
Mitt Romney tried to sneak Paul Ryan onto the national ticket on Saturday while Paul Krugman was out of the country and on vacation.
It did not work.
Probably writing from one of those socialist summer camps, he points out that Paul Ryan is just another in a long line of charming Harold Hill-lesque frauds. Krugman then explains The Long Game:
So whence comes the Ryan reputation? As I said in my last post, it’s because many commentators want to tell a story about US politics that makes them feel and look good — a story in which both parties are equally at fault in our national stalemate, and in which said commentators stand above the fray. This story requires that there be good, honest, technically savvy conservative politicians, so that you can point to these politicians and say how much you admire them, even if you disagree with some of their ideas; after all, unless you lavish praise on some conservatives, you don’t come across as nobly even-handed.
The trouble, of course, is that it’s really really hard to find any actual conservative politicians who deserve that praise. Ryan, with his flaky numbers (and actually very hard-line stance on social issues), certainly doesn’t. But a large part of the commentariat decided early on that they were going to cast Ryan in the role of Serious Honest Conservative, and have been very unwilling to reconsider that casting call in the light of evidence.
So that’s the constituency Romney is targeting: not a large segment of the electorate, but a few hundred at most editors, reporters, programmers, and pundits. His hope is that Ryan’s unjustified reputation for honest wonkery will transfer to the ticket as a whole.
Somehow this will be lost on David Gregory and Mark Halperin and they will still spend the bulk of their sleepovers crushing on Paul Ryan while braiding each other’s hair, eating Cool Ranch Doritos, and wondering if the children that they will have with Ryan will have those dreamy blue eyes…




35 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About TBogg
RSS/XML Feed
Mitt Romney = Eddie Haskell
Paul Ryan = Eddie Munster
Look how easily, and similarly, our Elite Media lapped up the exciting but unbearable process story of the Paul Ryan choice: “I’ve Got a Secret!”
MR/PR + SCLM = TLA
The junior high school graffiti just writes itself! As we speak, Richard Cohen is writing “Mrs. Romney/Ryan 2012″ on his sneakers, just to see how it would look.
An oldie but a goodie
This quote needs to be the first thing that comes to mind any time Ryan’s name is mentioned.
It’s time to bring it back.
Mitt = Chadsworth Osbourn Jr.
Ryan = One of the Children of the Damned
Sadly, the pundits and right-wing true believers end up arguing as follows:
PUNDIT: Paul Ryan is a serious person because he has a plan to reduce the deficit!
SANE PERSON: Well, actually, if you look at Ryan’s plan, the numbers show pretty conclusively that it makes the deficit explode.
PUNDIT: But Paul Ryan has a plan! To reduce the deficit! And even if it explodes the deficit, he still has a plan! He has a plan! A plan, I tell you! How come Democrats don’t ever talk about stuff like this?
Love the graphic.
I’ll bet he’s tired. I’ll bet he dreeeams of serving a few well-placed Molotovs. So do I.
“…and wondering if the children that they will have with Ryan will have those dreamy blue eyes…”
Ye gads, children with a perpetual 5 o’clock shadow!
Errr, corre tion : ice – cold, scary blue eyes. Dead inside..or dead of feeling for e eryone nog part of his own family.
Whi h applids to Romney, too. Imho.
I’d always thought Ryan looked like he crawled from the pages of Mad Magazine. His view on the world seems like it was written there too. “Oh, hard work and personal responsibility’s the way! For everyone but me and my friends, of course.”
I WANT THAT PICTURE.
And, I want Burn Notice to host Krugman in the next couple of episodes.
McCain/Palin v2.0 – This is good news for John McCain.
Oh Boy! Ryan’s gonna sport Naughty Red Monkey Pumps!
John was heard remarking “If you had all just voted for me none of this would have happened!” Then something about a fence….
Lord Saletan’s opening salvo:
“My liberal friends point out that Ryan’s plan leaves many details unclear. That’s true. But show me another Republican who has addressed the nation’s fiscal problems as candidly and precisely as Ryan has. He’s got the least detailed budget proposal out there, except for all the others.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2012/08/paul_ryan_for_vice_president_he_s_the_fiscal_conservative_a_republican_should_be_.html
I know he’s a serial killer but he’s a polite serial killer.
Why are politicians considered “serious” by viture of being a cruel, heartless, woman-hating, priviledged jerk? Yeah, I’ll say it: Hitler was serious, very serious indeed. Stalin was pretty damned serious. Khaddafi was a joke, but he was a “serious” guy when it came to your torture. I never want to hear that term again when mentioned in the same sentence with a Republican. It’s an oxymoron, ‘serious Republican’.
OT: Pet peeves, along with ‘serious’……my teeth grind when anyone, especially party hacks say, “At the end of the day”. And I propose the word “notion” in place of “idea” can no longer be used by the dumb ‘elite’ press that heard that nice, articulate black guy use it and therefore think it makes them sound ‘serious’.
May I inject a small ray of optimism here on a related point? This video of Erskine Bowles praising Paul Ryan, and even better, the Ryan budget…may at least save us from having Bowles get named Secretary of the Treasury.
With any luck, Bowles will finally get discredited and we can quit worrying about him. I was pretty unhappy with him, anyway, but he has moved waay up on my most-loathed list.
Another OT subject, but knd of fun: There was Rachel Maddow sitting next to Rich “Starburst” Lawry on ‘Meet The Press’ this last weekend. Rachel Maddow sitting next to the guy who probably wrote the most idiotic, childish, seventh-grade ‘my harmones just kicked in’ column in the history of US politics. How Rachel sat there and ‘engaged’ this immature asshole is beyond me. I would have quoted Lowry’s ‘starburst’ column right back at him and embarrassed the fuck out of him.
Holy shit! Either Krugman was reading Balloon Juice comments this weekend, or I’m as smart as Paul Krugman!
ehhh…ok, while both scenarios are highly unlikely, the former is much less so than the latter.
Psychopath/Sociopath 2012!
I’m not sure it matters which one is which. This is going to be the most bizzare Prez Prom and Prize Award. Evhar!
Remember, a few cycles ago, they were being passed off as “compassionate conservatives” with the same flawed logic: we may want to starve the old, keep the young ignorant, and rip off those in the middle when we’re not using them as cannon fodder — but we’re compassionate about it all, so it’s really a good thing.
I’m wondering if much of the wishful thinking in Paul Ryan’s “Deficit Reduction Plans” involves legalizing offerings and sacrifices to AquaBuddha?
My favorite of the week is “Vulture/Voucher 2012!”
Nah. Krugman’s overthinking it. Romney picked the guy who is most like him, because that’s what he does and what he wants. He doesn’t need to think about that other stuff, because he’s a Master of the Universe and he can do whatever he wants. Not show his tax returns, for example, because he decided he didn’t feel like it, so that’s it. If changing his position on issues gets him what he wants, then that’s what he does. It’s just words, not real like money and power and prestige. The media does what the media needs to do to keep the soup hot until November, and that’s done by stirring the pot a lot.
Do Not Need all the appalling images (like that one) that various pundits are going to bring to mind in the next few months. The instant media mancrush of the last couple of days has been quite bad enough, thankyewverymuch.
Note to self: stock up on medications.
Real-life Gordon Gekko/Sex-change Ayn Rand 2012!
The possibilities are endless!
This pair makes Nixon/Agnew seem like rank amateurs.
Actually, Agnew was a far more professional politician than Romney has ever been (and far more honest and forthright about his corruption as well). He knew what politicians are supposed to do, and by and large he did it. Nixon had few morals or scruples, but that means he had more than Romney, and he had a fair amount of what Romney lacks entirely – patriotism and an interest in benefiting the country instead of merely himself. Both Nixon and Agnew were solidly based in reality, where Ryan is off deeply lost in Cloud-cuckoo-land and Romney is zigzagging across an ever-shifting landscape chasing power and wealth tokens like Pokemon. This ticket should be down around 27% in the polls right now (the lunatic minimum of the GOP), and that they are actually near parity says a lot about the GOP’s post-Nixon strategy of controlling the media. They may be scum, but they’re pretty effective at what they do. I used to wonder, reading Shirer, how Germany could have gone insane like that. I don’t any more – we’ve been living it for the last 30 years.
And Krugman has already ripped Lord Saletan’s guts out and strewn them on the Christmas tree. The final graf:
Remember, a lot of American companies didn’t want FDR to go to war against Germany. Bad for business, don’t ‘cha know.
Actually, it wasn’t so much that a lot of American companies thought that war against Germany was bad for business, but that many of them thought that Hitler had the right idea w/r/t Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other “social undesirables.”
Egoiste/Leche-cul 2012
RMoney hid out in France to avoid the draft. He should get it.
If the eyes are the window to the soul, Ryan’s eyes reveal his vacant interior moral landscape.
A while back in the midst of the Bush II years, I was reading a book on Kennedy and Kruschev, and was amazed at how much Kruschev’s actions were driven by the best interests of the U.S.S.R. rather than that of himself and his buddies. Kind of sobering, actually.
Oh so true….
Zzzapp! Just exactly what I was thinking…