# Ryan = Romney's VP Thread



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 11, 2012)

> Mitt Romney Set To Pick Paul Ryan As Running Mate
> 
> Mitt Romney is expected to name his choice for his vice presidential running mate on Saturday morning in Norfolk, Virginia.
> 
> ...






> NBC News ‏@NBCNews
> 
> NBC News: 3 Sources indicate Rep Paul Ryan is Romney’s Vice Presidential pick.





Appears he will announce tomorrow. This will be one of his chances before the election to talk about something other than Bain/taxes. 

It's a safe choice for sure. Ryan is good looking with solid conservative credentials. To give you a general idea of his policies, he is part of the "fuck the poor" crowd. The Catholic Church (he's Catholic) found his budget proposals harsh on the poor. 

Now to wait for an announcement tomorrow.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

It's the safe-wild choice. Ryan has a blue collar background, a history of hunting and is respected among Conservative circles.


----------



## Mael (Aug 11, 2012)

Birds of a feather...


----------



## geG (Aug 11, 2012)

Something tells me this will be like a mini-repeat of 2008 where the Republican candidate chose someone waaaaaay too far to the right


----------



## MasterSitsu (Aug 11, 2012)

No confirmation?


he will pick  marco rubio simply because he is better strategically for Florida.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 11, 2012)

Geg said:


> Something tells me this will be like a mini-repeat of 2008 where the Republican candidate chose someone waaaaaay too far to the right



he's not nearly as dumb as palin though, just mean.


----------



## Lightysnake (Aug 11, 2012)

Seriously, how fucking STUPID is this pick?

No private sector experience. No executive experience. No military experience,...it's like he doesn't even care that every criticism they applied to Obama can be used here!

Nevermind Ryan's abhorrent budget. Ryan provides a boost in Wisconsin but that isn't a state he should focus on as he likely won't win there regardless. You think Florida seniors will like the Ryan Budget?


----------



## Revolution (Aug 11, 2012)

Oh, Huffington Post.  The Liberal Democrat vlog on a Conservative Republican Canditate.  Not the best source for balanced information.


----------



## KFC (Aug 11, 2012)

Sarahmint said:


> Oh, Huffington Post.  The Liberal Democrat vlog on a Conservative Republican Canditate.  Not the best source for balanced information.



And of course that has nothing to do with this certain situation. Announcing who Mitt Romney's running mate is going to be physically CAN'T be biased.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 11, 2012)

All of all the possible candidates, he picked another white guy.  Oh well, at least he isn't old.


----------



## αce (Aug 11, 2012)

It's like he wants to lose.


----------



## PureWIN (Aug 11, 2012)

Congrats on reelection Obama. GG, Republicans.


----------



## iander (Aug 11, 2012)

I'm actually surprised Ryan would to be part of the Romney ticket.  Romney isn't doing so well and a big loss for the Romney ticket could ruin Ryan's career.


----------



## The Great Oneddd (Aug 11, 2012)

I don't think it will end up being a big deal.  Still it is an interesting pick of a person cause I have never heard of the guy.


----------



## PureWIN (Aug 11, 2012)

iander said:


> I'm actually surprised Ryan would to be part of the Romney ticket.  Romney isn't doing so well and a big loss for the Romney ticket could ruin Ryan's career.



Nah. Palin became an overnight superstar thanks to the '08 election despite losing. This election can only serve to increase Ryan's notoriety amongst all Americans and give him an opportunity to run for higher office later on down the road.


----------



## iander (Aug 11, 2012)

PureWIN said:


> Nah. Palin became an overnight superstar thanks to the '08 election despite losing. This election can only serve to increase Ryan's notoriety amongst all Americans and give him an opportunity to run for higher office later on down the road.



Palin became a celebrity instead of a politician.  Her VP run and resigning early as governor pretty much ended her political career.  She made a lot of money but that won't help her get political office again.

I can only think of one failed vice-presidential candidate that ever became president and that was FDR.  Paul Ryan is certainly no FDR.


----------



## Kahvehane (Aug 11, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> To give you a general idea of his policies, he is part of the "fuck the poor" crowd. The Catholic Church (he's Catholic) found his budget proposals harsh on the poor.



Are you kidding me? The guy literally requires his interns to read Ayn Rand novels. He's part of the "bend the poor over and rape them with three old wooden dragon dildoes wound together with barbed wire" crowd. I daresay he prowls the back alleys of skid row late into the darkest hours of the night, hungering for the blood of the unsuspecting lower class and any straggling Medicaid recipient he can find.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 11, 2012)

iander said:


> I'm actually surprised Ryan would to be part of the Romney ticket.  Romney isn't doing so well and a big loss for the Romney ticket could ruin Ryan's career.





iander said:


> Palin became a celebrity instead of a politician.  Her VP run and resigning early as governor pretty much ended her political career.  She made a lot of money but that won't help her get political office again.
> 
> I can only think of one failed vice-presidential candidate that ever became president and that was FDR.  Paul Ryan is certainly no FDR.



Palin is still super popular amongst conservatives. Maybe she couldn't win the national election and she really shot herself in the foot resigning as governor but it has still leveraged her a lot of power, influence and money.

Ryan is mere congressman level. Given how even someone as dumb as Palin became so popular he could easily use it as a springboard to greater things.

I don't see why it'd negatively impact his career if they lose. Romney will get the blame for that and Palin still got more than she lost by acting like a total fool.

Anyway, politicians tend to be pretty deluded about their chances and abilities. He probably thinks they will win and in four to eights years he will be president.


----------



## Mithos (Aug 11, 2012)

This could either be really good or bad. 

Really good because Paul Ryan is so conservative and such an asshole it will probably hurt Romney and give Obama the presidency.

Really bad if Romney wins cause then we're fucked.


----------



## PureWIN (Aug 11, 2012)

Kahvehane said:


> Are you kidding me? The guy literally requires his interns to read Ayn Rand novels. He's part of the "bend the poor over and rape them with three old wooden dragon dildoes wound together with barbed wire" crowd. I daresay he prowls the back alleys of skid row late into the darkest hours of the night, hungering for the blood of the unsuspecting lower class and any straggling Medicaid recipient he can find.



That's some...serious...imagery right there.


----------



## Mintaka (Aug 11, 2012)

Kahvehane said:


> Are you kidding me? The guy literally requires his interns to read Ayn Rand novels. He's part of the "bend the poor over and rape them with three old wooden dragon dildoes wound together with barbed wire" crowd. I daresay he prowls the back alleys of skid row late into the darkest hours of the night, hungering for the blood of the unsuspecting lower class and any straggling Medicaid recipient he can find.


How strangely erotic....


----------



## impersonal (Aug 11, 2012)

> "I just want to speak to you a little bit about Ayn Rand and what she meant to me in my life and [in] the fight we?re engaged here in Congress. I grew up on Ayn Rand, that?s what I tell people."
> "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. We start with Atlas Shrugged. People tell me I need to start with The Fountainhead then go to Atlas Shrugged [laughter]. There?s a big debate about that. We go to Fountainhead, but then we move on, and we require Mises and Hayek as well."
> "But 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."
> ...


Are you kidding me? ...

Of course Romney's going to lose. But in 4 years, it'll most likely be the republicans' turn to rule over America. And by the looks of it, seeing at the kind of people they have (first Palin, now this: both lacking elementary knowledge and any sort of reason), they're going to destroy it. They'll turn the USA into a tax haven, except what works for parasites like Monaco, Switzerland or Liechtenstein doesn't work for a nation of 300,000,000 people.

Not that it's any of my business, but they'll take down half of the world (economically) with them.


----------



## Pilaf (Aug 11, 2012)

The Pink Ninja said:


> Palin is still super popular amongst conservatives.




I believe that's all we really need to say to sum up why the conservatives will ultimately lose on every single position they currently hold. Maybe not this year, maybe not in ten, but my side will shit on everything they love and the world will be a better place for it.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

He just said a "faithful Catholic" and got a stirring response. 

Will be interesting to see how this affects the campaign.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 11, 2012)

♠Ace♠ said:


> It's like he wants to lose.



No I think Ryans is a very good VP choice for Romney. He's someone who can hit obama where he's weakest, the economy.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

I think he will allow the campaign to focus on ideas, not necessarily American politics. A lot of pundits have said that is what the candidates are missing. It looks like Mitt calculated that because the President does not have a plan, public opinion will sway towards the politicians boldly proclaiming something.

The only weird part is that there's nothing bold about Romney's policies themselves. So you just brought on a guy to support what many people have said is an underwhelming platform.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 11, 2012)

I like how he got into public service because of an incredibly self centered maniac who'd never serve the public in any way


----------



## ghstwrld (Aug 11, 2012)




----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

"We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcome" - Paul Ryan

wait wat.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 11, 2012)

^ well you know, if you're poor thats your fault. that's all ryans sayin


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 11, 2012)

Ryan comes off as actually (mostly) sensible and non-retarded, and would probably be a better president then Romney. That being said there's zero chance Romney will win, his campaign has been horrifically mismanaged and the Republican party itself is too split between wacky Christians (who imo have destroyed the party), Tea Partyers, the old guard, and libertarians. Meanwhile the Dems mobilize effectively in ways such as sending voter registration forms in Welfare checks and trying to get illegals to the polls. I've already settled into 4 more years of Obama for better or worse, though I suspect Romney would have been the same anyway.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

Nah Romney would get a lot of things done..probably "tax reform" and rolling back a lot of policies the President championed. I imagined there would be some incentives for small businesses in his plans as well. 

What does concern me though is that he would probably repeal Dodd Frank. Stocks would surge at first, but then the same risky practices that got us here in the first place could take hold of the economy again and ruin everything.


----------



## Mael (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Ryan comes off as actually (mostly) sensible and non-retarded, and would probably be a better president then Romney. That being said there's zero chance Romney will win, his campaign has been horrifically mismanaged and the Republican party itself is too split between wacky Christians (who imo have destroyed the party), Tea Partyers, the old guard, and libertarians. Meanwhile the Dems mobilize effectively in ways such as sending voter registration forms in Welfare checks and trying to get illegals to the polls. I've already settled into 4 more years of Obama for better or worse, though I suspect Romney would have been the same anyway.



Eh, if we were perhaps a smaller nation I'd go for Ryan and SOME of his budget proposals, but it's simply unrealistic.  That and anyone who worships Ayn Rand the way he does scares me.  It's basically bootstraps or bust...no middle ground and if you should fail, then you might as well kill yourself.  That's the notion I get.

I'd also much rather NOT have a party in charge that seems so hawkish in foreign policy.  I can't stand North Korea/Iran or get frilled with China as much as the next guy but they take it to a dangerous level.  With a party that allows people like Bachmann and Grover Norquist into their ranks with open arms while hushing others like McCain or pushing Scott Brown to the side as some sort of ideological traitor, I'll take the Democrats any day.

That being said I'm not too big a fan of the Democratic tactics either.  Illegals shouldn't vote simply because they're not citizens and welfare checks?  Seriously?  The one thing that scares me about welfare is that some people go Venezuelan and literally use it as a culture of dependence.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 11, 2012)

Can't wait for the debate over Ryan's budget. Let's see how cutting medicare and medicaid to pay for a corporate tax decrease goes over. 

I guess this is a perfectly reasonable solution if you're Rush Limbaugh or a feudal baron with uppity serfs, probably not appealing to anyone else.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 11, 2012)

Dems and lefties say he is a sucky choie, Repubs and rightwingers say he is a good one.
What a suprise.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Can't wait for the debate over Ryan's budget. Let's see how cutting medicare and medicaid to pay for a corporate tax decrease goes over.



He also refuses to support anything for tax reform. CNN had an inside joke as to why that was the case; I'm honestly too slow to figure it out.


----------



## Revolution (Aug 11, 2012)

*Ryan comes out swinging as Romney VP pick, condemns Obama 'record of failure'*

  Video included in link.



> Paul Ryan came out swinging Saturday in his new role as Mitt Romney's running mate, accusing President Obama of presiding over a "record of failure" and promising to speak "truth" to America's problems and correct course.
> "We can turn this thing around," Ryan vowed, as he and Romney joined for the first time as the official 2012 Republican ticket.
> The Wisconsin congressman, to the backdrop of retired battleship USS Wisconsin, gave a feisty opening speech -- setting the tone for the Romney-Ryan bus tour that's next on the agenda, and the race going forward. Dutifully promoting the top of the ticket, Ryan touted Romney as the solution to the economic problems under Obama.
> Met with chants of "USA, USA" from a riled-up crowd in Virginia, Ryan spoke broadly about the virtues of free enterprise and specifically about America's economic woes, all laced with pointed attacks on the White House incumbent. Though Ryan's reputation is that of a reserved and wonkish pol, his break-out speech as running mate signaled he'll be playing offense for Romney quite frequently.
> ...


----------



## Mael (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> He also refuses to support anything for tax reform. CNN had an inside joke as to why that was the case; I'm honestly too slow to figure it out.



Yeah...how dare he dig a little deeper to help his fellow man.


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Good, because Joe Biden is no soft VP, Ryan will need to be just as tough on the competition. But in terms of VP, Joe holds a strong position as well liked and tough as well as competent in his tasks.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 11, 2012)

> "We can turn this thing around," Ryan vowed



Yeah yeah, we know. Tax cuts for corporations is the way to turn America around


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Yeah yeah, we know. Tax cuts for corporations is the way to turn America around


He hasn't even mentioned that. His outlay for tax-budgets back in 11 was to focus on getting people to pay taxes rather than cut taxes; that's why news pegged him as a more moderate repb. 

The IRSs move to get back to the basis of enforcing citizens pay taxes was influenced by him; I doubt he'd just want to give tax cuts to corporations as a first move or a main move. In any case, Obama has given many tax-cuts to corporations- GE didn't even pay taxes in 2011, it outraged other Fortune 4,000 companies.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 11, 2012)

Bishop said:


> *He hasn't even mentioned that. *His outlay for tax-budgets back in 11 was to focus on getting people to pay taxes rather than cut taxes; that's why news pegged him as a more moderate repb.
> 
> The IRSs move to get back to the basis of enforcing citizens pay taxes was influenced by him; I doubt he'd just want to give tax cuts to corporations as a first move or a main move. In any case, Obama has given many tax-cuts to corporations- GE didn't even pay taxes in 2011, it outraged other Fortune 4,000 companies.



It's his proposal in congress. 



> The new budget also would lower the top corporate tax rate to 25% from 35% and plunge into the debate about how to tax companies' overseas operations. U.S. companies now pay the tax rate of the country where the outpost is located and then, if they bring those profits home, often pay some U.S. taxes as well. Under the Ryan-Camp proposal, companies essentially would pay just the tax rate of the country where the profits are earned.




It's the "Ryan plan"


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It's his proposal in congress.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, though I believe that's the Ryan-Camp proposal which is what was accepted after his was turned down by fellow repubs. His initial two (or it could've just been one) were turned down and this was made with Camp with many variations. He did a talk on CNN where he was accused of shifting his priorities, but he didn't believe in "trying to fill a bucket with holes."

But, his claim initially was to get people to pay taxes more so than cutting everything. In any case, I don't think this is what he's all about at the end of the day. I also don't think it will matter as Obama will win. Period.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 11, 2012)

I'm sorry, but you can tell who's a shitheap if they cheer USA USA


----------



## Grape (Aug 11, 2012)

Got the news when I woke up via txt messages. At first I read "Ron Paul", because my eyes were still fuzzy. I was slightly frightened until I read it again.

And then I laughed. 

bama


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 11, 2012)

I think in the end both Ryan and Biden will be non-factors unless they do something really stupid or have fucked a rentboy or something.

The election will be Obama versus Romney, who the electorate hates least, race to the bottom.

Whoever wins will have no political capital and will be a total lameduck.

I do not envy America the next four years.


----------



## Ae (Aug 11, 2012)

Paul Ryan will be the greatest VP of all time!


----------



## MasterSitsu (Aug 11, 2012)

vice presidency doesn't make or break elections maybe bump a state or two but NOTHING major.


----------



## Hwon (Aug 11, 2012)

MasterSitsu said:


> vice presidency doesn't make or break elections maybe bump a state or two but NOTHING major.





 Most influential VP pick of all time.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

> Meanwhile the Dems mobilize effectively in ways such as sending voter registration forms in Welfare checks and trying to get illegals to the polls. I've already settled into 4 more years of Obama for better or worse, though I suspect Romney would have been the same anyway.



This was pretty ignorant....Or were you joking?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

ARMCHAIR PATRIOTISM FTW


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This was pretty ignorant....Or were you joking?



I don't know about that illegal portion, but the registration and dem ads sent with welfare checks is very true at least in Detroit.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

Well...I don't see the issue in getting welfare recipients to vote, are they lesser citizens now, less worthy to vote? The illegals accusation however is completely unfounded. Sounds like something off of Hannity or some shit.


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Well...I don't see the issue in getting welfare recipients to vote, are they lesser citizens now, less worthy to vote? The illegals accusation however is completely unfounded. Sounds like something off of Hannity or some shit.



The registration is sent with an ad for Obama. I've seen two ads from friends who put it up on their FB: One says Obama is helping them out in hard times, time to return the favor; the other was Michelle telling them to support Barack.


----------



## Rescuebear (Aug 11, 2012)

I hope he does pick Paul, if he does that's it. Shows over, Obama wins.


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

Here's some more on Paul Ryan.




> Six Things to Know About Ryan (and Romney)
> 
> Jonathan Cohn
> August 11, 2012 | 8:50 am
> ...


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

The rest of the article.



> 5. Ryan really does want the biggest transfer of wealth, from poor and middle class to rich, in modern U.S. history. Forgive the long direct quote, but this statement from Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, is something that every single reporter covering the campaign should read—and that every American planning to vote should understand:
> 
> The new Ryan budget is a remarkable document — one that, for most of the past half-century, would have been outside the bounds of mainstream discussion due to its extreme nature. In essence, this budget is Robin Hood in reverse — on steroids. It would likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times (and possibly in the nation’s history). …
> 
> ...


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)




----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

So half the crowd right now is cheering to be screwed over?


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 11, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> This was pretty ignorant....Or were you joking?



Not really. There have been initiatives to get illegals to vote in Connecticut (New Haven comes to mind) and recently voter registration forms have been sent in the welfare checks to recipients in a move sponsored by local Democrats. Republicans have failed to mobilize basis's of support like that. 


Of course do I think Obama will win the election because of illegals and people on welfare? No, I think primarily he will win because the country hasn't really gotten any worse under his tenure, his foreign policy has been solid while his domestic policy has been stable, it's naturally difficult to dislodge a sitting president, he automatically gets the entire black vote, and because at the end of the day he isn't all that different from Romney (and vice versa).

Reading into Ryan more though I don't like him very much, not that I was a fan of a spineless robot like Romney anyway. It was also a bad choice due to his historic support for the "1%ers" at a time when Reid is throwing tantrums about Romney not paying taxes.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 11, 2012)

iander said:


> I can only think of one failed vice-presidential candidate that ever became president and that was FDR.  Paul Ryan is certainly no FDR.



Dick Nixon says hello.


----------



## Mithos (Aug 11, 2012)

Bishop said:


> The registration is sent with an ad for Obama. I've seen two ads from friends who put it up on their FB: One says Obama is helping them out in hard times, time to return the favor; the other was Michelle telling them to support Barack.



The Dems are just trying to protect them by getting them to vote in their best interest  

But at least they still have a choice of who they vote for - unlike many minorities that the GOP disenfranchises in their quest to rid the nation of "voter fraud"


----------



## Coteaz (Aug 11, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> So half the crowd right now is cheering to be screwed over?


It's very surreal.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

Ugh, are they really gonna try and talk about hate? Like really?


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Not really. There have been initiatives to get illegals to vote in Connecticut (New Haven comes to mind)



So, an outlier. More of an outlier than what certain Republican groups have done for certain districts in misinforming Democrat voters with phone calls that they don't have to vote for the general election because they already voted during a primary. In the end, I wouldn't those cases as a reflection of official policy for either party.


> and recently voter registration forms have been sent in the welfare checks to recipients in a move sponsored by local Democrats. Republicans have failed to mobilize basis's of support like that.


Sounds nice of Democracts to encourage voter participation.


> No, I think primarily he will win because the country hasn't really gotten any worse under his tenure, his foreign policy has been solid while his domestic policy has been stable, it's naturally difficult to dislodge a sitting president, he automatically gets the entire black vote, and because at the end of the day he isn't all that different from Romney (and vice versa).
> 
> Reading into Ryan more though I don't like him very much, not that I was a fan of a spineless robot like Romney anyway. It was also a bad choice due to his historic support for the "1%ers" at a time when Reid is throwing tantrums about Romney not paying taxes.



An election of two warm, emotion having charismatics versus two robots that are limited to being charismatic for a relatively narrow part of the political spectrum.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 11, 2012)

Did you just call Biden warm and charismatic man? I don't really object to much else you said except if you were saying that.

Biden reminds me of my drunk uncle.


----------



## Coteaz (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Did you just call Biden warm and charismatic man? I don't really object to much else you said except if you were saying that.
> 
> Biden reminds me of my drunk uncle.


Drunk uncle vs. malfunctioning robot?


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

It's kinda distasteful that you guys are playing into the idea that Democrats are the welfare party. I'm just saying..


----------



## Bishop (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> It's kinda distasteful that you guys are playing into the idea that Democrats are the welfare party. I'm just saying..



There are two parties, are you implying that Democrats are not the welfare party in this context


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Did you just call Biden warm and charismatic man? I don't really object to much else you said except if you were saying that.
> 
> Biden reminds me of my drunk uncle.



And do you like your drunk uncle?

Seriously, Biden does have it. He has a personality that people can find somewhat easy going, quite open, and lays off pushing the button labelled "grim serious."


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

Specifically the questions Seto raised about Democratic strategies to pull in those people : /.


----------



## Yachiru (Aug 11, 2012)

Obama takes it alone.


----------



## On and On (Aug 11, 2012)

Sarahmint said:


> Oh, Huffington Post.  The Liberal Democrat vlog on a Conservative Republican Canditate.  Not the best source for balanced information.



you're cancer 



Things look better and better for Obama everyday in this election


----------



## davidpliskin (Aug 11, 2012)

Well Ryan definitely doesn't have the sex appeal of Palin.


----------



## iander (Aug 11, 2012)

Mider T said:


> Dick Nixon says hello.



I said a failed vice-presidential candidate. Nixon was successfully elected vice-president in 1952 and served as VP for 8 years before losing in the presidential election in 1960.  Completely different from what I was saying.


----------



## impersonal (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Not really. There have been initiatives to get illegals to vote in Connecticut (New Haven comes to mind) and recently voter registration forms have been sent in the welfare checks to recipients in a move sponsored by local Democrats. Republicans have failed to mobilize basis's of support like that.
> 
> 
> Of course do I think Obama will win the election because of illegals and people on welfare? No, I think primarily he will win because the country hasn't really gotten any worse under his tenure, his foreign policy has been solid while his domestic policy has been stable, it's naturally difficult to dislodge a sitting president, he automatically gets the entire black vote, and because at the end of the day he isn't all that different from Romney (and vice versa).
> ...


You're comparing a few (morally disputable) local initiatives from some liberals, to the republican party picking an Ayn-Rand-libertarian as the potential next vice-president of the USA. That's extremely near-sighted if you ask me.

I really don't think you recognize the kind of person that Ryan is. He is an ideologue, a man who has thrown pragmatism out the window. He believes in low taxes, but not because he thinks that will ultimately save the economy and re-establish prosperity for all. He thinks, truly and deeply, that the government helping those in need is immoral, that any tax that's not going to the military or the police is ultimately theft, that reaching prosperity through any sorts of re-distribution system is unjust and amoral. 

Sure, he claims that his ideas will _*also*_ save the economy, but that's not the original objective; the original objective is the sanctity of property rights over absolutely everything else. What I'm getting to is that he'll let the country go to its ruin if it means establishing his ideals. If you doubt it, just read his first speech as a candidate-VP. The ideology is there, between the lines, stereotypical Ayn Rand and clear as day for anyone who is familiar with it:


> We Americans look at one another’s success with pride, not resentment, because we know, as more Americans work hard, take risks, and succeed, more people will prosper, our communities will benefit, and individual lives will be improved and uplifted.
> *[Translation: celebrate the rich, don't tax them.]*
> 
> But America is more than just a place...it’s an idea. It’s the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from nature and God, not government. We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
> ...



Now, he's just the vice-president of a candidate who won't get elected. But the fact that he got this far should be a warning sign.



> "A lot of people in the other party disagree with Paul Ryan. I don't know of anyone who doesn't respect his character and judgment," Romney said.


Well, I certainly don't respect either. The man got out of uni with a bachelor in political science, and perhaps because of that, he never got past that early college Ayn Rand phase. There's plenty of people like him, but normally they're kept at a good distance from any really important position.


----------



## Coteaz (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> It's kinda distasteful that you guys are playing into the idea that Democrats are the welfare party. I'm just saying..


It's distasteful that people think welfare is bad...


----------



## drache (Aug 11, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Appears he will announce tomorrow. This will be one of his chances before the election to talk about something other than Bain/taxes.
> 
> It's a safe choice for sure. Ryan is good looking with solid conservative credentials. To give you a general idea of his policies, he is part of the "fuck the poor" crowd. The Catholic Church (he's Catholic) found his budget proposals harsh on the poor.
> 
> Now to wait for an announcement tomorrow.


 
Romney is toast now, he was losing before but this might be landslide level losses with dragging the Senate and House with him. The Ryan budget is sheer insanity which is why Ryan has never run for state level office

thannk you mittens



Raiden said:


> It's the safe-wild choice. Ryan has a blue collar background, a history of hunting and is respected among Conservative circles.


 
right and he's also an ayrn rand lovign wack job that will keep seniors at home in droves 



Sarahmint said:


> Oh, Huffington Post. The Liberal Democrat vlog on a Conservative Republican Canditate. Not the best source for balanced information.


 
I got some mustard with you want it with your crow 



Raiden said:


> He just said a "faithful Catholic" and got a stirring response.
> 
> Will be interesting to see how this affects the campaign.


 
considering the league of Catholic bishops harshly attacked Ryan's plan it will be 



Petes12 said:


> No I think Ryans is a very good VP choice for Romney. He's someone who can hit obama where he's weakest, the economy.


 
no Ryan's economic suggest are pure pie in the sky bat shit insanity and Biden will eat him alive. 



Sarahmint said:


> Video included in link.


 
:yawn: thank you for the GOP spin on their childish tactics


----------



## roninmedia (Aug 11, 2012)

Coteaz said:


> It's distasteful that people think welfare is bad...




*Who is Paul Ryan? 10 facts about the VP pick*


> 9. Already collected Social Security. After Ryan?s father passed away, he saved Social Security survivor?s benefits to pay for attending Miami University, where Ryan double majored in economics and political science in 1992.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79592.html

Guess it worked for you when it did.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Aug 11, 2012)

Why would anyone vote for a Paul Ryan VP? Except baconbits


----------



## drache (Aug 11, 2012)

roninmedia said:


> *Who is Paul Ryan? 10 facts about the VP pick*
> 
> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79592.html
> 
> Guess it worked for you when it did.


 
typical fucking tea bagger 'i hate government except when it helps me'


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

tldr: Paul Ryan's big ideas include eliminating Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security in favor of tax cuts for the rich.

I think Obama's just secured the senior vote without lifting a finger.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 11, 2012)

impersonal said:


> You're comparing a few (morally disputable) local initiatives from some liberals, to the republican party picking an Ayn-Rand-libertarian as the potential next vice-president of the USA. That's extremely near-sighted if you ask me.
> 
> I really don't think you recognize the kind of person that Ryan is. He is an ideologue, a man who has thrown pragmatism out the window. He believes in low taxes, but not because he thinks that will ultimately save the economy and re-establish prosperity for all. He thinks, truly and deeply, that the government helping those in need is immoral, that any tax that's not going to the military or the police is ultimately theft, that reaching prosperity through any sorts of re-distribution system is unjust and amoral.
> 
> Sure, he claims that his ideas will _*also*_ save the economy, but that's not the original objective; the original objective is the sanctity of property rights over absolutely everything else. What I'm getting to is that he'll let the country go to its ruin if it means establishing his ideals. If you doubt it, just read his first speech as a candidate-VP. The ideology is there, between the lines, stereotypical Ayn Rand and clear as day for anyone who is familiar with it:



You really think he's that ideological? I think the guy voted for the unpopular Bush/Obama bailouts, which is very un-libertarian and very big government if you ask me. Like most politicians I think he will moderate himself if he ever goes into office, similar to Hollande right now.

Though I agree Libertarian economics and Libertarianism in general is BS and belongs in the trash bin of history, though I've never read Atlas Shrugged it sounds like a load of crap from what I've read on articles/wiki in the past. Ryan praising it to me sounds like a college student who got attached to something and never let it go or grew up and realized that academia is a cesspool of nonsense as opposed to fervently believing the dogma it preaches.


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> You really think he's that ideological? I think the guy voted for the unpopular Bush/Obama bailouts, which is very un-libertarian and very big government if you ask me.
> 
> Though I agree Libertarian economics and Libertarianism in general is BS and belongs in the trash bin of history, though I've never read Atlas Shrugged it sounds like a load of crap from what I've read on articles/wiki in the past. Ryan praising it to me sounds like a college student who got attached to something and never let it go or grew up and realized that academia is a cesspool of nonsense as opposed to fervently believing the dogma it preaches.



Uh Mega? Did you get a chance to read this guys budget proposal? He's pretty much as right wing libertarian as he gets in regards to social policy. He's practically Ron Paul sans the military defense and isolationism.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

The most dangerous thing about Paul is that we've already had a debate about the things he is being attacked for. He already has a good statistical argument against Bush era tax cuts, saying that it hurt small businesses the most. What can you say against that when it does raise taxes on them?

Somehow I don't see Joe Biden preparing to fight the guy, and the debates will probably be a bad moment for the Obama campaign. Or at least that one in particular.


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> The most dangerous thing about Paul is that we've already had a debate about the things he is being attacked for. He already has a good statistical argument against Bush era tax cuts, saying that it hurt small businesses the most. What can you say against that when it does raise taxes on them?
> 
> Somehow I don't see Joe Biden preparing to fight the guy, and the debates will probably be a bad moment for the Obama campaign. Or at least that one in particular.



I don't see how Biden can muck up a chance to attack a guy who wants to cut Medicare to give tax cuts to the rich. That's like something you would hear from a cartoon stereotype GOP - like the Rich Texan from the Simpsons.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 11, 2012)

lol.

It might not mean much by that point in time since we're talking about it now. Surely they'll find a way around it...like saying how Obama cut 700 billion from Medicare or that he doesn't have a bold plan of his own.

Honestly I dunno lol. He's a crafty politician.


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> lol.
> 
> It might not mean much by that point in time since we're talking about it now. Surely they'll find a way around it...like saying how Obama cut 700 billion from Medicare or that he doesn't have a bold plan of his own.
> 
> Honestly I dunno lol. He's a crafty politician.



Obama can counter that his Medicare cuts don't get rid of the coverage guarantee for seniors, which it doesn't. Meanwhile, Ryan's plan would basically mean every senior will have to roll the dice to get Medicare, for the sake of giving more money to the rich.

I mean, the last time the public had a choice between politicians that were for and against Ryan's plan, the guy who was pro-Ryan lost.





> Democrat Kathy Hochul Wins NY Special Election For House Seat
> 
> In a victory certain to be read by many as a positive omen for House Democrats looking forward to the 2012 general elections and a warning for Republicans, Democrat Kathy Hochul won the closely watched special election to fill a vacant seat in a congressional district that until now has been reliably Republican.
> 
> ...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 11, 2012)

Newt Gingrich is so disingenuous.


----------



## drache (Aug 11, 2012)

Raiden said:


> The most dangerous thing about Paul is that we've already had a debate about the things he is being attacked for. He already has a good statistical argument against Bush era tax cuts, saying that it hurt small businesses the most. What can you say against that when it does raise taxes on them?
> 
> Somehow I don't see Joe Biden preparing to fight the guy, and the debates will probably be a bad moment for the Obama campaign. Or at least that one in particular.


 
Paul has neither jack nor shit and while seniors might not vote for the scary black man neither will they show up for the man that would destroy the social safeguards.

Is it over? No but I can't think this will be anything but a colassal mistake


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 11, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Newt Gingrich is so disingenuous.



Why? What did he say?


----------



## Karsh (Aug 11, 2012)

Kahvehane said:


> Are you kidding me? The guy literally requires his interns to read Ayn Rand novels. He's part of the "bend the poor over and rape them with three old wooden dragon dildoes wound together with barbed wire" crowd. I daresay he prowls the back alleys of skid row late into the darkest hours of the night, hungering for the blood of the unsuspecting lower class and any straggling Medicaid recipient he can find.



I... wow.

You should write a book about the republican nightcrawlers of the ayn rand sect



Mael said:


> Illegals shouldn't vote simply because they're not citizens and welfare checks?  Seriously?  The one thing that scares me about welfare is that some people go Venezuelan and literally use it as a culture of dependence.




Non-citizens not being allowed to vote, even when having documentation which allows you to work and live in a country as long as you like, is not something strange...


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

Lol, _Paul Ryan_? gg Romney. I would have said it regardless cause you weren't going to win no matter who you picked. But picking the one guy who has just happened to create the worst official GOP budget/economic "roadmap" in decades for their running mate in an election where sane people's votes are depended on just takes a special kind of retard. And Romney apparently fit the bill.


----------



## impersonal (Aug 12, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> You really think he's that ideological? I think the guy voted for the unpopular Bush/Obama bailouts, which is very un-libertarian and very big government if you ask me. Like most politicians I think he will moderate himself if he ever goes into office, similar to Hollande right now.


Hollande has not really "moderated himself", he was very moderate to begin with, and known as such.

The end of Ryan's speech was very ideological in nature, a statement of intention. It said: "I'm not just another politician, I'm a revolutionary". You may think that my "translations" were far-fetched, but I'm perfectly serious and 99,99% sure about all of them. _"Government by consent"_, in this context, is used as an opposed to the _"tyranny of the majority"_ that democracy is according to libertarians -- because according to them, in a democracy, the poor force the rich to pay taxes. The little tenet about rights being inherited by God and nature is used to get the religious vote, but it _also_ illustrates this deep-rooted libertarian belief that human organization should not interfere with the natural and "free" state of things. It's a belief that not only is the market _better performing_ than any sort of regulation, it is also _more moral_.

I do agree that some of his votes affect this image of him as a hardcore libertarian. Nonetheless, I don't forget that this guy has also voted for more tax breaks for the rich, for the end of medicare/medicaid, etc.




			
				Megaharrison said:
			
		

> Ryan praising it to me sounds like a college student who got attached to something and never let it go or grew up and realized that academia is a cesspool of nonsense as opposed to fervently believing the dogma it preaches.


Academia is not a "cesspool of nonsense". That's why Ayn Rand is usually dismissed, except when very rich people make her a mandatory condition to their donations (happened once or twice). However, to really benefit from academic knowledge in the long term, you have to go past bachelor level (unlike Ryan) and acquire some truly scientific knowledge and methodology, as opposed to an extra 3 years of highschool. It's this methodology that will allow you to appreciate new developments properly, instead of reading everything in the light of outdated, cold-war ideology.

Anyway, I think there's a double standard here. If a US politician had been a communist in college, for 2-3 years, he'd never hear the end of it. This guy has been a libertarian for more than 20 years and still is, and people still dismiss it as a silly youth thing.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 12, 2012)

impersonal said:


> Anyway, I think there's a double standard here. If a US politician had been a communist in college, for 2-3 years, he'd never hear the end of it. This guy has been a libertarian for more than 20 years and still is, and people still dismiss it as a silly youth thing.



Well, _apologists_ dismiss it as harmless and meaningless. 

Much of the establishment see nothing to apologise for. Ayn Rand is seen as a respectable intellectual, and libertarianism an altogether respectable ideology.

There is no reasonable doubt about the fact that Paul Ryan is a right-wing extremist. His economic plans will kill poor people.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 12, 2012)

impersonal said:


> Hollande has not really "moderated himself", he was very moderate to begin with, and known as such.
> 
> The end of Ryan's speech was very ideological in nature, a statement of intention. It said: "I'm not just another politician, I'm a revolutionary". You may think that my "translations" were far-fetched, but I'm perfectly serious and 99,99% sure about all of them. _"Government by consent"_, in this context, is used as an opposed to the _"tyranny of the majority"_ that democracy is according to libertarians -- because according to them, in a democracy, the poor force the rich to pay taxes. The little tenet about rights being inherited by God and nature is used to get the religious vote, but it _also_ illustrates this deep-rooted libertarian belief that human organization should not interfere with the natural and "free" state of things. It's a belief that not only is the market _better performing_ than any sort of regulation, it is also _more moral_.



I am very inclined towards the belief that there are very few hardcore ideological individuals in positions of power. Pragmatism and the requirements of Western democratic politics in general usually reduces such desires in individuals. Things like eliminating Medicare and what have you just aren't possible in the US. Just like Obama couldn't make socialized medicine. Both sides of the isle are stuck in a limbo or partisanism when it comes to their desired radical reforms.

Personally I think the guy is less fanatical/dangerous then Ron Paul, who comes off as less willing towards compromise. Paul for instance did not support the rather necessary bailouts that Ryan did, purely on ideological grounds.

Now do I think Ryan would make a good President after reading about him more? No, he doesn't have that strong concession/pragmatist streak that Romney does nor the "don't make waves" streak that Obama does. He would end up just benefiting the rich and probably simultaneously increasing government debt.



> Academia is not a "cesspool of nonsense". That's why Ayn Rand is usually dismissed, except when very rich people make her a mandatory condition to their donations (happened once or twice). However, to really benefit from academic knowledge in the long term, you have to go past bachelor level (unlike Ryan) and acquire some truly scientific knowledge and methodology, as opposed to an extra 3 years of highschool. It's this methodology that will allow you to appreciate new developments properly, instead of reading everything in the light of outdated, cold-war ideology.



I'll buy this, Graduate-level classes seem much more legitimate in the social sciences then Sociology 101 where the teacher tells us about how wonderful Castro is.

As for Rand, I was never exposed to that or Atlas Shrugged whereas I got the Communist Manifesto 3 times. Though in the teachers defense, I was taking Russian history classes and he was an Anti-Communist. 



> Anyway, I think there's a double standard here. If a US politician had been a communist in college, for 2-3 years, he'd never hear the end of it. This guy has been a libertarian for more than 20 years and still is, and people still dismiss it as a silly youth thing.



I do see a point here first off, far-left radicals are less tolerated in the US then far-right (whereas it's the opposite in Europe) with the exception of far-right racist groups like KKK and blah blah, where it seems to be the reverse (Far-left racist group like Black Panthers are seen as more legitimate then the far-right KKK). As for me personally, I have a very hard time with the non-American left (who are really centrists globally) and far-left in particular as they're usually pro-destroying my family, even if I agree with many of their social policies so obviously that effects my view of them. 

Yet I think libertarians, while stupid, should not really be compared to Communism which developed into a genocidal and nation-destroying political system responsible for at least 100 million deaths. I think Libertarianism/Libertarians in general lack the militant dogma and fanatical edge that would cause a catastrophe like this, not to mention labor camps and police states are too "big government". Moreover former ardent supporters of guys like Pol Pot like Chomsky are still respected, and Obama seems like he went through a far-left youth phase that many do at his age. John Kerry certainly did, and he came very close to becoming President indeed.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 12, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> Lol, _Paul Ryan_? gg Romney. I would have said it regardless cause you weren't going to win no matter who you picked. But picking the one guy who has just happened to create the worst official GOP budget/economic "roadmap" in decades for their running mate in an election where sane people's votes are depended on just takes a special kind of retard. And Romney apparently fit the bill.



honestly i think you overestimate people who are not democrats


----------



## Bungee Gum (Aug 12, 2012)

If Democrats are happy and exceedingly confident this is  a bad pick, that probably just means its a good pick.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 12, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Personally I think the guy is less fanatical/dangerous then Ron Paul, who comes off as less willing towards compromise. Paul for instance did not support the rather necessary bailouts that Ryan did, purely on ideological grounds.



While both did sign the pledge to never raise taxes...


> Now do I think Ryan would make a good President after reading about him more? No, he doesn't have that strong concession/pragmatist streak that Romney does nor the "don't make waves" streak that Obama does. He would end up just benefiting the rich and probably simultaneously increasing government debt.



His plan would also:


> It's not just the next decade, where Ryan would cut 40 percent from transportation, 40 percent from education and training, 30 percent from "income security" programs for the poor, and 24 percent from veterans, as Brad Plumer pointed out. It's that his long-term budget, if you project forward defense spending, would cut 91 percent from these and all other non-defense programs. Ninety-one percent.
> 
> In order to pretend that the U.S. government can wear its 1950s-era girdle, you have no choice but to either dismantle government-paid health care, or else cut the rest of government with such draconian verve that we're forced to let our highways rot, while the unemployed go bankrupt and our veterans go homeless. Voters don't want that. Republicans don't want that. I don't think Paul Ryan wants that. But that's the future that he has written. Deficit reduction isn't easy. When you insist on doing it without raising tax revenue, it gets much harder.







> I do see a point here first off, far-left radicals are less tolerated in the US then far-right (whereas it's the opposite in Europe) with the exception of far-right racist groups like KKK and blah blah, where it seems to be the reverse (Far-left racist group like *Black Panthers* are seen as more legitimate then the far-right KKK).



I hope you mean the New Black Panthers. The original Black Panthers are not a hate group.


Megaharrison said:


> Moreover former ardent supporters of guys like Pol Pot like Chomsky are still respected



*The boring truth about Chomsky: he does not support Pol Pot
*


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 12, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> I do see a point here first off, far-left radicals are less tolerated in the US then far-right (whereas it's the opposite in Europe) with the exception of far-right racist groups like KKK and blah blah, where it seems to be the reverse (Far-left racist group like Black Panthers are seen as more legitimate then the far-right KKK). As for me personally, I have a very hard time with the left and far-left in particular as they're usually pro-destroying my family, even if I agree with many of their social policies so obviously that effects my view of them.
> 
> Yet I think libertarians, while stupid, should not really be compared to Communism which developed into a genocidal and nation-destroying political system responsible for at least 100 million deaths. I think Libertarianism/Libertarians in general lack the militant dogma and fanatical edge that would cause a catastrophe like this, not to mention labor camps and police states are too "big government". Moreover former ardent supporters of guys like Pol Pot like Chomsky are still respected, and Obama seems like he went through a far-left youth phase that many do at his age. John Kerry certainly did, and he came very close to becoming President indeed.



I'm unsure of whether you're uninformed, or whether you're actually intending to deceive - but the "radical far-left" isn't, and was never constituted exclusively or predominantly by Communism, as you call it. 

I can tell for a fact that you're dreadfully misinformed on at least one count - the underlined. That's certainly false (Google is your pal).


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

Petes12 said:


> honestly i think you overestimate people who are not democrats






Goova said:


> If Democrats are happy and exceedingly confident this is  a bad pick, that probably just means its a good pick.



Pretty sure everyone and their mother including many conservative voters trashed Ryan when he actually went to their home state and tried to actually sell his "budget". I can remember the townhalls already.

This always makes me snicker


----------



## On and On (Aug 12, 2012)

Goova said:


> If Democrats are happy and exceedingly confident this is  a bad pick, that probably just means its a good pick.



Batshit logic 

Because that worked so well for Sarah Palin amirite


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 12, 2012)

Oh boy we've gotten off topic now....



neodragzero said:


> I hope you mean the New Black Panthers. The original Black Panthers are not a hate group.



Original Black Panthers don't exist anymore and haven't for decades.




> *The boring truth about Chomsky: he does not support Pol Pot
> *




This seems like a lot of spin and damage control on Chomsky's defenders since it is no longer fashionable to like guys like Lenin/Mao/Pol Pot over the last 20 years or so. There are articles/journals from the 1980's where Chomsky deliberately plays down the Cambodian genocide and compares the Khmer Rogue to liberators.

I find this to be a rather fair on Chomsky and Pol Pot, and it doesn't seem to be written by one of his supporters editorial style unlike the ABC one. Yes it's not a "professional" news article, but it does seem to cite everything and is well-researched from a Cambodian genocide website:






			
				erictheking said:
			
		

> I'm unsure of whether you're uninformed, or whether you're actually intending to deceive - but the "radical far-left" isn't, and was never constituted exclusively or predominantly by Communism, as you call it.
> 
> I can tell for a fact that you're dreadfully misinformed on at least one count - the underlined. That's certainly false (Google is your pal).



Lol so then mr. genius, inform me. Are you telling me that *far-left radicals* aren't made up predominately by Communists/Marxists? Who then else is there to make up the majority? Anarchists? They're even worse.

Modern socialism is associated with the left, and socialist parties (Again, pointing at Hollande) are hardly radical and mostly capitalist anyway. So don't go there.

I'll continue this pol pot/chomsky thing else if you wish neo out of respect for staying on topic (Paul Ryan) and for SP's thread. I have little interest in eric.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 12, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Lol so then mr. genius, inform me. Are you telling me that *far-left radicals* aren't made up predominately by Communists/Marxists? Who then else is there to make up the majority? Anarchists? They're even worse.
> 
> Modern socialism is associated with the left, and socialist parties (Again, pointing at Hollande) are hardly radical and mostly capitalist anyway. So don't go there.



You don't need a political science degree sunshine. It would help if you stopped equivocating as you do multiple times per post. 'Radical far-left' is a label stuck onto any and every anti-capitalist ideology. Certainly in the UK the majority of the "far-left" rank-and-file in left-wing parties, trade unions, organisations etc. in the UK are democratic socialists, as has always been the case (in the tradition of William Morris, Aneurin Bevan, George Orwell, etc.). Communism never gained a real foothold in the UK, and the Communist Party of GB was completely dissolved as of 20 years ago. 

Unfortunately because you insist on equivocation it's difficult for me to speak very clearly. But using your vocabulary, 'Marxism' covers a broader range of ideas than 'Communism'. 

By the way, seeing as you use Communism in the sense of the ideology that murdered millions of people, how does anarchism come off even worse than that?  That's a rather remarkable point of view. 



> I'll continue this pol pot/chomsky thing else if you wish neo out of respect for staying on topic (Paul Ryan) and for SP's thread. I have little interest in eric.


I'm mortified.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 12, 2012)

erictheking said:


> You don't need a political science degree sunshine. It would help if you stopped equivocating as you do multiple times per post. 'Radical far-left' is a label stuck onto any and every anti-capitalist ideology. Certainly in the UK the majority of the "far-left" rank-and-file in left-wing parties, trade unions, organisations etc. in the UK are democratic socialists, as has always been the case (in the tradition of William Morris, Aneurin Bevan, George Orwell, etc.). Communism never gained a real foothold in the UK, and the Communist Party of GB was completely dissolved as of 20 years ago.
> 
> Unfortunately because you insist on equivocation it's difficult for me to speak very clearly. But using your vocabulary, 'Marxism' covers a broader range of ideas than 'Communism'.



Good for Britain then. Though if we're talking about what far-left parties are in Britain right now, I'd look at  which more or less has every single one in said demographic of "Communist and/or Marxist".

The fact of the matter is that far-left ideologies are almost exclusively communist and marxist-orientated. Name me a far-left ideology that is not anarchism that is not affiliated with Communism/Marxism. Then, tell me how this is actually represents the majority of far-left radicals.

Unless you can prove to me that far-left radicals aren't made up primarily of Marxists/Communists/Branches of those, then your original attempted tut-tutting has no point.



> By the way, seeing as you use Communism in the sense of the ideology that murdered millions of people, how does anarchism come off even worse than that?  That's a rather remarkable point of view.



Worse in what it advocates I suppose. Fortunately beyond Ukraine (where they unleashed horrors on the local population), anarchism never got very far as a relevant ideology.


----------



## impersonal (Aug 12, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> I am very inclined towards the belief that there are very few hardcore ideological individuals in positions of power. (...)


To make things clear: I'm not saying this man would blow up every public building the moment Romney is elected. My issue is that this man represents a political tendency that supports similar actions. And I find it scary that this tendency is sufficiently strong that it has found representation at the highest levels of state: it indicates that in the USA, this is no longer the fringe.



Megaharrison said:


> I'll buy this, Graduate-level classes seem much more legitimate in the social sciences then Sociology 101 where the teacher tells us about how wonderful Castro is.
> 
> As for Rand, I was never exposed to that or Atlas Shrugged whereas I got the Communist Manifesto 3 times. Though in the teachers defense, I was taking Russian history classes and he was an Anti-Communist.


Are you seriously comparing Ayn Rand's work to the communist manifesto? And how often do you really see teachers praising Castro? 



Megaharrison said:


> Yet I think libertarians, while stupid, should not really be compared to Communism which developed into a genocidal and nation-destroying political system responsible for at least 100 million deaths.
> 
> I think Libertarianism/Libertarians in general lack the militant dogma and fanatical edge that would cause a catastrophe like this, not to mention labor camps and police states are too "big government".


Well, obviously libertarianism does not send people to labor camps. However, its program would cause global warming (refusal for concerted solutions), criminality (reducing funding to all state programs, increasing inequality), starvation (increasing inequality, suppressing welfare), sickness (suppressing health insurance) and deaths in millions... Indirect deaths, alright, and that's a big difference admittedly. But the people are still dead in the end.

Just like communism in Russia, libertarianism does not put its future victims in its political programs and fliers. But you should learn from history, and realize that just because they're not upfront about the damage they'll cause, doesn't mean there won't be any damage. You're also wrong to some extent about libertarian dogma. These people are very dogmatic. They have institutes that form them and teach them how to debate and how to make new converts. It's a fairly organized movement, heavily funded, which end up producing the same basic dumb militants that the liberal far left, the communist far left, or the racist far right already have.



Megaharrison said:


> Moreover former ardent supporters of guys like Pol Pot like Chomsky are still respected, and Obama seems like he went through a far-left youth phase that many do at his age. John Kerry certainly did, and he came very close to becoming President indeed.


Excuse me, but almost every word in this sentence is wrong. 
(1) Kerry was against the Vietnam war. Obama was against the Apartheid and tried to help local communities. Neither had any "politically incorrect" positions, e.g. on communism. So, apparently, doing the unquestionably right thing is something to be ashamed of, if it means being associated with far-left groups. That's what I call double standards.

(2) Bringing up Chomsky here does not make sense. Firstly, the man HAS received a lot of criticism for his positions, and is thus not really all that respected; in fact, he is politically incorrect in the US (even in academic circles) and in France, meaning you can't mention him outside of linguistics. Secondly, it's a blatant lie to call him an "ardent supporter" of Pol Pot. Thirdly,, we were talking about a potential vice president of the USA, someone who exists through politics and for politics and who needs widespread support, and you bring up a fringe man who was never elected and whose notoriety is built not so much on his politics, but rather on being a major figure of 20th century thought, through linguistics.

(3) Ryan not only had "a phase" in his youth. *He still supports these views.* Can you imagine Obama taking a self-avowed communist as his VP? Can you imagine Obama taking Chomsky (who is strongly anti-communist) as his VP?



			
				MH said:
			
		

> The fact of the matter is that far-left ideologies are almost exclusively communist and marxist-orientated. Name me a far-left ideology that is not anarchism that is not affiliated with Communism/Marxism. Then, tell me how this is actually represents the majority of far-left radicals.


I was talking about a guy who supports the dangerous stuff.

You're talking about people who at one time in their youth belonged to a movement that did something good, but in doing so worked with other people who happened to also support things that aren't so good.

I was saying there's a double standard, and all you're doing is giving me a pile of ammunition.


----------



## Rescuebear (Aug 12, 2012)

The radical portion of the left is much smaller that the right. And also the left give much less screen time and political sway to there radicals than on the right, the right seems to have embraced there inner crazy mostly since obama but even a bit before then.


----------



## MasterSitsu (Aug 12, 2012)

I have a hard time buying that.


----------



## Bender (Aug 12, 2012)

Geg said:


> Something tells me this will be like a mini-repeat of 2008 where the Republican candidate chose someone waaaaaay too far to the right



lol nice call

Even MCcain the empty brain has said that he's having flashbacks due to Romney picking this schmuck.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

Who would be considered a 'radical' lefty in the political sphere?  just curious


----------



## Bender (Aug 12, 2012)

^

I've honestly never heard of a super looney lefty before.  And there are, there are very few of them that exist in red, white and blue land. That's a pretty damn good plus for Dem's. Not to mention kinda makes them the lesser of two evils on the morality-o-meter.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

I've heard some people call Bernie a "radical lefty" before, and it always amused me tbh 

If that's your idea of a radical, i wonder what your perception of sane is.  Of course the conservatives would paint anyone who isn't their specific brand of lunacy a 'radical', so it might just be relative in the end


----------



## Bender (Aug 12, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> I've heard some people call Bernie a "radical lefty" before, and it always amused me tbh



Ha! The person who said that is probably a butthurt conservative. Anyone who can lay this type of informal layout, and verbal beatdown as sen. Sanders is far from that.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eU76nnPLZY&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]



> If that's your idea of a radical, i wonder what your perception of sane is.



lol most of the critics from conservatives are nonsensical, oxymoronic teabaggers.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 12, 2012)

I suppose PETA would be radical left? This country is so far to the right it's ridiculous sometimes, so of course someone like Bernie Sanders whom would probably be considered center-left anywhere else, would look like A RADICAL LEFTIST LIBERAL. I mean Obama isn't even liberal and he gets that label on him...


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

Yes, cause the conservatives will label anyone who doesn't follow their ideas that regardless of what shade of blue they are. 

Bernie is obviously a true Liberal, Obama is not and as you said, even then they call him that cause he's a Democrat.


----------



## Bender (Aug 12, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I suppose PETA would be radical left? This country is so far to the right it's ridiculous sometimes, so of course someone like Bernie Sanders whom would probably be considered center-left anywhere else, would look like A RADICAL LEFTIST LIBERAL. I mean Obama isn't even liberal and he gets that label on him...



PETA is one of the worst stretch marks in American society. They through a hissy fit over Obama SMACKING A FLY ON HIS WRIST.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 12, 2012)

I meant in terms of an actual political type character but PETA is pretty bad


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 12, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> Who would be considered a 'radical' lefty in the political sphere?  just curious



I think a good example would be Dennis Kuchinich before he was kicked out of office.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 12, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> Who would be considered a 'radical' lefty in the political sphere?  just curious



overly sensitive people who blog about able-ism on tumblr basically.

radical liberals don't actually have political power.


----------



## Mithos (Aug 13, 2012)

Bender said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eU76nnPLZY&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]



I love Bernie Sanders.

He totally bitch-slapped that insurance company lap-dog.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

That's why Bernie is the coolest


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 13, 2012)

hcheng02 said:


> I think a good example would be Dennis Kuchinich before he was kicked out of office.



For proper context, he's about as radical as a moderate politician in a European democracy, social democrat at the most.

He's retiring at the end of his term. He's still in office till then with no real interest in running in Washington after his loss to another Democrat in Ohio, as results go from Republican based redistricting of said state. I never heard of being kicked out of something that takes months, till January in this case, to get out of. Makes more sense as a description if Scott Walker for instance lost out on the recall attempt.

He's not Green Peace nor any of the other real examples that come to mind as far as radical left ideology goes. The radical left still have no real political power to speak of in the US. The spectrum in general is an odd shift to the right where even being a moderate conservative like Ronald Reagan at the moment is considered too liberal for the Republican party. Context.


----------



## Mithos (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> That's why Bernie is the coolest



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYYRZII62Vw[/YOUTUBE]

He definitely is


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 13, 2012)

So everyone agrees then? Bernie for emperor 

He's my favorite US politician. If there was any justice in this world, he would be president.


----------



## Mithos (Aug 13, 2012)

Shinigami Perv said:


> So everyone agrees then? Bernie for emperor
> 
> He's my favorite US politician. If there was any justice in this world, he would be president.



I don't know...I love Elizabeth Warren too.

It'd be great if Elizabeth Warren became the first female president and had Bernie as her VP


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

either combination is fine by me  As VP or prez it doesn't matter between the two of them.

She has to first win senate though, that's the first step


----------



## Mithos (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> either combination is fine by me  As VP or prez it doesn't matter between the two of them.
> 
> She has to first win senate though, that's the first step



I really hope she beats Scott Brown. I live in Mass so I can actually vote for her


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

I don't see how anyone could vote for Scott "i drivez a truck" brown considering his record and cluelessness, but the conservatives seem to be able to have some kind of mind game mastery


----------



## Mithos (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> I don't see how anyone could vote for Scott "i drivez a truck" brown considering his record and cluelessness, but the conservatives seem to be able to have some kind of mind game mastery



I was extremely shocked - and pissed - when he beat Martha Coakley. I really hope he doesn't win again. Elizabeth Warren is one of the few good politicians in the country...which probably means she will lose cause we're not allowed nice things


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

That goes without saying


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 13, 2012)

neodragzero said:


> *For proper context, he's about as radical as a moderate politician in a European democracy, social democrat at the most.
> *
> He's retiring at the end of his term. He's still in office till then with no real interest in running in Washington after his loss to another Democrat in Ohio, as results go from Republican based redistricting of said state. I never heard of being kicked out of something that takes months, till January in this case, to get out of. Makes more sense as a description if Scott Walker for instance lost out on the recall attempt.
> 
> He's not Green Peace nor any of the other real examples that come to mind as far as radical left ideology goes. The radical left still have no real political power to speak of in the US. The spectrum in general is an odd shift to the right where even being a moderate conservative like Ronald Reagan at the moment is considered too liberal for the Republican party. Context.



True, but that does speak well of European social democrats if Kuchinich's beliefs and agendas are examined. His ideas were mostly ridiculous and unworkable.

Examples of his idiocy.
-Wanted to abolish NAFTA
-Wanted to ban genetically modified organisms (read: 30% of the food grown in the US)
-Ban pesticides (read: collapse agribusiness overnight)
-Praised Bashar Al-Assad
-Praised Hugo Chavez
-Wanted to prevent American companies from bringing foreign workers into America no matter what (a hospital, for instance, could not employ an English doctor)


----------



## Banhammer (Aug 13, 2012)

europeans have a system to keep those quirks in check


----------



## Banhammer (Aug 13, 2012)

It involves many hookers


----------



## Raiden (Aug 13, 2012)

Matto-sama said:


> I really hope she beats Scott Brown. I live in Mass so I can actually vote for her



I think it depends on where the Presidential election swings.

She should step up anti-Washington rhetoric.


----------



## baconbits (Aug 13, 2012)

Geg said:


> Something tells me this will be like a mini-repeat of 2008 where the Republican candidate chose someone waaaaaay too far to the right



Not quite.  Ryan is incredibly smart and knows the issues.  He knows his way around Washington and he debates all the time on the cable news shows, particularly CNBC.  He makes the economy a big topic, something that Obama doesn't have much good to say about.

Ryan is very conservative but he's always managed to appeal to the moderates.  His district voted for Obama yet Ryan won the district almost two to one - he knows how to speak to the middle.



Matto-sama said:


> I was extremely shocked - and pissed - when he beat Martha Coakley. I really hope he doesn't win again. Elizabeth Warren is one of the few good politicians in the country...which probably means she will lose cause we're not allowed nice things



The fact that Massachutes is in play for the Senate should raise warning flags to the Dems on NF that the election is far from over.  I think the dems should be able to hold Massachutes any year, but there are still some hangover effects from the '10 election.

Ryan puts Wisconsin in play and don't forget that Rubio ran on the Ryan plan in Florida and won handily.  I don't think that people are looking at this election with the clarity they should.  This one is a toss up right now.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 13, 2012)

hcheng02 said:


> Examples of his idiocy.
> -Wanted to abolish NAFTA


Because NAFTA has only positive consequences.


> -Wanted to ban genetically modified organisms (read: 30% of the food grown in the US)



He wants more regulation and store transparency of GMO foods. That doesn't mean abolishment.


> -Ban pesticides (read: collapse agribusiness overnight)


Let me guess, you're making the "organic" isn't sustainable argument?




> -Praised Bashar Al-Assad




Nope.


> -Praised Hugo Chavez


Because Hugo Chavez is just a horrible brute with no positive influence on his country nor any for certain American citizens that would of been without heat during winter otherwise, offered to Haiti a deal that would of saved millions for said nation, etc. How dare he.


> -Wanted to prevent American companies from bringing foreign workers into America no matter what (a hospital, for instance, could not employ an English doctor)







You have a weird definition of "no matter what."


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

I'm not going to defend all of dennis's policies, cause i disagree with him on things as well. But the free trade agreements like NAFTA are unfavorably skewed where the poorer countries get shit on the hardest.  Even Bernie thinks that a restructure of these FTA's should be considered.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 13, 2012)

Oh Jesus Christ, the pandering. I LIKE BEER AND I LIKE TO HUNT AND FISH AND CAMP AND *insert local cuisines here* How and why do people continue to fall for that?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

Sell the 'upper class' on your "social side". It happens every time. Again, its like Scott brown and the truck.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> Sell the 'upper class' on your "social side". It happens every time. Again, its like Scott brown and the truck.



Or the grits thing that Romney and Obama did. Although, the latter I am more inclined to believe of his familiarity with it than the former...he didn't have to reference it in a southern accent though...


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Aug 13, 2012)

Not surprising.  If you want a poster boy for helping the rich at the expense of the poor and powerless you'd have a hard time finding a better one than Paul Ryan.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

*ROMNEY DEFENDS RYAN MEDICARE BUDGET AGAIN*




What Obama took out of Medicare was pure cost savings bro, no benefits were effected to begin with, but that's how the conservatives project themselves onto their targets.


----------



## Hwon (Aug 13, 2012)

baconbits said:


> Not quite.  Ryan is incredibly smart and knows the issues.  He knows his way around Washington and he debates all the time on the cable news shows, particularly CNBC.  He makes the economy a big topic, something that Obama doesn't have much good to say about.
> 
> Ryan is very conservative but he's always managed to appeal to the moderates.  His district voted for Obama yet Ryan won the district almost two to one - he knows how to speak to the middle.
> 
> ...



Ryan having won a district in Wisconsin isn't the same thing as putting Wisconsin in play.  Nor is winning a district anything remotely close to appealing to people under the microscope of the presidential election.  Palin was a governor after all and if she can win any election anywhere than a conservative can certainly win a Rep. seat in a democratic voting block.

That being said Ryan is no Palin.  He is well spoken, likeable, shows leadership qualities, and isn't a media liability as far as I know.  However, I don't see him being any major benefit to Romney.  Romney already shifted right to win the primary and Ryan is right of him.  He's not going to attract the middle anymore than Romney will and it is likely that his budget plan will be used against them to scare off those on SS, medicare, and medicaid.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

> Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, announced Ryan, a Wisconsin congressman, as his running mate on Saturday. Ryan has led the Republican Party's charge to shrink the size of government, including cutting spending on welfare, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, while slashing taxes for the wealthiest.
> 
> Ryan has been praised as a deficit hawk, but his budget proposal would raise $2.2 trillion less in tax revenue over the next 10 years than President Obama's budget, according to the Washington Post's Brad Plumer. To offset that lost revenue, Ryan also has proposed spending $5.3 trillion less over the same time period, but has not specified exact cuts.
> 
> ...



How anyone can think Ryan 'plays to the middle' with these kinds of proposals is being ridiculous 

He's not even into "spending less", as all of his plans involve taking money from every other place except the military(which gets even more money) and simply dumping that money into tax cuts  Your still running up a deficit regardless


----------



## drache (Aug 13, 2012)

baconbits said:


> Not quite.  Ryan is incredibly smart and knows the issues.  He knows his way around Washington and he debates all the time on the cable news shows, particularly CNBC.  He makes the economy a big topic, something that Obama doesn't have much good to say about.
> 
> Ryan is very conservative but he's always managed to appeal to the moderates.  His district voted for Obama yet Ryan won the district almost two to one - he knows how to speak to the middle.



:rofl

right which is why in the 13 years of office Ryan has only had 2 bills passed, one renaming a post office in his district and another on the taxes of arrows

If Ryan is so smart and everything why has he never run statewide? Probably cause he knows he would lose

And Obama has nothing good to say about the economy? Just how deluded are you? We went from economic free fall under Bush to stead if slow growth under Obama.

Only a republican could call that a 'probelm'




baconbits said:


> The fact that Massachutes is in play for the Senate should raise warning flags to the Dems on NF that the election is far from over.  I think the dems should be able to hold Massachutes any year, but there are still some hangover effects from the '10 election.
> 
> Ryan puts Wisconsin in play and don't forget that Rubio ran on the Ryan plan in Florida and won handily.  I don't think that people are looking at this election with the clarity they should.  This one is a toss up right now.



Not really Scott Brown's opponent ran a poor campaign and he's established now so the advantage is to him. Don't forget till the GOP went batshit fucking insane they did have a proud tradition of actual moderate republicans in the NE (which ironically is how Romney first protrayed himself). As such it's not surprising that MA is a race. (some fun history for you, the Civil Rights Act actually depended on that same tradition to pass)

The election isn't over till it's over but your excessive concern trolling and down right disconnected from reality comments just are absurd. WI isn't in play and if you _reallly_ think that the Ryan plan won't kill Romney state wide in FL, Ohio, PA and a number of other older states you are crazy.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

*EVEN RON PAUL TRASHES RYAN BUDGET, "IT DOESN'T CUT ANYTHING OF SUBSTANCE"*



By 'substance' he means military spending.  Which is fine and good, until you realize Ronnie himself is trying to hide from his own views on cutting medicare, social security and other safety nets.


----------



## Jena (Aug 13, 2012)

Paul Ryan 

Guy is a tool. He likes to have people arrested for asking him questions during his speeches. 

I guess it could be worse, though. At least it's not Bachmann. Even Romney isn't suicidal enough to add that ball of insanity to his team.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 13, 2012)

I've already noticed that the only ones who thinks Ryan appeals to the middle, are the right wingers


----------



## Mael (Aug 13, 2012)

Scott Brown for the record acts more independent than most Republicans.  He really isn't the best indicator of political trends and just capitalized on a crappy campaign by Martha Coakley.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

Mael said:


> Scott Brown for the record acts more independent than most Republicans.  He really isn't the best indicator of political trends and just capitalized on a crappy campaign by Martha Coakley.



You just like him


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 13, 2012)

Megaharrison said:


> Good for Britain then. Though if we're talking about what far-left parties are in Britain right now, I'd look at  which more or less has every single one in said demographic of "Communist and/or Marxist".
> 
> The fact of the matter is that far-left ideologies are almost exclusively communist and marxist-orientated. Name me a far-left ideology that is not anarchism that is not affiliated with Communism/Marxism. Then, tell me how this is actually represents the majority of far-left radicals.
> 
> Unless you can prove to me that far-left radicals aren't made up primarily of Marxists/Communists/Branches of those, then your original attempted tut-tutting has no point.


I should've made this clear earlier, this has now become an absolute mess. Let me specify what I meant by equivocation. 

You have to stop using "Communism/Marxism" as though they are interchangeable, since you have already designated Communism to be that ideology which espouses Bolshevik-style totalitarian rule. That is obviously not what all Marxists espouse, it's impossible for that to be the case, since leading Marxist figures were/are entirely opposed to it. If you are unwilling to accept the equivalent of 2+2=4, there's no point in discussing anything.

Let me also re-state what "far-left radical" means in the sense that I used it - anyone who suggests an alternative to capitalism as a better way of organising an economy. I think that qualifies as both far-left and radical. Socialism is the predominant far-left radical ideology. 

The substance of my original disagreement was essentially your use of the same equivocation fallacy. You said that the far-left are in fact incomparably more evil than the far-right, because of Stalin and Mao... I'm not saying this as a personal attack but unless one is totally and absolutely brain-dead, they ought to be able to see that socialism has nothing to do with mass murder. The moral problems with the far-right are with what they actually and explicitly stand for.

As for various kinds of far-left ideology, there are actually fairly influential socialist movements/organisations that are explicitly anti-Marxist; Christian Socialism and the CSM goes back to 1848 - and the Fabian Society which was founded on non-revolutionary anti-Marxist socialism. But surely the largest concentration of socialists were always inside the Labour Party itself (historically - it's less certain today) which was always very hostile to Communism. And certainly some number of Marxist organisations are not what you'd call Communist (left-Marxists).

By the way you don't have any right to avoid meeting _your_ burden of proof on this - that the far-left everywhere are predominantly Stalinist and Maoist types. That little Wikipedia list is a fraction of the number of far-left parties out there, which is a running joke to be fair. But the fact that some of these are described as "Marxist" doesn't mean much as to their advocacy of totalitarian rule, as should be obvious by now.



> Worse in what it advocates I suppose. Fortunately beyond Ukraine (where they unleashed horrors on the local population), anarchism never got very far as a relevant ideology.


It was rather influential in the Second Spanish Republic, before Franco's fascists crushed their democracy (luckily?). But OK - what does anarchism advocate that is worse than Stalinism?


----------



## Raiden (Aug 13, 2012)

Seventeen percent more likely to vote for Romney  now because of Ryan. 

lol.


----------



## Banhammer (Aug 13, 2012)

Paul Ryan is a dream come true. The evil Bain vulture capitalist couldn't have picked  a better running mate if he had gotten on his knees and begged for Sarah Palin


----------



## Banhammer (Aug 13, 2012)

Raiden said:


> Seventeen percent more likely to vote for Romney  now because of Ryan.
> 
> lol.



Then again, Einstein did say "there are only two infinite things, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about the universe."


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 13, 2012)

Raiden said:


> Seventeen percent more likely to vote for Romney  now because of Ryan.
> 
> lol.



I'm taking your lol on the assumption that you are joking.

*Right?*


----------



## Ae (Aug 13, 2012)

Seventeen percent less likely to vote for Obama now because of Ryan.


----------



## drache (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> I'm taking your lol on the assumption that you are joking.
> 
> *Right?*



they likely are the ones convinced that Obama is a secret mulism facist socialist neo nazi kenyan who secretly married a man

a depressing number of my fellow country men and women are utterly fucking nuts


----------



## Raiden (Aug 13, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> I'm taking your lol on the assumption that you are joking.
> 
> *Right?*



Nah I'm not
That's what one of CNN's tickers said. lol.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 13, 2012)

I can't think of a single reason to think that voting for Romney makes more sense because of Ryan.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 14, 2012)

Newt Gingrich eating his words about Ryan.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 14, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Newt Gingrich eating his words about Ryan.



What words? Words that make up for the abysmal budget Ryan has in mind?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 14, 2012)

He basically derided Paul Ryan's budget plan as some form of social engineering parallel to "Obamacare," and he's really backtracking on all that now.


----------



## drache (Aug 14, 2012)

Masterpiece said:


> Seventeen percent less likely to vote for Obama now because of Ryan.



if you seriously think those 17% would ever vote for Obama you are dead wrong


----------



## Raiden (Aug 14, 2012)

> A video of former Clinton White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles began circulating in conservative news outlets today. In the clip, the Democratic co-chair of President Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform gives high praises to Paul Ryan's budget plan.


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/erskine-bowles-praises-paul-ryan-budget-plan-video-003642883.html

Says the plan he gave President Obama was a two trillion cut, not four trillion. Wait why did he give this speech .


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 14, 2012)

The South, Raiden.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 14, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> He basically derided Paul Ryan's budget plan as some form of social engineering parallel to "Obamacare," and he's really backtracking on all that now.



Gingrich can be a tard.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 14, 2012)

The current GOP is pretty much that right now.

These Romney-Ryan spokespeople are terrible, they are really not able to stand up to the tough questions the journalists pose for them. Soledad O'Brien was filling in for Cooper, and a Romney spokeswoman was just getting trounced. It was evident she neither did her homework nor did she know the facts, as many of her statements had been immediately disproven right there by cited sources O'Brien referenced to in response.


----------



## drache (Aug 14, 2012)

Raiden said:


> http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/erskine-bowles-praises-paul-ryan-budget-plan-video-003642883.html
> 
> Says the plan he gave President Obama was a two trillion cut, not four trillion. Wait why did he give this speech .



and I am sure it is entirely unedited and not misleading in the slightest I mean it's not like conservatives have a history of doing that


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 14, 2012)

Joe Biden vs. Paul Ryan: Smart vs. Dumb Visions for America


October is gonna be a fun month.


----------



## Amatsukami (Aug 14, 2012)

Ryan is too much of a wild card for Romney to handle, I think. Having the Tea Parties' poster boy as your VP might consolidate your crazy right wing fanatics, but the extremism of the tea party only serves to galvanize moderates and the left. Not to mention, the whole Ryan 'Let's gut all social programs' thing allows for Obama to go on the offensive and make the election less about his own record and more about medicare/medicaid, etc. Romney might patch one hole in his sinking ship, but a few more leaks just sprung, so to speak.


He's also an alumnus of my university, _great._


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 14, 2012)

That's seems a bit more embarrassing than great


----------



## Amatsukami (Aug 14, 2012)

Inuhanyou said:


> That's seems a bit more embarrassing than great



I'm more than embarrassed.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 14, 2012)

Mider T said:


> All of all the possible candidates, he picked another white guy.  Oh well, at least he isn't old.


Possibilities? It's the Republican party? There's barely anything but white guys, he's lucky he found someone not old and who didn't have a bunch of obvious skeletons in the closet.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Aug 14, 2012)

We might as well just get rid of our education system right now, it would save us a lot of money.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Aug 14, 2012)

Ryan is in my state I feel so unclean


----------



## hellonoam (Aug 14, 2012)

Banhammer said:


> Paul Ryan is a dream come true. *The evil Bain vulture capitalist* couldn't have picked  a better running mate if he had gotten on his knees and begged for Sarah Palin



The whole "evil vulture capitalist" rhetoric is complete nonsense. just letting you know. And I don't even like Romney. Just have to correct you. And Paul Ryan much better than Sarah Palin. Ryan is articulate and doesn't come off as a complete idiot. Again, not a Romney fan. Just trying to be balanced which can come off as conservative in NF


----------



## drache (Aug 14, 2012)

hellonoam said:


> The whole "evil vulture capitalist" rhetoric is complete nonsense. just letting you know. And I don't even like Romney. Just have to correct you. And Paul Ryan much better than Sarah Palin. Ryan is articulate and doesn't come off as a complete idiot. Again, not a Romney fan. Just trying to be balanced which can come off as conservative in NF



it makes complete sense Romney long has put profits over people and as such destroyed good companies for money. And you are right Ryan is more articulate then Palin but both are children refusing to grow up though if you don't think Ryan's 'budget' isn't going to kill them in FL you're very wrong


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 14, 2012)

hellonoam said:


> The whole "evil vulture capitalist" rhetoric is complete nonsense. just letting you know. And I don't even like Romney. Just have to correct you. And Paul Ryan much better than Sarah Palin. Ryan is articulate and doesn't come off as a complete idiot. Again, not a Romney fan. Just trying to be balanced which can come off as conservative in NF



Wow, this victimization with you people, and you were one of the guys that thought Obama was born in Kenya...so you to talk about balance is just odd...NF is an international forum, and America is far to the right compared to many of its western counterparts, even its liberal wing.


----------



## iander (Aug 15, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> These Romney-Ryan spokespeople are terrible, they are really not able to stand up to the tough questions the journalists pose for them. Soledad O'Brien was filling in for Cooper, and a Romney spokeswoman was just getting trounced. It was evident she neither did her homework nor did she know the facts, as many of her statements had been immediately disproven right there by cited sources O'Brien referenced to in response.



If anyone is interested in the video of what Seto is talking about (its pretty hilarious):

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_BK28v_BZU[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Aug 15, 2012)

Oh God, Sununu.  

Talk about a retread, can't believe he hasn't retired. Shit like that is why I don't watch the news networks anymore.


----------



## Xyloxi (Aug 15, 2012)

hellonoam said:


> The whole "evil vulture capitalist" rhetoric is complete nonsense. just letting you know. And I don't even like Romney. Just have to correct you. And Paul Ryan much better than Sarah Palin. Ryan is articulate and doesn't come off as a complete idiot. Again, not a Romney fan. Just trying to be balanced which can come off as conservative in NF



You aren't coming off as balanced at all, if anything balanced would be the political centre ground, which only a few American politicians can claim to occupy on an international scale.


----------



## Mael (Aug 15, 2012)

Mostly doing this for Elim, but also just because:




> In an earlier ,  I tried my best to debunk several myths about the office, particularly this persistent media-spun fantasy that presidents pick their running mates primarily for reasons of ideological or geographic pandering. At the time, it seemed that there was very little historic precedent to justify such a widely-held trope, but following Mitt Romney?s selection of Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan this morning, there?s now at least one undeniable case study.
> 
> As a 41-year-old Representative who has held his current office (his first and only real job) since age 27, it?s very hard to argue that Ryan possesses the diverse lifetime of experience necessary for national leadership. Though very down on the idea of hackish career legislators, Ryan?s own much-celebrated identity as one of his party?s leading ?policy wonks? is only a slightly different side of that same coin. He may very well be one of his party?s most talented seven-term members of the lower chamber, but whether or not that?s sufficient training for the top job is a question with a much less certain answer.
> 
> ...



Personally I can at the LEAST admire Ryan's steadfastness and despite the rhetoric would likely never actually fully cut the social programs hot-listed.  However he has zero international experience and likely would be forced into the same hawkish and ignorant dialogue the GOP would feed him.  I'm conservative in foreign policy in the sense that you can't be buddies with everyone and there are internationally recognized assholes who need a spanking, but the way the GOP does it now is alarming with this "exceptionalism" nonsense.  We're not the City on the Hill anymore, folks.  Sorry.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 15, 2012)

That Ayn Rand shit unsettles me, and his ideas on budget cuts have already stated would only drive up the deficit as well as be just plain disastrous.


----------



## davidpliskin (Aug 15, 2012)

I can care less about Ryans rhetoric, his voting record removes him miles from anything libertarian, he's voting record shows him to be nothing but your run of the mill neocon despite what drug addled limbaugh says.


----------



## drache (Aug 15, 2012)

Mael said:


> Mostly doing this for Elim, but also just because:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



mael he voted for his budget which would literally end medicare as we know it and likely end it permamently; which would completely privatize social security, give obscene tax cuts to the wealthy, end food stamps and the American public volunteer programs

Yeah he talks nice and is persuasive but he is also a bible thumping, ayrn rand quoting, me first piece of crap. But I mean that in the nicest way.

A vote for Romney is a vote for the Ryan budget and the Ryan budget talks the extreme adolescent selfishness of Ayn Rand and combines it with lots of reach arounds for all the corporations funding this farce

let me add that foreign policy isn't simple and this 'we either are or are not' black and white  nonsense just doesn't work. Take China, China manipluates it's currency, is becoming very aggressive and cocky  and uses borderline slave labor to gain an unfair advantage in the international trade. And yet we need China too for now, a lot of our trade goes there for starters. Don't be fooled into the  simplistic thinking of GOP foreign 'policy'


----------



## Mael (Aug 15, 2012)

I have never gone along with the GOP foreign policy.  They still believe in the American exceptionalism notion to be an outright dick.  I don't like the UN either and the idealists that hump it and while I'm pro-American through and through you need friends to get moving in this world.


----------



## baconbits (Aug 15, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> That Ayn Rand shit unsettles me, and his ideas on budget cuts have already stated would only drive up the deficit as well as be just plain disastrous.



How can budget cuts raise the deficit?  Cuts mean less spending.  Less spending and equal revenue means lower deficits.



drache said:


> mael he voted for his budget which would literally end medicare as we know it and likely end it permamently; which would completely privatize social security, give obscene tax cuts to the wealthy, end food stamps and the American public volunteer programs



The Ryan plan keeps social security the same for everyone over 55.  It just provides a private option for everyone else.



drache said:


> Yeah he talks nice and is persuasive but he is also a bible thumping, ayrn rand quoting, me first piece of crap. But I mean that in the nicest way.



I know you do, but its sad that you think that about every conservative we've mentioned so far.  Is there a conservative that the base likes that you think is a decent human being?


----------



## drache (Aug 15, 2012)

baconbits said:


> How can budget cuts raise the deficit?  Cuts mean less spending.  Less spending and equal revenue means lower deficits.



because they also include absolutely fucking inane tax cuts for the rich Romeny for example would have only paid less then 1% taxes for 2010



baconbits said:


> The Ryan plan keeps social security the same for everyone over 55.  It just provides a private option for everyone else.



which is generational warfare but hey he does it for medicare so why not here too?



baconbits said:


> I know you do, but its sad that you think that about every conservative we've mentioned so far.  Is there a conservative that the base likes that you think is a decent human being?



there's a difference between being a 'decent human being' and being a selfish twit. I am sure both Ryan and Romeny are good fathers, supportive of their wives and even consider themselves success stories. They also want to destroy the very support net that made possible  for them to be where they are, are childishly selfish, secretive and manipulative.

And no I highly suspect there is no one the tea party likes that I would considering their rather disturbing desire to destroy the very foundation of our nation. Such radical disagreement is hard to reconcile even if I am actually fiscially conservative.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 15, 2012)

Ryan has voted for every single proposal that get us into the predicament we are currently in  I don't want to see anyone here thinking they can bring him up to a respectable level.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 15, 2012)

> In 2010 -- the only year we have seen a full return from him -- Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney's income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.





> It might seem impossible to fund the government when the super-rich pay no taxes. That is accurate. Ryan would actually raise taxes on the bottom 30 percent of earners, according to the nonpartisan , but that hardly fills the revenue hole he would create. The solution? All but eliminate all government outside of Social Security and defense -- a point my colleague  has made in incredible chart form.





----

His deficit-busting voting record. 




----

And  is worth reading, to say the least. The last page is particularly revealing.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 15, 2012)

That chart is inaccurate  those numbers are the estimate of what the projects cost when they were first created. Not the cost extended outward 10 years. When you think about the fact that the tax cuts have been going for almost 10 years now, and the extension of the bush tax cuts for 2 years cost 600 billion, the numbers don't add up. The actual cost of the bush tax cuts from 01 now is closer to *4.5 trillion* dollars. Not 1.7. That also goes for the cost of invading Iraq and Medicare part D.



A full overview ^


----------



## Raiden (Aug 15, 2012)

Seems like the pick is going really well so far. 

Joe fucked up on epic proportions yesterday, so Repubs escaped Obama's jabs.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 15, 2012)

They should probably pull Biden off the trail and lock him in a room with some food and a TV.


----------



## P-X 12 (Aug 15, 2012)

Raiden said:


> Seems like the pick is going really well so far.
> 
> Joe fucked up on epic proportions yesterday, so Repubs escaped Obama's jabs.



Wait, I wasn't watching any news yesterday, what he do this time?


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 15, 2012)

Biden is always doing that


----------



## drache (Aug 15, 2012)

Raiden said:


> Seems like the pick is going really well so far.
> 
> Joe fucked up on epic proportions yesterday, so Repubs escaped Obama's jabs.



much to do about nothing


----------



## Raiden (Aug 15, 2012)

Phx12 said:


> Wait, I wasn't watching any news yesterday, what he do this time?



Said that Romney wants to put people back "in chains." He also was at a campaign stop and called out the wrong state. 

And because we're such a racially sensitive society, people jumped all over the comment and it has dominated the press. 

This is happening at the same time new policies for immigrants are helping out thousands of people .


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 15, 2012)

For more detail on what Biden did:


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 15, 2012)

Raiden said:


> Said that Romney wants to put people back "in chains." He also was at a campaign stop and called out the wrong state.
> 
> And because we're such a racially sensitive society, people jumped all over the comment and it has dominated the press.
> 
> This is happening at the same time new policies for immigrants are helping out thousands of people .



Biden just needs to have someone write out what he says at these things, because his constant slip of the tongue is pretty tiring and worrisome.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 15, 2012)

Do you think he's going to do well against Ryan ?

I don't think there's anything wrong with his comment. But obviously you have to be careful because people can spin things.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 15, 2012)

No I do not.


----------



## neodragzero (Aug 15, 2012)

You have to keep in mind that the atmosphere of debate and just making a speech without any real response from another party do quite vary.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 15, 2012)

drache said:


> much to do about nothing



You mean ado?


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Aug 15, 2012)

Mider T said:


> You mean ado?



 **


----------



## P-X 12 (Aug 15, 2012)

Wow. That's...really bad. 
Do you think the republicans will let this go any time soon?


----------



## drache (Aug 15, 2012)

Mider T said:


> You mean ado?



no I went for modern english


----------



## EvilMoogle (Aug 16, 2012)

Since I'm bored...

"Close" states:
Colorado: 9 electoral votes, Obama +3%
Florida: 29 electoral votes, Romney +1%
Iowa: 6 electoral votes, Romney +2%
Missouri: 10 electoral votes, Romney +1%
North Carolina: 15 electoral votes, Romney +1%
Ohio: 18 electoral votes, Obama +1%
Virgina: 13 electoral votes, Tied
()

Percentage of state population on Medicare:
Colorado: 12.3%
Florida: 17.8%
Iowa: 17.0%
Missouri: 16.8%
North Carolina: 15.6%
Ohio: 16.5%
Virgina: 14.3%

I'm not sure picking the a guy that wants to end Medicare was the best move.  Expect some major backtracking on this in the next week.


----------



## Mael (Aug 16, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Since I'm bored...
> 
> "Close" states:
> Colorado: 9 electoral votes, Obama +3%
> ...



Some of these people polled likely don't think about the intricacies of that.  And seeing some of those states paints a pretty clear picture of alternate reasons to not vote Obama.


----------



## drache (Aug 16, 2012)

Mael said:


> Some of these people polled likely don't think about the intricacies of that.  And seeing some of those states paints a pretty clear picture of alternate reasons to not vote Obama.



isk i don't think 'wants to end medicare' is that complicated still i think that is more likely to effect turn out then the polls


----------



## Mael (Aug 16, 2012)

drache said:


> isk i don't think 'wants to end medicare' is that complicated still i think that is more likely to effect turn out then the polls



I was thinking more the pollsters going "I don't like that ^ (use bro) Muslim socialist insert ignorant media portrayal Democrat stomping on mah Constitution."


----------



## drache (Aug 16, 2012)

Mael said:


> I was thinking more the pollsters going "I don't like that ^ (use bro) Muslim socialist insert ignorant media portrayal Democrat stomping on mah Constitution."



which is why i do not think the polls will move much but niether will they out to vote for romney


----------



## EvilMoogle (Aug 16, 2012)

Expect commercials to hammer "Mitt Romney wants to kill you/your parents/your grandparents" home for the next couple months in those states.

Assuming that the people on medicare are dead split right now between candidates, and assuming the voter representation in people on medicare matches the general population (both are generous estimates IMO) Obama gaining these votes would make the electoral college 380 - 158.

It would also make a lot of the deep south into battleground states.


----------



## drache (Aug 16, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Expect commercials to hammer "Mitt Romney wants to kill you/your parents/your grandparents" home for the next couple months in those states.
> 
> Assuming that the people on medicare are dead split right now between candidates, and assuming the voter representation in people on medicare matches the general population (both are generous estimates IMO) Obama gaining these votes would make the electoral college 380 - 158.
> 
> It would also make a lot of the deep south into battleground states.



that would be nice but I won't hold my breath though really I am hoping for goldwater level of loss from Romney


----------



## EvilMoogle (Aug 16, 2012)

I doubt it will end up making that big of a difference, I suspect there will be a week or two of damage control where Ryan publicly recants his position (or redefines it at least) and most people forget about it.

It's interesting speculation though.


----------



## drache (Aug 16, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> I doubt it will end up making that big of a difference, I suspect there will be a week or two of damage control where Ryan publicly recants his position (or redefines it at least) and most people forget about it.
> 
> It's interesting speculation though.



The only time the democrats made an election about the budget the GOP lost and badly it is going to take more then a week or 2 and that even presumes they do.

Look at the taxes Romney could easily fix the whole issue by realeasing the last 4-7 years but won't. Fact is that both men are arrogant enough to believe that it is more about explaining better then that there is an actual problem with the idea itself


----------



## EvilMoogle (Aug 16, 2012)

Oh I totally expect the Democrats to hammer on this.  And they should, it's a good position and forces a response.

I just expect that Ryan will make a statement to the effect of "yes while in Congress I proposed measures to reduce the budget for the good of everyone.  However I think Mr. Romney has some excellent alternative ideas on this and we should discuss his plans not my old, outdated one." 

And in general people will ignore it from then and move on (because ultimately he's only the vice presidential candidate).  It may be good for a point or two ultimately (which _is_ significant in this election).

The only way this really backfires is if the Romney campaign goes all in on it (which they've shown no indication of doing) or if they continue to attempt to dodge every question about their positions and leave the press to set the dialogue (which they might do, Romney's not making any friends in the press with his love for dodging questions).


----------



## drache (Aug 16, 2012)

considering there is video of Romney supporting the budget don't be suprised if they go all in


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 16, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> Oh I totally expect the Democrats to hammer on this.  And they should, it's a good position and forces a response.
> 
> I just expect that Ryan will make a statement to the effect of "yes while in Congress I proposed measures to reduce the budget for the good of everyone.  However I think Mr. Romney has some excellent alternative ideas on this and we should discuss his plans not my old, outdated one."
> 
> ...



The thing is that Paul Ryan is pretty much the de facto ideological leader of the GOP at this point, so the radical right wing of the GOP might force Romney and Ryan to defend the budget plan in the basis of ideological purity and such.


----------



## EvilMoogle (Aug 16, 2012)

hcheng02 said:


> The thing is that Paul Ryan is pretty much the de facto ideological leader of the GOP at this point, so the radical right wing of the GOP might force Romney and Ryan to defend the budget plan in the basis of ideological purity and such.


He matches very well with an ideological core of the GOP yes.

But even within his party he's extreme.  Outside of his party his ideas poll very poorly.

_If_ the democrats can link his past ideas with Romney's campaign that will be very damaging to them.  

I think it's more likely that Romney's campaign will take minor damage before having Ryan abandon his position and deflect.  The core of the party will accept this as necessary ("he's still one of us") while it won't have much long-term damage.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Aug 16, 2012)

Ryan has bold faced lied about his plan over and over again, why would he backtrack now


----------



## hcheng02 (Aug 16, 2012)

EvilMoogle said:


> He matches very well with an ideological core of the GOP yes.
> 
> But even within his party he's extreme.  Outside of his party his ideas poll very poorly.
> *
> ...



Thats pretty much the reason why the Democrats were so happy to hear that Ryan got the VP spot. That's really the main attack strategy of the Obama campaign now, and its not a bad plan really. I mean when they polled Ryan's plan to take money from Medicare to give tax cuts to the rich, people literally could not believe that such a plan existed.

I don't think Ryan is actually that extreme in the Tea party. He's simply more honest and forthright about them.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 16, 2012)

I've seen reports some conservatives are actually worried the attention on ryan will bring higher scrutiny to the rest of the house of reps. But opinions on how ryan will affect this race are all over the map. We won't really know how it works out until the debates start.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 16, 2012)

Yeah and that can be abysmal for the Romney campaign if Joe nails the right facts.

Such as how Ryan's budget only works because he estimated the unemployment rate would fall below three percent.

But I don't think the Obama administration can count on him for anything. They need to start prepping him now and make sure he gets enough sleep or something lol.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 17, 2012)

Wow. This D'Souza guy...he's an idiot, if they keep getting him to talk he could really hurt the Romney campaign.


----------



## Petes12 (Aug 17, 2012)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Wow. This D'Souza guy...he's an idiot, if they keep getting him to talk he could really hurt the Romney campaign.



why what happened? 


so, I dunno if you guys are aware, but paul ryan apparently loves listening to rage against the machine. so this was pretty funny.



> “Paul Ryan is the embodiment of the machine our music rages against.”
> —	Tom Morello, on Paul Ryan’s claim that Rage Against the Machine is his favorite band (via scout)



edit:


> “I wonder what Ryan’s favorite Rage song is? Is it the one where we condemn the genocide of Native Americans? The one lambasting American imperialism? Our cover of “Fuck the Police”? Or is it the one where we call on the people to seize the means of production? So many excellent choices to jam out to at Young Republican meetings!….. Don’t mistake me, I clearly see that Ryan has a whole lotta “rage” in him: A rage against women, a rage against immigrants, a rage against workers, a rage against gays, a rage against the poor, a rage against the environment. Basically the only thing he’s not raging against is the privileged elite he’s groveling in front of for campaign contributions.”


----------

