Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:26 PM
DonViejo (4,526 posts)
Paul Ryan lies againHe got famous for telling fibs during the campaign. Now he’s dissembling about his attack on society’s “takers” BY JOAN WALSH Last seen blaming “urban” voters (you know who he’s talking about) for his and Mitt Romney’s bitter November defeat, Rep. Paul Ryan returned to the prevaricating ways he made famous throughout the campaign on Tuesday. There were his silly lies about his marathon time, of course, and perhaps more serious, his serial lies in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention in Tampa, Fla., last August, on welfare, GM restructuring and the 2009 stimulus bill. It’s hard to know exactly what words to use to describe his campaign appearance “helping” at a soup kitchen that turned out to be a photo op showing him scrubbing already clean pots and pans, but “honest” isn’t one of them. Now Ryan is trying to squirm out of the lasso in which the president captured him in his inaugural address Monday. “The commitments we make to each other through Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, these things do not sap our initiative, they strengthen us,” Obama said with indignation. “They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great.” Everyone who followed the 2012 campaign knew Obama was talking about Ryan as surely as if he’d said his name. But now Ryan is complaining that Obama is being unfair, and that he never included Social Security and Medicare recipients in his attacks on “takers.” On the Laura Ingraham Show, he told a guest host that those programs “are not taker programs.” He accused the president of a “switcheroo” and said he had decided to “shadowbox with a straw man” and misrepresent the GOP position on those programs. The problem, as Mother Jones points out, is that Ryan is on record in several places saying that the 60 to 70 percent of Americans who receive some sort of government assistance are making us “a society where we have a net majority of takers versus makers.” He says he got those numbers from a Tax Foundation study — which included Medicare and Social Security recipients to get that number. -snip- http://www.salon.com/2013/01/22/paul_ryan_lies_again/
|
8 replies, 961 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| DonViejo | Jan 2013 | OP | |
| libdem4life | Jan 2013 | #1 | |
| ladym55 | Jan 2013 | #2 | |
| Kalidurga | Jan 2013 | #3 | |
| kairos12 | Jan 2013 | #4 | |
| Scuba | Jan 2013 | #5 | |
| lunatica | Jan 2013 | #6 | |
| NewJeffCT | Jan 2013 | #7 | |
| Filibuster Harry | Jan 2013 | #8 |
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:29 PM
libdem4life (1,783 posts)
1. It's just amazing what a difference a re-election can make. Even the troglodytes have to backpedal.
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:31 PM
ladym55 (1,670 posts)
2. Another day, another lie
|
I'm tired of being told by M$M that that little weasel should be taken seriously.
|
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:54 PM
Kalidurga (4,822 posts)
3. The problem for Ryan is...
|
If you don't include Social Security or Medicare recipients, you don't get anywhere near 47%.
|
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Tue Jan 22, 2013, 11:54 PM
kairos12 (705 posts)
4. Breaking News When He Tells The Truth--Not Holding My Breath
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:15 AM
Scuba (26,739 posts)
5. Paul "Lying" Ryan lies again and again and again and again.
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:22 AM
lunatica (28,848 posts)
6. He no longer has anonymity and obscurity to hide behind
|
Last edited Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:24 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2) We all know him well now. And unfortunately for him women aren't about to forget his delicate touch when discussing the merits of rape.
|
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 10:07 AM
NewJeffCT (35,914 posts)
7. I'm shocked he would lie
|
given his track record of being honest.
|
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 11:27 AM
Filibuster Harry (583 posts)
8. Ah, the clueless one again. Do we have to roll out the tape again??
|
But 2 points here:
1) He had to include SS and Medicare recipients to get to his 60 to 70 %; If he didn't include them maybe he is including our military??? 2) If he truly believes that he never included SS and Medicare recipients in his attacks on "takers" then why is there any reason for him to complain?? He wasn't mentioned personally so why complain?? BECAUSE HE REALLY KNOWS WHAT HE SAID AND MEANT |

