Mitt Romney: I’m Running With Paul Ryan, But Not On The Ryan Budget

[joko104]

I think Mitt Romney and his election campaign is incompetent. He picks Paul Ryan, who is most famous for his Budget plan, and in the same day he announces Ryan as his running mate he distances himself from said budget? :doh

You mean like Obama throwing Biden under the bus by not following Biden's plan of dividing Iraq into 3 countries?

 

[The Barbarian]

The Ryan Plan is the Republican plan (voted several times in the House) so what's the harm in Romney endorsing it? Could it possibly be that it's too extreme? And shouldn't Romney be more forthcoming with his own plan?

Maybe you mean like the Obama administration budget plan ??? Oh wait I forget .. Since he took office we haven’t had a budget passed have we? Guess you like that plan better huh ??? I guess you just feel we need another 4 years of “NO” plan … and another 5+ trillion dollars added to our debt ?? Now there is a really great plan.

 

[TheNextEra]

Maybe you mean like the Obama administration budget plan ??? Oh wait I forget .. Since he took office we haven’t had a budget passed have we? Guess you like that plan better huh ??? I guess you just feel we need another 4 years of “NO” plan … and another 5+ trillion dollars added to our debt ?? Now there is a really great plan.

I thoght you enjoyed that since you supported the congress of "NO". You like having no plan since you and other conservatives have supported blocking ANYTHING. So you get what you support, nothing.

 

[AdamT]

You quoted two of my statements, so thank you for identifying which of my statements you were questioning.

Because of Romney's statement, the Ryan Budget is a non-issue and until Romney reveals his own budget, Democrats will simply be trying to wrongly associate Romney to Ryan's Budget if they continue to talk about it.

Several problems there:

One, as several conservative posters have noted, Romney hasn't really rejected Ryan's budget. In fact he has endorsed it on many occasions and categorically stated that he would have signed if he was president and it came to his desk.

Two, Romney refuses to say what the specifics of his plan are, which is an obvious attempt on his part to avoid debate over the harsher aspects of his agenda. And while Ryan's plan is also missing key data, it is far more explicit than Romney's plan and thus provides a better framework for discussion.

Three, Romney's selection of Ryan obviously calls into play discussion of Ryan's budget, which is really the only thing Ryan is known for. Take away Ryan's budget and what do you have? The guy has passed two incredibly minor bills in his decade in Washington and has no other experience to speak of.

 

[cpwill]

Several problems there:

One, as several conservative posters have noted, Romney hasn't really rejected Ryan's budget. In fact he has endorsed it on many occasions and categorically stated that he would have signed if he was president and it came to his desk.

Two, Romney refuses to say what the specifics of his plan are, which is an obvious attempt on his part to avoid debate over the harsher aspects of his agenda. And while Ryan's plan is also missing key data, it is far more explicit than Romney's plan and thus provides a better framework for discussion.

Three, Romney's selection of Ryan obviously calls into play discussion of Ryan's budget, which is really the only thing Ryan is known for. Take away Ryan's budget and what do you have? The guy has passed two incredibly minor bills in his decade in Washington and has no other experience to speak of.

1. Romney is the guy at the top of the ticket, and the policies need to bear his name.

2. Romney is pretty clearly in agreement with Ryan on the basic principles and structures that need to drive entitlement and tax reform; Ryan has changed the details on both multiple times, so he isn't wedded to a set of particulars. Romney has a set of particulars in mind as a goal that fit in with the principles and structure, and so this is simply another change.

3. The Romney-Ryan plan is thus far lightyears ahead from their oppositions', inasmuch as the opposition even has a plan other than "keep on doing what we've been doing and hope eventually it starts working."

 

[danarhea]

LMAO.

 

[cpwill]

I thoght you enjoyed that since you supported the congress of "NO".

No to the Obama agenda as it has been presented (broad strokes - some of the smaller things I like), absolutely.

You like having no plan since you and other conservatives have supported blocking ANYTHING.

But this is simply false. The last time Democrats haven't passed a budget since before the iPad was invented. Republicans have not only fulfilled this basic task of governance, they have done so in a way that is particularly courageous in being willing to grab the Third Rail of politics that threatens our nations' fisc. There are... what, seventeen? twenty? jobs bills passed by the House currently sitting on the Senate Leaders' desk. If you want a "do nothing" house of congress, look in the upper chamber, not the lower.

 

[cpwill]

LMAO.

yup. the stupidity begins.

hey you know what's really funny? have him throw an old lady off a cliff. it's hilarious. :roll:

 

[AdamT]

3. The Romney-Ryan plan is thus far lightyears ahead from their oppositions', inasmuch as the opposition even has a plan other than "keep on doing what we've been doing and hope eventually it starts working."

Again, having a really bad plan is not better than the status quo. What we've been doing has been working pretty well for the last 70 or so years. It isn't irrational to suggest that it can continue to work well with relatively modest tweaks. OTOH, what Ryan has proposed is an absolutely radical elimination of federal government.

 

[Tettsuo]

I find it almost humorous that any person not in the top 2% of earners would vote for another Conservative that's promoting the exact same trickle down crap that's been increasing the deficit since Reagan. Romney and Ryan are again telling Americans that if they're allowed to cut taxes again (mostly for the rich) that this would cause an economic boom. Yet, we've seen the exact same results of a shrink middle class and an ever rising deficit. Whenever someone does a review of their proposals, they tell us that's going to screw the country over... and still people vote Conservative. It's completely mind-boggling.

The wealthy aren't going to save America with a flood of jobs! Get over it! It ain't happening! The Romney / Ryan plan will further shrink the middle class as they want to cut the programs that help those that want to rise out of poverty and join the middle class and the middle class to rise to the wealthy by creating businesses.

Trickle-down, Horse/sparrow, supply-side and any new iteration of these failed policies will only hurt America. Stop buying into the lies and look at the effects of these policies over time. Good lord, we have a vast storehouse of data with the internet at our finger tips. Republican presidents do not reduce the deficit with tax cuts and a larger military. They don't increase the middle class. Income inequality increases and the country continues to sink.

 

[AdamT]

I find it almost humorous that any person not in the top 2% of earners would vote for another Conservative that's promoting the exact same trickle down crap that's been increasing the deficit since Reagan.

Instead of bumper stickers they should have backside stickers: "Romney/Ryan 2012: Kick Me"

 

[Gimmesometruth]

There are... what, seventeen? twenty? jobs bills passed by the House currently sitting on the Senate Leaders' desk.

GOP's Claim That House Passed 30 Jobs Bills? Bogus. | Crooks and Liars

 

[Mycroft]

Several problems there:

One, as several conservative posters have noted, Romney hasn't really rejected Ryan's budget. In fact he has endorsed it on many occasions and categorically stated that he would have signed if he was president and it came to his desk.

Two, Romney refuses to say what the specifics of his plan are, which is an obvious attempt on his part to avoid debate over the harsher aspects of his agenda. And while Ryan's plan is also missing key data, it is far more explicit than Romney's plan and thus provides a better framework for discussion.

Three, Romney's selection of Ryan obviously calls into play discussion of Ryan's budget, which is really the only thing Ryan is known for. Take away Ryan's budget and what do you have? The guy has passed two incredibly minor bills in his decade in Washington and has no other experience to speak of.

1. You need to be reminded of this before you get too far down the road of hysterical demagoguery:

Gov. Romney applauds Paul Ryan for going in the right direction with his budget, and as president he will be putting together his own plan for cutting the deficit and putting the budget on a path to balance.

2. Of course he hasn't stated specifics. Do you find that problematical? If so, don't you find Obama's whole campaign problematical?

3. Romney's selection doesn't call Ryan's budget into play anymore...not since Romney made the statement that is the title of this thread. And even without considering the budget, Romney is well served by selecting Ryan. Do I need to waste space here with links to all the OTHER good things Romney has said about Ryan?

AdamT, it's sounding to me like you have no problem accepting the mantle of hysterical demagogue. Wear it well.

 

[The Barbarian]

I thoght you enjoyed that since you supported the congress of "NO". You like having no plan since you and other conservatives have supported blocking ANYTHING. So you get what you support, nothing.

LOL..... ohh I'm sorry I keep forgetting the liberal matra .. . always blame someone else ..

 

[TheNextEra]

LOL..... ohh I'm sorry I keep forgetting the liberal matra .. . always blame someone else ..

Actually, that's what the conservatives have been doing in regards to debt and unemployment. Only blame Obama as if all the debt and unemployment started with him. Your welcome, now go run and hide some more.

 

[CONSagainROMNEY]

Mitt Romney: I’m Running With Paul Ryan, But Not On The Ryan Budget | TPM2012

FLIP FLOPPER...Next he'll be taking a page out of John Kerry's book and claim that "I supported the Ryan Plan before I didn't support it."

 

[Mycroft]

FLIP FLOPPER...Next he'll be taking a page out of John Kerry's book and claim that "I supported the Ryan Plan before I didn't support it."

Better a flip flopper than a hysterical demagogue like you and your buddy Obama.

 

[CONSagainROMNEY]

Better a flip flopper than a hysterical demagogue like you and your buddy Obama.

Wrong and wrong. I am a fiscal conservative who is not voting for Obama nor any other Democrat.
But as a fiscal conservative and as a man of integrity, Romney's dizzying flip flopping and now his failure to release his tax returns sickens me.

 

[Mycroft]

Wrong and wrong. I am a fiscal conservative who is not voting for Obama nor any other Democrat.
But as a fiscal conservative and as a man of integrity, Romney's dizzying flip flopping and now his failure to release his tax returns sickens me.

You place too much importance on Romney, then. There are really only two issues here:

1. Romney has an "R" behind his name.
2. There is no one else with an "R" behind their name to vote for.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

You place too much importance on Romney, then. There are really only two issues here:

1. Romney has an "R" behind his name.
2. There is no one else with an "R" behind their name to vote for.

So if Obama ran with an (R) by his name, you'd vote for him? That's called "hackery."

 

[CONSagainROMNEY]

You place too much importance on Romney, then. There are really only two issues here:

1. Romney has an "R" behind his name.
2. There is no one else with an "R" behind their name to vote for.

Does that "R" stand for "RINO"???

Look Pal, a letter next to your name does not make a person good or bad friend - that is the most ignorant excuse for determining a vote ther is. Dick Nixon had an R next to his name and he nearly RUIN our great nation.

Btw, What do you have against Gary Johnson - who has an L beside his name??? Or Ron Paul, who you could still write in as your choice?

 

[Mycroft]

So if Obama ran with an (R) by his name, you'd vote for him? That's called "hackery."

Does that "R" stand for "RINO"???

Look Pal, a letter next to your name does not make a person good or bad friend - that is the most ignorant excuse for determining a vote ther is. Dick Nixon had an R next to his name and he nearly RUIN our great nation.

Btw, What do you have against Gary Johnson - who has an L beside his name??? Or Ron Paul, who you could still write in as your choice?

What you both don't seem to understand is...we have two choices here:

1. Elect Obama and continue the same useless non-solution stuff we've gotten from him and the Democrats for the past 4 years.

2. Elect a President with an "R" behind his name who will work with the Republican Congress...who happen to be the ones with the solutions.

If you could guarantee the Obama with an "R" behind his name will work with the Republicans, I'd vote for him. I don't think you could do that, though.

And I have nothing against Gary Johnson...but I know he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell to get elected. Same with Ron Paul. I prefer not to waste my vote.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

2. Elect a President with an "R" behind his name who will work with the Republican Congress...who happen to be the ones with the solutions.

Both sides have solutions. You may not like one sides but differentiate it and prevent falsehoods.

If you could guarantee the Obama with an "R" behind his name will work with the Republicans, I'd vote for him. I don't think you could do that, though.

Such as his $10 per spending cuts for every $1 tax increases?

And I have nothing against Gary Johnson...but I know he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell to get elected. Same with Ron Paul. I prefer not to waste my vote.

You should look up the word "integrity." You seem to lack it as is evidenced by your unwillingness to vote for someone who you really don't support. Vote for who agrees with you wholeheartedly, not some sheepish cop out.

 

[Mycroft]

1. Both sides have solutions. You may not like one sides but differentiate it and prevent falsehoods.

2. Such as his $10 per spending cuts for every $1 tax increases?

3. You should look up the word "integrity." You seem to lack it as is evidenced by your unwillingness to vote for someone who you really don't support. Vote for who agrees with you wholeheartedly, not some sheepish cop out.

1. Sorry, but I don't see runaway increased government spending as a viable solution. Obama and the Democrats tried that already...it didn't work.

2. Now, see...If Obama had an "R" behind his name, he wouldn't be trying to make crappy deals like that. That's what Democrats do.

3. Perhaps YOU should look the word up...here, I'll help:

in·teg·ri·ty   [in-teg-ri-tee] Show IPA
noun
1.
adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.
Integrity | What is the Definition of Integrity? | Dictionary.com

Now, lets see...I don't support Obama, so I suppose to you I have no integrity because I'm unwilling to vote for him. Or, are you talking about Romney? I do support him because he has an "R" behind his name and I am willing to vote for him. Do you think that means I don't have integrity?

Do YOU really know what you mean?

Tell you what...YOU tell me who you want to vote for and tell me if you believe wholeheartedly in everything he stands for. And, if that person is Obama, tell me that you think his campaign tactics...if his flip flops...his insistence on taxing anyone who moves...is something you agree with.

What kind of integrity do YOU have?

 

[Fruityfact]

What you both don't seem to understand is...we have two choices here:

1. Elect Obama and continue the same useless non-solution stuff we've gotten from him and the Democrats for the past 4 years.

2. Elect a President with an "R" behind his name who will work with the Republican Congress...who happen to be the ones with the solutions.

If you could guarantee the Obama with an "R" behind his name will work with the Republicans, I'd vote for him. I don't think you could do that, though.

And I have nothing against Gary Johnson...but I know he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell to get elected. Same with Ron Paul. I prefer not to waste my vote.

What solutions?