"But the Obama campaign recognized, correctly, that Ryan's positioning of himself as the point man on behalf of an austerity that would remake America as a dramatically weaker and more dysfunctional country makes him the most vulnerable of prominent Republicans.
Ryan scares people who live outside the "bubble" of a modern conservative movement that thinks the wealthiest country in the world is "broke" and that Ayn Rand is an literary and economic seer.
The House Budget Committee chairman imagines himself as a high priest speaking unfortunate truths about debts and deficits, the unforgiving foe of social spending who would gladly sacrifice Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on the altar of debt reduction. Ryan has branded himself well within Republican circles, so well that he has parlayed himself into contention for the vice presidential nod. To get that nomination, however, Ryan must count on the prospect that the party that takes as its symbol the memory-rich elephant will suddenly suffer a spell of forgetfulness. That's because the Republican congressman from Wisconsin, for all his bluster, is anything but a consistent advocate for fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets. He is, in fact, a hypocrite,
Or, to be more precise, a hypocritical big spender - at least when Wall Street, the insurance industry and the military-industrial complex call.
Ryan has been a steady voter for unwise bailouts of big banks, unfunded mandates and unnecessary wars. Few members of Congress have run up such very big tabs while doing so little to figure out how to pay the piper. How has Ryan gotten away with his fool-most-of-the-people-most-of-the-time politics?"
-- excerpt from "Paul Ryan? Seriously?" By John Nichols, Common Dreams
This is a confounding analysis, for it ignores the moral ideal of the primacy of the individual, scoffs at the idea that we, yes the almighty U.S., are subject to the same laws of economics as the rest of the world (from the largest nations to the smallest of families, down to an individual's pocketbook), and ridicules the notion that we are heading down a government led fiscal path to the same dead end that Greece and the Eurozone are experiencing (the same to which all nations/political unions throughout history have ultimately succumb).
Make no mistake, I agree that Ryan is a hypocrite, but no less than any other politician, especially Obama/Biden. But what really irks me is that this stinging analysis is all used as a way to bash the republican candidates and in turn support Obama. Yet, Obama pushed for bailout after bailout. Encouraged monetary policies like QE 1, QE 2, and more. He threw money at sham business plans (I.e. Solyndra, G.M.), and now in his arrogance, thinking that those demonstrable failures worked so well, he is calling for bailing out all industries (at least the industries and companies within them that he likes or that throws money at his campaign). He kept us engaged in foreign wars (and gitmo open), and he got us involved in even more wars--unilaterally, with no concern for the consent of the people, or approval of congress. He is involving our service men and women in foreign conflicts for the sole purpose of political power grabs, and supporting the regimes he likes. He fights Al Qaeda in afganistan and supports them in Libya and now Syria. Ohh, and if Bush spying on Americans was so bad, I guess it's quite alright that Obama assassinated an American citizen...(sure he was a terrorist, but then again so are those who are "reverent of individual liberty," "anti-global," or "suspicious of centralized federal authority" to quote Obama's DHS).
From the article:
"The House Budget Committee chairman imagines himself as a high priest speaking unfortunate truths about debts and deficits..." And obama doesn't imagine himself as a high priest speaking unfortunate truths about the dangers of budget cuts and limited government?
I am not saying this means we should turn to Romney or Ryan as our savior. Actually, i am calling for quite another thing. I am saying that we must stop looking to fallen man to be our savior. The right wants corporate welfare and and their own brand of unadmitted soft socialism. The left wants a dependent class, and the state as the supreme being sovereign above all. Both sides of the isle are fascist in the textbook definition of the term.
if both sides are such obvious and demonstrable hypocrites, then why do we keep lining up on the battle lines that they have drawn, encouraging us to take their sides and support them at the expense of our honor and honesty? We are pushed into a world of false choices. We are given a binary set of options and it is in neither that the answers can be found. Why keep defending or supporting any of these power hungry narcissists?
It is pure folly to point out special interests in one side as if they don't exist in the other. This is why our system is so broken today, no one can take anyone seriously anymore. The 'debate' has devolved into schoolyard arguments devoid of logic or self-application of the principles we claim to espouse.
The only way forward is to recognize these inherent faults of any system built on power hungry men. Does Romney want power? sure he does. but can anyone honestly say that Obama doesn't love the power he has or hasn't used it for his own purposes or to aid his special interests? Just because we can point to some faults in Romney doesn't mean that we should hail Obama or praise him blindly. If we are honest seekers of truth, and truly people that desire justice, and individuals who want to be loved and live out love, then we must look for those same faults in every man. For it is not out of a label or a specific party platform that these faults arise; all faults find their source in the heart of man, and it is there we must look and do so indiscriminately.
**disclaimer** I am not a republican, democrat, or affiliated with any other political party. I am a free individual and a free thinker. I pursue truth and desire to live in peace with all regardless of their personal lifestyle. I believe that force/violence/coercion/aggression is evil when wielded by one person or a group of people (even if we call them our leaders,'representatives,' or the state). I put my faith not in man, But in God and his divine laws, yet i force no man to live as I believe I ought to live. I only ask that others respect my individual rights to life, liberty,and property, as I respect theirs. I believe that only through mutual consent may one be bound to and contract, scheme, or policy. And I believe as a moral truism that voluntarism is always superior to coercion.
If we all started truly respecting one another's rights and maintaining respect for one another's opinions, we could all get along much better than we do currently, and maybe then real progress could be made--instead of constantly meandering back and forth between the popular principles of the day.
That is all.