Ryan will present a major problem for the President. He will be able to explain why the President has been such a spectacular failure and why his Obamacare numbers simply don't add up. Obama just can't "do math" while Ryan is a budget wiz. Add Obama's IQ to that of Biden's and they still come up 25 points short of Ryan's. Anyone who listens to the three of them know that.

Romney selected Ryan partly because he was able to look at several years of his tax returns and liked what he saw.

Some Republicans may ultimately reject Ryan for his championing of LGBT rights and his affection for Ayn Rand, an atheist.

Ultimately, it's mostly the government throttling faction that will stay with Romney/Ryan.

"Spectacular failure", comments about Obama's low IQ. Hilarious. Keep on hatin' pal. Obama is going to win. Ryan is a zealot who will energize the base but no one votes for VP. Mitt is too milquetoast for anyone to really care. Mitt has is a cold hearted capitalist who has destroyed more lives while enriching his. He's also a colossal liar and an accomplished flip flopper. He's the best the republicans could do? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so scary. A Romney/Ryan administration would do the same amount of damage to our country as Bush/Cheney.

You need to read the NY Times article today regarding Paul Ryan's stand on social issues - he is a conservative Catholic and his positions fall in line with the tenets of the Church on same-sex marriage and abortion. President Obama himself is an avid pro abortion president (even voting as a Senator in Chicago against a bill that would protect the life of a baby that survived an abortion, the "Baby Born Alive" bill), was, until recently, also against same-sex marriage but in the interest of garnering votes and inciting passions, he "FLIP-FLOPPAED" his position on the issue. As to Obama's "IQ", we have no real knowledge as to what that is as he will not release his college records....I do believe that a truly intelligent person speaking to a military audience would never mis-pronounce the word, "corpsman" not once, but twice....corpseman? really?? ah ah

Hey JustAMom......remember when the POTUS referred to the "Austrian Language", or that The US did not have enought Arabic translators in Afghanistan, or while insulting the British said they should return the "Maldives" to Argentina, or when he pronounced Massachusetts as Massa"tu"setts, or his campaining in 57 states, or his surprise that his third party car insurance did not pay for the repair of his old Honda Civic when it was sideswiped in Somerville, or that Rutherforrd B Hayes would not allow a telephone in the White House, or the Germans signing surrender terms on the Missouri........man my hand is getting tired typing and I am only 10% through

Ms Inglis,
Just curious, but what makes you say Obama is intelligent? He presented a budget that was rejected, 97-0 in the Senate, and another one in the House that was rejected 414-0 (that is the US Presidential record by the way). Is it the case that he is just soooo intelligent that us mere mortals and the hoi poloi in the Congress, both Democrat and Republican, just can't see it? His spectacular budget failure, rejected unanimously on two occasions by the Congress.....it is because he is just so intelligent and above everyone, that he is not understood? Or are you one of the privledged few that saw his mysterious college transcripts?

President Obama is not only intelligent, but articulate and thoughtful as well--just a few of his characteristics that make him such a good Presdient. Mitt Romeny better get out his Etch-A-Sketch and hope he can erase his terrible decision to choose Ryan a/k/a the zealot (good one hammergjh)! Republicans love to pretend they're fiscally responsible; however, their records simply do not support that fantasy. Putting a Republican back in charge of the economy is like putting a fox in charge of the hen house. We just can't afford it!

And what proves he his intelligent? You couldn't argue that he is in the same league as Romney or Ryan, correct? He may be smarter than Biden....I'm not sure, but he is no intellectual. In fact I think he is probably bright, but he appears to be intellectually lazy because he says so many ignortant things that suggest he is not a big reader. and I believe it is because he seems to have decided he learned everything he needed to know 25 years ago. I mean how many other 51 year olds are left in the US that believe Socialism works after witnessing the collapse of the old Eastern block and now the near collapse of Western Europe?

Well Hammergjh, I didn't insult you, but angry liberals can't help themselves, can they? But lets straighten a few things out. The "head of the law review:" is an elected position. It is not based on merit, it is based on popularity. Obama was 27 when he was at Harvard which probably helped in convincing the younger students to vote for him because of his level of maturity measured against thiers in a relative sense. If the acheiving the position had been based on merit because, wouldn't we expect some sort of contribution by Obama to the review....an article, a cartoon, a horoscope, a movie review? As far as familial influence to get it, of course he had that. It was his African Heritage that got him in, he even admits it was Affirmative Action that got him the education that middle class people like me could only dream of. Despite his grandparents being fairly wealthy (his Grandmother was a bank President in the 60's !), sending him to the best private high school in Hawaii and providing a life of privledge to young Barack, he still got a free ride into Columbia and Harvard because of his "familial" influence....his father's bloodline. Oh, and Bush's grades at Yale were far better than Obama's at Occidental, Columbia, or Harvard. Dont' forget, in his own book he admits that he was a pot smoking, cocaine sniffing lay about who rarely attended class when at Occidental. Hard to get good grades when you are strung out every day.

In a word...No. They are both terrible for the middle class (and anyone else that isn't wealthy).

I suspect if you want Obamacare repealled you'd vote for Romney/Ryan.
If you're happy with the way your money's been spent the last four years, vote for Obama/Biden.
Personally, I think if Obama wins, the country will wait four more years for a chance at recovery. I was surprised that Deval Patrick was reelected, so anything can happen.

i can't stand ryan or rommeny. Obama is my man. he is smart and intelligent.

There is no convincing people who support government run healthcare what a nightmare it is until it is too late. I lived in a socialist country with "Free" healthcare. It proved the old adage that you get what you pay for. You dealt with bureacrats with Registry of Moter Vehicle atitudes and intelligence, telling you who would see you, when they would see you, and what they would do for you. From time to time you faced nurses strikes, or doctor strikes, or at times both. Lines were long and even when you made it to the front of the line, the doctor was underskilled because he/she were undertrained to save money. Good luck with Obamacare......ignorance is bliss. Who needs the freedom to chose how to manage your health when you can have a 40K a year bureacrat to tell you want to do. Oh and Sarah Palin may never have had too much to say that was intelligent, but she was spot on with the Death Panels.....that is exactly what they are. 15 appointed government hacks will decide levels of care that comport with funding. If you are over the age of 55, you'd better get your knees or hips replaced now if you need to, because you will be deemed too old and non productive enough to warrant replacement under Obamacare. Don't believe me....put the words blue pill/redpill/Obama into a Google search to see what your President thinks should happen to you when you get to be too old in his opinion. That is Obamacare in a nutshell and from the horses mouth.

I think unfortunately Obama says the soothing words that appeal to his supporters emotionally and not rationally. He tells them not to worry, that he will give them something for nothing by taxing other people to pay for it. The problem is that the "others" don't have enough money to pay for the free stuff he promises, even if every last cent was confiscated from them. So he will print extra money and inflate the economy, leaving the bill for our children, and he will borrow the rest from China for our granchildren to pay.. One way or another, his supporters won't have to pay and none of them will have an ounce of guilt over the wrecked carcuss of a country they will pass along to future generations. It is them, the "me" generation, that Obama represents, that truely believes someone else should pay their way...either the rich, future generations, or both. History is replete with examples of bankrupt nations that went broke because popular leaders gave them free stuff that was never paid for.

Lenny, I think you should shut off Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck. Obama has never said anything even remotely close to your nonsensical post, but I know Messrs. Limbaugh and Beck have! I think a reality check is in order for you. Stop obsessing and worrying that someone else is going to get something for nothing, and try doing something to help out someone in need. Trust me--you will feel a lot better. Do you really think someone is going to try to get cancer so they can get free health care? That's just crazy! Shut off your right wingnut radio (now)!

Lenny, give it a rest, you are embarrassing yourself now. "Death Panels"? Really? Dude.

Keep at it Lenny, the libs are getting upset, they can feel their free things and bloated pensions slipping away. Given the chance to vote themselves free things the people will do it every time. The wave is coming and they don't even see it.

Yes Hammerigjh, death panels. They will decide the funding levels for end of life care. They're panels that decide whether socialized care will be provided in certain instances and certain illness, whether to prolong life or hasten death. They're Death Panels....panels that make life & death decisions. Death Panels. Really "Dude" they are Death panels. --And Ms Inflis, what did I say that Obama said, that he didn't say? Are you referrring to the Blue Pill/Red pill thing? Because I believe that is all I quote him as saying. As far as Beck,.I don't like him. But Rush, I think he is the greatest. Rush is right almost all the time, juxtaposed to Obama who is almost always wrong. I don't worry about someone getting something for nothing,.I worry about people who think they are entitled to something for nothing. Because the more and more the numbers of people who think like that grow, the greater the danger to the well being of society is, and they can vote. Tell me both of you, the riots in Greece for example......any idea at all why that is happening? The huge numbers of unemployed people in Spain....any clue? Do you think you are watching a movie? Is there any possibility...any chance at all that either of you can draw any conclusions, or learn anything from what is happening over there, and learn something from it? Can you take any bit of evidence that is in front of your eyes and extrapolate that to our future under Obama if he is re-elected (God forbid)?

remember Lenny, we live in Mass. we tend to think that the rest of the country thinks like we do and thank God they don't. We live in a state where the last three democratic speakers of the house are convicted felons. You have to go all the way to Chicago to get those kind of numbers. Have faith in the people, even if Obama wins another term the people will eventually right the ship. It is very difficult to put this freedom thing back in the bottle after the people have fought and died for it and have enjoyed it for so long. Yes, the people built this country, not the government and it will be very difficult for the government to take it away from the people.

"Rush is right almost all the time". Damn Lenny. You need to get out more. I'm done w/ this conversation. Whenever someone quotes Rush Limabugh and says "he's the greatest" I'm know I've been dealing w/ the tinfoil hat crowd. Get back you your meds man.

Hmmm, as the great Rushbo says, when liberals can't refute an argument they revert to name calling. Sounds like he's got your number hammergjh. But I must admit hammergjh, I'm a bit disappointed with you. You didn't call me a racist, a tea bagger, the pilot of the Halliburton hurricane machine, or a hate monger before you threw in the towel. You may have to turn in your Chris Matthews fan club card for falling so short. I mean all you did was insult what you guess to be my fashion sense and my medical condition. Too bad you can't come up with an answer as to why Greece is in the condition it is in and what reasons you have for why it is not the path Obama has us on. But again, to quote Rush Limbaugh, you name call because you have no plausible argument to support your flawed views.

Yes, and I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting you actually believe what you write. I am sure you received a good education, the problem is that what you learned was wrong.

So Hammergjh, if I ask you to answer Lenny's simple question which you have been dodging for some time now does that make me a fool too and if so please enlighten us on how we are not going down the same road as Greece.

Lexi, unfortunately we can't draw them out specifically because they have no answer that can support what they want to believe. Their silence in response to the question about Greece tells us all we really need to know about them and that they know they have no answer to defend the President's policies when asked in the context of the Greek colllapse. I'm sure you have heard the old adage that conservatives believe what they see while liberals see what they believe. This is what is happening here....they just refuse to see what is happening in Greece and why, but instead chose to believe that Obama, doing exactly what Greek governments of the past, will somehow defy the laws of math and physics.

We are not Greece, not even close. Our bonds are highly rated and still sought after because investors know how truly safe they are. The U.S. pays it's debt. And btw, whose the biggest debtor for the U.S. gov't? We are. We own it in the form of bonds, treasuries, etc. NOT the Chinese. We have debt but the biggest problem is lack of demand. And where's the inflation the right seems to warn us about because of are debt? Non-existant. We are not Greece. What we need is a strong middle class. The MC drives the economy. When the MC got hammered in '08 the economy tanked. Millions lost their jobs due to the greed of the oligarchs, the malfeasance of the banks and the fact that the past republican administration was in cahoots w/ them. Laissez-faire oversight under Bush 43. George W. Bush did more damage to this country than Bernard Pollard did to Tom Brady's knee. The MC drives 70% of the economy. When the class warfare against the MC stops, we will have a strong economy again. Cutting wages and benefits, offshoring, all has to stop. Increasing manufacturing, gov't jobs (teachers, police, fire, etc.), good white collar and blue collar jobs that pay a living wage must be here. We need these so that we can recover. Big business isn't the answer because they are too busy cutting and offshoring jobs for short term gain, sorta Romney's game plan at Bain. If you want a repeat of Bush 43, vote for that lying, flip flopping Mitt Romney.

Right on the money John B Goode. They destroyed the economy by the forced unwinding of traditional banking rules; 20% down, verified income, accurate market assessment of property value. They bullied banks to lend in contravention of those age old parameters accusing them of "redlining". Then when the Democrats effected the near collapse of the economy by bullying the banks into unsound lending they turned around and accused the same banks of "predatory lending". Have we heard those hypocrites mention the phrase "redlining" since?

It is really interesting to read these comments. I usually try not to get involved with any political discussion, I am not even a voter, because I believe before you choose something you should have real and truthful information about the choices, and I do not have time to do the research. But reading your discussion I noticed an interesting trend: republicans are much more intelligent and operate with facts (at least it seems like it) while democrats mostly insult opponents. Also it seems more women are democrats and more men are republicans.

well i am still for obama ok he is the man. forget about rommey. he doesn't for the middle class only for the rich.

There you go Jean

Double wow at this exchange. Freedom of speech hi test! Lenny, I thought your posting priveledges were still under suspension... Glad to see you are out of the penalty box.

There are many comments that grow from factual inaccuracies. We all have to be responsible in sorting this out. Very difficult. Former Mayer Kock of New York City sees the selection of Ryan as a repeat of the polarizing Goldwater ticket of 1964. The results reflected a rejection of extreme views. The proposed ticket represents A surrender by those who should know better in the republican hierarchy . How embarassing the limitless series of destructive debates had to be for those who respect the traditional republican vales...Karl Rove ,who remains puzzled by Romney's ascension ,must be doubled over in pain with the Ryan choice.
The radicals on both sides disrupt. The art of compromise requires cooperation. It is up to the electorate to seek candidates who can make good things happen.

Let's be the first to abandon the extreme rhetoric of mud slinging( everyone gets a face ful) and try to really appreciate what is needed to restore cooperation between all three branches of our Goernment. Mud slinging is more fun, but kids. Time to really get serious.

Congratulations to this group of people who have posted....you are really participating in a great and free political process..

Pa Lenny. Would you be on my death panel next time my name comes up on the list?

Brian, I thought it was you that sanctioned my parole? Anyway, happy to be on your death panel if you'll have me, but I warn you that I am pretty frugal and you won't be getting the red pill.....you'll have to hope for the best with the blue one!

Brian,
I understand what Koch is saying,but let me ask you....don't you think Obama is the most leftist President ever? Wouldn't you say he to the far left? It is not an attack, his views are his views and if they are to the far left, so what? But when Koch or anyone says that the Ryan pick is the polarizing one, I would say that is missing the point. Had Hillary been the Dem nominee in 2008, I would say that would have been a Center Left pick opposing a Center Right McCain. But in my view, Obama is much further to left than Ryan is to the far right. I would also suggest that Ryan's ideas are closer to President Kennedy's then Obama's are.

Lenny
Good points. Obama would be my clear choice not because of leftist leanings. He is an advocate for social justice. Mitt is not. Ryan's budget has been analyzed as impractical by the office of management and budget A very detailed 21 page report that describes his plan as one that could not be implemented. Given Mitts fluidity, and Ryan's extreme budget desires, they represent an unworkable team. In the final analysis neither presidential candidate has the power to raise or cut taxes. That rests with the congress. Same for budgeting. So much wind blowing around on these items. Leadership philosophy is where I hang my hat. A commitment to Social justice is what I look for.

Great to hear Death panels are back in the discussion. I expect the birth certificate issue will surface , right after the accusations of Muslim terrorist connections.

The silly season is upon us!

Jim Malone, you are quoting an article written by a "liberal economist" (a bit of an oxymoron) 16 months ago. Mr. Wiesberg praised the Ryan budget but then was forced to backtrack because the liberal blogs went nuts. He says so in the article. Then Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman (there are no longer any standards for the awarding of Nobel Prizes) repeats Wiesberg's interpretation of what the CBO reported the other day and every liberal blog picks it up, it is what you copied and pasted on your comment. Firstly, the CBO does not use words or phrases like "absurd future". It is made up, it isn't true, and you are repeating it without knowing that it is false. Secondly, Ryan is not against SS...it is crazy to even suggest that he is. It is made up and it is untrue. He is not against private companies working for the government.......how the hell would roads or bridges be built if they weren't done by private companies hired by the government? Suggesting he is against gov contracts is factually incorrect. What he is against is government control of those companies. I'd like to know where this hysteria coming from? Is following the constitution and balancing the budget that frightening?

So BC, instead of saying you are for social justice why don't you just tell us all that you are for progressive taxation, income redistribution and property redistribution so everyone out here knows exactly what you stand for. The term social justice is a bit benign until you look a little deeper into its meaning, I'm gonna go way out on a limb and say your in the minority with that type of thinking. Maybe you should suspend yourself for a little while instead of waving your magic wand and suspending people you do not agree with or better yet just ask Obama to make a executive order to shut everyone out you don't agree with, he's getting very good at it and you two seem to have a lot in common

Lexi
Glad to see you have not lost any of your charm.

My pleasure, enjoy this beautiful day.

I think social justice is a term that can be broadly defined. It appears to have been sucessfully captured by the left to mean what they believe in, but it my view, having a job is the best social program. It gives one dignity, independence, and a pride in being able to create and support a family on your own terms. For the last 3.5 years, the focus has not been on creating jobs or an enviornment in which to create jobs. People need unemployment checks, food stamps, welfare subsidies, and housing assistance because they are desperate due to the Obama economy, not because they want those things or prefer to live with that way. The overwhelming majority would prefer a job and not to be a ward of the state. That is why Romney is going to be the next President.

I agree that Romney will likely be a one term president, because nobody likes cost cutters. Unfortunately, someone will have to do it to ward off our becoming Greece. And where on God's green earth did you get a "fact" that Obama created more jobs than GWB? Do the simple math...unemployment is at 8.3 (14.9 if you consider those who have dropped out or are undermployed)....undemployement under Bush never went past 6.5. To sustain less than 6.5 for 8 years means that a hell of a lot of jobs had to be created just to keep up with the population growth. Also your terms "war on teachers, firefighters" etc. What does the mean....really? In Wisconsin, all the governor wanted public emmployees to do was contribute 5% top their own retirement and it resulted in mobs in the staehouse defecating on the marble floors. The war is on us, the taxpayer.....not the public unions. And Keynesian economics have been discredited all over the world. If you want us all to pull on the same oar, then help us row to the right, because Obamanomics has failed miserably.

Lenny

You silver tongued devil. I don't think any of these Romney/Ryan budget proposals will be a problem for either of them. Unless hell freezes over. the proposed ticket is unelectable . There are too many lead weights in that boat.

My personal definition of social justice dates back to the UK in 1849, and the roots of the US democratic party of the twentieth century that pledged that the government will not allow a disaster of that magnitude to occur again. Government intervention does fight against the brutal forces of big Business. Why did they call them "Robber Barons" in the late 19th century. Both of the Roosevelt's abhorred the lack of accountability to the man in the street espoused by
Those who had amassed huge fortunes Teddy went after them with a few shakes of his big stick, and Franklin became a social engineer who rebuilt the country with a healthy attitude of sharing . There is no shame in caring for those who are less fortunate. That is what social justice means to me. Those values do not go out of style

Love you Lenny. You cannot be as harsh and uncaring as you suggest. You are honest and feisty. Keep it up. But don't get taken in by these show biz wonders who are a little on the transparent side. Just remember those positions espoused in the great republican debate series.

And Romney is the author of Obamacare. Lovingly referred to as Romneycare at the state house. Sorry his horse didn't cop a medal

My

Brian, the “roots of the Democrat party” was for the preservation of slavery. Martin Luther King was a registered Republican for a reason. Were it not for the Republican Party, LBJ wouldn’t have passed Civil Rights legislation as 37% of Dem House members voted against it (80% of House Repubs voted for it) Progressiveism is neither a zero sum game nor a dirty word. You pointed to Republican T Roosevelt passing anti-trust laws to tame the Robber Barons. Conservatives supported such laws then & do so now. When Dems say Repubs want to de-regulate everything, it’s nonsense. The problem is the DEGREE to which Dems want to regulate & tax everything that moves. Whne social programs make sense to both sides then Americans usually get what they want. Medicare & social security passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support. When major social programs such as Obamacare are rammed down the throats of more than half the population who hate it, problems ensue. Scott Brown’s election, hostile town hall meetings, poll after poll showing more than 60% against it; nothing persuaded them; Dems rammed it through regardless of what voters told them, & then paid the price w/the largest midterm defeat of any party in more than 90 yrs in 2010. SS & Medicare filled a real need for Americans, the desire to retire without burdening children, but Americans don’t want to reform healthcare by surrendering control of medical decisions to bureaucrats, which is Obamacare will do.

Lenny
I was referring to the statements made by house speaker John Mc Cormick restating his view of the role of govt in the context of the 1849 famine. The Dixiecrats of 1948 clearly were walking away from the democratic leadership that consisted of a Northern urban power base. I could never be comfortable with the Dixiecrat contingent. That was not my democratic party every one of all stripes bears the blame for the Jim Crow compromises of the late 19th century that Dr King battled.

Thanks for your well researched comments. You remain a worthy voice for the opposition. Have a good weekend my friend

Nobody could ever knock you for a lack of wit and generosity of good will Brian.

FYI the New York Times columnist, Gail Sheehy had some good things to say about Romney and Ryan. She referred to the pair as "Sincere Hypocrites". pretty positive statement for The Times.

Lenny
Your optometrist must be a Democrat. Those progressive glasses can be a problem when you a coming down a flight of stairs....you may hit bottom long before you planned to do so. May be a plot to sideline you.

Reference the multiplier effect. Every administration that has pushed for a tax cut , has relied upon that economic principle as a positive justification. A tax cut of one dollar improves the GDP by multiples of three or more. That was argued by Ford, regan, bush and bush. It is still taught as a real economic factor in graduate economics.

Hope you are well....watch out for those glasses on curb stones as well!

I think sometimes people confuse a tax cut with a lack of fairness. You may recall the famous Democratic debate in early 2008 when Charlie Gibson from ABC asked then candidate Obama if he would favor an increase in the capital gains tax despite the overwhelming evidenced that it actually 'reduced " revenue to the gov. Obama said he did because it was fairer. Gibson pressed him, and to Obama's credit, he persisted in his view that even though a tax increase resulted in a loss of revenue to the government, it was still fairer. So Obama and most people on the left understand the mulitiplier effect, but they can't square it with their sense of right and wrong and what is fair or unfair. My view has always been based on the answer to a simple question. Ask a person what they would do if they won a million dollars. My answer would be I'd pay off my mortgage and bank the rest in a safe CD or something of that nature. I am risk adverse and I would not invest the million in a new business. But the Romneys of this would would invest it and therefore risk it. If that same person lost it all in the investment, the most they can write off under current tax code is 3K. Buf if they profit, they are taxed at 15%. I think it is fair to reward people for taking risk and possibly creating a few jobs, especially because someone like me won't do so. So if my taxable percentage is larger than the risk taker, then I'm comfortable with that, and if not I can put my money at risk too.