Even senior Bush strategists admit that Paul Ryan’s convention speech was completely dishonest. Here’s what I don’t get. Shouldn’t Paul Ryan have been presented as the All-American boy next door? He’s young; he’s fit; he looks wholesome and eager and ambitious and sincere. He might be the kind of guy you’d like to see marry your daughter. The Republicans really could have pushed that angle. But what happens when your daughter’s date comes over and lies about his family and his job and then breaks his promise to have her home by eleven?
You never get a second chance to make a first impression. Why would the GOP send Ryan out to meet the American people with a script filled with distortions and misrepresentations? I mean, even if they ultimately wanted to use Ryan as an attack-dog who would push the edges of truthfulness, couldn’t that wait for later? Couldn’t they let him come across as a golden boy instead of a prevaricating slime ball?
Frankly, I don’t understand why Romney chose him at all, but if they were going to pick such a polarizing figure, they could have at least made the most of his assets before they completely squandered them. I don’t get it.
As someone who has lived in dangerous urban neighborhoods and had people shot and killed on my street, I can relate.
Nick Hanauer gives a great speech knocking down the concept of job creation by the 1% risk takers. Clip isn’t up yet of his back and forth on GPS this Sunday with Bain Capital exec.
Hmmm…
I’m an evil one-percenter…but I used to be poor…
When I was poor, I had zero employees…
Now I am rich, and I have nearly 1,000 employees…
There really isn’t a way to get rich without hiring people!
What’s the myth, again?
Well, you could play the market or the ponies!
You could kite worthless “securities” and get obscenely rich for doing nothing useful at all. You could write music or books or apps. You could be a trust fund baby and marry money like Ryan did. You could get lucky on the markets. You could scam like Madoff and Abramoff and Delay and Norquist. You could be a porn star. You could be an extortionist. You could run fast with a ball. ad infinitum.
Have you done any research on how many folks get rich on randomn chances like you have described?
Can you admit that it is a tiny percentage? Since we’re talking about honesty here?
Um, you said “There really isn’t a way to get rich without hiring people!” By your standards that’s a lie. Nobody said anything about percentages.
Dave…good work!
Good call on bullshit…like Ryan, I need to be more careful with my words!
This reply repeated the same childish pattern you use every time you’re proven wrong. It’s not words it’s a habit of lying. Like Ryan.
If Republicans are exhausting some of their slender resource of arguably cogent supporters, paid or otherwise, to hijack threads on progressive forums with obfuscation and futile arguments they must already be repenting of the choice they’ve collectively made of selecting Ryan as their vice-presidential nominee. Whatever the merits of the case for Ryan’s mendacity it has certainly gained rapid acceptance in the mainstream media; this is a positive sign and apparently a source of considerable concern to our opponents if our periphrastic interlocutor is any indication.
So you weren’t already rich when you started the business, is that what you’re telling us?
They myth, since you missed it the first time, is that only rich people create jobs, and that the creation of jobs relies up coddling people who are rich.
Good job knocking that myth down with your story.
No, Joe, I was quite poor.
In 1996, my annual income was $6,000…supporting me and my wife, who couldn’t work due to a debilitating back injury…I went to college full-time, and worked full-time, and donated blood plasma two times a week for $35 to pay for our groceries…
Your ideology will never be appealing to someone with my life experience…
The ultimate question is…is our fate determined by circumstances beyond our control, or do we determine our fate…one answer means your a Democrat, the other a Republican…
As simple as that…
you really need to watch that you tube I posted
Where?
The link in my reply that you’ve been responding to. Kinda the whole point of what I was referring to and you were arguing with.
And btw, seems to me that you built up your company to the point of having 1,000 employees when tax rates were higher than they have been under Obama.
background to yours. I happen to know someone who worked their way from poverty to a multi-million dollar business and they are as progressive as they come.
Also your question is way too simplistic and does not speak well of your critical thinking skills. It isn’t a black and white answer and it is people attempting to boil it down to one that makes them radicals unable to find solutions for our society.
For example the African American woman born in poverty does not have the same advantages that the white man born in wealth does. That does not mean that woman is destined to stay in poverty nor does that give that woman a free pass to not work hard to rise above her circumstances. It does, however, say that we as a society should recognize she was born at a disadvantage and foster an atmosphere that will allow her to achieve. For example:
Nice sob story. I’ll give you a minute to pull yourself together…
..and then observe that you are still refuting your own point.
You didn’t get rich or create any jobs through government coddling of the 1%, such as through cuts in their taxes. You were poor as shit, and you managed (assuming you aren’t just lying) to create a whole bunch of jobs.
NIce own-goal.
And if you don’t think there were a whole boat-load of circumstances completely beyond your control that allowed you to (theoretically) succeed, you’re deluding yourself.
Didn’t you say your wife was a nurse? How many professions has she had? I take it her injury is gone now?
$6,000 a month. You weren’t on Medicaid? Did you just refuse it to spite yourself? Or too high on your own bullshit like Craig T. Nelson:
“‘ve been on food stamps and welfare, did anybody help me out? No. No.”
~Craig T. Nelson
Sorry, year*
Highest corporate profits ever. Where are the jobs?
Not much of a fan of Perry, but damn that was righteous.
MHP now lives in NOLA with her husband. And she is so right about what’s going on in NOLA. It’s one of the things I hate most to hear when I visit. There are just not enough public schools for the children of the city. The private schools that are left too expensive and some are trying to do the voucher program, but the private schools don’t want those “ghetto-hood” kids in their schools, so even if there are vouchers, the “screen” the applicants as if it’s a prestigive college or pre-school, which makes the average kid in the poor communities who may not be making A’s but who’s eager to learn and finish school, stuck in a public charter school, that’s overpopulated, underfunded and still in some cases having classes in trailers.
It’s ridiculous.
BTW, don’t even get me started on what it’s like to try to get healthcare when the only ER is overcrowded with people who have no insurance along with real ER and the only other ER is in another parish and that hospital isn’t even a public hospital, it’s a private one.
I could go on, but I won’t. I need to get back to work…lol
I’d forgotten about the sickening bit of opportunism that allowed privatization nuts in LA to seize control of 107 of 128 public schools and convert them to charter schools while crushing the teachers’ union.
That’s the free market for ya. Good for you; good for me.
Your question is a good one. What I get from it is that Romney may have been given some kind of ultimatum by the Ryanists in the GOP leadership. Either that, or his cowardice is stronger than his prudence, which is also quite possible.
Why would the GOP send Ryan out to meet the American people with a script filled with distortions and misrepresentations?
My theory is that since they have nothing substantially positive to run on they had to go all out negative. In order to go all out negative against Obama they have to lie. And, the clincher is that they have started to believe some of their own lies.
There’s a fair degree of self delusion at work here. I think Ryan’s marathon time is a good example of that.
This is an easy question.
In the land of the Repugnant Ones, lying is a badge of honor. It is required for their side to win and they know it. Ryan simply proved to the base that he has the required dishonesty to lead as a Repugnant One.
AND, they get their information from FAUX News. At some point, what’s true is an opinion – nothing more.
The real question is whether the lies are hurting them. The media is calling out Ryan (and Romney) on the lies, but at this point I wonder if the media has lost so much credibility with the public that it simply won’t matter. This might be what happens when you spend so much time engaging in equivalency that everyone can see is false.
I think what we’re seeing is some sort of hybrid of mass groupthink and the echo chamber effect. The Republican party is no longer capable of learning, adapting, and improving.
Republicans, even most of the leadership, rarely venture outside the cocoon of right wing media. Any uncomfortable factoid is instantly dismissed with a barrage of articles generated by the likes of townhall and redstate, linked to by drudge, and discussed on fox using the “some say” construct. There is no opportunity for self-examination – those who do question their own party on any topic are immediately excommunicated.
I guess the one thing that has really amazed me these last few years is the degree to which obvious, easily-disproven right wing memes have become common in the day-to-day speech of their leadership. Once it was cute to hear obscure local GOP leaders, like Palin or Brewster, make absurd comments straight from Rush. But now you’ll hear the same from Scalia, Ryan, and even supposed moderate Republicans like Gerson.
As anyone who has studied quality control the first step to improvement is an accurate assessment and to recognize the problem. Or, if you prefer, the same is true for the AA-style 12-step model. It’s a basic premise. But the GOP no longer can do that.
2010 was probably the nail in the coffin for the GOP’s ability to self-analyze and improve. Their interpretation of the losses of 2006 and 2008 was that they weren’t conservative enough, and by being the Party of No they were able to gum up the works enough to get the voters to blame Obama – and win. Now, whenever they suffer any blow they’ll reflexively double down on their previous strategy and cite 2010 as evidence that this will work.
The question is how do the Democrats respond? Yes, the GOP has huge advantages of money and media influence, but there is still an unprecedented opportunity here.
BITE YOUR TONGUE!
I do. Were Romney/Pawlenty or Romney/Portman going to win in November? No. Was the Republican base going to give a shit when they lost? Double no.
Ryan (and congress) were already Romney’s second greatest liability (the first being his own disapproval/personal unpopularity numbers and the characterization of his business record). It’s not the worst idea in the world to make Ryan more than a surrogate who might be operating on his own agenda, and instead make him and his supporters explicit stakeholders in Romney’s success. As much as he’s anchored himself to them, they’ve now anchored themselves to him as well.
It’s not an ongoing mystery as to why the secretly pro-choice Mormon private equity magnate who enacted universal health care and bought the presidential nomination in the face of opposition who couldn’t even get themselves on the ballot properly might still face a disconnect with his base.
I think they have forgotten that human slaves rarely stay bought. Now that bloggers are pointing out the lies, many in the media are embarrassed to have been exposed for the fools that they have been.
Republicans are not the smartest people on the planet, so why would their behavior be smart? It’s all about appearances for these grifters.
Who turned Romney down?
Who had serious policy baggage?
Who was duller than Romney?
That narrows the list quite a bit.
And then:
Who did Rush Limbaugh, the real leader of the Republican Party, push for?
Q.E.D.
Tarheel…you’re intelligent and forthright…
Can you show me a quote from Ryan’s speech–actual words–that state an untruth?
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/9/1/163126/5442#28
Seabe…give me the quote!!!
Is that too much to ask? If you are going to say a man is a liar, have the balls to give the quote!!!
I read your link…still no quote…
All I am asking you Progs is to put forth a direct quote from Ryan that asserts a factually untrue statement, and you cannot do it.
Ryan can put forth a narrative that places his worldview in the most favorable light…it’s called politics! Obama does the same thing!
You’re just pissed that Ryan is as good, or better, than Obama at playing the game of politics!
You would stop referring to people as “you progs.” That is rude as heck and a sign that all you want to do here is troll.
Deal…I’ll stop saying you Progs if you stop calling me a “troll”!
See definition 2 here: http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/troll
I do like your new handle much better than MassDem.
Do you think my sole purpose in posting a comment is to disrupt the conversation?
I do this for some sort of bizarre entertainment…l really don’t know why…but I know it serve’s to get this group out of it’s group-think and engage the opposition…
Trust me…my addiction to this blog is like my addiction to the spirits…I’ve sworn it off, but keep coming back for more!
Sorry, but a parrot doesn’t make much of a sparring partner.
BTW, when are we going to hear the whine about how your poor previous name was victimized by censorship again? We await with violins in hand.
Dave…censorship is only exercised, by definition, by Governments…
I respect private property rights…
Boo worked his ass off for this site…He Built It!!!
It’s his property…There is no “censorship” here…
Then if he kicked you off as you alleged, why don’t you respect his private property right and stay off? Doesn’t strike me as respect, but it’s what I expect from a Ryan toady.
politics? Not from what I have seen. His introduction has not even resulted in a bounce except for his home state. He had the Republicans own network (Fox) calling him out on his lies.
Sally Kohn, self-described “Progressive voice of Fox News” called him out.
As for “bounces”, Rasmussen and Reuters both showed a six point “bounce”…
But as I predicted, with an unprecedentedly polarized electorate, there will be, barring an unforeseen blunder or event, no noticeable “bounce” from conventions or debates.
The first one especially. It is an indisputable fact that the commission never approved a final report. NEVER. It didn’t get the 14 of 18 votes needed and in fact Ryan was one of the votes against. So no urgent report = lie on Ryan’s part.
1. “He created a bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report.” LIE – they never came back with a report because they couldn’t agree to one, primarily because Ryan himself torpedoed any agreement.
“And the biggest, coldest power play of all in
Good work…finally an effort!
As to Simpson Bowles, the commission made a recommendation…I.e. “came back with an urgent report”…the fact that the “urgent report” failed to garner a majority of the votes on the commission doesn’t alter the fact that they made recommendations comprising an “urgent report”…
Obamacare came at the expense of the elderly…but Obamacare does reduce payments to Medicare providers…your assertion rests on the assumption that we have to reduce entitlement payments to save the entitlement! What a Republican-ish idea!
He got everything he wanted (re Stimulus)…I’d have to compare proposed stimulus vs. passed stimulus… Worst case, Ryan should have said “nearly” Everthing he wanted…
Good work! Thank You!
because HZ posted the exact same thing in response to your “there is no proof of lies” yesterday.
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/9/1/163126/5442
If you had bothered to actually read people’s responses to you you would have known that and not come back with a condescending “finally an effort.” Seems to me that you are the one who didn’t make the effort. It is things like that that make you a troll.
And no they did not issue a report formally. They released two things
There was no report issued. There was a draft released – big difference
You also have failed to address the other two lies I posted.
Which two lies?
The closest you have gotten to a misstatement of fact is “Obama got everything he wanted” in regards to the stimulus…I need to the research comparing what he asked for and what he got…
By the way, “unendorsed final report” does not contradict “urgent report” as asserted by Ryan. Still no “lie”.
No actionable items were endorsed. The reason they weren’t endorsed? Because Ryan led the group of people NOT endorsing him.
The simplest way to put this is the commission issued a draft and Ryan is saying well Obama didn’t grade our final report. Well that is because they didn’t issue a final report. By the way the report was to be issued to the congress for them to act on.
As for the stimulus I am quoting wiki because it quotes the original sources
“Senate Republicans forced a near unprecedented level of changes (near $150 billion) in the House bill which had more closely followed the Obama plan. The biggest losers were states[19] (severely restricted Stabilization Fund) and the low income workers (reduced tax credit) with major gains for the elderly (largely left out of the Obama and House plans) and high income tax-payers. A comparison of the $827 billion economic recovery plan drafted by Senate Democrats with an $820 billion version passed by the House and the final $787 billion conference version shows huge shifts within these similar totals. Additional debt costs would add about $350 billion or more over 10 years. Many provisions will expire in two years.[20]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009
Next time before you claim something as truth you should look up the facts.
find a way to compromise and come up with a final report that he could endorse? Seems to me he didn’t think it was that urgent since he shot thing report down. Like I said it was a LIE.
Of course, many folks would consider the fact that the unendorsed final report did not, in fact, come from the commission (but merely represented the opinions of the two co-chairs) means that Ryan lied when he stated the report came from the commission. (Let alone the lie that the commission was “they”. For Paul Ryan, the commission was “we”.)
assertion comes from regarding the ACA. You are making an assumption that is just plain wrong.
The ACA savings comes from 2 places
By the way Ryan includes both of those in his plan as well.
As for why I support the ACA – because there is funding for demonstration programs that will eventually move us from a procedure based model to an outcomes based model. This analogy to the Agriculture industry in the earlier 20th century is the best I have seen when it comes to explaining why the ACA will bend the cost curve.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/12/14/091214fa_fact_gawande
Yawn.
How about you show a quote that posited something more than a lie by omission?
Here’s one detailed look at Ryan’s speech: http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/106730/ryan-most-dishonest-convention-speech-five-lies-gm-medicare-def
icit-medicaid
Here’s another: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/ryan-risks-reputation-with-misleading-nomination-speech.p
hp
And here’s The Atlantic’s James Fallows with both his own evaluation of Ryan’s “post-truth convention speech”, as well as numerous links to other acts of journalism committed on the speech: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/paul-ryan-and-the-post-truth-convention-speech/2
61775/
There are, of course, many ways to lie. Lying by omission is one that Paul Ryan is presumably aware of from his childhood preparations to receive the Catholic sacrament of reconciliation (penance, confession).
Mass appeal…I’ve read everyone of these links already…not one puts forth a Ryan quote that is factually untrue…
I don’t know how to do the “link” thing, but I can refer you to articles by Jay Cost and Stephen Hayes with the Weekly Standard that clearly debunk the notion that Ryan “lied”…
I’m no philosopher, and I don’t know what definition of “factually untrue” you’re using. I just know that if I gave a speech like the one Ryan gave in Tampa last week, at least half my older relatives would call to chastise me for shaming the family by telling so many lies in public.
I found, and have read, the columns by Cost and Hayes. I find them unpersuasive.
Ryan, over several years, cultivated a reputation as a “bold”, “serious”, “truth teller”…especially on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, budgets and deficits.
It ill behooves such a man to give a prominent national speech in which the best his defenders can do is point to how cleverly worded his lies and deceptions were. I believe the expression is “too clever by half”?
All Due respect…
Ryan knows that what he is trying to do is absolutely necessary for the survival of this country, and must package that message in in the most appealing way possible…
He is indeed courageous…God Bless him!
So in other words: “I have to kill you to save you”?
You know that, without changes, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unsustainable and insolvent…Ryan has the balls to put forth an alternative…
Where is Obama’s solution? Show commercials where a Ryan look-alike throws a senior citizen in a wheel chair off a cliff?
Your only answer is to “tax the rich”, but you know the math does not add up…
Who is dishonest?? Really?
So you agree with my characterize, that’s a pretty extreme position even for conservative like yourself LoA.
*characterization
I’m curious: how do you know that “Ryan know that what he is trying to do is absolutely necessary for the survival of the country”? (Bonus points if you can lead us to a direct quotation where Ryan says something like that.)
Also: Is “must package that message in the most appealing way possible” a roundabout way of conceding that he…well…lied?
What does that mean?
Take the Janesville plant…GM decided to close the plant while Bush was President, but the plant produced it’s last truck in April, 2009…
Companies can reverse decisions…
They still closed the plant after the Messiah took office, after the Measiah bailed out GM, after the Messiah passed his stimulus…
Show me the “lie by omission”?
Your attempt to smear Ryan, with your bogus left-leaning “fact checkers” truly illustrates your fear of this man…
If he was truly an unrepentant liar, reality itself would eliminate any serious consideration of the man.
President Obama took office. His speech is misleading because it implies it was closed AFTER he took office. Now it can be said that the plant did not re-open AFTER President Obama’s administration rescued GM. On the flip side many plants have not only stayed open but added workers.
Also you should stop projecting your Ryan fanboyishness on to other posters. I can tell you I don’t fear the guy in the least. I just think he comes across as a weasel and am not afraid to say so.
Finally the Ryan lied about his marathon time bumping it from very respectable to BQ (Boston Qualifying). Marathon times are sacrosanct in the running world and someone who would lie about their time especially in a way that bumps it up to BQ is an unrepentant liar.
“If he was truly an unrepentant liar, reality itself would eliminate any serious consideration of the man.”
Well, that may be what is happening.
Wow, what a ass-kicking.
Nick, just because you can keep typing “nuh-uh” doesn’t make the lies that have been pointed out to you truthful.
It just means that you don’t have the integrity to admit you’re wrong, or that Paul Ryan is a hack.
Obama never “promised” to keep the plant open.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/30/obama-could-not-have-saved-janesville-g
m-plant-it-closed-before-he-took-office/?print=1
Obama never “promised” to keep the plant open.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/30/obama-could-not-have-saved-janesville-g
m-plant-it-closed-before-he-took-office/?print=1
Paul Ryan: Obama didn’t close the Janesville GM plant
Go pick up your pay from Karl. With that kind of logic, those 1000 employees must be in a political PR firm, and you only wish you were the boss.
Playing dumb and hectoring again, are you.
Tarheel…you’re smarter than that…
You surely know that I do not know Karl Rove…hectoring?…
You’re smart…I’ll make a deal with you…I’ll fly you to my corporate office in Atlanta…meet my staff…tell me I’m “hectoring”…meet my female COO, meet my second-in-command managing partner, a black guy who spent 11 years in prison on drug charges, who will make at least 400k this year…
Tarheel…I’ll get the tickets…let me Know…
Flying out of Raleigh?
I have black friends!
And all the people I pay will tell you I’m a helluva guy.
So your 1000 employees are busy working while you are dorking around on the internet?
Just to repeat the original post, since there’s so much discussion in between:
Booman’s big question deals with why they rolled out Ryan the way they did, but I’m still somewhat fascinated by the secondary question as to why pick him at all.
Carrying on your thoughts, you can bet T-Paw didn’t turn Romney down, and I doubt Portman did either. Of course, they’re both duller than dishwater, but as I’ve stated long ago here somewhere, I don’t see that as a disadvantage from Romney’s perspective: what Presidential candidate would want to be outshone by his running mate? It makes a weak candidate look even weaker.
I’m tempted to think there’s something in Roger Stone’s allegation that the Koch Brothers were instrumental in the pick. We know–or are pretty sure–that they were pushing Christie for all they were worth earlier this year, but Christie was too smart to hitch his wagon to Romney’s falling star.
After Christie’s refusal, it falls to whoever the Kochs like that will say yes to the offer. It works to Ryan’s advantage in a way it wouldn’t to many other pols: it gives him a leg up on the competition for the ‘016 nom, and failing that, a much better chance of escaping House of Representin’ Hell for more lucrative or powerful positions in the future.
Bah. But who knows. I find the Koch theory as likely as anything else out there.
As to why the GOP made Ryan the liar in chief, well, someone has to do it, and Romney is too busy trying to convince people that he’s not a reptile.
They’ve been getting away with massive lies and distortions for at least 40 years. Why would they think pushing those same buttons wouldn’t keep the food pellets coming? I think the Ryan lie fest nails down what lots of us started to believe a while ago: that the very concept of truth, distortion, lie no longer registers with them. When’s the last time you heard a Rep try to argue seriously about an issue or about a history? Almost always, no matter what the question might be, they just spew the usual irrelevant boilerplate.
They have no real issues that resonate. All they have is attacking without offering a credible replacement. I think they (or Romney personally) reacted to the perception of Romney’s weakness and indecisiveness by showing that they could offer a super junkyard dog not constrained by upper-class timidity. I continue to think they have, or think they have, reason to fear a defection from the teabagger right, so Ryan’s speech was a panic reaction.
As to why he chose Ryan, it’s just a continuation of the obfuscation strategy they settled on some time ago. It’s what the Multiple Romneys is all about, and now it’s what picking Ryan is all about: what the geek types call FUD — fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Ryan just ups their ability to play all sides strategically without being held to account. For general audiences, RyanRomney assure the folks that Romney will be in charge and that Ryan accepts that. Where dog whistles work better, Ryan is proof to the wingnut majority that Romney shares extremist values on the economy, gender rights, and other social policy. Good cop – bad cop times 50. No one can be nailed down, no one held responsible. Their open contempt for honest dispute makes this the most chilling electoral season in my lifetime.
These guys ‘make their own reality’. The base eats it up, and choose to believe it because it plays in to their prejudices.
Frankly, I don’t understand why Romney chose him at all
You could say the same thing about why the primary voters picked Romney in the first place.
In both cases, the answer is the same: you got a better idea?
Looking over the Republican primary field, as well as the bench of potential VP picks, it’s not as though there were obviously-better options.
Yet…no one can demonstrate a quote that asserts a fact that is not true!
Unbelievable!
3)”The first troubling sign came with the stimulus. It was President Obama’s first and best shot at fixing the economy, at a time when he got everything he wanted under one-party rule” LIE – he didn’t get everything he wanted and there wasn’t one party rule thanks to the filibuster. In order to get Snowe, Collins, and Specter’s votes he had to include about 40% tax cuts instead of more stimulative measures.
Is that enough for you or should I link to the Fox News article which actually cites his lies as well?
don’t feed the troll. He’s purely trolling and uninterested in the truth.
Nice. Save the link to this comment and post it in response to every future assertion that Ryan didn’t actually lie.
Of course, that won’t change any minds, but will force the troll to either go back to his cocoon and find a creative response to that (which will be interesting) or to start another line of argument.
But the fact that a veritable army of fighting keyboarders are swarming the internets arguing that the Ryan speech – which is perhaps the most fact free of any convention speech in living memory – contained no lies is itself a demonstration of the severe groupthink/echo chamber phenomenon that is the GOP today.
Informed Comment: Top Ten Repeated Paul Ryan Lies
See my earlier diary – Paul Ryan: Wealth, Men, Power and Church Hierarchy
Hmm .. it seems the cardinal is repentant.
Game On! I don’t know Romney and Ryan personally…but I suspect Romney picked Ryan to reinforce his will to win!