Sometimes it’s the little moments that tell you something–like this from a Meet the Press panel discussion (4/22/12) about potential running mates for Mitt Romney:
DAVID GREGORY: E.J., the point though also about Paul Ryan is that if you want to send a message you’re serious about the budget you could do that with Paul Ryan.
DIONNE: Well, I don’t think his budget is serious, so I disagree with the premise of the question.
It’s worth remembering that in the Beltway media, “Paul Ryan is Mr. Serious Budget” is the neutral, middle-of-the-road position, and someone who thinks otherwise–based on, you know, facts–has an opinion.
I’m not sure the point here. Yes, it is frustrating how seriously people take Paul Ryan. I don’t even think we can say he has a budget. When I make a budget, I don’t say, “I’m going to buy a new car that I’m going to pay for some way that I’ll figure out some time in the future.” That’s not a budget. That’s a plan to make a budget.
However, I think we need to give a little credit to E. J. Dionne. I like the man, and by American standards he is a liberal. But he is definitely part of the mainstream and it is hopeful that people like him are countering what all the Serious Centrists take as the Word. In fact, it seems that there has been a lot more push-back on Ryan’s “plan to make a budget” this year than last.
I would say this exchange is an ever so slightly positive sign.
I on the other hand LOVE Paul Ryan.Obamas budget(years in the making) has been turned down by his OWN PARTY.The CBO has given it a thumbs down.To Republicans it is just a goof.Ryans budget on the other hand is based on the tried ,and true method of letting an economy breath, and the good that will come of it.It has NEVER failed us before.Personally i think he underestimates it by a country mile.So he is not serious?Just wait to see how serious he is once Mitt takes the helm.I would give a lot to see Ryan debate Obama on fiscal policy.He would make mincemeat of him.Listen please to his speech at the George Bush presidential library.Fantastic.
Ryan certainly isn’t serious. His proposal is a stunt, and if the full details of its impact were explained to the public, it wouldn’t poll out of single digits in the reddest state in the union, which is why Harry Reid insisted on holding it up for a vote, so Senate Republicans would be on the record as voting for it. Where Reid and the Senate Demos may have miscalculated is in expecting the press to tell the public what was in it, a necessary step in effectively using it as a weapon. The corporate press–inherently conservative, as always–treats it as serious merely because it’s designed to make a show of embracing “tough” austerity measures. The press loves austerity. Reporters and commentators who bother to look into it understand it to be ludicrous, but they’re few and far between. It’s much easier just to parrot the narrative about it being serious and about Ryan being “brave” for offering it.
Classic liberal2
Are you saying austerity measures are ludicrous?Or are you saying “his” austerity measures are ?As far as the press I too am surprised they are not doing more to attack it.Not for any concrete reason but because they are so in Obamas corner (if the last election be any indication).Look Paul Ryan is doing something Obama is not.He is floating ideas about how to stop spending.Stop taxation that cripples the economy.Remove burdens on businesses that recreates wealth and floats the existing social programs.Obama has nothing but tax and spend.Even his OWN side turned down his better late that never budget.After that horror it takes balls to say the other side is not serious.Ryan has said in effect that it is not draconian yet.But it damn well will be soon if someone does not turn off the spending tap.But be specific if you can.What about his ideas makes you feel he is not serious?Because the way things look now….Obama is out in november.Possibly the right takes the senate as well.You better come to grips that this xmas you may be looking at a “brave” new world very different from liberal hopes.
Dean Baker admirably dismantled it in the article to which Peter linked above:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/the-paul-ryan-rorschach-t_b_1380895.html
The Washington Post took it apart, as well, but the article seems to have disappeared. Ryan’s plan is built on phony numbers, and ends most of what government does, which would destroy not only the economy, but a lot of civilized society, as well. But that presumes it would ever be enacted, and it won’t. Nor is it ever meant to be.
Classic liberal
Well i read the piece you offered and what can I say but I don’t agree at all.The idea that we can’t shrink government spending as he proposes….That it is an impossibility at least as far as the left is concerned is troubling.Mr Ryan is saying that we can do this the hard way…. or we can do this the really hard way.The spending will be coming to an end.One way or another.You can take all of Obamas wish list taxes and what will it pay for?The increased and increasing food stamps.Thats about all.You can tax the rich at 100%…confiscate every thing in the United states…times it by five,and you are not out of the woods.This is the last chance to put our financial house in order.Or at least to turn the boat.After this we will follow Europe into austerity measures.We will dance to the tune of puppet masters like Standard and poor.We will loose control of our own economy.Put blame aside for a moment.There are many things we can agree on.Things that are absolute economic principles.At least with anyone not ed-u-ma-kated in liberal economic centers.Seriously we must stop spending what we do not have.We must stop printing and borrowing money.We must recreate wealth.Creating wealth is creating real holdings of real value.Broad taxation simply shuffles the existing money from on side to the other passing through government hands,loosing most of its value in the exchange.I understand the left believes that government(even a republican government)spends people money better than they can themselves.I understand you believe that.Why you believe it I have not the foggiest idea.
Paul Ryan is the beginning .The first step to move away from everything Obama.Away from the greatest effort in the history of mankind to create a supremely empowered FED in complete control of a massive nanny state.An idea in complete variation to our constitution and the bedrock principles of this country.You can scoff all you want at any attempt to turn of the taps.Hope you keep that sparkling sense of humor when everybody realizes the gravy train is over.
@classic liberal
Here’s the Washington Post piece on why the Ryan budget doesn’t work.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-unrealistic-assumptions-behind-paul-ryans-budget-numbers/2011/08/25/gIQAEZrePS_blog.html
Jonathan Bernstein
What I think is notable about Ryan is how fraudulent his budgets are. And that’s why I’d suggest 3.75 as one of the key numbers. That’s the target as a percentage of GDP, under Ryan, for the entire government other than Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP, by 2050.
Since Ryan has separately objected to cuts in the military below 4% of GDP, it means that Ryan would theoretically not be able to meet his own target, even if he shut down student loans, FEMA, NASA and the National Weather Service, the FBI and federal prisons, all immigration enforcement, the FDA and other food safety programs, air traffic control, and more.
The problem with Ryan is that his numbers — his $4.6T and his 3.75 — are just phony. He has no intention of producing $4.6T in revenues, and no intention of shutting down those programs (which, remember, still don’t do the trick if he wants to protect military spending from any cuts), but he wants the credit for being serious about deficit reduction.
He’s not serious. The numbers don’t add up. He’s peddling a fraud. And that’s why $4.6T and 3.75 are all you need to know about Paul Ryan.
http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/04/in-which-i-disagree-with-paul-krugman.html