.
I wake up Saturday morning and Republican presidential nominee Slick Willard has picked his running mate: Wisconsin Congressman and rightwing budget guru Paul Ryan, whom the Stephanie Miller Show refers to as “The Budget Munster” due to his uncanny resemblance to Eddie from the 60’s TV hit “The Munsters.” (See right.)
I love that Congressman Ryan has always been a fervent and outspoken disciple of Ayn Rand, written papers, given lectures about her, the whole shebang… while also having always called himself a “devout Catholic.” It wasn’t long ago that someone broke the news to him that Ayn Rand was an outspoken atheist. I mean, DUH. Her whole philosophy of selfishness as the highest virtue is the exact opposite of Christianity. Paul reacted with incredulity, people must be lying to him. After a few months of the truth setting in, he has gradually stopped talking about his goddess. But his philosophy has not changed.
Which brings up a couple other things: Paul Ryan, like Newt Gingrich, is what passes for an “intellectual” among contemporary Republicans. What kind of intellectual can pass himself off as a Rand disciple for half his life, and totally miss her militant atheism? And also, this problem of worshiping both Rand and Christ is endemic with the modern right. Jesus did say you can’t serve two masters. I think I know where their heart really lies.
Another thought – and remember, this is an open thread, so we welcome all your thoughts below: All the TV bobbleheads have been saying for weeks that, sure, Romney should release his tax returns, when is he going to release them, things are just going to get worse until he does, and yet… they also say that as soon as he announces his Vice-Presidential pick, the questions about his tax returns will disappear for a while. Which leads me to ask two questions: How long do you think that will last? And also, now that we mention it, Where the hell ARE Mitt Romney’s tax returns??
Another Paul Ryan story: A few months ago, President Clinton was seen walking with his arm around Ryan’s shoulder. Paranoid liberals’ heads exploded – see, more evidence what a closet rightwinger the ex-President was. More recently we found out exactly how the conversation went. Bill Clinton: “Young man, would you like any help with your mathematics?”
LOL, LOL, and again LOL. On account of: This supposed budget genius just can NOT make his numbers add up.
His supposed deficit-reduction plan would actually add at least $5 TRILLION to the debt over the next decade, if we experienced the catastrophe of its passing.
His plan to end Medicare as we know it – aka, forcing all of us born after 1956 to switch to a “voucher plan” that he’ll call “Medicare” which would funnel trillions of our public monies to HMO profiteers – will WASTE possibly $30 f—ng trillion.
And Seniors will be dying, no way around it – that’s you and me, when WE’RE seniors. These vouchers will be attached to general inflation, not healthcare inflation… there is absolutely no way we Seniors would be able to afford our healthcare under Ryan’s plan.
Ordinarily we’d be, oh well, it’s just a VP pick, this fellow won’t be President unless the thinkable happens … but when we’re looking at a candidate like Mitt Romney, who, as even his supporters have to admit, will say anything to anybody for a little political advantage at the moment – the choice of a running mate WHICH IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE is a relatively dependable indication of how Romney intends to govern. And that is NOT as the moderate Massachusetts Governor he was ten years ago.
Well, what else do you Juice denizens think this weekend? About this or anything else? Open thread. Oh yea, Greg told me I should read this on the Ryan pick, maybe you should too… Damn it’s hot…
Thanks Mitt: Get Ready for Palin II .
CJ
So Art Pedroza said that he’d support Sal Tinajero over Miguel Pulido for Santa Ana Mayor. Now, Tinajero has dropped out — and is supporting fellow Council member David Benavides. Pedroza (himself a candidate for Santa Ana School Board) says that he’ll go against Tinajero and will support Pulido 100% over Benavides. There’s an obvious question or two that someone ought to ask Art here (and maybe Art’s bromance partner too.)
Second time in just a few months that Sal Tinajero has majorly defied the Small Dark Lord Pulido. Just like I said when Sal endorsed Julio instead of Michele or Tom, “I always told you guys Sal was an independent, progressive cat.”
Homeland Security retains an orange alert for the high possibility of the two hugest heads in the Santa Ana blogsophere exploding.
I’m liking Tinajero more and more. He’s gutsy. He makes some odd choices in appointments, though.
It’s probably just to throw the rest of us off! Tricky…
Liked him since I met him, and have liked (what I’ve noticed of) his record.
Politics make for strange bedfellows.
Which reminds me that Benavides had better dump Bustamante over the side of the boat if he wants any chance of winning. When’s that going to happen — or why won’t it?
Bustamante is a done deal. No need to kick the man while he is down, we have a DA who is going to do that job.
Busta should resign. Benavides should call for his resignation; as I recall, he’s the only member of the Council who hasn’t.
You think that because everything in life to you is a political calculation. Do you throw your friends off the side of the boat when they’ve been charged of crimes?
It depends on the crime and the evidence. In this case, the charges are serious enough, and the evidence significant enough, that there’s very likely fire behind the smoke (although maybe he’ll plead insanity or something and escape prison.) Busta has already apparently decided not to run for re-election. This is now just about Busta’s collecting an extra few months of pay.
As for everything in my life being a political calculation — you have got to be kidding. My involvement with Occupy, FFFF, anti-Prop 35, and taking on the local Dem establishment should make that pretty clear.
Well if Bustamante’s not running for re-election, why are you so obsessed with Benavides calling for his resignation?
Good, on-topic comments just now from “silver price” and “offshore bank account” — who apparently accidentally linked their usernames to commercial URLs for — imagine this — precious metal accounts and offshore legal services. (As a result, both of them went to spam, but I fished them out.)
Don’t worry, either of you — I disabled the links, so no one is going to think that you’re just here to sell us something. Hope to see you around again — but leave the commercial URLs at home. (Vern will sell you an ad cheap, though!)
Really Greg? Those are totally spam. Some computer wrang words out of the posts themselves for content.
OK, I’ll take them down — but I’ll leave up that comment just as a notice to other commercial spamsters.
The better of them was the quote applied to the “Chalk Walk” article:
“Deface” is in the eye of the beholder, as surely as de eye is in the face of the beholder.
This Paul Ryan is a fraud. I mean, he claims to idolize Ayn Rand, yet he’s able to vote for TARP as well as Medicare Part D, one of the largest (and unfunded) entitlement programs ever! Does it get any more hypocritical than that? Rand would NOT be pleased!
As far as I can tell, he became a “fiscal conservative” the minute Barack Obama took office, which is exactly what many of these fiscal frauds did.
Oh yeah! My brother told me to include THAT! Thanks for filling that in. My story was already a little long for an open-thread-stoker.
oh yeah ….. you are TOTALLY right anon – this Tea Partier is going to change his vote from Romney to BHO …………. not.
That’s OK Skally….I didn’t really expect objectivity and an ability to honestly criticize one of your own from you.
Ryan got totally confused when he found out that Ayn was an atheist. He’s just not that well thought out.
That is false.
And skally — congratulations on winning the contest we’ve been having, the progress of which I’ve been closely watching for weeks. You are quite worthy of the honor of being the author of this site’s 100,000th comment — and I say that without irony.
your looking for hypocrits just look no further that the guy in the white house
Do you agree with Ryan’s votes for Medicare Part D and TARP?
“The Slog” at Seattle’s “The Stranger” (Dan Savage’s home base) has what they call “the most important Slog poll of all time,” geared mainly toward straight women and gay men – on the question “Is Paul Ryan hot or not?”
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/08/11/the-most-important-slog-poll-of-all-time-paul-ryan-hot-or-not
Right now, out of six options, the one that is far ahead is: “He’s hot for politics. Politics-hot is not the same as regular-hot. It’s a lower bar..”
hat-tip Matt Munson.
Read this a few moments ago…thought I’d share….sums it up pretty well…
“Of course, the thirty-second skinny on Paul Ryan’s plan for America is this: Ryan’s plan to reduce taxes is to raise them on nearly everybody. (He’s a good match with Romney, given that the Tax Policy Center, who tried excruciatingly hard to make Romney’s plan work, nevertheless demonstrated that it could not avoid a fat middle-class tax hike.) His plan to balance the budget is to not balance the budget. (He is, incorrectly, considered a deficit hawk. Actual deficit hawks exist to hawk over the deficit that he essentially voted into existence._ His plan to reduce long-term health care costs is to ration out vouchers that diminish in value over time, relative to rising costs. His main objection to that is the use of the word, “voucher,” so let’s give him a break, and just call them, “Ryan Fun Bucks.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/12/tv-soundoff-sunday-talkin_n_1769858.html
“I, like millions of young people in America, read Rand’s novels when I was young. I enjoyed them,” Ryan says. “They spurred an interest in economics, in the Chicago School and Milton Friedman,” a subject he eventually studied as an undergraduate at Miami University in Ohio. “But it’s a big stretch to suggest that a person is therefore an Objectivist.”
He’s right. You would need to look at all of the other evidence of Ryan’s extolling Rand over the years (until recently, when he finally found out that she was an atheist), including requiring his staff to read Atlas Shrugged, before suggesting that Ryan is an Objectivist is no longer a stretch.
It’s almost hilarious that Ryan is now denying his longstanding devotion to Rand as a childish detour. It’s a wholesale and desperate rewriting of history to suit political ends. It’s so — what’s the word — Randian!
Please substantiate your claim that Ryan “just found out” that Rand was an athiest – you can’t – because it is not true.
He is denying that he is an “Objectivist” – big difference.
Here’s some background on Ryan and Rand from the LA Times. Also, this from Politico.
He’s not even denying that he’s an Objectivist, he’s just saying that you can’t infer it from the limited evidence at hand.
As for when he found out: I’m looking for a primary source to address whether his sudden flight from Rand in April 2012 was due to a discovery or a “discovery” of Rand’s atheism. I’m happy for the scare quotes to be included (for now.)
Here are some great quotes from Ryan and Rand that have recently been compiled:
One word ….. so?
NONE of that substantiates any of the allegations made in this blog article or comments.
I linked to two articles, skally — how did you like them? Why do you think that they substantiate NONE of the allegations made here?
To make it easier on you, I even gave you a bunch of quotes not requiring you to click a link!
Find me something Ryan said distancing himself from Rand’s “philosophy” before April of this year, when things got hot for him.
This video pretty much says it all. He can’t even stop and answer an honest question about the contradictions inherent in his worldview:
In 2005, Ryan paid homage to Rand in a speech given to The Atlas Society, an organization promoting, among other things “open Objectivism.” I’m hoping to come across the text of that speech sometime.
http://www.atlassociety.org
Recording of Ryan’s speech 2005 speech to The Atlas Society can be found here:
http://www.atlassociety.org/ele/blog/2012/04/30/paul-ryan-and-ayn-rands-ideas-hot-seat-again
Notice some of the excerpts on the Atlas Society website, and the intensity of Ryan’s devotion to Rand. One word I hear Ryan using is “individualism”. It’s NOT a stretch to highlight Rand’s devotion to “self” and Ryan’s promotion of “individualism”, and then link that to his ideas on Medicare and Social Security. It all goes together. And it ain’t going to sell to senior citizens.
And it is not a stretch to translate BHO’s words and actions into “collectivism.”
Yes, I have to admit, Obama’s history of giving out Mao’s “Little Red Book” and quotations from Stalin to staffers is troubling…. Oh, wait, he never did that.
It’s not hard to translate Romney and Ryan’s “socialism for the rich” ideology as a form of “collectivism” either, eh? That’s what you get when you toss out words that are so ill-defined. Hey, is Christianity itself “collectivist”?
Comparing mass murderers to Ayn Rand Diamond? Hell – you may as well have thrown Hitler in there..
I compare them only in the sense that they published material (or in Stalin’s case, had quotes published) promoting extremist political viewpoints. Is that too subtle for you?
By using the term “collectivist,” were you instead intending to compare Obama to FDR, JFK, and LBJ? If so, then I would amend my comparison. However, I don’t think that that’s what you were doing, eh?
If by collectivism you mean the emphasis on the interdependence of human beings, then I’ll take that over the worship of self any day.
Diamond – Paul Ryan did not need to distance himself before April because those who knew him know that he is not an athiest or objectivist. He is speaking to a much larger audience now – and there are those who would distort his beliefs – like those in this blog article.
I’ll agree that people didn’t think that he was an atheist. (The notorious Satanist Anton LeVay famously said that Rand’s philosophy was like the principles of Satanism without the rites and ritual — and that’s definitely not an atheist perspective. Not that I’m calling Ryan a Satanist, mind you, regardless of how much he may agree with the non-theological parts of their dogma regarding interpersonal economic relations.) You present no evidence, though, that no one who knew Ryan thought in years past that this serial gifter and intern-reading-requirer of Atlas Shrugged and praiser of things Rand was an Objectivist. I presume that that is because you don’t have any.
He is a *$%& life-long catholic – that should be evidence enough. You are really starting to annoy me GD – desist with your circular argumentation.
Yes…and many Catholics can’t help but note the contradictions when it comes to Ryan’s economic/budget ideas and traditional Catholic teachings regarding standing with the poor and the “least among us.”
http://www.catholics-united.org/content/press-release-paul-ryan%E2%80%99s-priorities-reflect-teachings-ayn-rand-not-jesus-christ
Liberal catholic groups do not represent a significant proportion of catholic thought.
Uhhmmmmm — what proportion of Catholics in the U.S. use birth control again?
I have great admiration for Catholic thinkers such as Bishop Oscar Romero and Cardinal Bernadin. I’m sorry if you don’t find their thinking “significant.” I sure do.
Sorry Skally, but the Catholic tradition of standing with the poor has absolutely nothing to do with right and left…it’s a belief that is at the very core of Catholic teaching and practice.
skally, I know many wonderful lifelong Catholics who are seriously devoted to the teachings of Jesus. In fact, I’m married to one — and my first wife was one at the time we got married as well. I am a great admirer of the “red-letter” teachings of Jesus (“Jefferson Bible” stuff, you understand), although I find his radical devotion to transformative economic activism at the cost of one’s comfort and existing social relations difficult to achieve or even to conceive.
But if you think that one’s lifelong Catholicism is in some way definitive proof that one is not a rotten and selfish person with believes antithetical to those expressed by the Jesus of the Gospels — well, I must respectfully disagree. Let’s leave it at that. We live in a debased world, my Christian believers in Original Sin frequently tell me, and we should not be shocked when people are debased — even Catholics, even Catholic politicians.
To me, the fetishism of Rand’s writing is a warning sign of someone’s moral debasement.
How is he a “*$%& life-long catholic??” I’m sure he thinks he’s a Catholic. What makes a Catholic? Being baptized? Taking the sacraments?
I haven’t seen anything about him making his interns read the Bible, LET ALONE the Baltimore Catechism or any Papal decrees. Only this atheist worshiper of selfishness.
Wasn’t Jerry Sandusky a Catholic too?
That is a stupid comment Vern.
Just saying not all practicing “Catholics” live up to what Catholics should be, and that would include someone who thinks so highly of a thinker like Ayn Rand, whose thinking is so far from Jesus’ teaching and inspires him to create a budget plan for all Americans that is condemned as un-Christian by US bishops.
So to make that point I go to the extreme, Sandusky. He was also a practicing Catholic, wasn’t he?
I didn’t say that no one who knew Ryan in years past thought that he was an Objectivist – quite the contrary.
You wrote above: “before April … those who knew him know that he is not an athiest or objectivist.” That’s where I got the impression that you were saying that people who knew him knew that he was not an Objectivist. I presume that you just need to revise that sentence — or this later one.
Diamond – Show me how the two articles you cite substantiate the claims made in this article and comments.
OK — which claims do you want me to substantiate?
I’ll be away from the computer for a few hours, though, so this may have to wait.
I would like you to substantiate that:
Ryan did not know until recently that Ayn Rand was an athiest.
To be “Randian” means to rewrite history – that one I know came out of your a$$.
Show me that Paul acted “with incredulity” when he “found out” that Rand was an athiest – pure fabrication.
Substantiate that, as anon suggests, Ryan is a proponent of Objectivism.
That will do for now – thanks.
OK — so I don’t waste time, could you list the many more claims I made that you don’t think I need to substantiate? Because the ones you mention (except maybe the last, which (sigh) depends on what the definition of “is” is) are pretty ancillary to the main thrust of the criticism.
If I renounce those claims, do you continue to argue that this is all fabrication? On what basis? (See, I think that you’re overgeneralizing your umbrage here, in case that wasn’t clear.)
“It wasn’t long ago that someone broke the news to him (Ryan) that Rand was an outspoken athiest.”
Substantiate THAT one Diamond.
This post is crap.
This is what has been reported. I’m trying to trace it back to Weekly World News.
As I said, though — it’s an ancillary point. I’m willing to concede for the sake of argument that at the time that Ryan was loudly singing Rand’s praises, he already knew her to be an atheist. Is that better?
I never said that Ryan is a proponent of Objectivism.
I’ve said that he admires Ayn Rand (who created Objectivism), and I’ve said that he gave a speech at The Atlas Society, an organization that promotes “open Objectivism.”
So what was your point in pointing that out?
You ever heard of laying out the facts?
YOU KNOW WHY WE ARE HAVING SUCH A FIELD DAY HERE?
It’s because FINALLY we have someone to focus on who says what they mean, who we know what they really think – unlike his would-be boss Slick Willard. Something we can SINK OUR TEETH INTO!
It is glorious!
What’s with the sensationalizing of keeping Romney’s VP pick a secret.
You would think that they had just revealed the Colonel’s 11 Secret Herbs and Spices. (Spoiler alert: one of them may actually be a mineral.)
100,000th comment – I am stoked!
Is there a prize?
Chris Hayes put up a handy list of important votes – all YES votes – that Congressman Paul Ryan took during the Bush years, which put the lie to his deficit hawkishness. Each of these yes votes followed by the amount it added to our nation’s debt:
BUSH TAX CUTS – $1.7 Tillion, 2001-8
EXTEND BUSH TAX CUTS – $620 Billion
TARP – $224 Billion
INVADING & OCCUPYING IRAQ – $853 Billion
MEDICARE PART D $180 Billion
Yeah, real thrifty little character there.
Ryan is now saying he’ll release 2 years of tax returns. He won’t say how many he had to submit to Romney during the vetting process. Pawlenty admits that he was vetted but will only say he had to release a “bunch” of years.
Bunch…somewhere between “zero” and a “shitload.”
Wasn’t that the third verse of the “Theme from Arthur”?
anon said:
“.. the Catholic tradition of standing with the poor has absolutely nothing to do with right and left…it’s a belief that is at the very core of Catholic teaching and practice.”
That is absolutely correct anon.
But not included in that principle is forced confiscation of one’s property to give to the anyone else .. including lobbyists and the poor. What good does it do one’s soul, what graces are bestowed, on one whose wealth is redistributed against his will? These things must be freely given from the goodness of one’s heart.
Indeed: hence the teaching “render unto Caeser if he can pry it from your cold dead hands.” (Admittedly, I may be referring to an inferior translation there.)
F**k Caesar and the horse he rode in on.
True enough. We also live under a Constitution, created by our Founding Fathers, that invests the 3 branches of government with certain powers (among them, for example, the powers to levy taxes and regulate commerce). If you don’t like that, then perhaps you should live in a different country.
Well of course – and that is why we have elections.
anon: “If you don’t like that, then perhaps you should live in a different country.”
I think that after the election we all will be living in a country that is very different – and much improved!
I agree! It WILL be improved if Romney wins…for political and corporate elites.
I’ll also add that the Courts have found programs like Medicare and Social Security to be Constitutional. But that’s the part you don’t like, isn’t it? Those pesky Courts that The Founders saw fit to create…what were they thinking?
awesome pick…finally someone with values…..Vern, looks as if alot of your cities are in a finacial crunch…..I told u on Dittmers facebook that it was coming and look what happened.
A Wisconisn Republican weighs in. Our cities will do fine without your budget munster, thank you…
HaHaHa…sure looks like it….looks like Cally could use a little more Wisconsin!
Sure maybe a President Feingold one of these days.
Feingold knew he couldn’t win…..smart man.
Not Repub…..straight TEA PARTIER!!! Or as u guys say “extremist”.
Take care Vern….gotta go too work….still luv our arguments :->