tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

From the Huffington Post August 19th 2012:

WASHINGTON - When Congressman Paul Ryan has been asked the past few years about the value of stimulus to the sagging economy and the nation's jobless, the Wisconsin Republican has dismissed it as meaningless, and dubbed it "sugar-high economics." But that's when President Obama is pushing for the spending. When it was President George W. Bush arguing for more stimulus to boost a slow economy in the early 2000s, Ryan's economic analysis was entirely different.

"What we're trying to accomplish today with the passage of this third stimulus package is to create jobs and help the unemployed," Ryan said, in comments unearthed by MSNBC's "Up with Chris Hayes" and provided to HuffPost. "What we're trying to accomplish is to pass the kinds of legislation that when they've passed in the past have grown the economy and gotten people back to work."
Video of the comments will be aired at 8:00 a.m. Sunday on MSNBC.

"In recessions unemployment lags on well after a recovery has taken place," Ryan accurately noted in 2002.

Conservatives have routinely mocked Vice President Joe Biden for arguing that in order to reduce the deficit in the long run, the government needs to spend more now; that sentiment is lampooned in a recent pro-Republican campaign ad. But Biden's analysis -- that the government needs to juice the economy to promote growth, or else revenue will fall long term -- is one that Ryan himself articulated cogently back when the GOP was urging stimulus. Ryan called such stimulus a "constructive answer" worked out on "a bipartisan basis." Opponents of stimulus, Ryan said, ought to "drop the demagoguery."

"We've got to get the engine of economic growth growing again because we now know, because of recession, we don't have the revenues that we wanted to, we don't have the revenues we need, to fix Medicare, to fix Social Security, to fix these issues. We've got to get Americans back to work. Then the surpluses come back, then the jobs come back. That is the constructive answer we're trying to accomplish here on, yes, a bipartisan basis. I urge members to drop the demagoguery and to pass this bill to help us work together to get the American people back to work and help those people who've lost their jobs," Ryan said.

Bush's stimulus, which included an extension of jobless benefits and resulted in checks being mailed to millions of Americans, was signed in March 2002. "We have a lot of laid off workers, and more layoffs are occurring," the congressman continued. "And we know, as a historical fact, that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, unemployment is going to linger on and on well after that recovery takes place. What we have been trying to do starting in October and into December and now is to try and get people back to work. The things we're trying to pass in this bill are the time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs."

While Obama has been in office, Ryan has voted against extending unemployment benefits and against helping laid-off workers pay for health insurance by subsidizing COBRA payments. Such actions are difficult to square with 2002's Paul Ryan. "It's more than just giving someone an unemployment check," he said then. "It's also helping those people with their health insurance while they've lost their jobs and more important than just that unemployment check, it's to do what we can to give people a paycheck."

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

Let's stimulate the economy by asking manufacturers to lower the price of their goods by first offering jobs at a slightly lower hourly pay.

Instead of stagnant work at $25.00 bucks an hour for mostly unskilled labor, try hiring at $20.00 an hour and lowering the purchase price. With the 'Made In America ' label prominently showing, folks might buy American instead of China, Viet Nam, Cambodia etc etc etc.

Also try to keep the CEO's pay in line with the workers. A worker making $37,000.00 a year shouldn't have a CEO making $3.7 Million a year.

Sarge

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

There is nothing in Ryan's statements that you spend money you haven't got.

Kit Lens

Sarge,
That's just one of the things that Ryan has flipped on. I think as all these things come out, some of his supporters will be quite surprised.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

What do any of these replies except by KitLens have to do with the fact that Ryan is a lying hypocrite? As usual, when a rightie can't answer a charge, they just change the subject.

In today's LA Times there was yet another article about what a lying hypocrite he is. Seems he was very active in a bipartisan effort trying to get bailout money when his hometown GM factory was in trouble, even flying to meet with company reps when they were being offered tax incentives and other goodies, before Obama's election. He voted for $14 billion dollars in emergency federal loans in the "waning" days of the Bush administration. Then, magically on the day after the election, Ryan, along with every other Republican, changed his stance on every single Republican idea that Obama agreed with.

Amazing. A black Democrat takes office and now every one of your prior positions sucks. An entire party full of verifiable lying hypocrites. An entire party with no spine and no integrity, taken over by zealots hell-bent on destroying this country. God help us.

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

Oh well. Time to Unwatch and go back to intelligent posts.

:roll:

Sarge

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

Exactly ....

Phreedom Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

BigBear, there is nothing in Ryan's statements that say you do not spend money you haven't got.
Your rebuttal may be prejudicial but it makes no sense based on the report that Ryan has reversed his stand on an issue he formerly, enthusiastically supported under a different administration.

the_imaginist Loc: St. Louis, MO

Tschmath,

A+ on the article quote.

DennisK Loc: Pickle City,Illinois

Yeah,like the huffington post ain't bias.hahaha

charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota

I expect you'll never blame OB.

WNYShooter Loc: WNY

Not that such an ignorant statement deserves a reply, but using your same rational, maybe it's because he is half-white, or maybe it's because he's Hawiian, or maybe it's because he has short hair, or maybe because he is a lawyer, or maybe because..... O.o




You have just described the two major parties to a T! Excellent summation!

I seriously have a very hard time naming even one elected politician who doesn't exhibit some degree of hypocrisy on a daily basis.

charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota

My apologies to teamath. I pushed the wrong button on the blame photo. ( it makes no sense to his subject line)

mommommom4 Loc: In the middle of Iowa

Very well said.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Sarge...how would YOU know????