3/30/2012

27 Comments

1. If this is the case, Romney should advise Paul Ryan to stop calling U.S. Generals liars, as reported in the Wall Street Journal yesterday. Link

   
   

   House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said Thursday that generals were not being honest with Congress because they presented a budget request they don’t really support.

   Comment by Jeremy Wolcott (9de8d9) — 3/30/2012 @ 8:36 am

2. Ryan is an honorable politician, a citizen patriot, who is nonetheless a loyal Republican. Nobody’s perfect.

   At least he’s endorsing ahead the primary when it might matter unlike Boosh the taller.

   I’ll as my sister, residing in his hometown, at her coming B-day fete whether it mattered. Not likely.

   Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/30/2012 @ 8:59 am

3. One wonders if endorsements like this would have been more meaningful had they been made before the outcome was a foregone conclusion.

   Comment by The sarcastic Dana (3e4784) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:06 am

4. Jeremy,

   Ryan did not call the generals liars in the link you posted. Rather, that was the general’s characterization of Ryan’s remarks, which is not only a nice way to distract from the substance of Ryan’s remark, but also a suggestion that Ryan is likely correct. Nevertheless, thanks for saving us the trouble of visiting ThinkProgress for the meme du jour.

   Comment by Karl (f07e38) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:06 am

5. I guess the inverse of “rats from a sinking ship” is “rats to a rising sh*t”.

   Comment by Leviticus (0f9f7a) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:15 am

6. Levi,
   Flies or maggots work there. Rats don’t much care for feces.

   *not calling Paul Ryan a maggot, just helping the analogy.*

   Comment by Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:19 am

7. “You know who this benefits?”

   Newt?

   Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:27 am

8. Karl, is not being honest different from being a liar?

   Comment by Jeremy Wolcott (9de8d9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:34 am

9. Of course, Karl had to pretend that my kind of comment could only be found at Thinkprogress, instead of going to say, the Washington Post, and reading that, “House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan believes generals testifying to lawmakers about the defense budget haven’t been honest because — in Ryan’s opinion– the generals don’t really support the budget proposal.”

   link

   Comment by Jeremy Wolcott (9de8d9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:38 am

10. I had to come back because I just re-read the WSJ article and found out that Karl did not read it. Karl claimed that the “not honest” characterization was Dempsey’s, but it was actually the WSJ’s writer’s characterization, as he (Adam Entous) did was not quoting Dempsey:

    House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said Thursday that generals were not being honest with Congress because they presented a budget request they don’t really support.

    Period. No reference to Dempsey in the paragraph in question. We should all try to read carefully and be honest.

    Comment by Jeremy Wolcott (9de8d9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:41 am

11. “Karl claimed that the “not honest” characterization was Dempsey’s, but it was actually the WSJ’s writer’s characterization, as he (Adam Entous) did was not quoting Dempsey:”

    Jeremy – Whereas the liars characterization was Dempsey’s, not Ryan’s, from the same article. Some of can read.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:51 am

12. Some of us can read.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:52 am

13. “You know who this benefits?”

    Not America.

    Comment by rrpjr (b98fe2) — 3/30/2012 @ 9:54 am

14. We should all try to read carefully and be honest.

    Who is this we you speak of, “wolcott”? How about you try it, since you are apparently allergic to it.

    Comment by JD (e5c06b) — 3/30/2012 @ 10:07 am

15. “You know who this benefits?”

    Nobody!

    Comment by Rorschach (c5574d) — 3/30/2012 @ 10:40 am

16. Karl #4: no worries. Dissent is patriotic, right?

    Comment by Simon Jester (c8876d) — 3/30/2012 @ 10:41 am

17. This Wolcott is every bit as douchey as its namesake, the Ocelot of Wolcott.

    Comment by JD (e5c06b) — 3/30/2012 @ 10:52 am

18. The fact is that Meghan Mccain and Donald Frum won the primary. They got their man.

    He’s not as conservative as my side of the GOP is.

    So that means we have a unity problem. But every primary leads to one.

    Romney is far better than Obama, and Romney is going to be the nominee, so why shouldn’t Ryan and Rubio come out and support the guy who needs to beat Obama? The conversation about how Romney isn’t the right nominee is becoming less and less relevant as the primary comes to a close.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 3/30/2012 @ 10:58 am

19. 18. We’ll see whether Willard can wrap it up in June, when the urgency will also be known with more certainty.

    If no ground swell at least a sinkhole seems safely precluded.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/30/2012 @ 12:25 pm

20. Gary, he had better win. All the compromising we’ve been asked to do for electability… he had better freaking win.

    Obama has got to go.

    I respect where you’re coming from in hoping to see this through to convention. I do too. I think the primary fight can go on and there is no harm to the general election prospects if it does. Let Texas and California have a say. Frankly, they should move Texas’s primary to the day after Iowa’s. Screw it.

    But I do think Romney’s going to be the nominee. Obviously this isn’t what I wanted, but the big picture is beating Obama and I’m ready to focus on that.

    I see the remaining primary fight as symbolic, frankly.

    Comment by Dustin (330eed) — 3/30/2012 @ 12:32 pm

21. i’m thinking it benefits Ron Paul…

    Comment by redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/30/2012 @ 1:53 pm

22. Shameless OT: Keith Olbermann got fired . . . again.

    Comment by Icy (ef96c5) — 3/30/2012 @ 2:22 pm

23. If Olbermann was a Republican, he would still be out of another job.

    Being a jerk transcends party lines.

    Comment by Ag80 (b0b671) — 3/30/2012 @ 5:32 pm

24. Evidently the bloom is off the rose, Nor Laup has left off smiling and talking favorably of Willard and will not commit to supporting him following Tampa.

    Must be Romany’s whoring around after Ryan.

    Ann doesn’t care for Rubio ’cause conservatives ogle him who liked Perry. Definitely a Jackie Spratt thing going. Bulemic my guess.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/1/2012 @ 9:14 pm

25. Hot Air is pleased with their final primary poll, McBain got 60%.

    Then one peruses the 2008 supported candidate list and finds 60% were for Willard then too.

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/1/2012 @ 9:47 pm

26. Romney knocking ‘em dead in WI:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dk4l2PXS_gk

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/1/2012 @ 10:57 pm

27. Mitch McConnell thinks Willard would be an extraordinarily fine POTUS.

    And would save his sequestered azz in the bargain.

    Comment by gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/2/2012 @ 10:05 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.