Ship: Sinking; Rats; Leaving a

House Speaker Paul Ryan says his family is the top reason he isn't seeking reelection.

And maybe that's true. Or even partially true.

But it often seems that the "I'm leaving to spend more time with my family" is the excuse that is given by a politician (or senior executive in industry or government) when the alternative is to be tossed out on one's ass.

Ask yourself which looks better in promotional literature (or on a résumé): "Paul Ryan retired from Congress after serving ten full terms, including two terms as Speaker;" or "Paul Ryan was defeated in his bid for re-election for an eleventh term in Congress."

(This ties into an earlier post. Fifty years ago, he would have lived, with his family, in Alexandria, only returning to his home district for meetings and campaigning. For that's what congressmen did, back in the day.)

The Dreamers Are Truly Screwed

Paul Ryan says 'Dreamers' should 'rest easy' over expiring Daca policy.

Right. Ryan is telling the Dreamers that he can deliver something that he damn well knows that he cannot. If Ryan was honest about helping the Dreamers, he'd deliver a "clean" bill, one that only handles the issue. But he can't do that. His caucus will insist on adding in amendments and other poison-pill shit that the Democrats will never go for. They'll add in provisions for building habitats for poisonous snakes into The Great Wall of Trump, or provisions that people who are worth $4 billion and whose primary residence is in Manhattan not only pay no taxes, but they get free ponies.

Or Ryan can try to get something through the House by working with the Democrats and a handful of Republicans. That'll eventually end up with Ryan getting deposed, like Boehner was.

That's how things work, these days. Dysfunction is baked into the process.

Look Around At Your Hospitals

In the last few years, you might have noticed things going on. New facilities have been built. Existing facilities have been expanded.

They are doing that because they have more money coming in. The "why do they have more money" is fairly plain: Obamacare. More people have insurance, hospitals are treating fewer people without insurance. People without insurance often don't pay or cannot pay. Or if they were solvent, a medical crisis would drive them into bankruptcy (the hospital doesn't get paid). Everyone else who could pay, whether by insurance or because they're rich, subsidized all that.

The GOP's "reform" plan is to (a) kick 22 million people off insurance and (b) give a tax cut to the rich. That's wicked perverse-- Take away from those who don't have money in order to give more money to greedy bastards who don't need more money.

Everything TrumpCare's supporters say is to obscure one salient fact: They want to deny insurance to over 20 million people in order to give more money to the rich. You know, people like Donald Trump, Martin Shkreli and Betsy DuVois-- people who are more than happy to take a few more millions and if lots of people end up dying, not their problem. Because they are heartless.

That's what TrumpCare is all about, Gentle Reader: Greed. Avarice. Fiscal gluttony. Ryan and McConell and the rest of that pack can blather all they want about the benefits of TrumpCare, but the only winners in TrumpCare are those who already have gobs of money. And, of course, the politicians that they are paying so they can have more.

Blow It Out Yer Ass, John

Kasich calls for Democrats to work with Republicans to enact TrumpCare.

Kasich conveniently forgets that the Republicans in Congress decided that their approach to enacting health care legislation in `09-`10 was to say no to everything. The ACA was patterned on the very plans that the Republicans wanted in the 1990s and on RomneyCare in Massachusetts. Republicans, out of hatred and spite for President Obama, chose to stonewall and, at the time, the Democrats were able to cobble up the votes to enact the ACA.

Well, now the Republicans want to repeal the ACA and replace it with TrumpCare, something that is far worse, and Kasich expects the Democrats to play along? When one of the pushers of TrumpCare clearly doesn't understand how insurance works?

Republicans aren't interested in "fixing" health care. Everybody knows it, except maybe John Kasich. The GOP has bleated that they would repeal the ACA and they whined and kicked and took comfort in the fact that they didn't have the power to do that. They were like a bunch of lance corporals complaining about the Corps.

But now they have to make good on their promises, and they want the Democrats to play along? Fat fucking chance. The GOP owns this pig, TrumpCare, let them dance with it.

So, blow it out yer ass, John.

Profiles in Political Cowardice; Paul Ryan Edition

House Speaker Paul Ryan told fellow Republicans Monday he will no longer defend GOP nominee Donald Trump and will instead use the next 29 days to focus on preserving his party's hold on Congress.

The Waffling Wisconsin Weasel won't be bothered to take a stand. He'll try to cleave to the middle of the GOP road.

But there is no middle in this election. The GOP base will view this as yet another backstabbing from a Washington insider. Those opposed to Trump will see it as an act of political triangulation, which, in this instance, translates to "political cowardice".

For or against, Paul. Those are the choices.

Musings about 2016, or "Somebody Please Shoot Me Now".

You can find a lot of musings about 2016 all over the damn place. It's probably true, though, that one of the problems with Hillary Clinton is that she has enough political baggage to fill up a truck and that's never helpful.[1]

While Bill Maher was pinging on the number of candidates who have "waited their turn" and he used Obama as the guy who didn't wait his turn and won, there are other examples of politicians who didn't wait their turn and won: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

The outlier here, of course, is Reagan and Bush the Elder. Reagan waited his turn, but between nearly 20% inflation, a second gas crisis and the Iranian hostage crisis, even Rick Santorum would have been able to beat President Carter.[2] Bush was on his was to losing, but between an inept campaign by the Democrats, a lousy debate performance by Dukakis and the race-baiting of Bush, he turned it around.

In late 1991, it seems from the polling that Bush I was going to win in a walk. The "next turn" Democrats, like Anthony Cuomo, sat it out, figuring that they'd let some poor schmuck get buried and then come in in `96. Didn't work that way.

In 2000, there really wasn't a "next guy" for the GOP, other than Danny Quayle, and nobody was crazy enough for that.[3] And so George W. Bush won the Republican nomination[4] and the election.[5]

So yes, I think Maher is onto something. But it doesn't seem to matter. The GOP candidates for 2016, this far out, appear to be all of the same inhabitants of the 2012 Klown Kar, including Mitt Romney, and with a couple of quasi-new clowns. The Democrats seem to be, so far, Clinton and maybe Biden. Biden, well, you can just write off all but about ten states if he runs, for Shotgun Joe isn't exactly popular.

But, Jesus, why are we even talking about the intrigues in the American Political Whorehouse, now?
________________________________
[1] "Politicians are like a box of chocolates: Democrats are mostly soft and gooey and Republicans are mostly nuts."
[2] OK, maybe not Santorum.
[3] Unrepentant Nazi sympathizer Pat Buchanan might have also had a claim. Both men were interested, but pulled out before the primaries began.
[4] Like his father, his campaign used race-baiting as a tool.
[5] As for his campaign's successful theft of the two general election, let's not go there.

The Government is a Smarter Investor Than Romney (and Bain Capital)

For one thing, they have a higher success rate when it comes to investing in start-up companies (something that Romney has been lying about).

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The next clip discusses the issue that Romney and Ryan are all hot about the government picking winners and losers, some that, as Jon points out, happens every time the government awards a contract.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Quote of the Day: "Maybe Romney and Ryan don't think we should have picked losers and winners in World War Two. But unlike them, I'm glad we beat Hitler."

Ryan: Boastful or Lying?

Or is there a difference?

Mitt Romney's running mate told his hometown newspaper that he had scaled 'close to 40' of Colorado's 54 'fourteeners' mountains, each of which is at least 14,000ft tall.

Although Mr Ryan made this claim three years ago, it is now under scrutiny after he admitted on Saturday that he hasn't run a marathon in under three hours, as he had boasted last month on a radio show broadcast across the U.S.

In case you've forgotten, Paul "Rosie Ruiz" Ryan shaved more than an hour off his best marathon time, claiming to run in the "high twos" when, in fact, he didn't break four hours.

I am sure that certain Republican apologists will weigh in that this is small beer.

I disagree.

First off, every one that I know who has run a marathon knows their finishing time. If they ran more than one. they know their best time. Changing a four-plus hour time into a time under three hours isn't a matter of a foggy memory. It is lying.

And so is the one where Ryan claims to be some kind of whiz of a mountain climber. It speaks to his lack of character. It speaks to his contempt of both the public, who he figures will swallow down any lie he serves up, and to the press, who he thinks will just regurgitate it unchallenged.

Besides being a liar about his own athletic prowess, Ryan is pretty much a liar about being a deficit hawk. He didn't care about the deficit when he voted for Medicare Part D. He didn't care about the deficit when he voted repeatedly to fund the Iraq and Afghan Wars without a single move to pay for those wars.

No, Ryan only became concerned about the deficit when the Tea Party began parading around with their guns. He is the exemplar of a cowardly, soulless politician who waits to see which way the parade is going before rushing to get to the front of it.

I Don't Much Care for Obama

I truly don't.

Look, I think it was ballsy for him to approve the raid on bin Ladin's compound. He had to have known that a botched attempt would have probably cost him his job.

What I do not like about him is that he has not only taken no steps to dismantle the national security state we now live in, he has increased it. He could have vetoed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, the one with the GOP-inserted language that authorized the indefinite detention of American citizens for whatever reason suits the Fed's fancy. He didn't; he only added a vague and non-binding signing statement of "of course we'd never do this".

I find that wholly inexcusable for a man who once taught Constitutional Law. Yes, I know that first year law school Con Law doesn't get into the Bill of Rights, but I'd expect him to have a passing familiarity with it.[1]

I don't like that he has spent over three years trying to work with people who lure him in close and cock-punch him. He then gets up and does it again. I don't know if he is a born optimist, a fool or has a partial brain deficit.[2] Personally, I'd like to see a little more Harry Truman from Obama.

Part of the problem is that Obama, when it comes to dealing with Congress, is acting like the only responsible adult in the room. The Republicans have been behaving like spoiled children who, if they don't get everything they want, will quit the game and go home. Or, more sinisterly, they've been acting like terrorists, who have been more than willing to throw this country into default and depression if they don't get their way. So maybe he is doing the best he can, but I would still have rather seen more fight out of him.

I don't like that Obama has been playing more from the old DLC playbook than anything else. Yes, he ended "don't ask, don't tell".[3] He got the Ledbetter Pay Act passed. While the Affordable Health Care Act is pretty damn sucky and is more a gift to those rapacious bastards in the health insurance industry than anything else, he still got something through.

But the stimulus was too little and was effectively hamstrung by Republicans who didn't want to be seen as being totally obstructionist on boosting the economy, but they didn't want to do anything that might lead to a solid recovery. That's because the Republicans, in full-blown "Party First" mode, would rather see many more millions of workers out of jobs if that would win them an election.

I want to see him fight for us. I want to see him make the Republicans pay a dear price for being economic kidnappers.

I'm not holding my breath.

But may G-d help us if he loses to that team of the Corporate Robot and the Wisconsin Fibber which the GOP put on their ticket.
_______________________________________
[1] As for Republicans, they talk a great game about freedom, but you'll note that they are really vigorous at slashing freedom and liberty in almost all areas (excepting the 2nd Amendment). All you have to do is mutter phrases like "terrorism" and "homeland security" and those weak-brained fools, along with Democrats like "Traitor Joe" Lieberman would let the NSA put cameras in their homes.
[2] I'd say "retarded", but the last time I did that, I got all sorts of nasty emails.
[3] Contrary to conservative predictions, the armed forces have not crumbled.

Heh. Heh. Heh.

(H/T)

On another note, is there any reason, now, for anyone to watch the GOP convention? The only reason that I can think of to watch one when a fresh candidate is running is for the drama of "who will he choose for Veep". There is no reason to watch a re-election candidate's convention, for everyone knows who will be the candidates, there is no drama and at best, there may be one or two interesting speeches.

But now Mittens has sucked all of the oxygen out of his convention. And this is the guy who ran an Olympics and he doesn't understand showmanship and timing? Unless the Ron Paul contingent starts chucking rotting fruit at Mittens, the GOP convention will now be as exciting as a Chamber of Commerce meeting at the local golf club.

Rubber-Stamp Romney

I spent the day out at a volunteering gig. I have not had the time to read any commentary on Mittens' selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate. So what follows is my thinking.

First off, if there was ever a signal that Romney is a weak candidate, this was it. Classic politics is that a candidate plays to the base until the nomination is secured and then pivots towards the center to try and win the moderate/swing voters. Romney, who has spent the last year telling anyone who would listen that he is "a severe conservative" (and persuading hardly anyone), moved even more to the right to pick Paul. This choice signals that Romney had to do more to try to secure his base, that even though he had won enough delegates to win the nomination, he hadn't closed the deal.

Second, Paul handcuffs Romney to the Right. Romney can't swing to the center with Paul cementing him in place.

Third, if anyone thought that Mittens could not have picked a running mate worse than the choice made by Grampaw McCain, they were proven wrong. The Obama campaign is going to hang Ryan's wingnutty policies around Romney's neck like a rotting albatross. If you thought that Romney's tax policies were a reverse Robin Hood, Ryan is that on steroids. As far as tax polices go, Ryan would string up the poor and the middle class by their heels and slit their throats so that the Koch Brothers and the Walton Clan can bathe in the warm blood of the wage-earning taxpayers.

Fourth, the far-Right has been clear that they expect a President Romney to function as a rubber stamp to whatever legislation they can get through Congress. They expect a President Romney to sleep to eight, walk into the Oval Office at ten, spend thirty minutes signing legislation passed by the Chamber of Commerce Congress, and then knock off for the rest of the day to go play with his dancing horses. They expect a President Romney to make Dubya look like a workaholic. And by picking Ryan, Romney has signaled that he is OK with being an autopen for the GOP.

What I feared was that Romney would find a slightly more moderate Republican, maybe even one of the turncoat blue-dog Democrats to run with him and that his operatives would have been out spreading the word among the conservatives: "whaddya going to do, it's either Romney or that nigger Obama gets another term." That might have sucked enough swing voters to Romney to come close or even win.

That's not going to happen now. If anything, the left wing of the Democratic party, which has been pretty upset by the fact that Obama's policies could well have originated from the George H.W. Bush Administration, are going to jump off the fence, open up their pockets and go to work to re-elect him. With a center-right Romney, they might have thought "ecch, what's the difference" and maybe gone through the motions.

Romney may have thought that he energized his base. But he has also energized Obama's base and given moderates a good reason to vote for Obama. Romney's path to power was looking harder each day as his negatives were climbing. He's now, in my estimation, about to go marching off the electoral cliff.

Lord knows that I've not been overly thrilled with Obama's presidency. But I don't see that I have a choice, now.