Paul Ryan: I came to Congress to make tough decisions, not run from them

posted at 12:41 pm on January 2, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

I (mercifully) got to spend the past few days trekking around the awesome and actual cliffs in Arizona with friends and completely ignoring the ongoing vagaries of the last-minute fiscal cliff drama (sigh, if only for a little while). MKH already touched on this, but catching up on what I’ve missed, this particular vote’s effect on certain members of the 2016 bench may (or, may not?) be a clutch side-narrative.

Over in the Senate, Sens. Rand Paul and Marco Rubio took the opportunity to keep their noses clean, and Rubio played it diplomatically, abstaining from criticisms but reemphasizing his pro-growth message:

But two names might stick out, among the five Republicans who opposed it. Sen. Marco Rubio is widely considered to have a decent shot at the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 and, as Roll Call’s Jonathan Strong aptly tweeted, his “no” vote could put some pressure on another potential White House aspirant, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who will likely have to vote on this deal in the next couple days. Big votes like this one are the kind that come up in presidential primary debates; last time around, the 2011 debt-limit vote was a topic. Rubio explained in a news  release after the vote that he appreciated the hard work that went into the deal, but “rapid economic growth and spending reforms are the only way out of the real fiscal cliff our nation is facing,” and those “will be made more difficult” by this bill. …

Perhaps an unsurprising name on the list was Sen. Rand Paul, never shy about bucking the policies of his fellow Kentuckian, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Of course, Rep. Paul Ryan did indeed have to pick a side late last night; the former VP nominee, now potentially poised to hold even more influence over his House Republicans after his VP bid and more than Rubio or Paul in the Senate, stuck by Speaker Boehner and contended that he voted deliberately and pragmatically:

Today, I joined my colleagues in the House to protect as many Americans as possible from a tax increase. We also provided certainty by making the lower tax rates permanent. The House has already passed legislation to prevent tax increases for every American family, and it is unfortunate that President Obama insisted on taking more from hardworking taxpayers. Despite my concerns with other provisions in the bill, I commend my colleagues for limiting the damage as much as possible.

“The American people chose divided government. As elected officials, we have a duty to apply our principles to the realities of governing. And we must exercise prudence. We must weigh the benefits and the costs of action—and of inaction. In H.R. 8, there are clearly provisions that I oppose. But the question remains: Will the American people be better off if this law passes relative to the alternative? In the final analysis, the answer is undoubtedly yes. I came to Congress to make tough decisions—not to run away from them.

So, sincere question: Is this such a 2016-consequential vote? The time between now and 2016 potentially amounts to political centuries, and we’re certain to have even more realistically piddling but politically overwrought drama over our divided government in the next couple of years — or, will even these tax hikes have such a deep-seated economic impact that this is one of the big votes that some Americans won’t be so easy to forgive and forget? Hmmmm.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Translation: I’m a first class fraud

TexasJew on January 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Congressman Ryan, would you please explain us again why voting for TARP was so important?

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Lets put the laser on……. Smart Decisions.

FlaMurph on January 2, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Nice post Erika, anyone that goes along to get along does not get my support…EVER!

RedInMD on January 2, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Fluke him to Hades.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

So, sincere question: Is this such a 2016-consequential vote?

Sincere rephrasing: Won’t the rubes be just as gullible in pimping ANY GOPe-approved empty suit that’s waved in front of them?

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

May all who brung and sustain Obama, including Ryan, suffer enormously, until they yell in pain.

In the meanwhile Obama “Michelle we’s overcome – let’s party; the fools will pay”. He sends y’all a big Aloha kiss.

The picture of the foolish charlatanic narcissistic thug on Drudge is perfect. The land deserves him in full.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Since most people are now aware that the politicians (except for a few) are in the pockets of lobbyists, it’s starting to make sense that that is where the power is. If Paul Ryan is serious about wanting to change things, then people like him need to leave Congress (like Jim Demint) and start lobbying. The TEA Party also needs to forget about sending conservatives to Washington, and start raising money and lobbying. Power and money speak.

lea on January 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

I wish Ryan well with the politics within his rapidly decaying party.

Mr. Arrogant on January 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

The new land

It’s all the fault of the Eskimos.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:49 PM

So, sincere question: Is this such a 2016-consequential vote?

No. This whole law is basically meaningless and won’t help or hurt the country in any tangible way.

The real poison pill is still Obamacare with its myriad new regulations and fees. That is what is going to lead to four more years of a limping economy.

rbj on January 2, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Sorry, it’s the fault of those damned Eskimos.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Translation reality:
2014 is just around the corner in Wisconsin.

FlaMurph on January 2, 2013 at 12:49 PM

~ much less dreamy ~

Jeddite on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Sincere rephrasing: Won’t the rubes be just as gullible in pimping ANY GOPe-approved empty suit that’s waved in front of them?

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Yes, but until your dame, or you run, your insinuations are worthless.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

He looks as childish and scary in that picture as Obama always does.

Has Obama ever appeared like a grown up man, ever? If so, produce that picture.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:51 PM

~ much less dreamy ~

Jeddite on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

.
the Huckle is gone…………..

FlaMurph on January 2, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Translation: I’m a first class fraud

TexasJew on January 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM

I knew we lost Paul Ryan when I heard he was chosen for Vice President. The fastest way to make someone forget their principles and bring them into the Establishment fold is to nominate him. We’ll lose Marco Rubio too, as his name has been floated as a possible V.P., so I’m sure he is already jaded.

lea on January 2, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Politically stupid. It was going to carry without him just based on the sixty or so Boehner loyalists. It wasn’t a profile in courage and there was no political upside on it. This was a good time to vote present. But hey I guess that Ryan enjoys being a politically obscure Congressman of no consequence from WI and doesn’t really care about the fiscal situation. Not sure why he ran for VP if that is the case, but whatevers. I guess we can just get used to Marco Rubio’s special brand of nothingness.,

Illinidiva on January 2, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Man, does Ryan read the blogs? He had almost every angle covered.

So, if, say, this was voted down, we’d go over the fiscal cliff, and all the Bush tax cuts would expire? Is that correct?

Dongemaharu on January 2, 2013 at 12:54 PM

Yes, but until your dame, or you run, your insinuations are worthless.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Oh, shut the f*** up already. All you can do is sit around and throw Sarah Palin in anyone’s face that isn’t a GOPe toady. It’s all anyone ever gets for all eternity that ever voiced any support for Palin.

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Ryan committed political suicide.
Cantor proved what a worm he really is.
Boehner continued his spineless ways.
Rubio survived another day…..until his amnesty views show his true colors.

All the “conservatives” who betrayed the base and voted for this piece of garbage have showed us that they really don’t believe in or stand for anything, and they showed us who they really are.

Erika, as much as you would like us to, the conservative base will not forget this.
Times are different now, what the conservative base went through over these past many months has made us much stronger and wiser. The “Anybody But” days are over…..voting for the best of the worst, is over.
It’s time to start voting FOR something instead of against…..or, like Mitt just learned, we just won’t vote at all.

tencole on January 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

No Child Left Behind, TARP, the auto bailout, fiscal cliff, debt ceiling increases, etc., etc, etc. – looks like you are not too good with tough decisions, Mr. Ryan. But, you are very good at talking the talk.

bw222 on January 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM

I’ll never cheer for the Packers again.

GCM on January 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Bigger government is always better government. Paul Ryan. Only his false and lie filled rhetoric appears conservative, the man and his record is pure unadulterated progressive left voting records.

astonerii on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

tencole on January 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

bw222 on January 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Yeah, but St. Sarah didn’t run! Neener neener! ///

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Yes, but until your dame, or you run, your insinuations are worthless.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Oh, shut the f*** up already. All you can do is sit around and throw Sarah Palin in anyone’s face that isn’t a GOPe toady. It’s all anyone ever gets for all eternity that ever voiced any support for Palin.

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Who is Sarah Palin?

verbaluce on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

ryan, it seems you underestimate a large number of American’s who do know what came out of dc in the last few days! Bunch of pork added to bill, taxes ARE going up on everyone, and to top it off, you are a great disappointment to me because I voted for you and Mitt because I thought you were a better person than you are! I guess I wasn’t all that smart afterall?
L

letget on January 2, 2013 at 12:59 PM

The PT Barnum School of Political Science.

Limerick on January 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Shorter Paul Ryan – When Bo(eh)ner purges Cantor and McCarthy, I’ll move up the pecking order.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Who is Sarah Palin?

verbaluce on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Beats me. I’m still bedazzled by brilliant Paul Ryan’s bedazzling brilliant brilliance.

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Ryan will regret this….. stupid move. Incredible!!!!!

ultracon on January 2, 2013 at 1:02 PM

For the GOP, voting in big government is always a “tough decision“. That’s why they do it so often, to show that they have more balls than the democrats who vote for big government out of conviction… or something like that, yeah!

Nixon – EPA & China
Ford – Equal rights amendment
Regan – Amnesty
HW – Read my lips
W – Medicare part d, Iraq

Some mighty fine list of limited government heroes we got here. Alright, alright!! I’ll shut up already, I know how people love their myths.

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

No Child Left Behind, TARP, the auto bailout, fiscal cliff, debt ceiling increases, etc., etc, etc. – looks like you are not too good with tough decisions, Mr. Ryan. But, you are very good at talking the talk.

bw222 on January 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Indeed.

Also very tough ads in the primary against Republicans by Romney.

Very soft ads in the general against Obama once Ryan joined the ticket. Did Ryan cost the election?

No that was sarcasm. We know thanks to Matt Mitts son that Mitt never wanted to be President. But still Ryan sure hitched his wagon to the wrong horse with Mitt.

Steveangell on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

WTF does my criticism of Paul Ryan have to do with Sarah Palin?

It’s January 2 – time to sober up.

bw222 on January 2, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Ryan, you wouldn’t know a tough decision if one came up and kicked you in the Obama with a steel-toed boot, much less how to HANDLE such a thing.

MelonCollie on January 2, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Tough decisions, like giving obama everything he wants?

Pork-Chop on January 2, 2013 at 1:04 PM

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah… another politician.

Out with every one of them.

stenwin77 on January 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

So, sincere question: Is this such a 2016-consequential vote?

If you consider one of the requirements to be the post-modern GOP nominee is to be 180 degrees out of phase with the base on The Issue of the Day, it is probably a resume-enhancing vote. Unless the Tea Party Movement moves to its own party, taxes are likely going to be The Issue of the Day.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

WTF does my criticism of Paul Ryan have to do with Sarah Palin?

It’s January 2 – time to sober up.

bw222 on January 2, 2013 at 1:04 PM

I don’t know. Take that up with Schadenfreude there.

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

I think people are way too hard on Paul Ryan. Saying the Dems control the Senate and the White House so we can’t get conservative reforms through sounds like a cop out….except for the fact that it’s plainly true.

The house can sit around all day passing stuff that will get nowhere. Pass the Fairtax or flatax, beef up immigration enforcement, dramatically increase domestic energy production and watch as those bills are all ignored.

I’m a die hard conservative and I know that nothing was solved by passing this law. The nation is still going over a fiscal cliff of deficit spending. But I think this is a vote you could almost flip a coin on. I can see voting against it because the bill does nothing to address the fundamental problems, but do you really want to risk taxes going up for 98% of Americans (yes, I know about the payroll tax)? Hard to get angry at Paul Ryan over this when he was the first one out there talking about reforming Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Whatever his faults, he is NOT a coward, and certainly not some status quo politician.

MikeRuss on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Yeah, but St. Sarah didn’t run! Neener neener! ///

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

What the frak…..I didn’t even mention Palin’s name.
Now that YOU brought it up, let me just say, if she decides to run great…I’d vote for her in a heartbeat and she’d have my full support, but if she doesn’t I’ll support a candidate as much like her as possible.

The most important thing is to “vote for” someone….rather than “anybody but”. If there’s no one I want to vote for, than I won’t vote at all…….capeesh?

tencole on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

All Republicans should have just voted “present”.

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

I won’t vote for Ryan now…and the includes if he wins the nomination. He has completely lost my vote. We have a real problem coming, and he chose to do the exact opposite of making a tough decision.

Ca97 on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

You forgot about price controls for both Nixon and Ford.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

If you consider one of the requirements to be the post-modern GOP nominee is to be 180 degrees out of phase with the base on The Issue of the Day, it is probably a resume-enhancing vote. Unless the Tea Party Movement moves to its own party, taxes are likely going to be The Issue of the Day.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

True.

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Yeah, but St. Sarah didn’t run! Neener neener! ///

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 12:58 PM

What the frak…..I didn’t even mention Palin’s name.
Now that YOU brought it up, let me just say, if she decides to run great…I’d vote for her in a heartbeat and she’d have my full support, but if she doesn’t I’ll support a candidate as much like her as possible.

The most important thing is to “vote for” someone….rather than “anybody but”. If there’s no one I want to vote for, than I won’t vote at all…….capeesh?

tencole on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Notice the “slashes” there? Now, how come I get that, but Schadenfreude never does? LOL

ddrintn on January 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM

I came to Congress to make tough decisions, not run from them.

This dog whistle to true Limited government Conservatives means…..

I came to Congress to make do whatever it takes to grow Federal power and influence, and to pose as a Conservative to the base to keep campaign money coming in. All the while complaining about those dastardly Democrats and how we can’t stop them, and this “is the best deal we could get”.

PappyD61 on January 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

republicans…………the lowercase party.

PappyD61 on January 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Would have given myself a stroke if I tried to make that list comprehensive. W’s pork alone would take up the character limit. And no Ike on the list too!

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Paul Ryan, the political powerhouse who couldn’t even deliver his own state? A one-hit wonder at best and not much of one at that. Hopefully, this is just one more nail in the GOP coffin that takes down the whole corrupt party.

Panther on January 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

just another typical GOP fraud.

TARP – yes vote
Stimulus – yes vote
debt limit – yes vote
2013 tax increases – yes vote

this is the GOP establishment; raising taxes and spending just like the democRATS!!!

burserker on January 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

NO Paul-you came to Congress to be a political hack-and it shows.Besides you sucked as a VP candidate!

redware on January 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

You forgot about price controls for both Nixon and Ford.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

And budget-busting deficits for Reagan. You’re so right buddy, with Republicans like these we don’t need Democrats.

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

republicans…………the DEAD party.

PappyD61 on January 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

FIFM

PappyD61 on January 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

PaulSmall Ryan

LetsBfrank on January 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Would have given myself a stroke if I tried to make that list comprehensive. W’s pork alone would take up the character limit. And no Ike on the list too!

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

True. Remind me to do that later this year so I don’t have to worry about the PlaceboCare fine/tax/whatever Roberts calls it today in 2014.

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

Hey Girl Obama, it’s Paul Ryan

LetsBfrank on January 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

I suggest a new party for taxpayers:

The Forgotten Man Party

Resist We Much on January 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

So call me a contrarian. Or if past is prologue, other less polite names.

The choices were…well- were there any real choices?

We could have raised taxes on all American’s or taken the best we could get. Frankly, I believe Democrats finally conceding the “Bush Tax Cuts” were “mostly” benefiting the so-called Middle Class was win number 1.

Win number two was making them permanent and fixing the AMT.

The GOP messaging on this, as usual, sucks.

Ultimately, there is no doubt this will hurt the productive sector and people who fuel our economy.

There is also little allusion this will help our real spending problem.

Hold the line on our debt ceiling and don’t negotiate any more taxes on the spending issue. That’s where the real fight is. Make Mr. Obama own this.

Marcus Traianus on January 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

But…but….P90X!!!!!

He was a fraud. He didn’t help the ’12 presidential ticket.

portlandon on January 2, 2013 at 1:17 PM

And budget-busting deficits for Reagan. You’re so right buddy, with Republicans like these we don’t need Democrats.

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Reagan buried the Soviet Union with those deficits, so like wartime deficits, I’ll give him a partial pass on that.

Or do you like borscht?

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Shutting doors, opening windows?

The hills are alive with the sound of deficit spending.

Paul-Cincy on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I love the Paulians trying to tear down the acheivements of Ronaldus Magnus. And, yes, Dubya spent too much. But, I’m glad that he was president on that horrible day of 9/11/01, and not some Democrat or the Muslim-living idiot that’s riding waves in Hawaii right now.

kingsjester on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I came to Congress to make tough decisions, not run from them

So… what happened?

Kent18 on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I can see voting against it because the bill does nothing to address the fundamental problems, but do you really want to risk taxes going up for 98% of Americans (yes, I know about the payroll tax)? Hard to get angry at Paul Ryan over this when he was the first one out there talking about reforming Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Whatever his faults, he is NOT a coward, and certainly not some status quo politician.

MikeRuss on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

As an aside, I’ve been wondering when payroll taxes became real taxes?

I mean when conservatives suggest that everyone pay taxes to have “skin in the game”, and leftist answer that the lowest income brackets pay payroll taxes, isn’t the response, “yeah, but those don’t count”?

When did they start counting? And why are conservatives angry about the expiration of an Obama stimulus gimmick (payroll tax holiday)? What’s next, outrage that cash for clunkers II wasn’t funded or that we wont be getting anoth Bush stimulus check?

This is why we are losing.

right of the dial on January 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Ryan Rand 2016

Sorry Paul, too many questionable votes. Time to start rallying behind Rand, a guy who walks the talk.

can_con on January 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

For the GOP, voting in big government is always a “tough decision“. That’s why they do it so often, to show that they have more balls than the democrats who vote for big government out of conviction… or something like that, yeah!

Nixon – EPA & China
Ford – Equal rights amendment
Regan – Amnesty
HW – Read my lips
W – Medicare part d, Iraq

Some mighty fine list of limited government heroes we got here. Alright, alright!! I’ll shut up already, I know how people love their myths.

abobo on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

small govt my arse!!! never voting GOP again, libertarian or not at all

burserker on January 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Paul Ryan, the political powerhouse who couldn’t even deliver his own state?

Panther on January 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Gave him something in common with his last running mate, who couldn’t deliver either Michigan (birth state) or Massachusetts (state where last held elected office).

Kent18 on January 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

“I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him!” Marc Anthony

“I come to bury Americans in taxes, not to lead them!” Paul Ryan

pilamaye on January 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

I won’t vote for Ryan now…and the includes if he wins the nomination. He has completely lost my vote. We have a real problem coming, and he chose to do the exact opposite of making a tough decision.

Ca97 on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

People like you are the reason Romney (who was my last choice for the nomination) lost and with it the hopes of repealing Obamacare and getting our fiscal house in order. Because of people like you we’re subjected to 4 more years of Obama the demagogue. I always and forever will vote for ANY republican for President no matter how clueless, as long as the Democrat alternative is one that is a deliberately mortal threat to the nation. You wouldn’t vote for President Ryan over President Hillary Clinton?! You make me sick.

MikeRuss on January 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

I’m starting to think that that PaulBots were right. At least that would have been DIFFERENT. How is the present Republican Party doing anything different from Obama? Heck, how would Mitt/Ryan have been different? Sure, we’d be “REFORMING” ObamaCare (sure), but that’s about it…

Darin on January 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Paul Ryan always was a stealth Democrat.

This is the guy whose solution to entitlement reform is means-testing everything, turning them into welfare programs.

cool breeze on January 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Voting against will play well in a GOP primary I imagine. In a general campaign, you would have to defend against not raising the top two percent’s taxes. Guess, yet another sound beating for the GOP.

rubberneck on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

The “Anybody But” days are over…..voting for the best of the worst, is over.
It’s time to start voting FOR something instead of against…..or, like Mitt just learned, we just won’t vote at all.

tencole on January 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

You are correct.

Ryan, you’re all washed up.

dogsoldier on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

The Institutional Republicans made their choice, I’ve made mine. I am no longer a registered Republican as of today. Note that I have only missed voting in two primary elections in the last 40 years, have only not been a state level convention delegate 4 times, and have run a successful county level Republican presidential campaign. Despite Romney not being anywhere near my choice, I worked GOTV events once or twice a week the entire 2012 campaign.

I’m tired of being betrayed. If a real TEA Party, Patriot Party, or Conservative Party under whatever name arises, I’m there. The Institutional Republicans will not stand and fight the Democrats or those few farther to the Left of the Democrats. We need a second party for our two party system.

Subotai Bahadur on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

This was a responsible vote and the notion any better deal for Republicans was going to come along is shear lunacy.

NoDonkey on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

People like you are the reason Romney (who was my last choice for the nomination) lost MikeRuss on January 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

what a load of horsecrap. his vote is his to give to whichever politician earns it. and if one doesnt it’s his to withhold. to blame him for ryan’s or romney’s shortcomings is childless.

chasdal on January 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Hilarious! Too bad so many were so fooled by him prior to this point. NOTHING he has done in Congress points to any conservative values on his part.

riddick on January 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Well, Ryan has now set himself up for a career-defining moment.

If he budges on the debt ceiling now, he is dead to conservatives and becomes just another big-government hack with good abs.

cane_loader on January 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Voting against will play well in a GOP primary I imagine. In a general campaign, you would have to defend against not raising the top two percent’s taxes. Guess, yet another sound beating for the GOP.

rubberneck on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

This from the poster who was insulting Conservatives who had doubts about voting for Romney. It’s the same dadgum Class Warfare Rhetoric Obama uses. You’re nothing but a Moby.

kingsjester on January 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

And budget-busting deficits for Reagan. You’re so right buddy, with Republicans like these we don’t need Democrats.

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I will only point out that bills need to be passed by Congress before the President has the opportunity to sign or veto. Keep that in mind when laying blame for over-spending – and that blame should go primarily to Congress no matter who the Pres might be.

Don’t forget that ALL of Reagan’s proposed budgets were declared DOA by the Dem controlled Congress that he had to deal with during his entire 4 years (only 3 years of Repub controlled Senate).

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

or, will even these tax hikes have such a deep-seated economic impact that this is one of the big votes that some Americans won’t be so easy to forgive and forget?

This is one American with a very long memory….I don’t forget…and will no longer “forgive”.

I’m exhausted from Forgiving.

Kiss my @ss Paulie you traitorous douche.

Tim_CA on January 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

This was a responsible vote and the notion any better deal for Republicans was going to come along is shear lunacy.

NoDonkey on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Yet another illuminating post by NoBrains. Communists rule!

Cut the communist cancer out now, its a disease killing the planet at a way more efficient rate than pollution and all that crap.

riddick on January 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Reagan buried the Soviet Union with those deficits, so like wartime deficits, I’ll give him a partial pass on that.

Or do you like borscht?

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Bullshit, and you know it – the Soviets were buried under their own expansionism in Afghanistan and their attempts to catch up with “star wars” program, which never existed. The money Reagan squeezed out of the budget funded further governmental growth. Voiding Executive Order 10988 would do wonders without costing a cent.

PS: I’m Soviet-born, so yes I do like borscht. By the way, it’s not a Russian dish. :)

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

I’m so thankful that Republicans have a majority in the House! Wait… why again?

Flash: This was not only about some mythical “cliff” we thought we were going over when we’re already in freefall (to quote Sarah Palin: we’ve already gone over the cliff; it’s only about how hard we’re going to hit the bottom at this point), it’s a precursor to the Debt Ceiling fight.

And, one concept of warfare that’s applicable here: It’s very difficult to un-retreat.

Another version: It’s very difficult to attack when running in the opposite direction.

Take your pick.

IndieDogg on January 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

The son of the clipper’s owner found dead…..possible drug OD.

Tim_CA on January 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

4 8 years (only 3 years of Repub controlled Senate).

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

FIFM

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Reagan buried the Soviet Union with those deficits, so like wartime deficits, I’ll give him a partial pass on that.

Or do you like borscht?

Steve Eggleston on January 2, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Really? Please tell me how rules The New Soviet Unions today. Same thugs as before, no? Do you even understand what is oping on there today?

When Reagan supposedly destroyed USSR, Soviets said that they do not need to have a military conflict with us to defeat us, they will simply destroy us from within via infiltration of our education system and government offices.

Remind me, who of the two actually won when we have a communist in White House today, communists controlling our Congress and communists running our educational system from top to bottom as well as government unions controlled and run by said communists.

Are you that blind?

riddick on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Guess ryan will vote for the pork full(half of the 69+B) sandy bill if it comes up for vote also?
L

letget on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Don’t forget that ALL of Reagan’s proposed budgets were declared DOA by the Dem controlled Congress that he had to deal with during his entire 4 years (only 3 years of Repub controlled Senate).

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Then he should have learned from Obama how to deal with the Congress controlled by opposition. The President owns the bully pulpit and the E.O. pen, and he is ultimately responsible for whatever happens on his watch.

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

I won’t vote for Ryan now…and the includes if he wins the nomination. He has completely lost my vote. We have a real problem coming, and he chose to do the exact opposite of making a tough decision.

Ca97 on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

He sure “sounded” good and convincing while defending his “principled” support of the bill though, didn’t he? lol@Ryan!

Anti-Control on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

I always and forever will vote for ANY republican for President no matter how clueless

MikeRuss on January 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Even if, say, Dennis Kucinich were to re-register as a Republican, and somehow managed to win the GOP primary? (Don’t laugh; Mittens did, after all.) Just so long as they have the cute li’l capital “R” next to their name… no matter what position(s) they take on any/all issues?

Proof positive (if so) that it’s always Happy Hour someplace, I s’pose.

Kent18 on January 2, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Today, I joined my colleagues in the House to protect as many Americans as possible from a tax increase. We also provided certainty by making the lower tax rates permanent.

Wrong thing to do, my friend.

It would have been better to vote “present,” let the lower classes see their taxes go up, and let 0bama own all of it.

But you chose to play the Democrats’ game. The same game that got us $16 trillion in debt and has eroded the liberty of the American people.

UltimateBob on January 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM

So, sincere question: Is this such a 2016-consequential vote?

Who cares? Are we concerned with politics, or with governance here? The fact that this might damage Ryan in 2016 makes his vote all the more impressive.

Ryan did the right thing. He could have hid behind a given win and vote no, like Rubio and Cantor did, to look good for the cameras, and instead he chose to govern. I give him credit for that.

What did Rubio and Cantor contribute to this debate? Nothing. Neither made any attempt to make the case for going over the cliff, which was the right’s only option other than this deal. Tough, principled no votes? Please, spare me.

Ryan is now in an excellent position to take the lead in the debt ceiling/spending debate that comes up in a couple of months. Cantor and Rubio, as usual, will have little to add but feeble conservative rhetoric.

Besides, Rubio has to write that amnesty bill, and Paul will be looking to cut defense to the bone. Priorities, priorities.

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

This was a responsible vote and the notion any better deal for Republicans was going to come along is shear lunacy.

NoDonkey on January 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

If only we could have sent them that SHEAR to cut something! Instead, they’re efforts were SHEER FUBAR/SNAFU/GOPe SOP.

Resist We Much on January 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Then he should have learned from Obama how to deal with the Congress controlled by opposition. The President owns the bully pulpit and the E.O. pen, and he is ultimately responsible for whatever happens on his watch.

Archivarix on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Huh? Reagan should have leaned 30 years ago from what Obama is doing today????

Reagan did deal with Congress – he got what he wanted for the military, but went along with the social spending (entitlements) the Dems insisted on – which in the long run has done much more damage to us than Reagan likley predicted. reagan also got promises from the Dems for spending cuts that never happened – so bad move trusting a Dem promise.

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Idiot.

tom daschle concerned on January 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

ok, let’s see…

John Boehner – crybaby, tanned alcoholic with no testicles

Mitt Romney – dudley do-right wimp who played it safe and sat there in the third debate with his thumb up his @$$ and let obama slide on Benghazi

Paul Ryan – a GOP puppet with John Boehener’s hand up his @$$.

did i miss anything?

GhoulAid on January 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM

GhoulAid on January 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM

I’d say that’s a pretty good summary of the Repub party’s problem.

dentarthurdent on January 2, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3