Paul Ryan’s brazen lies: His Republican National Convention speech was stunning for its dishonesty

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

For those holding out hope that Congress will find its way to the bipartisan grand bargain to reduce the deficit that eluded Boehner and Obama in summertime talks to raise the nation’s debt ceiling, it was Wednesday night’s vote on the Simpson-Bowles model that said more about Washington’s deep divide.

Dozens of House members who signed a letter in the fall urging Congress’s special deficit reduction super committee to “go big” and craft an ambitious plan to cut debt along the lines of Simpson-Bowles nevertheless voted against the budget Wednesday.

Republican Rep. Steve LaTourette (Ohio), who sponsored the Simpson-Bowles budget amendment along with Cooper, said they had dozens of promises from colleagues to back it. And then, “the fax machines and the e-mails lit up around here around 6 p.m. And they never stopped.”

[JohnR! 5,495]

Tell me. What did Obama do with the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission?

And tell me, what happened to all the budgets passed under Ryan in the House when they went to the Senate?

Where are your "facts"?

I think that Ryan's discourse was incorrect and deceitful in some points, hopefully not all.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Tell me. What did Obama do with the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission?

Why don't you tell us why the Simpson-Bowles plan never made it to Congress for a vote? Who kept Congress from taking a vote on the recommendations of the commission? That's right. One Paul Ryan did.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Why don't you tell us why the Simpson-Bowles plan never made it to Congress for a vote? Who kept Congress from taking a vote on the recommendations of the commission? That's right. One Paul Ryan did.

Look up a couple posts. The House did vote on it, and all the Democrats that said they would vote for it, didn't.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Look up a couple posts. The House did vote on it, and all the Democrats that said they would vote for it, didn't.

The Congress was to vote on Simpson-Bowles. That would have automatically happened has the commission approved the report with a supermajority. Ryan was among the commission members that sabotaged it's work by voting against the commission report thus preventing it from going to Congress. You can try and re-write that history all you want but that is how it went down. It's public record.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The Congress was to vote on Simpson-Bowles. That would have automatically happened has the commission approved the report with a supermajority. Ryan was among the commission members that sabotaged it's work by voting against the commission report thus preventing it from going to Congress. You can try and re-write that history all you want but that is how it went down. It's public record.

And yet, the House did vote on it,

On Wednesday [March 28, 2012], Reps. Jim Cooper and Steve LaTourette managed to put Simpson-Bowles to a vote before the House of Representatives. It didn't just fail. It got crushed. The final tally was 382-38. Twenty-two of the supporters were Democrats, while 16 were Republicans. But overall, the rejection was overwhelming, and overwhelmingly bipartisan.

This was, of course, what the White House always complained would happen if they had listened to the pundits and brought Simpson-Bowles to a vote. Republicans would reject it because it included $2 trillion in new taxes and $800 billion in defense cuts. Democrats would reject it because they weren't going to vote for a doomed proposal that included deep Medicare and Social Security cuts in addition to a large tax increase just to show how much they cared about deficits. Perhaps, with presidential leadership, the vote would have been less lopsided.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/wonkbook-house-reaches-bipartisan-deal-to-reject-simpson-bowles/2012/03/29/gIQAfucdiS_blog.html

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And yet, the House did vote on it,

And yet, the commission's recommendations never went to Congress - that's the House and the Senate - for a vote because Paul Ryan and six other committee members decided to sabotage the work of the commission.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

And yet, the commission's recommendations never went to Congress - that's the House and the Senate - for a vote because Paul Ryan and six other committee members decided to sabotage the work of the commission.

You are chasing your tail.

The only thing Ryan's vote did was not force a mandatory vote in the House and if it passed there, it could go to the Senate. In spite of all that, it did get defeated soundly in the House by mega-majorities from both parties. It could still be reintroduced in the House at anytime.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You are chasing your tail.

Nonsense. What come up for a vote was a budget blueprint based on Simpson-Bowles but there were significant differences in that piece of legislation vs. the original Simpson-Bowles plan. Had you read the article of which you posted a paragraph earlier, you would know that. Of course, full stories make for bad propaganda. So, carry on with the latter. That still doesn't make it any more true.

Flooding Capitol Hill were notes of opposition to the Simpson-Bowles legislation from advocacy groups on the left and right, with veiled threats to pull campaign dollars or fund super PAC ads against those who crossed them.

Anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist warned that the plan raised taxes too much. It called for a revamp of the tax code to close loopholes and ultimately bring in $1 trillion in new money for the government over the next decade.

Labor groups said it raised taxes too little — noting that the plan called for half of the tax revenue than originally endorsed by Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles but still called for deep cuts and a reduction in Social Security benefits over time.

The original Simpson-Bowles report was shelved when only 11 of 18 members of the commission endorsed the proposal. It needed a supermajority of 14 to advance to Congress.

Leaders in both parties had kind words for the joint effort. But they still urged their members to defeat it.

House Speaker John A. Boehner cast LaTourette and Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), another leader of the effort, as misguided friends, working on the right ideas at the wrong time.

Top Democrats, meanwhile, said the budget blueprint didn’t hew closely enough to the original Simpson-Bowles proposal on taxes.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Nonsense. What come up for a vote was a budget blueprint based on Simpson-Bowles but there were significant differences in that piece of legislation vs. the original Simpson-Bowles plan. Had you read the article of which you posted a paragraph earlier, you would know that. Of course, full stories make for bad propaganda. So, carry on with the latter. That still doesn't make it any more true.

More excuses. Catch that tail yet?

Voting against were Baucus(Dem), Becerra(Dem), Camp(Rep), Hensarling(Rep), Ryan(Rep), Schakowsky(Dem), and Stern(Dem)

Looks like the Democrats didn't need Ryan's vote at all.

Edited August 30, 2012 by The Patriot

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

More excuses. Catch that tail yet?

No excuses. Simple facts. "The original Simpson-Bowles report was shelved when only 11 of 18 members of the commission endorsed the proposal."

Looks like the Democrats didn't need Ryan's vote at all.

Ryan and the other House Republicans voted against. Ryan being a leader could have brought these three votes to the table forcing Congress - both the House and the Senate - to take an up-or-down vote on the commission's recommendation. He chose to sabotage the commission instead.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog

[Anh map 2,098]

OMG!!! Exaggeration and untruths at a pep rally!?!?!? We can't allow this to happen in politics!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Ryan and the other House Republicans voted against. Ryan being a leader could have brought these three votes to the table forcing Congress - both the House and the Senate - to take an up-or-down vote on the commission's recommendation. He chose to sabotage the commission instead.

That's a stretch, and you know it. Anyone of the remaining Democrats that voted the way they did only for cred could have scuttled that vote at any time.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That's a stretch, and you know it. Anyone of the remaining Democrats that voted the way they did only for cred could have scuttled that vote at any time.

We don't know what other commission members might have done. What we do know is that Ryan sabotaged the commission's report causing it to go nowhere.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

We don't know what other commission members might have done. What we do know is that Ryan sabotaged the commission's report causing it to go nowhere.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Fresh Nipple