GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Will Democrats Succeed in Demonizing Paul Ryan*?

by

A number of pundits on the left and in the center have showered praise on Paul Ryan’s proposed budget, with Slate’s Jacob Weisberg saying the Wisconsin Republican “has made a serious attempt to grapple with the long-term fiscal issue the country faces. He has a largely coherent, workable set of answers. If you don’t like them, now you need to come up with something better.”

Others have resorted to diatribe, with the Washington Post‘s Harold Meyerson calling the plan “a prescription for diminishing prosperity and security, a road map, in fact, for national decline“:

Ryan’s budget would also reduce projected spending on discretionary domestic programs — education, transportation, food safety and the like — to well below levels of inflation. That not only ensures that high-speed rail won’t be built but also means that potholes won’t be filled.

Does Mr. Meyerson realize that government has been growing well above the rate of inflation at least since Democrats took charge of Congress in January 2007, allowing budget deficits to soar?  And does he really believe his hyperbole about potholes?  If so, he should direct his ire at state and local governments, traditionally responsible for street repair.  And what is his plan for deficit reduction?

It seems national Democrats are following not the sober evaluation of Weisberg, but instead the hyperbolic outburst of Meyerson.  They think they can score political points by labeling Republicans as mean-spirited tightwads who want to give tax breaks to the rich and take food from the mouths of babes.  “House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi,” for example, “said the Republican budget” would “force seniors into starvation.”

Meanwhile, her Democrats still haven’t come up with a plan.  And yet, as Greg Sargent reports in the Post‘s Plum Line, they’re hoping “hoping to use the Ryan proposal against numerous” candidates.  Via David Freddoso who asks if Democrats can turn Paul Ryan into the next bogey-man?

Seems the Democrats’ plan is to attack rather than come up with a plan of their own.   Jennifer Rubin contends that Democrats aren’t even making a secret of their political game; they, she writes, “can’t help themselves, reinforcing at every opportunity that THEY are playing politics. Politico reports:

The reality is that Democrats with close ties to the White House believe Ryan has handed Obama a powerful political weapon for 2012 — an issue that starkly defines the GOP as a party bent on attacking the vulnerable with the potential to cause the same kind of damage as George W. Bush’s ill-fated plan to privatize Social Security.

Senior Democratic strategists told POLITICO that the Ryan plan is almost certain to be a centerpiece of their advertising and fundraising efforts.

“It’s bad enough,” she quips, “to do that; it’s just amateur hour to say it to the media.”  The Democratic plan is beginning to come into focus, attack Republicans.  They’d rather attack the opposing party than come up with a budget solution of their own.

Recall, that a government shutdown looms because when they last controlled Congress (i.e., last year), Democrats (“for the first time ever“) failed to pass a budget.

With a public increasingly concerned about high deficits, one wonders if, outside their base, this strategy can work.

—–

*And Republican proposals to control spending.

Comments

  2. Kind of funny to hear the same Democrats who attacked Sarah Palin as nuts for talking about “Death Panels” in ObamaCare now hysterically claim that the Ryan budget is going to destroy Medicare and “force the elderly into starvation.”

  3. The proposed Budget is TWICE what it was 10-12 years ago…and I don’t remember things being as Apocalyptic as the Democrats describe.

    And the Democrats thought that spending was at acceptable levels 10-12 years ago… The Democrats keep calling for returning to the Clinton tax-rates…yet the Clinton spending-levels are unacceptable??

  4. You know Ryan’s math assumes an unemployment rate of 2.8% in 2020? Does that sound realistic to you? Do you know that he assumes cutting even more taxes for the rich is going to increase revenues by about $600 billion? The guy is full of shit.

  6. Lyin’ Ryan’s entitled to about the same degree of respect you folks have for Congressman Frank or Senator Boxer.

    To expect more than that would be silly of you.

  7. I don’t read comments here very often so I’m going to give Levi the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s not just a troll. Could you please share the research you’ve seen that demonstrates that current federal tax rates are to the left of the hump on the Laffer curve? Thanks.

  9. Kind of funny to hear the same Democrats who attacked Bush as nuts and evil for talking about “terrorism” now hysterically claim that a budget showdown is going to mean the troops go unpaid.

    Oh wait, it will – only because Democrats want it that way:

    Republicans have proposed [ed: and Democrats have evidently not adopted] a one-week CR that takes the troops out of the line of fire entirely in the budget battle by fully funding the Department of Defense for the rest of FY2011.

    Hostage-taking, anybody?

    AndyN, welcome! Your comment is lovely, the more so as Levi actually isn’t very good at facts / research.

  10. The Obama Democrats have nothing to offer save their demagoguery of Ryan’s plan; this should speak for itself. The Democrats are alll sound & fury signifying nothing.

  11. Granny Goodness,

    If you can stop singing the praise of pedophiles long enough to actually provide some facts, care to explain the ‘lyin Ryan’ comment?

    I’m sure once you do, you’ll feel like a kid again.

  13. You know Ryan’s math assumes an unemployment rate of 2.8% in 2020? Does that sound realistic to you?

    Really, Levi?

    You and your fellow Obama puppets were screaming about a “depression” when unemployment was at 5% under Bush and claiming it should be half that amount — which is 2.5%.

    Were you unrealistic then? Or are you just desperate to smear and attack now, not realizing how absolutely stupid, hypocritical, and inconsistent you look to intelligent people?

    But then again, what should we expect – you and your Obama Party are full of brilliant people who are demanding the Mars rover take pictures of the flag the astronauts left there. You live in your own delusions of history, so it’s no surprise that you rewrite it at will. But intelligent people with values and principles can see right through that one.

  14. Nancy Pelosi gave me a good laugh last night. The first thing that came into my mind when she was commenting on Paul Ryan´s Budget Propoasal was that she read it yet. True to form, demonize it now, read it later.

  15. One very simple alternative to Ryan’s plan is to let the Bush tax cuts expire. It is slightly hypocritical that all these new House republicans who campaigned that Obama’s health plan would destroy Medicare are now supporting a plan that would privatize medicare and result in many senior citizens not having health insurance, the majority of senior citizens did not have health insurance prior to the passage of medicare.

  16. One very simple alternative to Ryan’s plan is to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

    One very simple alternative way to make the deficit *worse*… yes.

    Higher taxes wouldn’t actually increase revenue, after the first year or so. We are in the wrong part of the Laffer Curve for that.

  17. It is slightly hypocritical that all these new House republicans who campaigned that Obama’s health plan would destroy Medicare are now supporting a plan that would privatize medicare and result in many senior citizens not having health insurance, the majority of senior citizens did not have health insurance prior to the passage of medicare.

    Not really.

    You se, Obama and the Obama Party wanted to take the money that seniors had contributed throughout their entire working life to Medicare and use it to purchase free health care for the Obama Party base, which consists primarily of welfare addicts who won’t work and who want other people to pay their bills from them.

    What IS hypocritical, Brendan, is how Obama supporters like yourself cry about senior citizens when you in fact want to strip them of their ability to choose their own health care plan and force them to pay higher amounts to subsidize lazy Obama Party welfare addicts who won’t pay their own bills and won’t manage their own spending.

  19. One very simple alternative to Ryan’s plan is to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

    May I see your math on that? The last I saw, Ryan’s plan reduces the deficit by $4,000 Trillion over 10 years. Repealing the Bush Tax Rates only increases revenue $700 Billion over ten years. ($700 Billion being the number the Dems were tossing around last fall when they wanted the rates to expire.) According to math in my universe, $700 Billion is less $4 Trillion.

  21. Is that really what Brendan wants to advocate?

    We have to remember, V the K, that liberals and Obama Party members don’t actually pay taxes.

    It is easy for Brendan to say that raising tax rates 88% is an option, because it’s not going to hit his wallet — and the spending cuts will likely blow up one of the myriad welfare programs that prevent him from having to be inconvenienced with such petty things as jobs and responsibilities.