RSSFlashback: Paul Ryan Laughs at Debbie Wasserman Schultz During CNN Interview … “I would Like to have an Adult Level Converstion …”
Today, Rep. Paul Ryan (WI-R) was announced as Mitt Romney’s GOP Vice Presidential candidate; however, remember this blast from the past where Ryan owned Debbie Wasserman Schultz and laughed at her due to her lack of seriousness and childish approach to the dept crisis and entitlements. All Ryan wanted was for Americans to have the same type of social security plan as they do in Congress. However, for Debbie Wasserman Schultz that was too risky. Huh?
With Saturday’s announcement of Rep. Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s pick for vice president, here’s a flashback to 2010 when Ryan and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) appeared together on CNN to discuss the GOP’s then-proposed “Pledge to America.”
Recall that Republicans were swept into the House of Representatives during the midterm elections less than two months later.
Paul Ryan should have known better than to have an adult conversation with Debbie Waasserman Schultz or any other Democrat when it comes to the responsible manner of dealing with the debt, Medicare or Social Security. Libs and Dems would rather accuse Republicans of pushing grandma over the cliff than they would actually fix the problems of unsustainable entitlement or government healthcare or retirement programs.
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
20 Responses to “Flashback: Paul Ryan Laughs at Debbie Wasserman Schultz During CNN Interview … “I would Like to have an Adult Level Converstion …””
Leave a Reply
Debbie Schultz is all about social liberalism. She cannot think in any other way. An adult conversation with her would be impossible for she is stuck in the childhood warp of “mama give me”.
I live in Florida and every time this woman speaks I want to cringe. I sometimes wonder if she has any brains….. maybe if she did something with her hair it may help.
I either have to laugh or cry when I see personal comments as policy debate points, and to top it off, this is in the same breath as having an “adult” conservation. It’s really quite ridiculous.
__________________
SM: Sorry RK, there is nothing adult about any of the conversations that DWS ever has. She is a partisan hack who i cannot believe the people of FLA actually vote into office.
R
How nice of Cong. Ryan injecting personal opinion as meaningful criticism when discussing policy choices. Classy with a “K”.
And on top of that, falsely claiming there is a connection with the debt and entitlement programs? I assume since he is heavily involved with the budget committee, he knows his stuff on how funding for govt programs works.
But that doesn’t stop him from feeding us a couple of whoppers. First, I’m sure he knows that SocSec and Medicare each have separate funding mechanisms and treasury accounts, both which have surplus balances (no debt or deficit). SocSec has a balance over $2T, and is good to payout for 15-25 years (exact date not in front of me right now). Furthermore, not one penny of our debt or deficit involves either of these entitlement programs.
Second, he repeats the oft-used but incorrect claim that ObamaCare robs (or was it guts) Medicare of $500B. As the finance guy, he knows (or should know, unless he’s incompetent) that the heath law reduces Medicare Plus (a private insurance policy program) funding by $500B, and Medicare is, as I recall, improved by having this money applied to the new law’s health provisions.
Now I wonder if as the GOP VP candidate he will continue to lie to Americans because he thinks they are too stupid to catch him at it?
_____________________
SM: Call it what you want but it still takes out $500 million from the all inclusive Medicare. It all falls under one pocket.
You do not think that entitlement programs have an effect on the debt, seriously? The govt has been robbing from the SS fund for years. As for medicare, we do not take in enough for either care or SS as opposed to paying out.
SS was never intended to be a stand alone retirement plan, however, sadly and stupidly many Americans have made it that. The govt made the age 65 because actuaries figured out that most people would die before they ever reached an age to receive SS.
Sorry, but I am in favor of privatizing SS and as for Medicare, I deal with it every day and see the incompetence, waste, fraud and foolish guidelines.
Both need to be addressed. The LEFT cries and whines about a fictitious problem of man made global warming, yet Medicare and SS are a much more pressing issue and need to be corrected SASP.
R
If DWS was my wife I would have to run away from home. Rush calls her Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz… ha ha ha… case in point, this video. Go wash your hair Debbie.
That being said… I am a disenfranchised Republican and will be voting Libertarian again in the November election. Take a look at Paul Ryan’s voting record. Voted for the bailouts, for TSA and the Patriot act, for TARP, for the wars(1 trillion down the tubes in Iraq, 1/2 trillion and counting down the drain in Afghanistan)… his voting record does not seem match his rhetoric. He is for big government, and continued assault on personal liberty. I would trade all my future Social Security and Medicare for if they just balanced the budget and made my life savings worth more now.
Not Medicare; Medicare Advantage (MA) – a private insurance program support (http://goo.gl/TPqiT). The ACA eliminated subsidies to MA that makes up the $500B in savings (http://goo.gl/zmeZF – see “Effects of the Health Reform”).
Barack Obama said that Obamacare would do three things …
Remember President Barack Hussein Obama’s three tenants of health care? Obama’s three principles of health care reform were 1) the rising cost of health care must be brought down, 2) Americans must have the freedom to keep whatever doctor and health care plan they have or to choose a new doctor and health care plan if they want it and 3) all Americans must have quality affordable health care.
Media Finally Admits that Obamacare Will Increase Health Care Costs, So Much for Obama’s Health Care Principles
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2010/04/24/media-finally-admits-that-obamacare-will-increase-health-care-costs-so-much-for-obamas-health-care-principles/
http://youtu.be/GggVSAPt-HY
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/22/health-care-law-increase-costs-experts-conclude-new-report/
Among the findings, the actuary concluded that:
– About 14 million people would lose their employer coverage by 2019 as smaller employers terminate coverage and workers who currently have employer coverage become enrolled in Medicaid;
– The estimated reductions in the growth rate of health spending “may not be fully achievable” because “Medicare productivity adjustments could become unsustainable even within the next 10 years, and over time the reductions in the scope of employer-sponsored health insurance could also become an issue”;
– New fees and taxes on medical device makers will “generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug and devices prices and higher premiums”;
– By 2011 and 2012 the initial $5 billion in federal funding for the creation of a national high-risk pool “would be exhausted, resulting in substantial premium increases to sustain the program; we anticipate that such increases would limit further participation”;
– It is reasonable to expect that a significant portion of the increased demand for Medicaid would be difficult to meet, particularly over the first few years”;
– Businesses would pay $87 billion in penalties between 2014-2019 for failure to offer insurance.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/22/health-care-law-increase-costs-experts-conclude-new-report/#ixzz23Lyzmd1W
CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion
http://news.yahoo.com/cbo-obamacare-price-tag-shifts-940-billion-1-163500655.html
By the time all is said and done it will probably be triple that amount. The big Obama govt lie. Originally in 1965 the govt said that Medicare would not add a dime to the federal deficit.
U.S. health plans have history of cost overruns
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/18/health-programs-have-history-of-cost-overruns/print/
Yea, Obamacare will reduce premiums and health care costs. What a joke that is.
R
CBO: Obamacare Will Leave 30 Million Uninsured
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-obamacare-will-leave-30-million-uninsured
Obamacare has accomplished nothing but add to the US Debt. In the beginning it was said that there was 30 million uninsured because Obama was not allowed to count the illegals in the US w/o healthcare insurance. In the end, he has provided the govt take over of healthcare and accomplished NADA!
The Obama lie:
“If you’re one of the 30 million Americans who don’t yet have health insurance, starting in 2014, this law will offer you an array of quality, affordable, private health insurance plans to choose from,” said Obama.
However, as the CBO concludes, despite all the new government regulations and bureaucracies, taxes and subsidies created by Obamacare, there will still be 30 million uninsured people in the United States a decade from now.
Barack Obama … The Debt Master
National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
(CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.
The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.
The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.
The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.
Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.
The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.
### lost a comment to the spam filter again, I think. Thanks!
_______________________
SM: i do not see anything in the spam folder
R
#10 It can be helpful to (try to) know what makes up the deficit, as only an incredibly ignorant person (Rep. M. Bachmann) would suggest a current president is responsible for every dollar of debt or deficit.
Lacking the ability to directly post pictures here (AFAIK), here are links that add additional perspective to this topic.
# CBO_Forecast_Changes_for_2009-2012: http://goo.gl/frd22
# Public Debt Allocation By Source (CBPP data): http://goo.gl/3jLe6
# What’s driving the deficits (CBPP / CBO): http://goo.gl/O9FKx
# Natl_Debt_Chart (Dept of Treasury data): http://goo.gl/61okX
# Bush-policies-deficits-june-2010 (CBPP / CBO): http://goo.gl/n2PO
My apologies that some of the charts and data are historical, which I hope won’t offend those who don’t believe in history. In no way do I try and blame anyone with this comment, or take a political position. My only hope is that more data can be useful; letting the evidence speak for itself.
#10 It can be helpful to (try to) know what makes up the deficit, as only an incredibly ignorant person (Rep. M. Bachmann) would suggest a current president is responsible for every dollar of debt or deficit.
Lacking the ability to directly post pictures here (AFAIK), here are links that add additional perspective to this topic.
– CBO_Forecast_Changes_for_2009-2012: http://goo.gl/frd22
– Public Debt Allocation By Source (CBPP data): http://goo.gl/3jLe6
– What’s driving the deficits (CBPP / CBO): http://goo.gl/O9FKx
– Natl_Debt_Chart (Dept of Treasury data): http://goo.gl/61okX
– Bush-policies-deficits-june-2010 (CBPP / CBO): http://goo.gl/n2PO
My apologies that some of the charts and data are historical, which I hope won’t offend those who don’t believe in history. In no way do I try and blame anyone with this comment, or take a political position. My only hope is that more data can be useful; letting the evidence speak for itself.
______________________________
SM: Sorry, but Obama has blown a hole in the debt. No not every $, but he has to take responsibility. Its his Presidency. If he doe not own up to it then he should not run again and he has no business being president.
However, to use your theory, then Obama is not responsible for killing Bin Laden, Bush is. You cannot have it both ways.
R
Three separate (slightly different) submits show no pending message on my end. If I do an exact second submit, I get a message:
Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that!
Any suggestions to get around this problem?
Thanks!
__________________
SM: Found 2 of the 3. Its because you have numerous links in your posts which in any spam filter is defined as SPAM.
R
#14 – thanks for the tip on links; that is very helpful!
Sorry I forgot to mention that all three messages were in fact duplicates in messaging, and didn’t need to all get posted.
I’ll be more clear if this ever happens again.
RE: “However, to use your theory, then Obama is not responsible for killing Bin Laden, Bush is. You cannot have it both ways.”
I would not consider these topics analogous. On the one hand, the Govt has a budget and operations that, despite who is Pres., will happen. Money continues to be spent on the programs in place from all former Presidents until changes are made.
The size of the defense dept doesn’t change upon inauguration or even much after because it is an ongoing concern. Most, if not all other departments are the same. Only policy changes will bend the budget curve. The Bush tax cuts, the two Bush wars; their continued existence means the budget impact also remains. If Obama pledges more troops for Afghanistan, that is his increased cost. If he brings the Iraq war to a close, any savings can be considered his.
This is not a matter or blame, just accounting for how and why money is spent; and the resulting budget balance tips towards either deficit or surplus. IMO, that is.
With Bin Laden, AFAIK, the Bush Bin Laden program was shut-down years before, and he is famous for saying he is no longer interested in him. The policy was gone. Obama began his policy for Bin Laden, reportedly asking Panetta to develop intel and a plan to find and go after him. the end result, once the time and pan were ready to go, was his death. I fail to see how Bush played a role in achieving that outcome.
At least, that is my understanding of these two topics. They are quite different, and don’t fall into a “both ways” comparison.
#12 RE: “Sorry, but Obama has blown a hole in the debt. No not every $, but he has to take responsibility.”
Every President needs to take responsibility for their actions (and inaction’s). The hard part just might be determining an accurate version of actions and accountability.
Since here we are primarily talking budgets, balances, expenditures, receipts and the like, personal opinion is not nearly as useful as actual statistical measurements. I’ve found the type of financial data needed to understand this topic is easily available and routinely published (i.e. http://www.treasurydirect.gov).
The chart in #10 showed the debt balance, but didn’t attribute the costs to any specific presidential policies. One important aspect to note is that typically, debt figures don’t neatly divide along presidencies, but are a continuum based on government operations. The chart also uses calendar dates, not budget years as the government operates under.
The links I offered in #12 were an attempt to consider why the debt and deficit grew as they did, by examining charts based on public government statistics (primarily CBPP & CBO). As far as I can tell, these charts do not align with your notion that Obama has blown a hole in the deficit.
I have no stake in an opinion, other than to assess what I see in data, able to be shown I’m not seeing it correctly when that is the case. I’d like to think that could hold for others as well.
__________________________________
SM: You still did not answer my question … if all Presidents inherit from others and you want to blame others for the debt, how come Bush is not responsible for killing Bin Laden? Obama inherited all the intelligence from GWB administration. Obama has also embraced the drone program. Another thing set up under GWB.
R
#16 – “You still did not answer my question”
I don’t know what you could be talking about. If you had read my comment, I clearly discuss Bush and Bin Laden.
You also repeat the “blame” idea, which I talked about in #12.
BTW, you’re saying Obama inherited the intel, but didn’t inherit the budget mess? Bin Laden was killed about 2 1/2 years after Bush left office; wouldn’t you also need to say the state of the economy at that time was still foundering due to a Bush effect?
Independent of the exact intel needed to do the mission, which could be debated, one set of facts is without debate. Obama took the initiative, planned, and executed the plan (and the man). Bush publicly gave up years before he left office.
I am a disenfranchised Republican and will be voting Libertarian again in the November. Take a look at Paul Ryan’s voting record. Voted for the bailouts, for TSA and the Patriot act, for TARP, for the wars(1 trillion down the tubes in Iraq, 1/2 trillion and counting down the drain in Afghanistan)… his voting record does not seem match his rhetoric. He is for big government, and continued assault on personal liberty. I would trade all my future Social Security and Medicare for if they just balanced the budget and made my life savings worth more now.
5. Just Bearly on August 12th, 2012 2:32 am
++++++
Bearly … my son’s American inlaws agree with you in regards to the “progressive” record of Paul Ryan … a record that closely reflects that of Mitt Romney. Neither is the “conservative” this family had prayed God would raise up in 2012. Nevertheless … despite the disappointment … it is realize that God’s timing is often not our timing.
Now that this family has stepped back and considered what is … the conclusion is that a RINO in the White House is a positive alternative to a Marxist who with “the petal to the metal” has the ability to destroy the American way in the next four years.
Bearly … vote splitting between a Libertarian Candidate and a Republican Candidate is paving a pathway for an Obama win in November. Think about it … Gary Johnson is not stupid. He comprehends perfectly.
Think about it. Democrates are not going to vote for Gary Johnson. The outcome will be a split “conservative” vote that will afford Barack Obama another four years in the White House … another four years to destroy America. Johnson knows this. Who is really behind Johnson’s campaign?
.
.
Former GOP primary candidate Gary Johnson asks you to be Libertarian with him for one election
Posted on August 8, 2012 at 6:23pm
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/08/08/former-gop-primary-candidate-gary-johnson-asks-you-to-be-libertarian-with-him-for-one-election/