How much of your valuable time did they waste?

Karen, seriously? Yes, 13,000 people showing up in any spontaneously planned event that draws people from around the state is breaking news.

You shouldn't allow your ideology so clearly distort your cynical/reality machine.

@morninmist -

Would Ryan's father have been kicked off SS under Ryan's budget plan? Please cite the the part of the plan that would have done this, so that we can all take a look at it for ourselves.

@morninmist

Your attempt to paint a TEENAGER as a hypocrite today makes you look REALLY pathetic.

I received benefits from MKE Co, as well, until I was 22, but I rejected the concept, and have campaigned against it. That doesn't make me a hypocrite. In fact, working to end benefits that my mom and I got is a sign of integrity. Grow up.

Edward, do you refuse to accept interest earned on your bank savings as well? SS is an investment plan.

@Bren -

"SS is an investment plan."

You're joking, right? I thought you were smarter than this.

The SS fund earns its investment income by purchasing Treasury Bills. The US Treasury gets its money to pay interest on the Treasury Bills from compulsory tax collections conducted by the IRS. The people of the US pay the compulsory taxes that are collected by the IRS for the US Treasury. Thus, the SS fund doesn't really earn any type of investment income, as it's just another form of taxation under a different name - income tax as opposed to FICA/FUTA tax.

The people aren't earning anything with their investment in the SS Fund, as the people are directly paying for the interest that their money in the SS Fund is generating! It's like borrowing money from yourself and charging yourself interest - it all comes from the same pair of pants, doesn't it?

School is recessed! You're welcome ;-)

They see the smoke and mirrors. Because they don't pay attention and accept what they are told at face value, they vote against their own self interest. They claim to be Christian but support an atheist-fueled agenda. I doubt they have a clue that "personhood" amendments can effectively ban most forms of the hormonal birth control used in many U.S. households. Now they'll support decimating Medicare and Social Security.

And when the current 35-54 year-olds, who've had their investments decimated try to retire, then find that their SS and Medicare won't keep a small bird alive, they'll scratch their heads and say "Huh?" Their kids won't be able to help, since they'll all be working two $13/hour jobs with crap/no benefits, no pension, and probably even less SS and Medicare benefits. Gee Willigers. How did all this happen?

How indeed.

@Kathy -

Could you cite the part of Ryan's budget plan that wants to take away birth control pills from women (are you talking about some kind of all out ban on birth control pills?) and the right that entitles women to taxpayer subsidized birth control pills so that we can take a look at these for ourselves?

Thanks!

@Bren -

Because people like you sold America and her workers down the river to help exploitational foreign entities profit off our backs - that's how this happened!

Same question to you that I posed to Kathy.

Thanks!

Heres an idea buy your own birth control I don't want topay for it with my taxes, I had to buy my own!

@ Kathy
Most are low information Faux news folks. Enough said.

@morninmist -

Don't you think that the whole 'Faux News' thing is getting really old and stale, or is the Daily Kos still promoting that slam against conservatives?

Educate yourself Kathy. Ryan does not want to end Medicare for the elderly. Anyone 55 and up it won't affect at all. He wants to reform it which is not a bad thing. Also, yes we do want women to pay for their own birth control pills. Why should we pay for another person's family planning? Maybe they should cut their cell phone bill to compensate to live within their means rather than asking or expecting handouts.

Colleen, Abby35, why would you be paying part of someone else's insurance premium? I've heard this idea before and its incorrect. Colleen, say Abby35 has birth a routine physical covered at 100% on her health plan, how much of that physical are you responsible for paying? If that answer is "none," the same is true for birth control. Abby35, Mr. Hoffa, the reverse is also true for you.

I'm not sure where you are hearing/reading this kind of garbage, but that's just what it is, garbage. Don't be fooled again.

And Mr. Hoffa, you're still teasing me about my car? That's not nice or "smart," is it? ; ) People received wages to assemble my car, and thanks to Toyota for creating jobs here when so many U.S. companies have shipped jobs overseas to avoid paying family-sustaining wages. And my mechanic tells me there's no such thing as a 100% American made automobile anymore. So you are as guilty as I, it seems! Better find yourself a horse and buggy--wait, equus is not indigenous to this continent. Make that a buffalo and buggy. ; )

@Kathy

When and where did Paul Ryan say he wanted to end medicare? When did he take away birth control pills from women? And what does Ayn Rand being an atheist have to do with a discussion on entitlement reform?

You're a very strange debater, and your view of us, young and old is very warped.

He has a plan. It saves the programs you want. It saves the country I want. And it preserves the constitution the Founders wanted.

Oh, and btw, you ever see the rest of Ryan explaining that he doesn't agree with the spiritual perspective (or lack of) with Rand, but with her liberty and economic focus? Yeah, good blog-reading, Kathy.

@Bren -

I had no idea that your mechanic was the end all authority on the automobile industry. I already explained the situation to you time and again, but seeing as how you choose to ignore reality:

Toyota is a foreign corporation. The big three are American corporations. When purchasing a car, if you look at the federally mandated window (Monroney) sticker, you'll notice a multitude of information, including the point of assembly, the origination of the engine, the origination of the transmission, and the remainder of the vehicle's domestic parts content.

Obviously, one would want the sticker to state an assembly point somewhere here in America, preferably in a UAW represented factory, with an engine that originated from the US, a transmission that originated from the US, and a very high remaining domestic parts content.

Your vehicle was manufactured in what you commonly refer to as a right-to-work-for-less state, by a company that firmly opposes the unionization of its laborers, pays their laborers a significantly lower compensation package than their UAW counterparts, with a non US originated powertrain, and yet still charges a similar retail price for their product as the domestic manufacturers, thus leading to an excessive corporate profit for the greedy fat-cats and investors at the top!

You claim to be against right-to-work-for-less legislation, companies that discourage unionization of its work force, and excessive profits. And yet, that's exactly what you supported in your choice of automobile!

What good are principles if you don't act on them when presented with the opportunity to do so?

Now that we have the remedial stuff out of the way, as for birth control - I don't have any problem in the world with private insurance plans covering the cost of birth control so long as the additional expense is properly reflected in the premium payment that the individual is making on their policy. The law should not dictate to insurance companies to provide the coverage at no additional premium cost to the policy holder demanding such coverage. Nor should the federal government be subsidizing birth control in any fashion for the reasons stated in my response to your response in Tyler's thread below.

Mr. Hoffa, my mechanic has 17 years of experience on cars domestic and foreign. Having benefited from his expertise and professionalism I would certainly consider him the authority in this matter over you. Interesting that you are suddenly incensed about "Right to Work." If Diane Hendricks has her way, that legislation will be coming along here soon enough, so thanks for supporting the benefactor-friendly Scott Walker.

Concerning birth control, I've never seen a health insurance company not reimburse itself at healthy profit, no need to worry there. As for government subsidized birth control, you should research the cost of preventive birth control v. the cost of raising an unwanted child in the system. If the "pro-lifers" actually cared about saving children, they would be offering $100,000 checks to the women entering clinics toward child raising instead of standing there on the nice sunny days spewing hate (and hiring temp workers for those not-so-nice days). That would be "putting the money where your mouth is."

BOOM!

@Bren -

Take what I wrote to you concerning vehicles and the window (Monroney) sticker to your mechanic and a UAW auto worker. If they disagree with anything that I've written, then they are idiots and I would suggest you find a new mechanic immediately.

There are still cars that are a majority 'American' and it's very easy to identify them. If you actually believe in the crap that you perpetuate here on Patch, you would invest the time and effort in assuring that you have one of the most solidly American cars on the market, like Hoffa's 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo:

Assembly Point - Jefferson North Assembly, Detroit, MI USA with pride by the UAW
Engine - Mack Ave Engine, Detroit, MI USA with pride by the UAW
Transmission - Indiana Transmission, Kokomo, IN USA with pride by the UAW
Remaining Domestic Parts Content - 87%

Or Hoffa's Cadillac Eldorado Touring Coupe.

Pull out the sticker on your Camry and post your details here - let's see who's more supportive of American family sustaining wages. You need not bother, as we all know that Toyota pays their people far less than the UAW - nearly $20/hr less in salary and benefits according to the Associated Press:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/11/more-on-total-hourly-labor-costs-gm-vs.html

That's a gross $41,200 that you took out of an American family's paycheck just so you could have your coveted Toyota Camry. You must feel so proud of yourself!

Start walking your talk Bren!

As far as insurance goes, your coveted Obamacare forces insurance providers to offer birth control pills as a part of their policies without being able to charge an extra premium solely for that option. That means that people who do not have birth control as an option on their policies are effectively helping to pay for others birth control because Obamacare only allows an across the broad increase of premium on all policies for the additional coverage being offered, whether the policy covers it or not. THIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG and is ANTI-AMERICAN! It's government exerting its force on a private contractual relationship. If you want extra coverage on your policy, you should pay for the extra coverage YOURSELF!!!

Again, sexual relations are NOT a compulsory act - they are strictly and wholly voluntary (except in the instances of rape, and it's not like rapists are concerned with birth control)!!! What about this concept eludes you exactly? If you can't afford a child, you shouldn't be engaging in sexual relations! If want to engage in sexual relations while practicing responsible family planning, then you can pay for own birth control - it's easily available and very affordable! The government should NOT be subsidizing this at all! Nor should we be paying for other people's children - that's just ludicrous! It punishes the responsible and righteous!

Man, such a completely simple concept and yet for some reason or another, you just don't seem to get it!

@Tyler -

Very nice!

Tyler, I'd point out that the GOP is in a fair way to repeating the mistakes of the past. The Federalist Party marginalized itself after migrating from its core values. If you take time to review our fiscal history from 1980 you will see that it is the GOP that creates deficits. Bill Clinton brought the budget back under control/surplus* but multiple tax breaks for wealthy people and two unfunded wars, in addition to deregulation/sidestepping in the financial industry and enacting the Clinton era Homeland Security dept. caused a record deficit and and the worst recession since the Great Depression.

"Democrats, frankly, don't care about our future. If they did, they would create a plan of their own..." A dishonest statement, as all universal assumptions are. And for the record, the Democrats do have a "plan of their own." It's called Social Security and Medicare.

"...Birth control will be important if Obama is reelected." I find you sad, Tyler. Even though you are a quarter-century old you write with ignorance. Perhaps some more life experience and independent political research would bring maturity.

@Bren -

Your right, both the Republicans and the Democrats have created large deficits and debts since 1980. Ryan acknowledges this in his budget proposal. The GOP is returning to its core of fiscal conservatism - not migrating even further away from that core as you appear to erroneously believe.

How do Social Security and Medicare address solving the deficit and debt crisis that our nation is currently facing? The $16T federal debt is just the tip of the ice berg. When you add in another $5T in state debt, $4T in school district and local government debt, and another $5T in unfunded public liabilities, such as pensions and the like, the magnitude of our public debt crisis is actually somewhere around $30T - that's about $265k per individual taxpayer in this country. When are you going to write a check for your share?

More outrageous and immature than Tyler's statement about birth control is the fact that many people feel that the taxpayers/government should subsidize birth control - that's ABSURD because engaging in sexual relations is a completely voluntary act, not a compulsory one!?!? If you can't afford birth control but want to exercise family planning responsibilities, then you shouldn't be engaging in sexual relations!!! It's that simple Bren! Sexual relations with a safeguard against an unwanted pregnancy is a LUXURY, not a necessity!!!

Now do you understand why that comment set Tyler off? Hell, it pissed Hoffa off as well!

Mr. Hoffa, I found two of Tyler's comments abhorrent but note your "Very nice" right underneath. You and I clearly have differing value systems.

After the corporate tax cuts are the most wealthy are cancelled we can talk about what's your share and mine. I've lost a significant chunk of investment earnings because of the recession and so have millions of other Americans. That's what I've paid so far. When the uber-wealthy in this country have had to give up, in relational dollars, what so many other Americans have had to do (100% income loss due to job loss, salary furloughs/reductions, hours cut, investment losses, etc.) then let's talk about returning to the 98% for more handouts.

And concerning "sexual relations" smoking, over-eating, alcohol consumption, tanning, and sports-playing and getting behind the wheel of a car are all "voluntary acts." Should health insurance also not cover these activities?

@Bren -

"I've lost a significant chunk of investment earnings because of the recession and so have millions of other Americans."

How exactly did the recession cause you to lose "a significant chunk of investment earnings?" Hoffa's investment portfolio did stellar during the recession! Sounds to Hoffa like you're just a BAD investor and prefer to point the finger at others for your own investing short comings.

Always pointing the finger, always blaming others - that's not very nice Bren!

"Should health insurance also not cover these activities?"

Insurance can cover what ever the individual wants it to cover. But if the individual is going to engage in voluntary risky activities, then they should be prepared to pay the extra premium that goes along with taking on such risk. But no, fat people, women (regarding bc) etc. claim that doing this is discriminatory, etc.

And let's not forget the definition of insurance "a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss." Using insurance to pay for U&C care does not make any sense what-so-ever. Policies shouldn't even cover U&C care, as there is nothing contingent or uncertain about U&C care. Health insurance should really only cover catastrophic events. The riskier the activities that you engage in, the higher the premium.

What this country needs more than anything is a return to common sense and practicality!

Not all of us can be short-selling day-traders like Hoffa. FYI, my investments did better than average during the great recession, but they still lost money.

As for finger pointing, Hoffa likes to blame people who aren't doing as well as Hoffa for their own misfortune. It's an annoying attitude, and it's one that life often teaches the holder of said attitude a lesson about.

@JRH -- "Policies shouldn't even cover U&C care, as there is nothing contingent or uncertain about U&C care. Health insurance should really only cover catastrophic events."

I actually agree with you there. The price of health insurance began to skyrocket with the advent of managed care -- that is, insurance that pays for every little doctor's visit for a sniffle. Back when I had insurance through employment, it covered major medical (hospital and doctors' fees) and diagnostic lab work. Nothing else. But back then, you could see a doctor for $25 and get half an hour of his attention.

@Randy1949 -

"Not all of us can be short-selling day-traders like Hoffa."

Why not? What's stopping you? What's so special about Hoffa that he is able to do it effectively?

"Hoffa likes to blame people who aren't doing as well as Hoffa for their own misfortune."

Not true - Hoffa just expects people to accept personal responsibility for their own choices/decisions in life. Honestly, what is so wrong with that?

"I actually agree with you there (regarding insurance not covering U&C care)."

See, we do reach a consensus every now and then. Fundamentally speaking, we both want the same end results - we just tend to disagree most of the time about how to achieve those results. But every time we reach an agreement, we come closer to a real solution that will satisfy the majority!

For starters, Hoffa seems to have a job that allows him to check the internet frequently. I never had a job like that. Mine always involved working balls-to-the wall for every minute I was on the clock.

Furthermore, some people's retirement plans don't allow for that much control. The majority of my spouse's money is in TIAA-CREF. You get to choose your funds, but you don't get to choose individual stocks.

@Randy1949 -

First off, Hoffa rarely day-trades, although he has been known to execute a few such trades. Hoffa is more or so a swing-trader.

Second, there are several tools that one can utilize to become effective swing-traders without having to be able to frequently check market conditions - but you should keep an active eye on the market, checking it at least once every other day. There are limit orders, stop loss orders, trailing stops, good till canceled orders, day orders, all or none order, etc.

Just because most people are lazy and don't want to use their free time to educate themselves about the market isn't a very good excuse!

Third, you can always setup and fund your own investment account. It doesn't have to go through an employer controlled plan with limited options. Again, laziness is not an adequate excuse!

@Greendale Dad -

Do you honestly think that the Dems will maintain their majority in the state senate come November?

Where did the traditional Republicans get us exactly? They helped create the situation, so obviously they aren't the right solution.

Tom, what do you mean obama doesn't have a plan, his plan is to destroy america as we know it!!

Our congressman gets picked for Vice President, and comes home to 13,000 estatic supporters certaily is breaking news. Put down your bong, and try to b authentic.

Now I understand why we should give out free birth control.

Got new for ya Kathy come 2013 your taxes will go the roof along with gas, electric and food because of obamacare. Read some of the bill yourself to find out.

You are joking right? The Dems want are all about raising taxes. The Republicans want to lower taxes. Obama wants to raise them on many in the income bracket that hire those who are not. Do you understand that would bring more unemployment? Or do you not care since Obama will give you Bama money and a lot of freebies?

You took the words out of my head, just what I was thinking, but one thing, they will not raise taxes no matter what kind of disarray there is, but it's okay to cut services or pay to the middle class.

Download it or read it here:
http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/09/believe-america-mitt-romneys-plan-jobs-and-economic-growth

@Kathy -

Here's a free lesson for you:

Here is a link to the actual text of Public Law 111-148, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ148/pdf/PLAW-111publ148.pdf

I strongly suggest that you read all 906 pages of it for understanding.

Here is a link to websites that are commonly known to frequently lie about Obamacare:

http://www.barackobama.com/
http://www.democrats.org/
http://www.dailykos.com/
http://thinkprogress.org/
http://front.moveon.org/
http://www.nbcnews.com/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434

And many more - I think you get the picture. Avoid those websites if you want to know the truth about Obamacare.

As far as plans go, I believe that Tom was referring to budget plans that address the issue of the federal deficits and debts. Obama's proposed budget was not filibustered, in fact, it failed to secure a single vote from both Senate Democrats and Republicans alike:

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/227857-senate-rejects-obama-budget-in-99-0-vote/

Ryan and Romney's proposed budget can be found here:

Path to Prosperity:
http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf

The Budget Bill H.CON.RES.34:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hconres34pcs/pdf/BILLS-112hconres34pcs.pdf

Again the rules pertaining to websites that lie about these bills are the same as the rules for Obamacare.

Best of luck to you!

To be fair, Obama introduced Biden as "the next President" in 2008. Romney did a much better job of recovery from his mistake.

And Pennyluhu, you want to re-elect the person who is causing the division of the people in this country. Our country is circling the drain as you say because of lack of family values yes but it has to start with family. It starts with being less dependent on government, and living by morals and standards that made this country great but you would rather vote for obama. Your comment above is then senseless.

Attending what?

I'm not being condescending, I am stating a fact. If you can't afford the birth control then maybe you should not be sleeping around in the first place making babies that everyone else has to pay for. You can't blame republicans for their actions.

Birth control doesn't have to be expensive. You can get it at the gas station for less than a pack of cigs. For years, that method was the only reliable option and we weren't up to our elbows in unwanted children. Maybe it's a little less convenient than popping a pill, but not everyone can afford the nice stuff. That's life.

Social stigma was effective too, but that was way back when personal responsibilty was expected.

Excellent point Greg!

Today, we're expected to praise single mothers and broken families like they're the greatest thing since sliced bread - where is this mentality getting us?

"For years, that method was the only reliable option and we weren't up to our elbows in unwanted children."

Uh . . . McBride, condoms were the only realistic method before 1964, and oddly enough, we have the Baby Boom that is about to overwhelm Social Security and Medicare. I won't say all those third, fourth and fifth children were unwanted -- more like accepted as a fact of marital life in the 1950s.

Bottom line -- birth control is less expensive than birth. It saves both insurance companies and taxpayers money.

You're not seriously going to argue that the baby boom was due to a lack of pharmaceutical contraceptives, are you Randy?

If we're going to hand out contraceptives to those who, honestly, can't afford them, then give them rubbers and instructions on how to use them and be done with it. If the argument is that people are in poverty because of something other than a lack of personal responsibility, then by no means is it a stretch to ask them to use the lowest cost (to the taxpayer) form of contraception - one that requires some forethought and personal responsibility in order to be effective.

McBride, I think if we're talking the least expensive form of contraception, that would be an IUD like the Mirena coil, which covers a woman indefinitely, as opposed to a cost per 'event'. Of course, there's an initial outlay of several hundred dollars, which stops a lot of people.

As for the Baby Boom, I can't explain it, other than my parents' generation was not really thinking about what would happen sixty years down the road. And yes -- quite a few of those pregnancies were unplanned.

We still have a lot of unplanned pregnancies and it's not solely amongst those who can't afford birth control. Like anything else, you have to use it for it to work.

The coil may be the most cost effective over the long term, however if someone decides 6 months to a year down the line that they want to have kids, not so much.

People who have to rely on taxpayers to provide for them shouldn't expect to get the most convenient, latest and greatest of everything, Their part of the bargain should be the accept whatever extra effort/responsibility goes along with getting a basic, workable solution at no monetary cost. There's actually a benefit to that, in that it may provide an incentive for some to find a way to improve their lot in life (or adjust their priorities) so they can afford those conveniences.

@McBride -

You really want the government to provide people with condoms? The government will end up paying $20/unit, if not more!

JRH, I'd really rather people spring for their own (no pun intended) but since that apparently borders on the inhumane, yes, I think that of all the options its probably the cheapest. Besides, I'd imagine we've got military surplus lying around somewhere. Once folks get past the desert camo look, they'll probably be alright.

McCain didn't make the choice, someone else did. And while neither choice is a good one, the two individuals are hardly comparable. Palin had nowhere else to go but down. Ryan, while not the ideal choice (some non-descript and more traditional smiler and nodder would have been better, since we don't really have an Uncle Buck Biden type to warm hearts with their buffoonery and misremembered anecdotes.), still possesses the ability to surprise, since expectations are low.

@robert -

Zerban is a joke - his entire campaign consists of the following:

Trashing Ryan with propaganda, rhetoric, and lies.

Parroting Obama.

That's it - the man brings nothing to the table of his own. Ryan will retain the House seat no matter what happens in the Presidential race!

@robert -

So, why didn't Obama save those plants?

Hoffa supports the auto bailouts, but not the way in which Obama did them - with backroom behind closed doors shady deals with his buddies in the UAW, the Canadians, and the Italians. What happened to closing the White House to lobbyists and crony capitalism, transparency, and being able to watch negotiations on C-SPAN 3? Hope change were little more than LIES.

The bailouts should have simply been straight up interest bearing loans with a repayment schedule, just as Bush had originally set them up to be, and just like Carter successfully did it for Chrysler under Iacocca back in '79. Under the Carter/Bush plan, the taxpayers would have fully recovered all of their money plus interest. Under Obama's shady deal, the taxpayers stand to lose out on billions.

Why aren't you upset at Obama for lying to you and UAW for allowing those plants to be closed? Oh yeah, because it's easier to point the finger and blame Paul Ryan as opposed to facing the reality of the truth! Silly Hoffa, he should have known that!

Strike two on this board robert - care to go for the strike out?

More lefty lies...
U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 7321, “The Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act” by a vote of 237 – 170. H.R. 7321 is currently pending before the U.S. Senate.
12/10/2008
“At the forefront of my mind are jobs in Southern Wisconsin and the retiree commitments to workers that could be placed in jeopardy under certain bankruptcy scenarios. To be clear, this bill is not intended to save the American auto industry and makes no guarantees that layoffs in this industry will end. Congress must stop overselling what it can do. At the very least, I am hopeful that by extending these loans to the American auto manufacturers, bankruptcy will be avoided in the near term and protections for retirees will remain intact.”
The above quote is part of what Paul Ryan presented.

Here is Obama's work:
"As Washington rushed to nationalize the US auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team and the Treasury Department schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts. The nonunion pensioners also lost all their health- and life-insurance benefits.

The abused workers — most from hard-hit northeast Ohio, Michigan and neighboring states — had devoted decades of their lives as secretaries, technicians, engineers and sales employees at Delphi/GM. Some workers have watched up to 70 percent of their pensions vanish."

@Greg -

Thanks for effectively covering the rest of the TRUTH about the auto bailouts under Obama - job well done!

@Pennyluhu -

The concept extends to any bad decisions/choices made by an individual - that's why Hoffa used general descriptors when premising the concept before applying karen's specific examples.

The Kennedy's are indeed far worse than Obama - Johnny and Bobby were the absolute worst of the worst!

Although as far as modern President's in general go, Obama's not too far behind Kennedy!

If you think Romney's out-of-touch, did you know that Obama held at the taxpayer's expense a multi-million dollar Alice in Wonderland Party at the White House staged by Tim Burton and Johnny Depp while the nation was going through the worst of the Great Recession? He lied about hope and change and the worst part is, he won't admit that he lied!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083831/Obamas-held-secret-Alice-Wonderland-themed-party-White-House-depths-recession-2009.html

I admit that Romney wasn't my first choice during the GOP nomination process, but if you're really going with the lesser of two evils here, you may want to reconsider exactly who that is in this election!

Reforming the third rail sounds pretty substantive to most of us. Goals, guts and greatness will continue to rise his star across America. The conversation is now changing from Obama's small-ball talk to the conversation we needed to have decades ago. I couldn't be prouder of the selection of my congressman to second the ticket

Obama voted "present" 129 times as a state senator.

With Russ Feingold, Sen. Obama helped put together and co-sponsor the Obama/Feingold 2007 Ethics Reform Law, which curbed lobbying abuses. The bill was perhaps the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.

Rep. Ryan also proposed a federal budget, something Obama doesn't do.

http://roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/plan/#federaltaxreform

"Elimination of Double Taxation of Savings. The current system essentially taxes savings twice: individuals pay tax on their earnings and, if they choose to invest those after-tax funds, they pay another tax on the return from their savings (i.e. interest, capital gains, or dividends). This proposal eliminates the second layer of taxation. Not only is this fair to individual taxpayers, it also is good for the economy. Greater savings leads to more investment and higher rates of productivity. Higher productivity ultimately drives increased living standards. The plan also eliminates the estate tax, another form of double taxation that is particularly harmful to small businesses."

Romney already paid on his earnings, just like everyone else morninmist. You're just mad because while Romney makes worthwhile investments with his money, you just piss yours away. That's no reason to be as hateful as you are towards him or to want to penalize his success, is it?

You're a very jealous and envious person, aren't you?

@morninmist -

Jealousy and envy are very unbecoming traits - that's why they suit you perfectly!

wfb51 -

I think it would be very wise and appropriate, not only for you, but for all posters, to simply leave the candidates wives OUT OF ANY POLITICAL DISCUSSION... they are not running for anything...

This is about President Obama, Willard... we are electing a President, not a VP, and certainly - Biden and Ryan are irrelevant footnotes, we vote for the PRESIDENT - not a VP’s wife...

If the Palin based Tea Party and the rest of the Republicans – no real difference, other than name - want to “go there” let them do that at their own peril…

ummm - don't tell ME what's wise....I think it shows he is married to a normal person:

she is educated and smart and not sporting a retro 'do". You are known by the people you associate with! That goes for Romney - he is associated with Ryan. It goes both ways - I mean, McCain was skewered for chooing Palin!

I suppose that is on silver lining-perhaps?

Walker -

Unfortunately, Mr. Ryan’s current term as congressman does not end until December 31, 2012, and this will NOT get Mr. Ryan out of Wisconsin.

Mr. Ryan - a Senselessbrenner devotee - is concurrently running as a congressman from Janesville, the 1st. district. Therefore, should his egomaniacal and extraordinary ambitious plan to run for VP fail, he could still be elected as a congressional representative for an 8th term...

Should the backup plan fail, he will also represent the 1st district as the reigning "Noodling Champion" in Wisconsin.

@John Wilson -- "Should the backup plan fail, he will also represent the 1st district as the reigning "Noodling Champion" in Wisconsin."

Wow! I never realized Paul Ryan had so much in common with Gollum.

WI have a "favorite son" clause that if someone (Ryan) is running for VP or PRES, they are allowed to run also for their district. So, then R and R lose, Ryan will still be on the ticket for his district for US congressperson. If they win (teapartyer's) then a special election will have to be held (if ryan wins his district). Lots of if's.

Wisconsin saving America via Vice President Paul Ryan - making Wisconsin proud!

@morninmist -

Romney said: "He found a Democrat to co-lead a piece of legislation that makes sure we can save Medicare."

'Co-lead' - what does that mean exactly? It's not co-sponsoring or co-authoring, is it?

"Ryan and Wyden did work together in December 2011 to develop a paper outlining ways to provide for Medicare solvency, including a "premium support" model."

Sure sounds to Hoffa like Wyden was leading the way with Ryan to advance the discussion about Medicare reform to save the program from insolvency. So where exactly is the lie from Romney here?

BTW - Wyden voted against Obama's proposed budget!

@morninmist -

Obama's plan of raising taxes on annual income above $250k doesn't even come close to solving the problem, it just slows the bleeding a little and kicks the can even further down the road.

So, what else are Obama and the Democrats offering? We want to fix this problem NOW so that we won't be spending 30% of the federal budget on interest payments on prior accrued debt.

Waiting for a real plan from the Dems - please link us to one.

I am 29 and have been planning and saving for retirement for 7 years now.
Why do we have to keep catering to the stupid that can't take care of them self because of personal choice? You know that when you get too old you can't work anymore, right?

Both programs will come to a crashing end very soon, should we just screw everyone instead?

Politicians on both sides of the aisle have been talking for at least a decade about raising the SS retirement age. In fact, current law (not Ryan's proposed SS reforms) raises the SS retirement age to 67 by 2026. Ryan's plan calls for retirement age of 67 in 2025, and then raising the age by 1 month each year--it will be at least another 36 years until the retirement age reaches 70.

Those under 55 would have a choice under Ryan's plan--they can stay in the same SS program we have today, or they can pay some of their contribution into a private retirement account.

Menoparent:

Politicians on both sides of the aisle have been talking for at least a decade about raising the SS retirement age. In fact, current law (not Ryan's proposed SS reforms) raises the SS retirement age to 67 by 2026. Ryan's plan calls for retirement age of 67 in 2025, and then raising the age by 1 month each year--it will be at least another 36 years until the retirement age reaches 70.

Those under 55 would have a choice under Ryan's plan--they can stay in the same SS program we have today, or they can pay some of their contribution into a private retirement account.

"I am 29 and have been planning and saving for retirement for 7 years now. "

I did the same. What I could not control was long periods of unemployment and underemployment in my family that left us with less money to put aside, and the 2001 and 2008 crashes that hurt the portfolios.

The other thing I could not control was the price of health insurance, especially for an older person. I could possibly 'exist' on my private retirement savings, but I need Medicare so that the surviving spouse will not be left penniless when the first of us goes.

CowDung, I do note the option for the traditional fee for service Medicare in Ryan's plan. What I do not see is the guarantee that the voucher will be sufficient to cover the premium for it. Will seniors find themselves with less and less to actually live on?

Randy,
"... but I need Medicare..."
Then you should be really upset that Obama is sucking 700 BILLION out of Medicare so he can feed Obama-care, right? And you haven't forgotten the Ryan plan doesn't impact you one bit because of your elderly age, right?

You need to re-assess your silly allegiance and support Ryan, the guy looking out for you.

Obongo is raping you old timers Randy, he is sucking 700 million away from you geezers...must be his version of a death panel.

@Gearhead -- I do not for one minute believe that I will not be 'impacted'. Two or three years down the line, when the electorate has had time to forget, there will be call for further reforms, playing on the resentment of those of us born before 1956. But that's beside the point. I have younger friends. I have a son and a grandson.

I don't doubt that Medicare needs some reforming. I've seen things that need to be tightened, like the sale of medical equipment like wheelchairs and scooters to elderly who don't need them yet, on the theory of 'just in case'. Medicare Advantage and Part D are needlessly expensive.

I'd believe that Paul Ryan was looking out for me if his 'reforms' were not coupled with further tax cuts for those doing well enough already.

"You old timers" Alfred? I thought you and I were roughly the same age. You think and reason like you're well into senility.

@Randy: There is much more at stake than wheelchairs and scooters. We are well past the time for tinkering and small-ball adjustments. Without the Ryan plan, the "defined benefit" of what you know as Medicare will continue to evaporate. Sure, those of us who follow you will still have Medicare, but it will necessarily become a shadow of itself, much like chasing a mirage. It is unsustainable without private-sector market reform. The adults in the room understand this.

@ Gearhead, the 'adults in the room' will see exactly whom the voucher system will end up hurting -- those people who earned the least over their lifetimes, have the lowest Social Security benefits, and have the least in extra retirement savings to make up the difference between the voucher and the actual premium for their chosen insurance plan.

@Menoparent -

Please learn the facts instead of just perpetuating the propaganda and rhetoric, as it really does make you look like a fool.

@Randy1949 -

"What I could not control was long periods of unemployment and underemployment in my family that left us with less money to put aside, and the 2001 and 2008 crashes that hurt the portfolios."

Couldn't take two jobs at McDonalds? Hoffa's NEVER seen a newspaper without any help wanted ads since he has been alive. There are always jobs available to those willing to work! Again with the pointing the finger and blaming others for your own investment short comings. Hoffa's investments did quite well during 2008, because he is an active investor, as one needs to be if they are serious about making money in the market. You can't just park money and forget about it, expecting that it will always go up Randy - that's as foolish as those who assumed that the value of real estate would never go down.

Come on - take some responsibility for your own actions/inactions instead of constantly looking to pass the buck on to someone else!

@ Randy, you seem to be against choice when it comes to others shopping for their best retirement care. How arrogant of you! Ryan believes in smaller government with people exercising their own choice of care. Relics such as yourself cling to outmoded socialist programs like Medicare. Do you enjoy medical welfare for old people? Doctors don't because Medicare is too clunky to flex with medical changes, is always behind the curve on payments, and are refusing to see Medicare patients in more increasing numbers. What good is Medicare if there is no doctor to see you? Or are Obama's enforcers gonna break their knees if they don't see you? Wake up!

There you go, Hoffa, doing what you do best and being Job's comforter. Things went wrong, it has to be my fault, right? How much money could you have saved working two jobs at McDonalds if you weren't living with your parents? If you had a spouse and child to support? Yes -- I took jobs and kept us eating, but the money available for savings was less than it had been during the better times. Life for a fortyish family person is different from life for a twenty year old college student just starting out.

Bottom line -- no one should have to work two full-time jobs just to be able to survive in retirement.

@Gear Head -- there IS no choice when you simply can't afford it. I'm not against choice. Today's seniors have it. They can purchase Cadillac supplemental health insurance or they can pay out of pocket. IF they can afford it.

@ Randy: You are not thinking very hard today. Your choice of paying out of pocket or buying supplemental is incomplete. What's wrong with having dozens of other choices to use your $11,000 voucher on? The private health care market will happily reach out to get your attention, mine, and our grandchildrens as well, thanks to implementation of Ryan's roadmap. I'd rather trust the innovation of free enterprise to the certain decline of Medicare with Obama Care implemented. Current course is your worst enemy. It is unsustainable.

@Gear head -- "The private health care market will happily reach out to get your attention, mine, and our grandchildrens as well, thanks to implementation of Ryan's roadmap."

You mean like they were doing back in the 1960s when seniors already couldn't afford healthcare? So tell me, what will the premium be for the traditional fee for service plan with a co-pay for Part B that seniors have today? If it's more than the voucher, and it almost certainly will be, that leaves me without the resources to purchase supplemental or pay the co-pay out of pocket.

Please tell me what these attractive other plans will be. High deductible? Higher co-pay for less premium? Your 'choice' will leave the less well off with no choice at all.

@Randy1949 -

And Obamacare sticks the working class with one of the largest tax increases in the history of this nation!

You claim to be looking out for your children and grandchildren and not just yourself, but how does saddling them with higher taxes for the rest of their working years and not addressing the deficit and debt situation with a real plan help them exactly? Obama's proposed tax increase on the wealthy doesn't even come close to significantly reducing the federal deficit, yet alone start paying down the debt.

So by voting Obama, you're sticking future working class generations with higher taxes, increasing the debt obligation that those future generations will have to contend with, and contributing to lower domestic investment/speculation and increased jobs outsourcing.

Remember - not even a single Democrat supported Obama's proposed budget. The man has no sense of economic reality.

Looks to me like the Obama decision is self-motivated as opposed to caring about the future of your children and grandchildren!

@JRH -- Just the working class? If so, why does it bother you?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/02/no-obamacare-isnt-the-largest-tax-increase-in-the-history-of-the-world-in-one-chart/

I am no fool and cannot be fooled by rhetoric! I just know that keeping tax breaks for the rich up is not working and taking it away from the others is just not right. I am a responsible middle classer saving for retirement and know that others are and in many cases have no choice but to rely on social security through no fault of their own! This is not an entitlement or social welfare, we all pay into it for our future.

It looks like the 'Ryan passed only two bills' is the Dem talking point of the week...

You may want to do some research and see how many bills Ryan actually voted on during his 13 or so years in congress, before you spout off about him doing nothing but passing but two bills during his tenure...

http://paulryan.house.gov/voterecord/

You really want to go there? Most of what he voted on added to our deficit. So now he's turning around and looking to Grams, Gramps and the poor to fix it. And let's not forget the veterans.

Ryan is seen nation-wide as a brilliant policy expert whose bold plan is right for the country. I'll trust his expertise because I've looked him in eyes.

Just wondering how many bills Tammy Baldwin has authored, and what her big idea is for saving the country?

Ryan's record is what it is. If you like what he voted for, then you will like Ryan. If you don't, you won't.

My point is that we at least need to be honest in what we are criticizing him for. If Ryan was a worthless do-nothing in Congress as some are painting him to be, he certainly would not have been re-elected several times, been made chairman of the House budget committee or have been selected to be VP candidate...

Ryan is the perfect counter to accusations that the republicans have been the 'party of no', and that the GOP hasn't presented any alternatives to what the Dems are pushing...

@John Wilson -

Ryan has proposed and co-sponsored several piece of legislation. This year alone, he's authored and sponsored 8 bills while co-authoring and co-sponsoring 74 bills. Rarely does he miss a vote and he always provides an explanation to his constituents as to why he voted on a bill the way in which he did. All of this is exponentially more than I can say for representation provided by congresswomen Gwen Moore to her constituents!

I suggest you look at the primary source as opposed to trusting the Daily Kos as gospel!

Here's the link to help you get started:

http://paulryan.house.gov/

Reading some coverage of the Ryan rollout brings to the forefront the question of the cliches of political journalism, and outlines one way in which Democrats have their work cut out for them. In attempting to create in the public mind a negative perception of Paul Ryan, they'll be fighting not just the GOP's counter-spin, but decades of accepted journalistic convention, and most news consumers' initial reactions to certain key words and phrases.

These conventions work in this case on two levels. The first explicitly involves the journalistic definition of the word "bold." Proposals are routinely labeled "bold" in journalism in a completely morally neutral way. It wouldn't surprise me if we went back to American and British newspapers of 1938 and found a headline or two about "Herr Hitler's Bold Sudetenland Gambit." "Bold," in journalism, can mean anything from genuinely courageous to utterly reckless to morally outrageous.

So by this definition, Ryan's radical and draconian budget is definitely "bold." This means he was a "bold" pick. This in turn means that Mitt Romney, lately just barely keeping his nose above the water line of "milquetoast," is now suddenly "bold" himself! Works like a charm.

GearHead -

GWB too, looked Putin in the eyes and came away "thinking" Putin was an honest, honorable man. Tea Party folks always BELIEVE that they have special powers to discern things that other citizens simply miss, because they have all the answers; and, if you don't believe them, they will gladly point out that you must be a “low-information” citizen, then, they will proudly point to their 4-word bumper sticker, which clearly enshrines all the wisdom of the ages...

Mr. Ryan also Co-sponsored the “Personhood Bill”, which even the arguably dumbest and most inbred – everyone in the state is either your sister, brother, mom or dad – state in the Union, MISSISSIPPI, rejected in a popular referendum by a huge majority… That dog won’t hunt even in a state where IQ’s are as close to being NEGATIVE as you can get.

Ryan co-sponsered the Personhood bill? I thought you said that Ryan had only two bills with his name on them?

Not quite, John. The dude with all the answers (Obama) has looked like an idiot every time he goes up against Ryan. Ryan has run rings around Obama when it comes to policy. The "special powers" folks are those who have stars in their eyes having sucked the Kool-aid of "hope and change." There is a difference between observing honesty and being on drugs.

Ryan has always delivered on what he promissed, and is exactly who he says he is. Obama can't run from his miserable record, and we still don't know who he is. Try as they might, the lamestream media will have a hard time ignoring the discussion of big ideas. But they will do their best to anyway and continue to harp on small-ball issues like income tax records. The groundswell for RR is overwhelming.

CowDung -

I know it is hard... but you Tea Party folks need to learn how to read, then how to understand...

I said Mr. Ryan "... has sponsored and passed TWO BILLS!"

That is the grand slam total of bills that Mr. Ryan has both sponsored AND passed... and that, in 13-years and 8-months!

Try and keep up...

JRH -

Mr. Ryan adores Washington D.C. and is really loathe leaving it to return to help his uncles with their oil leases in Texas, by obtaining federal subsidies for them, at taxpayer expense; parenthetically, he does not think the same about renewable energy or alternative energy resources, as he wants to terminate all federal subsidies for these.

Yes, JRH, Mr. Ryan has indeed been a very, very busy OCD - Don Quixote in congress – similar to you… However, he has accomplished as close to NOTHING as you can get…

This 7-term congressman, whose term will expire on December 31, 2012, has accomplished the following in 13-years and 8-months:

He has sponsored 71 bills or amendments

He has Co-sponsored 971 bills

His total of sponsored/Co-sponsored bills and amendments is 1,042

How much physical effort does it really take to roll off your cot in your congressional office in Washington D.C. to walk down to the House floor and say, “Yah or Nay?”

How much intellectual effort, research, thought – his staff does most of this – does it take to sign as Co-sponsor of a bill?

How ignominious is it for a superlative legislator to sponsor 71 bills and have 2 pass: the naming of a post office in your own hometown and a TAX [IRS] INCREASE BILL…

Only by the Tea Party standard could this be trumpeted as a superlative accomplishment…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/13/wonkbook-a-paul-ryan-primer/

Puh-leeze!!! Voting is part and parcel of doing your job as a congressman.... It is no great "feat".... This man (Ryan) came on the congressional scene when he was less than 30 and has mooched off of the taxpayers ever since. He hasn't done anything truly significant, has a cocky and insulting attitude towards his constituents, the elderly, and women, and simply put into writing a budget proposal that his wealthy campaign donor/masters told him to write. Let's not make a very ineffectual legislator into some kind of hero or super-star...prior to a few days ago, he has been pretty much invisible to everyone outside of Wisconsin. Most voters outside of Wisconsin did not even know who Ryan was until Romney's announcement was made. People from out of state were writing and asking "who is this guy?" and "what has he done other than propose a ridiculous budget?". But, we see this deification of the ordinary all the time in Tea Party politics - Palin, no one knew of her or the degree of her ineptness prior to her selection, and then, of course, there is Romney....who was never chosen or even liked by republicans until he bought the presumed nomination. @John Wilson - your comments were spot on!!

John Wilson:

Many of the 70+ bills sponsored by Ryan actually did pass the House as did many of the almost 1000 bills that he co-sponsored.

Seems like a fair amount of work for his 13 years in Congress.

@John Wilson -

How much effort did it take Senator Obama to roll out of his cot and vote 'present' 129 times during his tenure in the Congress? At least Ryan put in the effort of taking a stance on issues with his votes.

What exactly did Obama do while he served as a Senator in the Congress, other than make lofty speeches about how it was irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling - something that he apparently doesn't even believe in anymore!

By comparison, Ryan has 1000 times the experience and accomplishments of Senator Obama and has remained consistent throughout!

Do you really want to keep comparing Congressional records?

JRH –

YOU… went to comparing President Obama’s [Senatorial Record of 6 months before he began campaigning for the Presidency, with the long, illustrious Tea Party VP candidate who has now spent 13-years and 8-months as a congressman] and Mr. Ryan’s stellar record, NOT I...

And this [Quick, let’s change the topic] when your beloved Mr. Ryan was shown to be a congressman who never saw a Tea Party Bill or amendment that he did not want to sign and get brownie points in his quiver.

Let us face it, JRH, you have absolutely no argument to support [What YOU maintain] are the superlative accomplishments of an OCD congressman, who put his name on 1,042+ bills and had only 2 passed!

“By comparison, Ryan has 1000 times the experience and accomplishments of Senator Obama and has remained consistent throughout!”

Are you sure, it is 1000? Perhaps it is only 999? Maybe it is 1001?

Unadulterated hyperbole and sheer opinion, not a JRH, the ever-insistent FACT MAN to be found…

The only consistency with Mr. Ryan – other than his OCD – is that he is a Tea Party Ideologue!

The only other consistency here is that your arguments are emotional, devoid of any reasonable factual basis, and “full of sound and fury… signifying… NOTHING…”

GearHead –
Hi Sarah, I am so pleased that Bellevue finally released you and The Patch is allowing you to post!

The only thing “overwhelming “here is the manure you are attempting to spread…

“Ryan has always delivered on what he promissed” [Spl?] – Spell Check was just delivered to the Tea Party in June of 2012, so I will forgive your bad spelling, not your bad facts, though.

Mr. Ryan has never promised anything… therefore he has 100% on his delivery record…

Mr. Ryan has never delivered on anything, except naming a post office and, of course, RAISING TAXES on the price of arrows for bow hunting – what a delivery!

You must be aware that Mr. Ryan gleefully voted for TARP, the automotive bailout, and, he even voted to restrict the amount of CEO compensation. I tell you, this is one truly remarkable free market Capitalist!

I am confident that Mr. Romney, “Just let the auto industry go bankrupt” and Mr. Ryan, “We have to save the auto industry” will make the most charming flip-flop American couple that the world has ever known…

Please stay well, remember to take your Meds regularly, and, keep posting your thoughtful psychotic ramblings on The Patch… you and your ilk, just, well, make my day!

CowDung –

Are you really the slowest Tea Party person in America, ever?

Mr. Ryan only sponsored 71 bills and out of all of them only 2-passed!

That leaves 69 bills that fell to dust, died, never went anywhere… need a math refresher?

“Many of the 70+ bills sponsored by Ryan actually did pass the House as did many of the almost 1000 bills that he co-sponsored.”

Please tell me, cite a reliable source for the “Many of the 70+ bills sponsored by Ryan actually did pass the House…”

What are they? Where are they? When did they pass?

“…as did many of the almost 1000 bills that he co-sponsored.”

When did they pass? Where are they? What are they?

Mr. Ryan never saw a Tea Party Bill he did not want to sign; you never had an emotion that you did not want to post and call it FACT!

You and JRH ought to consider, at the very least, dating: you both love the number 1000 and you both are just so emotional and devoid of any FACTS…

I get a major headache every time I have to listen to one of you free loading broads, can I get free aspirin too?

Alfred -

Easy, little man... your loin-clothe is falling off...

There wouldn't be that much to see.

@Randy1949 -

;-)

Can I get free aspirin now that I have read your drivel, sweetheart? You get free BC, and I want free aspirin, isnt that fair?

@Tosa720 -

What insurance plans cover Viagra and Cialis? Hoffa's doesn't. Do those plans charge a higher premium than ones that do not offer such coverage? Could you cite some primary sources, like a copy of the actual insurance policies and a comparative matrix of premium costs for plans offering different levels of coverage? If not, then how exactly do you support the assertions that you're making here - must not be with FACTS???

Even the teachers in MPS don't get free Viagra benefits anymore...

I don't think there's a lot of oxygen where Alfred keeps his head.

There are really two things at issue in the birth control debate: Whether contraceptive drugs and devices should be considered 'preventive' and covered without a co-pay, and whether contraceptive should be covered by a health insurance plan or not. It happens to be the law here in Wisconsin that they must be covered under health plans. That isn't the case in every state, and what you end up with is women paying health insurance premiums that subsidize the other members of their group who choose not to avail themselves of contraception and have their pregnancy expenses covered. Contraceptive coverage lowers the costs of medical care for the group rather than raising them.

It's possible that I'm just better informed, Tosa. Since when has Walker had the authority to dictate what insurance coverage MPS can choose to provide their employees or not?

@Tosa720 -

You've provided nothing but hearsay and mentioned nothing about the difference in premium payments - so what exactly have you proved except your own ignorance as to the facts of reality?

Hoffa uses the third person because Hoffa is 'da man!

Most of the time co-sponsors are those who just want their name added to something whether they agree with it, or just so it doesn't look like they aren't doing anything significant. Further, being put in charge of a committee is not a big deal either. Everyone in Congress gets assigned to a committee and if you have been the long enough you get to actually head a committee - especially if you have brown-nosed the Speaker of the House enough or sat on one committee long enough.. And, after all - that is what Ryan is known for: brown-nosing. Like I said - please do not try deifying an ordinary man who has done nothing much in his career other than sponsor a budget bill written by his wealthy campaign donors.
Ryan is no mover and shaker by any means.

Got a source that lists the author of Ryan's budget bill as his 'wealthy campaign donors'?

There's a big difference between deifying they guy and defending the charge that he's a 'do nothing' congressman because only 2 of his sponsored bills were signed into law...

You seem to be rather brainwashed by rhetoric yourself, Tosa...

How many more Dem talking points are you going to parrot today?

And Barack Hussein Obongo has never run a lemonade stand, what is your point dear?

Your "facts" about the jobs that Ryan held in the private sector are wrong...

Still looking for a link to back up the claim you made about Ryan's wealthy donors authoring his budget bill.

Tosa720 –

You are wasting your time, effort and cognitive abilities on this forum, because you are responding to an entire cabal of Tea Party Devotees who are not interested in reason, rational processes, facts or logic.You cannot discuss anything logically when you are attempting to argue against a BELIEF; the empirical method, logic; Aristotelian or Boolean do not apply here… These folks believe in angels…

These folks believe that man is the ruler of the planet and all that they survey, especially women. Their arguments against women having rights, control of their bodies, health care, particularily their vagina and reproduction organs is not a $$$ argument, although it is couched as such, it is really a threat to their belief(s) that they should be the ones to tell you [Women] who you can have sex with [Behavior] and under what conditions – usually dictated by some religion, enforced by them.

These are people with 16th century mindsets, cultural values, deeply steeped in religious dogma, but living and spouting their prejudices, intolerance, authoritarianism, entitled male dominance in the 21st century.

Finally, once they decide they cannot convert you with their puerile arguments, they will attempt to demean you with: Low-information person, democratic talking points, liberal, et al. An apt analogy would be having the late Christopher Hitchens going to the Milwaukee County Zoo, and attempting to engage an ape in a discussion about the existence of GOD…

Tosa:

I wasn't making any attempt to demean you or John.

Notice the difference in tone between what I say and what John Wilson has been saying. I don't call you names, I don't make judgements about your mindset, prejudices, etc., nor do I make sweeping generalizations about why you believe the things you do. I am only challenging your claims that I believe to be incorrect.

The fact that you can't seem to find the source for your budget bill claim leads me to not believe it.

Wikipedia isn't exactly the most reliable of sources for providing proof for anything. Don't discount anyone working for their family business. Ryan is obviously an intelligent and ambitious person. You shouldn't assume that his work was unimportant or that it didn't contribute to the business. The only difference is that he likely didn't have to interview for the job. You also didn't mention his jobs as a waiter or fitness trainer.

@CowDung -- Alfred was definitely attempting to be demeaning. But he's equal opportunity. He does that to everyone.

Fitness trainer? Really?

I can't speak for anyone but myself, Randy. I'm not Alfred.