Slog
News & ArtsMonday, October 8, 2012
2012 Watch Paul Ryan Get Mad When Confronted with His Own Philosophy
Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:56 PM
This is an extremely uncomfortable video:
I think the problem that Paul Ryan has here is that the reporter states Ryan's philosophy a little too nakedly. Yes, he believes that tax cuts are somehow going to cause people to be better human beings, but his philosophy makes no sense when you say it out loud like that, so he naturally responded with anger.
1
The reporter oversimplified Ryan's position. Obviously, Ryan is for cutting taxes AND building more jails.
2
Yes you can have civil society and cut taxes. It does not take money to teach people civility. What am I missing Mr Constant?
3
@2 Civil society requires a population that is clothed, fed, and housed, whose immediate needs are taken care of. Eliminating social services for a tax cut drives people into desperation.
4
Not to mention, a lot of those churches, etc that supposedly teach us how to be so upright and civil, depend on federal grants.
What a boorish, tacky little nowhere man. The steroids must be taking their toll.
What a boorish, tacky little nowhere man. The steroids must be taking their toll.
6
What @3 said notwithstanding, I actually agree with Paul Ryan on this. The core issue with violent crime isn't really gun access, but rather an environment that fosters violent crime, and civic groups and churches and charities can and are helping. The reporter's sudden mention of tax cuts is sort of a non sequitur. The only way I can connect it with violent crime - and with what DavidG said - is that government plays a huge role in helping to provide healthy communities for children, and Paul Ryan disagrees with that. Like Romney, he only wants policies that benefit the wealthy. (I actually don't think he even cares whether it "trickles down" or not.)
8
I hope Biden gives little Eddie Munster a swift kick in the nuts on Thursday. Rhetorically, of course.
9
Floater, no one in the GOP has ever cared - or even believed - that anything "trickled down". That's just a sound byte for stupid people.
11
"Yes you can have civil society and cut taxes. It does not take money to teach people civility. What am I missing Mr Constant? "
What you are missing is that teachers and schools are an expense to government and adequate taxation is required to provide them. The same is true of policing, judicial services, social services.
Ryan has never addressed the real problem with providing jobs. We don't need just jobs, we need jobs that will provide a wage that can support a family. We need a well educated work force that is ready to take the jobs that are there. We have good paying jobs in skilled manufacturing and tech going begging or relying on workers from other countries because we aren't educating enough people with the right kinds of skills. We need to stop allowing businesses to rely on contract workers instead of hiring directly because they benefit from a lower headcount. Every worker whose job is downgraded that way pays less into the government and costs more in terms of requiring services from government because pay and benefits are so low. Large corporations have been receiving too much support for too long. Small business is not so much harmed by government taxes, as not efficient enough to complete sucessfully with the big players.
Mr. Ryans notions would have worked fine in a 19th or early 20th century environment. They won't serve in the 21st.
What you are missing is that teachers and schools are an expense to government and adequate taxation is required to provide them. The same is true of policing, judicial services, social services.
Ryan has never addressed the real problem with providing jobs. We don't need just jobs, we need jobs that will provide a wage that can support a family. We need a well educated work force that is ready to take the jobs that are there. We have good paying jobs in skilled manufacturing and tech going begging or relying on workers from other countries because we aren't educating enough people with the right kinds of skills. We need to stop allowing businesses to rely on contract workers instead of hiring directly because they benefit from a lower headcount. Every worker whose job is downgraded that way pays less into the government and costs more in terms of requiring services from government because pay and benefits are so low. Large corporations have been receiving too much support for too long. Small business is not so much harmed by government taxes, as not efficient enough to complete sucessfully with the big players.
Mr. Ryans notions would have worked fine in a 19th or early 20th century environment. They won't serve in the 21st.
12
Two points on this.
1. It appears that as soon as Ryan is challenged on anything his handlers end the interview. If you cannot handle an antagonistic interview how are you going to handle the VP job?
2. People in the "inner cities" do not have "good discipline" or "good character". But at least they can be taught.
We need to arrest more people because we are not enforcing the laws and it is their own fault if they're arrested because they lack the qualities of discipline and character.
Dog whistle.
1. It appears that as soon as Ryan is challenged on anything his handlers end the interview. If you cannot handle an antagonistic interview how are you going to handle the VP job?
2. People in the "inner cities" do not have "good discipline" or "good character". But at least they can be taught.
We need to arrest more people because we are not enforcing the laws and it is their own fault if they're arrested because they lack the qualities of discipline and character.
Dog whistle.
13
The GOP has long believed that cutting taxes rewards hard work, and that the reason poor people are poor is because they haven't learned to work hard. They've been coddled by government welfare. Take away the crutch of government support, and unleash the free market, and people will have to stand or fall on their own. That's why the mention of tax cuts is NOT a non-sequitur - it gets to the heart of GOP philosophy regarding personal responsibility.
Except it doesn't work that way in practice: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra…
Except it doesn't work that way in practice: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra…
[Romney's] comments evince no understanding of how difficult it is to focus on college when you’re also working full time, how much planning it takes to reliably commute to work without a car, how awful it is to choose between skipping a day on a job you can’t afford to lose and letting your sick child fend for herself. The working poor haven’t abdicated responsibility for their lives. They’re drowning in it.
14
That's why the mention of tax cuts is NOT a non-sequitur - it gets to the heart of GOP philosophy regarding personal responsibility.
They know all about personal responsibility because their wealthy parents taught them about it in between polo matches.
They know all about personal responsibility because their wealthy parents taught them about it in between polo matches.
15
I don't know if I'm reading too much into the reporter's question, but America does have a "gun problem." Americans love guns. There's a whole lore that has developed over the years that tie guns to freedom and civilization and security. You find it everywhere in America. Yet, the Berlin Wall came down, and all the authoritarian governments in Eastern Europe (with the exception of Romania) fell without a shot fired by the populace. The West was not tamed by the gun, but overwhelming numbers of settlers encroaching on formerly native lands. It's so much more complicated than Americans realize. And nearly every home in Israel and Switzerland and dozens of other countries have a gun in them (because they require miilitary service, and often the soldiers take their guns home - in Switzerland, it's required those serving keep their guns at home), but there's isn't the amount of gun craziness in those countries as there is here.
So yes, America does have a gun problem. It may also have a crime problem, and it may have other problems alluded to in this short clip. But a gun problem? Yes.
So yes, America does have a gun problem. It may also have a crime problem, and it may have other problems alluded to in this short clip. But a gun problem? Yes.
16
floater @6:
Here's what Ryan said: "But the best thing to help prevent violent crime in the inner cities is to bring opportunity to the inner cities"
The only way they're trying to bring opportunity is through tax cuts. I don't see the non sequitur.
The reporter's sudden mention of tax cuts is sort of a non sequitur.
Here's what Ryan said: "But the best thing to help prevent violent crime in the inner cities is to bring opportunity to the inner cities"
The only way they're trying to bring opportunity is through tax cuts. I don't see the non sequitur.
17
Since no one at the Stranger is actually a journalist, I don't expect them to understand what's odd with this reporter's hard left at the end.
18
#3 Wake up sweet heart. We ALREADY Have the social services AND the violent crime. DId you know listen to the interview. Simply giving money to people DOES NOT and never will make them civil people. Poverty does not mean one has to be dirty nor trashy. Being poor does not mean one has to turn to a life of crime. Neither poverty nor poorness are desirable, but if any thinks for one second that handing money to people makes them civil is simple not aware of how people function.
19
Since SWN is a mouth breather who listens to Limbaugh I don't expect him to understand that holding a politicians feet to the fire is exactly what a reporter should do.
20
Why not? Are you claiming that poverty isn't correlated with crime? Do you have even the slightest concept of the desperate measures people take when they're living in poverty?
Is it your contention that, for example, Scandinavian countries have very low crime rates because Scandinavians are morally superior to the rest of us? I wonder what's different about how they look that would make you draw that conclusion.
Alleviating poverty doesn't make people perfect and it doesn't eliminate crime, but it helps. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with what life is like in, say, Sao Paulo or Nairobi knows that to be a fact.
I also find it pretty amazing with how much you rant about this awful this "KKKuntree" is that you support the status quo and stomping on the poor to such a great degree.
if any thinks for one second that handing money to people makes them civil is simple not aware of how people function.
Why not? Are you claiming that poverty isn't correlated with crime? Do you have even the slightest concept of the desperate measures people take when they're living in poverty?
Is it your contention that, for example, Scandinavian countries have very low crime rates because Scandinavians are morally superior to the rest of us? I wonder what's different about how they look that would make you draw that conclusion.
Alleviating poverty doesn't make people perfect and it doesn't eliminate crime, but it helps. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with what life is like in, say, Sao Paulo or Nairobi knows that to be a fact.
I also find it pretty amazing with how much you rant about this awful this "KKKuntree" is that you support the status quo and stomping on the poor to such a great degree.
21
Oh, and by the way. This is a false statement. This country does not offer comprehensive services to the poor, whether in cash payments or anything else. Period.
We ALREADY Have the social services AND the violent crime.
Oh, and by the way. This is a false statement. This country does not offer comprehensive services to the poor, whether in cash payments or anything else. Period.
22
@13 One point that libertarians and I agree on: if you stop "funding poverty" with welfare, we will see a massive drop in poverty levels. Poverty will "die out." Thousands of people will "starve to death," if you will.
24
@18 is right. Just giving people money isn't the answer. If it were, white collar crime wouldn't exist. Eliminating poverty will never happen. What money does change is the nature of the crime, and the jail sentence. A person in poverty will hurt one person and get 40-life. A person with money can hurt more and get 20 years. A rich person can hurt the world and get 5 years (reduced to six months).
25
I don't know that giving people money will automatically make them "civil", however we're defining that. However, I know that giving people opportunities and assistance and a sense that they have potential and a future to live for can do wonders in terms of the choices they make. Taking away what little positivity remains will not suddenly make them stop being and lazy and force them to get their act together. That's not the problem. What it will do is make them more desperate, more hopeless, and then they'll start making worse decisions. And then - to top it off for the fiscal conservatives - society will end up paying the heavy price.
But that's okay, because we'll just take it out of the poor and middle class, while we keep the tax rates for the highest earners dirt low.
But that's okay, because we'll just take it out of the poor and middle class, while we keep the tax rates for the highest earners dirt low.
27
Just giving people money isn't enough, it's true. You have to give people money and education and health care (both physical and psychological, especially preventative). If you do all of that... well, crime won't totally go away and some people will still suck. But you'll have a lot less crime from the people who have the potential to not suck. And we might even learn how to help the people who tend to grow up to suck to suck less if we work harder on real mental health care.
Making people more desperate through cuts to any of the following - food, housing, health care, or education will likely lead to crime from people who aren't even really being immoral. If the only way your society creates for you to survive is through crime then the problem is your society, not you. Giving people the ability to live honestly and crime-free will see a lot of people taking it, because most people prefer not having to risk jail and just like being law-abiding.
Making people more desperate through cuts to any of the following - food, housing, health care, or education will likely lead to crime from people who aren't even really being immoral. If the only way your society creates for you to survive is through crime then the problem is your society, not you. Giving people the ability to live honestly and crime-free will see a lot of people taking it, because most people prefer not having to risk jail and just like being law-abiding.
28
The thing you notice is that Ryan's handlers cut off the interview regardless of what Ryan may have wanted. Ryan's a puppet.
29
Considering how much money rightwing creeps have, money obviously doesn't result in civility. Cheney was a VP (or a P, depending on how you look at it) and he wasn't kicked out of office for not being civil. So Ryan's anger/whatever isn't going to hurt him. Creeps tend to get supported by creeps; we'll soon see how many voters are creeps.
30
I'm sure every big city mayor is slapping their head right now "Of course, its so obvious! All we need to do is teach civility! and it won't cost us a dime -- great idea"
Seriously, this is just another arrogant Republican who obviously doesn't understand the deep seated problems that exist in American inner cities. Does he look to see which cities have done better with regards to these problems? No. Does he compare this country and our reckless disregard for the poor with other countries? No. Does he look at the Scandinavian countries and their success in dealing with social problems while simultaneously providing a better standard of living for almost all of their citizenry? Of course not. It is much easier to lecture about how the poor are lazy and lack the right moral character -- besides, all we really need is another round of tax cuts. This work really well, just like ... well like ... OK, it has never worked that well anywhere (including the U. S.) but this time it will for sure.
Seriously, this is just another arrogant Republican who obviously doesn't understand the deep seated problems that exist in American inner cities. Does he look to see which cities have done better with regards to these problems? No. Does he compare this country and our reckless disregard for the poor with other countries? No. Does he look at the Scandinavian countries and their success in dealing with social problems while simultaneously providing a better standard of living for almost all of their citizenry? Of course not. It is much easier to lecture about how the poor are lazy and lack the right moral character -- besides, all we really need is another round of tax cuts. This work really well, just like ... well like ... OK, it has never worked that well anywhere (including the U. S.) but this time it will for sure.
31
@30 Notably, during the debate, Romney charged that Obama was trying to remake America into another Europe. The idea was that enough of the American public would imagine Europe as an economic disaster zone sinking under the weight of the welfare state (not greedy predation by bankers and politicians). Judging from the polls, looks like it worked.
32
The U.S. does have a gun problem, quite separate from 'criminal' gun violence. Your successful suicide rate is really high because of easy access to guns, and those suicides account for over half of all deaths-by-gun.
Ryan really doesn't understand the connection between poverty and violent crime, and in his arrogance he fails to see that discipline and character is clearly something that people develop, or fail to develop, regardless of their financial resources. Stealing from people is something that rich people do really well, but since it's not generally done at gunpoint, the criminality of it gets diminished.
I was surprised that Ryan responded by accusing the interviewer of putting words in his mouth. Ryan usually just responds to interviewers by answering a question according to what he would have liked the question to have been. He's such a smug, whiny little bitch; I hope Biden spanks him.
Ryan really doesn't understand the connection between poverty and violent crime, and in his arrogance he fails to see that discipline and character is clearly something that people develop, or fail to develop, regardless of their financial resources. Stealing from people is something that rich people do really well, but since it's not generally done at gunpoint, the criminality of it gets diminished.
I was surprised that Ryan responded by accusing the interviewer of putting words in his mouth. Ryan usually just responds to interviewers by answering a question according to what he would have liked the question to have been. He's such a smug, whiny little bitch; I hope Biden spanks him.
33
What I find striking about this whole thing is that the interviewer actually asked that question. Have the media finally gotten sick enough of the right's naked bullshit that they're finally willing to ask them what the hell they mean?
34
This is probably too late for most of you to see this, but here goes: The most striking thing about this video isn't whether the interviewer's question was a non sequitur, it's how Ryan handles it. If we take his reaction as justified - meaning that the reporter was being unprofessional, or trying to get a gotcha out of Ryan - then he could have totally deflated the reporter by taking it on. He could have charged that the question was a non sequitur, or he could have said how cutting taxes creates opportunities for the poor, or something to show that he has full command of the facts and a clear vision for how his proposals would benefit everyone.
His testiness, and curt cutting off (which was actually called off by some handler, probably the same person who childishly tried to hide Ryan from being recorded any more) is evidence of two possibilities - that Ryan doesn't have any such command of the facts, and/or that the proposed policies aren't designed to help the poor at all. We on Slog know this already, but a lot of people wouldn't realize it.
His testiness, and curt cutting off (which was actually called off by some handler, probably the same person who childishly tried to hide Ryan from being recorded any more) is evidence of two possibilities - that Ryan doesn't have any such command of the facts, and/or that the proposed policies aren't designed to help the poor at all. We on Slog know this already, but a lot of people wouldn't realize it.
35
You guys are jealous. The man is brilliant and principled. He's young and nice looking. Then there's Obama who can't string 2 thoughts together without a TelePrompTer to tell him how to spin his failed policies, and Biden, a gaff-ridden buffoon a heartbeat from the Presidency. Democrats: Politicians for Dummies.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
All You Motherfuckers Complaining That aPodments Are Too Small at 200 Square Feet by Dominic Holden
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
Listen Up, Gays: They're Coming to Recruit You by Cienna Madrid
-
Saint Genet Re-Creates "Shoot" by Brendan Kiley
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (35) RSS