much like a democrat and we need to get away from the more Free Stuff mentality which got us into this financial mess in the first place.
I disagree with Dave and don't feel the Magnificent One will be accused of the same thing because he only served a year in congress. In that year what he did for his constituents was vote present. His handlers would not let him take a position because they were in the campaign mode.
Puss,
The limousine liberals on this board do not understand how dysfunctional medicare is. If you don't want part B you don't have to accept it but you still have to pay same with part D. Because of the obamacare tax my wife looses her employer supplemental she has paid for for 30 years. Because I earn a living I have to pay more for part B for the same services. I won't place blame on His Highness for that punish the middle class tax.
Free and fair elections are always a problem but when we will require identification to vote that will make it fair, glad you agree with voter ID.
It is a shame that Ryan stands behind his religious beliefs. Since the WH is having a Ramadan celebration it looks like obummer is celebrating his faith as well, good to see. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/10/obama-ramadan-dinner-iftar_n_1763758.html
Had that salesman made a despairing remark about Romney, would you have been equally upset? You seem to represent the views of the party of the tolerant yet are intolerant.
skudrunner: "My disappointment comes from the fact that this is to much like a democrat and we need to get away from the more Free Stuff mentality which got us into this financial mess in the first place."
You mean "free stuff" like a $77,000 tax deduction for a dancing horsey? Yeah. What a greedy, elitist boondoggle that is.
skudrunner: "I disagree with Dave and don't feel the Magnificent One will be accused of the same thing because he only served a year in congress."
More ignorance from skudrunner. Mr Obama was a US Senator for 4 years.
skudrunner: "In that year what he did for his constituents was vote present. His handlers would not let him take a position because they were in the campaign mode."
More lying.
Here's Mr. Obama's record on legislation he sponsored while a US Senator. Read it and know that what you spread here are stupid lies that are easily refuted.
"It is a shame that Ryan stands behind his religious beliefs. Since the WH is having a Ramadan celebration it looks like obummer is celebrating his faith as well, good to see.'
skudrunner: "It's a bigger shame that you're ignorant of the fact that it was a Republican president, George W. Bush who began and continued to recognize Ramadan while he was in the White House."
Your religious intolerance is surpassed only by your ignorance on this subject.
Republican President George W. Bush instituted acknowledging Ramadam during his administration and Mr. Obama carries on the tradition started by Dubya.
IMO, none of this should be part of the presidency, including the nonsensical "Day of Prayer."
skudrunner, I've tolerant of you coming here and using my comment section to spread your ignorance on facts and your whining about Mr. Obama's campaign and his presidency. More than tolerant.
Most of what you post are lies. I answer them with evidence to refute your exaggerations and lies, but you continue your rude behavior.
Skudrunner,
You believe that saying Mr. Obama is a Muslim [he's not--more bigotry on your part] is somehow something to be ashamed of, otherwise why would you ignorantly imply he is?
Mr. Obama has said he's a Christian. Non-bigoted people accept that he is a Christian.
Religious bigots, like SKUDRUNNER, insist he isn't.
It's a dirty form of racism.
Conservatives never questioned any other president's religion when he stated he was a Christian.
Only religious bigots and racists continue to make the claim that Mr. Obama is not a Christian.
Why don't you just come out and say why you don't like our first bi-racial president, skudrunner, and be done with your innuendos and lies.
RN,
Mr. Brook can deny that Ryan is not a Randian until the cows come home.
We have Ryan admitting he got into politics because of Rand, and he adheres to her philosophy and even required his staff to read her books [what did they ever do to deserve such punishment?].
The videos of Ryan saying she influenced him more than anyone else attests to the truth: Ryan is a full-blown Randian.
Brook's opinion counts for nothing, since he doesn't speak for Ryan. Ryan speaks for himself.
Most people outgrow their teenage infatuation with Rand. Ryan, apparently, carried it into his adult life, not realizing that one shouldn't base one's political philosophy on a poorly written fantasy. Would anyone admire a politician who based his or her political philosophy on The Lord of the Rings? You'd be better off reading Mother Goose than Rand if you want to learn something about politics.
Ryan said, "I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are and what my beliefs are. It's inspired me so much that it's required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff."
He went on to say that "the reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism."
@(O)CT(O)PUS << Yesterday, an appliance salesman sneaked a dig at Obama >>
Would you mind sharing the dig with us that the salesmen sneaked?
I am about to purchase a refrigerator. What brand(s) did this store carry?
Shaw,
"Why don't you just come out and say why you don't like our first bi-racial president"
Why is it always about race. I look at the person and not their color but it seems you cannot do that. I think and obama has proven that he is not competent to run the country, nothing racial about that. I felt the same about Carter (he was white) and Ford (he was white) so race has nothing to do with it.
I firmly believe in the separation of church and state. I just think that if he is holding a service for one religion he needs to do all. I have never seen a WH celebrating Buddhism, Hinduism, Wicca or many other religions and this is not an Obama issue but should be for all presidents.
Shaw,
skud's statements remind me of the answers I get when I call customer service and the representative is reading from a script, asking questions based on my answer to the previous question. I think skud cuts and pastes his statements without even reading them...or is he really that for out of touch with reality?
it's hardly a surprise that someone (Rand) who grew up is Stalinist Russia would believe that ANY collective effort by a government would result in tyrannical socialism.
Truth is, much of America's greatness comes from the implementation of ideas like collective effort and communal taxation.
Ryan seems to be a member of a small crowd that took Rands idea of small government and made it the "holy grail" of some kind of government utopia.
AS SF writes today:
Fire the teaches!
Eliminate education!
Schools are the evil that are indoctrinating our children with progressive ideas.
Learning needs guidance and the discipline to filter ideas.
Seems Ryan is self taught on Rand and distorted (lied) about her actual thinking. A good teacher might have been able to instruct him on the errors of the supposed lessons he learned from reading Rand.
If we ASSume Ryan is smart, then he is the worst kind of liar.
Skudrunner,
You seem to be oblivious as to the reasons Mr. Bush began the tradition of celebrating Ramadam in the WH.
All you have to do to understand why it continues is look at the recent shooting at the Sikh temple to know that certain people hate Muslims in this country since 9/11, and that hatred is so unreasonable and so vile, in fact, that anyone with brown skin and a beard, apparently, are labeled as Muslims, even if they're not, and subject to random acts of violence.
I don't think the WH under any president should be holding religious prayer meetings or acknowledging religious holidays. [Christmas is not really a religious holiday anymore, since it's more about commercialism and buying stuff than it is about a religious figure.]
As to bringing in race and bigotry. It is YOU, skudrunner, who states Mr. Obama is a Muslim.
Why?
When Jimmy Carter stated he was a Christian, did you suspect he was not?
When Ronald Reagan said he was a Christian, did people smirk behind his back and imply he was a liar?
When George HW Bush said he was a Christian, did you question that?
When Bill Clinton said he was a Christian, did you believe he was a secret Muslim?
When GWB said he was a Christian, did you doubt his word?
Why do you say Mr. Obama is not a Christian and insist that Islam is his religion?
I say it's because of his race and/or his name. It is not based on reason, it is based on bigotry.
No other president in the history of this country has had the level of disrespect and disbelief vis-a-vis his religious affiliation that Mr. Obama has.
And no other president has ever been bi-racial.
I think it's reasonable for me to associate this disrespect with Mr. Obama's race, since neither you nor any other of the people who continue to question his beliefs, ever did so to any white president.
Mr. Obama has made it perfectly clear that he is a Christian. What is it about that declaration that you and others don't accept?
Unless you can give me a good reason for your suspicions about Mr. Obama being a secret Muslim--other than you "think" he is--I will continue to call it racism.
skudrunner,
You're spreading lies AGAIN.
Obama’s ‘Dreams of My Father’
Posted on June 3, 2008
FactCheck.org:
Q: Did Obama write that he would "stand with the Muslims" and that he nurses a "pervasive sense of grievance and animosity" toward whites?
A: No. A widely circulated e-mail fabricates some quotes from Obama’s books and twists others."
You obviously get your information from conservative emails that you're too lazy to research to find out if they're true.
Mr. Obama was speaking of AMERICANS
when the passage was written in the book.
From FactCheck.org:
Misleading e-mail:
From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
Actual quote from "The Audacity of Hope" (pg. 261): Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
You, skudrunner, are an example of what is wrong with this country.
You are too easily led by lies and misrepresentation that feed into your prejudices and fears. There are too many of you who are intellectually lazy and contribute to the hate and misunderstanding that this country wallows in day in and day out by keeping these misrepresentations and lies circulating about President Obama.
The truth about what you claim has been out there for anyone with any since of curiosity to find since 2008, and yet you come here in 2012, 4 years later, and repeat the lie.
Shaw, quite shallow for you…
Ryan was indeed influenced; he used the "selling points" that the right loves to circle around in Rand's philosophy for political reasons. Read political gain, or at least he thought it would play out that way I'm quite sure.
Of course Ryan's economic outlook and a small part of his politics was partially shaped by Ayn Rand's views. Just as many politicians on the left have been either knowingly or unknowingly influenced in their economic and political thinking by Karl Marx to some degree. Of course that does not make them Marxists. It does make them statist. A view you yourself subscribe to. You'll admit that if you are honest with yourself.
Because Ryan shares some of Rand's philosophy does not make him an Objectivist or a Randian. His very record in politics/government, as you have amply pointed out on the pages of P.E. attests to that very fact. For those who have read Rand, which you obviously haven't, or you didn't digest it well, because if you had you would recognize that Ryan is indeed far removed from being a serious Objectivist/Randian practitioner of either her economic or her political expression of the same.
I proudly admit that I am by far more an Objectivist than is Paul Ryan. And, I am not a true disciple of everything she advocated, just the the the lions share. So I do advocate for her philosophy. But I digress. It is my view (guess) that Ryan never got beyond her fictional blockbusters.
Certainly you are right, Yaron Brook does not speak for Paul Ryan, any more than Hugo Chavez speaks for Obama. However, Brook, even more than me, and certainly a hell of a lot more than you, is qualified to state Ryan is not a Randian Objectivist.
I do understand however your need to befuddle the masses with half truths and liberal embellishments to divert attention from the real issues. Hell, the right is equally as bad at it and both are getting worse. Simple fact; both sides respond to the others negativity. Neither intend to make the first move to lay it down.
The bottom line, as long as the electorate chooses to remain focused as it is on the distractions by both sides nothing, and I mean nothing will change. The choice lies with each and every one of us to do what we think is right and go from there. I'll leave it at that.
Oh, one more thing, I do not like Obama politically but find him personable as a INDIVIDUAL. I also find myself defending Obama is ways I believe he is unfairly judged, even to my own father who has a great dislike both personally and politically for the man. He distrusts Obama primarily because of the perceived ambiguities in his birth certificate. Frankly he views him as dishonest (lying in your words)and believes he is really a Muslim.
If you, or your band of three commentators (the ones that I refer to as the Troika) wish to beat me up for this comment, feel free. It will I assure you roll off by back smoothly and very quickly.
Now my dear Shaw have a simply marvelous day!
RN, proof that:
The apple does not fall far from the tree.
"Just as many politicians on the left have been either knowingly or unknowingly influenced in their economic and political thinking by Karl Marx to some degree. Of course that does not make them Marxists. It does make them statist. A view you yourself subscribe to.
You'll admit that if you are honest with yourself."--RN
I don't admit to anything anyone "thinks" I believe, least of all people who base their philosophy on bad fiction writers.
Your condescending comments have been duly noted, and ignored.
"AS SF writes today:
Fire the teaches!
Eliminate education!
Schools are the evil that are indoctrinating our children with progressive ideas." --Steve
Ha! That from a guy who belongs to a party that denies global warming, says Evolution isn't a fact, and believes the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Yeah. Ejumacation is ruining our children.
The lowest scores in math and science are, for the most part, in the RED states, the highest are in the BLUE states--Massachusetts lead the country in math and science scores, BTW.
More on RED state vs. BLUE state from Alternet:
Ayn Rand Worshippers Should Face Facts: Blue States Are the Providers, Red States Are the Parasites
There's only one way to demonstrate who America's producers and parasites really are. It's time to go Galt.
[T]he New York Times published a widely discussed article updating an argument that progressive bloggers noticed a very long time ago. It's now well-understood that blue states generally export money to the federal government; and red states generally import it.
a stone fact that the blue states and cities are the country's real wealth creators. That's why we pay more taxes, and are able to send that money to the red states in the first place. We're working our butts off, being economically productive, going to college , raising good kids, supporting reality-based schools, keeping our marriages together, tending to our busy and diverse cities, and generally Playing By The Rules. And the fates have smiled on us in rough proportion to the degree that we’ve invested in our own common good.
by and large, the people who are getting our money are so damned ungrateful -- not to mention so ridiculously eager to spend it on stuff we don't approve of. We didn't ship them our hard-earned tax dollars to see them squandered on worse-than-useless abstinence-only education, textbooks that teach creationism, crisis-pregnancy misinformation centers, subsidies for GMO crops and oil companies, and so on. And we sure as hell didn't expect to be rewarded for our productivity and generosity with a rising tide of spittle-flecked insanity about how we’re just a bunch of immoral, godless, drug-soaked, sex-crazed, evil America-hating traitors who can’t wait to hand the country over to the Islamists and the Communists."
"Ironically, the conservative movement's favorite philosopher had some very insightful things to say about this exact situation. Ayn Rand's novels divided the world into two groups. On one hand, she lionized "producers" -- noble, intelligent Übermenschen whose faith in their own ideas and willingness to take risks to achieve their dreams drives everything else in society. And she called out the evil of "parasites," the dull, unimaginative masses who attach themselves to producers and drain away their resources and thwart their dreams.
Conservatives love this story. They're eager to claim the gleaming mantle of the producers, insisting loudly that their tax money is going to support people (mostly in blue states and cities, it's darkly implied) who won't or can't work as hard as they do. If you want to arouse their class and race resentments, there are few narratives that can get them rolling like this producers-versus-parasites tale.
But the NYT story and that map up there prove beyond arguing that the conservative interpretation of events is 100 percent, 180-degrees, flat-out wrong. America's real producer class is overwhelmingly concentrated in the blue cities and states.
"Must be that public school education that causes me to make those mistakes."
Typical conservative response. Never take responsibility for your own actions. It's always someone or something else's fault.
You posted the lies here.
That wasn't your public school education's fault.
One of SF's minions replied to his post on education:
"And finally, we should thank our public schools for introducing our children to homosexual lifestyles, drugs, teenaged sex, and revisionist history. I’m just thankful that none of our children can read, write, or do simple math … "
WOW
Anon,
I'm guessing that has to be a joke.
The certain folks on the right have always blamed public schools for "introducing" their children to homosexuality, because, y'know, if they didn't go to public schools, they'd never encounter those icky ideas and people!
And of course, teenage sex is nonexistent in private or home-schooled teenagers.
Those sort of folks are a dying breed. Thank goodness the younger generations don't think like that.
If that commenter lives in a RED state, chances are their children are doing poorly in math and science, and if they live in some southern states, they believe dinosaurs lived in the times of Jesus.
He sure fessed up in a hurry, and more importantly, he owned up.
I understand his point. Any congressman who wants to get reelected is going to advocate for his constituents.
Unfortunately, with the federal government in everything, it is a big fight over Uncle Sam's stash, and the congressman that doesn't jump in is doing his constituents wrong.
Hell of a system, ain't it?
SF: "I understand his point."
Of course you do! You will always "understand" when a pol on your side of the aisle does double-speak. There's always a "good" reason for it.
He fessed up? Well when the evidence is all over the news, that wasn't exactly brave was it? And you forget he denied it until he couldn't any more.
What you fail to understand is that other conservative senators, representatives, and governors did not take the money.
I'm not a fan of Jan Brewer, but she did have the cajones to say NO! to government money for her constituents.
Ryan did not. He's nothing more than a common, double-speaking run-of-the-mill pol.
A government-mad man.
haha! That should read "A government-MADE man.
I love my unintentional double entendre, though.
As they say Shaw, "it is what it is."
Your snark has been duly noted and sent to the circular file.
RN, try to be original when you try to insult, mkay?
@Shaw Looks like you were spot on. Ryan voted against the stimulus, said he wouldn't take stimulus, said the stimulus was waste of money and then requested stimulus money for his constituents, the Wisconsin department energy and labor.
@Dave I think you are correct; somebody will be able to give an example(s) of President Obama doing the same thing in another context.
I thought about it but I get so tired of others doing the 'he said she said' that I will not. As well, Shaw gave us a good early scoop and it's fair to let it stand on it's own.
@(O)CT(O)PUS Between you and me and this blog ... probably best not to tell anybody the names of the businesses you boycott. Keep it on the down low.
If you yell their names from the rooftops, those businesses you want to f-over will have lines out the door and around the block in a show of support for them. Wink.
Post a Comment